HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Homer's Odyssey

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-10-2013, 09:27 PM
  #101
GoneFullHextall
Fire Berube
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 32,560
vCash: 50
Pittsburgh and Chicago have been good for a good stretch now. So that theory of the current status of their prospect pool being good is because of tanking is well, wrong.
Good try tho.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:28 PM
  #102
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beef Runner
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 42,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
They traded Upshall because he was a running mate of Richards and Carter. Even adding Lupul to the casualties didn't straighten them out. Get over all of it.
The cap mismanagement had far more to do with it.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:31 PM
  #103
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 112,566
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Meh. Upshall is one of the more overrated players in Flyers lore. The second rounder people complain about a lot, but Upshall is also spoken of as if the team would have won a Cup if that trade wasn't made. Upshall is an energy player who can't stay healthy. His value is and was minimal. Rinaldo, Powe, Carcillo, Nodl, Harry Z, and Wellwood are all guys that played the same role he was playing here. Some played it better. Some worse. Some the same. But he was not an integral part of this team then and wouldn't be now.

As I said earlier, the trade was certainly not a good one, but the effect it had on the team then and on future teams is insignificant.
Please. Upshall was by no means a vital, core player, but he also wasn't and isn't the replacement-level player like those you're comparing him to.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:32 PM
  #104
PropJoe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
The Pittsburgh farm system has NOTHING to do with their tank years. Not one player there was acquired before 2009 when they were in the midst of back to back cup runs. Chicago has no one on the Wolves from pre-2010.
No but they are the reason they're a top team now. It's easier to remain competitive without giving up prospects when you have Crosby and Malkin.

PropJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:33 PM
  #105
Mr Black
Flyers-76ers-Eagles
 
Mr Black's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ross Ice Shelf
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 50
Quoted for emphasis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PropJoe View Post
The Flyers took their shot with Pronger the same way that the Kings took a shot with Richards. Flyers lost in the Stanley Cup. The Kings won. These trades shouldn't be evaluated with hindsight. They were both overpays for a shot at the cup. Fans shouldn't be surprised when a team has a weak farm system and contends regularly. Not that the two are mutually exclusive but it's a price that you have to pay for regular contention.

Mr Black is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:36 PM
  #106
GoneFullHextall
Fire Berube
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 32,560
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PropJoe View Post
No but they are the reason they're a top team now. It's easier to remain competitive without giving up prospects when you have Crosby and Malkin.
LOL.
If the Flyers had kids like Simon Despres or Joe Morrow Holmgren would of probably traded them for Pavel Kubina last year.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:37 PM
  #107
PropJoe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
Pittsburgh and Chicago have been good for a good stretch now. So that theory of the current status of their prospect pool being good is because of tanking is well, wrong.
Good try tho.
When you draft at the top of the 1st round and draft players like Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Staal, Toews, Kane, and Seabrook it's easier to maintain NHL success without giving up minor league talent/draft picks. I don't get why this difficult to understand.

PropJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:44 PM
  #108
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 112,566
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PropJoe View Post
The Flyers took their shot with Pronger the same way that the Kings took a shot with Richards. Flyers lost in the Stanley Cup. The Kings won. These trades shouldn't be evaluated with hindsight. They were both overpays for a shot at the cup. Fans shouldn't be surprised when a team has a weak farm system and contends regularly. Not that the two are mutually exclusive but it's a price that you have to pay for regular contention.
There is a major point of emphasis that you miss, which is the core issue of our complaints, and thus makes your statement incredibly misleading.

The Kings took their shot with Richards. And were roughly around the same position as the Flyers were in 2010. Underacheiving, and in danger of missing the playoffs in a year they expected to be a contender.

But then they traded for Carter. Not only did they trade for a good player, they replaced Jack Johnson because Slava Voynov was better. We had to sign Lukas Krajicek. Also, Jonathan Quick might be a wee bit better than Michael Leighton, and the Kings didn't have to blow up their roster to give him a huge money contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PropJoe View Post
When you draft at the top of the 1st round and draft players like Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Staal, Toews, Kane, and Seabrook it's easier to maintain NHL success without giving up minor league talent/draft picks. I don't get why this difficult to understand.
I'd like you to sell this theory on Blue Jackets fans. Or Oilers fans. Or Islanders fans. Or Panthers fans.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:45 PM
  #109
GoneFullHextall
Fire Berube
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 32,560
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PropJoe View Post
When you draft at the top of the 1st round and draft players like Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Staal, Toews, Kane, and Seabrook it's easier to maintain NHL success without giving up minor league talent/draft picks. I don't get why this difficult to understand.
because its a baseless argument that is completely false. teams are always looking to improve their clubs. Some teams dont give up their prospects and actually use them. Why is it so ****ing difficult to comprehend that its ok and a good idea to have prospects. good prospects and remain good.
Flyers have a ton of top end talent right? So why is there a need to always give away draft picks for rentals?

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:46 PM
  #110
The Couturier Effect
Registered User
 
The Couturier Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 4,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Also, Jonathan Quick might be a wee bit better than Michael Leighton.
I don't know...it's pretty close

The Couturier Effect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:47 PM
  #111
PALE PWNR
Registered User
 
PALE PWNR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,639
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
because its a baseless argument that is completely false. teams are always looking to improve their clubs. Some teams dont give up their prospects and actually use them. Why is it so ****ing difficult to comprehend that its ok and a good idea to have prospects. good prospects and remain good.
Flyers have a ton of top end talent right? So why is there a need to always give away draft picks for rentals?
How do we acquire top talent? Oh yea. We traded for it. I don't see the problem with having a thin prospect pool when our team is young and competetive. It's not like we have no one. Gostisbehere and Laughton are good prospects. Cousins looks like he could be something too. You can supplement lacking a strong prospect pool with signings like Matt Read or trade's like Leino.

PALE PWNR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:52 PM
  #112
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 112,566
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PALE PWNR View Post
How do we acquire top talent? Oh yea. We traded for it. I don't see the problem with having a thin prospect pool when our team is young and competetive. It's not like we have no one. Gostisbehere and Laughton are good prospects. Cousins looks like he could be something too. You can supplement lacking a strong prospect pool with signings like Matt Read or trade's like Leino.
So then, how come the Flyers had to offer sheet Weber instead of simply trading for him like the Penguins and Rangers were planning to do?

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:55 PM
  #113
PropJoe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
because its a baseless argument that is completely false. teams are always looking to improve their clubs. Some teams dont give up their prospects and actually use them. Why is it so ****ing difficult to comprehend that its ok and a good idea to have prospects. good prospects and remain good.
Flyers have a ton of top end talent right? So why is there a need to always give away draft picks for rentals?
I'm not saying its not a good idea to have good prospects but it's easier to build a talent base when you can draft players like that. If you draft guys like that you don't have to sell prospects and picks for players like Pronger.

Teams are always looking to improve but when already have top line NHL talent you aren't nearly as compelled to trade for it.

PropJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:57 PM
  #114
GoneFullHextall
Fire Berube
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 32,560
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PALE PWNR View Post
How do we acquire top talent? Oh yea. We traded for it. I don't see the problem with having a thin prospect pool when our team is young and competetive. It's not like we have no one. Gostisbehere and Laughton are good prospects. Cousins looks like he could be something too. You can supplement lacking a strong prospect pool with signings like Matt Read or trade's like Leino.
so while other teams are using their defensive prospects to make up for injuries ect we sign crappy #6 defenseman. Again who do the Flyers have they can call up on the blueline after Gus. Nobody. there isnt one AHL defenseman I would trust after Gus and he was a FA signing. That is sad. That has been my whole point in all this. I never once said we need to have a top notch AHL team. But look at that roster the last couple of years(minus the lockout years). Its pretty freaking bad.
I never said we dont have good prospects. We do. But after Laughton, Cousins, Ghost and Stolarz it drops off. fast.
for every Matt Read we have Jason Akeson and Luke Pither.
I really hope that we have started to change our philisophy on how we deal with our prospects. I really do. Peronally I would love it if we had some kids in the AHL who we could call up and not just be some 4th line plugger who has zero offense.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 09:59 PM
  #115
PALE PWNR
Registered User
 
PALE PWNR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,639
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
So then, how come the Flyers had to offer sheet Weber instead of simply trading for him like the Penguins and Rangers were planning to do?
Because they didn't want to give up our core youth for 1 player? Are you serious with this question? You would have us give up Schenn and Couturier for Weber that's what it would of cost. Could you imagine what our offense would look like? I don't know what the Preds wanted from either NYR or Pitt but I'm sure they weren't about to accept simply prospects and picks or they would of taken the compensation. We offersheeted him because we didn't want to give up what they were asking for and didn't want to see him go anywhere else and we thought there was a chance the Preds dont match. I don't see the problem with that move either but I'm sure someone will find fault with that decision as well.

PALE PWNR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:03 PM
  #116
BrindamoursNose
Registered User
 
BrindamoursNose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
I still think the trading of Carter and Richards was Sniders call. I just have a hard time believing that it was anything those idiots in the Philly papers were printing.
You really think they were traded because they liked to have a few beers?
Not that I want to go down that road with that topic because it just brings out the worst in people.
Who else was going to get traded to clear salary? Hartnell? Giroux? Briere?
Carter and Richards NTC had not kicked in yet with their new contracts.
I don't know what they were traded for, but I know it wasn't to make room for a goalie. And again, you only had to trade one of them to clear salary. Doesn't explain them both.

BrindamoursNose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:06 PM
  #117
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 112,566
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PALE PWNR View Post
Because they didn't want to give up our core youth for 1 player? Are you serious with this question? You would have us give up Schenn and Couturier for Weber that's what it would of cost. Could you imagine what our offense would look like? I don't know what the Preds wanted from either NYR or Pitt but I'm sure they weren't about to accept simply prospects and picks or they would of taken the compensation. We offersheeted him because we didn't want to give up what they were asking for and didn't want to see him go anywhere else and we thought there was a chance the Preds dont match. I don't see the problem with that move either but I'm sure someone will find fault with that decision as well.
Problems rationally solved if our farm system wasn't utterly decrepit. Common theme here.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:08 PM
  #118
PALE PWNR
Registered User
 
PALE PWNR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,639
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
so while other teams are using their defensive prospects to make up for injuries ect we sign crappy #6 defenseman. Again who do the Flyers have they can call up on the blueline after Gus. Nobody. there isnt one AHL defenseman I would trust after Gus and he was a FA signing. That is sad. That has been my whole point in all this. I never once said we need to have a top notch AHL team. But look at that roster the last couple of years(minus the lockout years). Its pretty freaking bad.
I never said we dont have good prospects. We do. But after Laughton, Cousins, Ghost and Stolarz it drops off. fast.
for every Matt Read we have Jason Akeson and Luke Pither.
I really hope that we have started to change our philisophy on how we deal with our prospects. I really do. Peronally I would love it if we had some kids in the AHL who we could call up and not just be some 4th line plugger who has zero offense.
So every team has young guys that can step in and play and be effective in NHL as a callup after the guys on their roster? Wow why would they have the old guy they are replacing him with in the first place then? He's probably more expensive and less effective apparently. What is the Problem with Foster Lilja and Gervais being your #6,7 and 8? That's a lot of experience on the back end. They might not be the best but whose #6 or #7 defensemen is?

PALE PWNR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:09 PM
  #119
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beef Runner
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 42,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrindamoursNose View Post
I don't know what they were traded for, but I know it wasn't to make room for a goalie. And again, you only had to trade one of them to clear salary. Doesn't explain them both.
They needed more cap space than what was required to sign Bryz. They had to fill other spots on the roster as well. It was always clear two players would need to be moved. Since the prospect pool was empty and Richards/Carter would get the most return of any of our players, trading them made the most logical sense.

The partying garbage probably had little to do with it, when you consider there were lots of practical reasons for Homer to make those trades.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:11 PM
  #120
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
The cap mismanagement had far more to do with it.
That they needed cap room to accommodate Briere coming back and having acquired Carle is the what. The why is how Upshall became the who.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:13 PM
  #121
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beef Runner
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 42,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
That they needed cap room to accommodate Briere coming back and having acquired Carle is the what. The why is how Upshall became the who.
It's not impossible Phoenix demanded Upshall, instead of Homer offering him from the start. Homer was in a very weak position because the cap woes were quite apparent.

Or, we could go the TMZ route and assume they lived lifestyles that make Keith Richards look like a Benedictine monk.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:15 PM
  #122
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 112,566
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
That they needed cap room to accommodate Briere coming back and having acquired Carle is the what. The why is how Upshall became the who.
They saved $331K doing that. Or $218K less than they were paying Riley Cote to not be waived and sent to the Phantoms. Which is Exhibit A to "Holmgren will do anything to win," because he's already demonstrated otherwise.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:16 PM
  #123
The Couturier Effect
Registered User
 
The Couturier Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 4,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Or, we could go the TMZ route and assume they lived lifestyles that make Keith Richards look like a Benedictine monk.

The Couturier Effect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:18 PM
  #124
GoneFullHextall
Fire Berube
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 32,560
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
That they needed cap room to accommodate Briere coming back and having acquired Carle is the what. The why is how Upshall became the who.
that was the year they had to sign 2 college kids off the street to PTO's the final weekend against the Rangers.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 10:19 PM
  #125
PALE PWNR
Registered User
 
PALE PWNR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,639
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Problems rationally solved if our farm system wasn't utterly decrepit. Common theme here.
Schenn and Couturier are our farm. The common theme is you refuse to acknowledge that our best offensive players are also our youngest and the ones you would have to give up in a trade of that magnitutude. Our farm is in the NHL already. How many of our picks next year have been traded? How about the year after that? Did we have a 1st and a 2nd last year? Who cares that we trade our future when we already have an extended future due to the youth of our current roster?

PALE PWNR is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.