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

Hide the women and children..Snider wants changes!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2013, 12:58 PM
  #26
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
Holmgren likes his team man.
I hope people never stop saying this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
Realistically, what could they possibly do that could make this team worse? Make a deal, who cares. Anything they do couldn't possibly hurt... Unless you trade the 1st.. That would be dumb.

Honestly, other than Giroux, Couturier, Mason and our 1st rounder, I'm putting everything on the table, auction style.
Oh, trust me it can get worse. The fact that you just listed four players/assets that are off the table means that it can get worse.

We could be Buffalo, Edmonton, Islanders, etc. That would be worse.

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:05 PM
  #27
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 31,634
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
I hope people never stop saying this.
im going to keep saying it. boggles my mind how Holmgren can say it with where the Flyers are in the standings. the eye test shows the Flyers are a average hockey team. at best.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:09 PM
  #28
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
im going to keep saying it. boggles my mind how Holmgren can say it with where the Flyers are in the standings. the eye test shows the Flyers are a average hockey team. at best.
Hey man, you never know... they might just "flip the switch".

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:14 PM
  #29
Go For It
Registered User
 
Go For It's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Collegeville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
im going to keep saying it. boggles my mind how Holmgren can say it with where the Flyers are in the standings. the eye test shows the Flyers are a average hockey team. at best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Hey man, you never know... they might just "flip the switch".
It is what it is at this point. What can you do?

Go For It is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:27 PM
  #30
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Your list includes pretty much the only players and pick that would be attractive to other teams. No one wants Adam Hall, Hal Gill, or Zac Rinaldo. Everyone else is either not appealing, underperforming, or has a No Trade clause.
Yes, because Halls, Gills, and Rinaldos are all we have aside from Giroux, Couturier, and Mason


There are more than a few teams in the league desperate for a player like Simmonds. As frustrating as he is, there are GMs who would give up value to land him. Same goes for Voracek, B. Schenn, and Downie. I'm not advocating a big more, but to act like the team is full of no value players is misguided. Even Hartnell could get moderate value at the deadline if the team falls off the rails and goes that route.


Also, I find it funny how after the Caps game we have an explosion of, "I hate this team! Everyone should be available!" remarks, then when the owner says that he'll explore whatever options necessary everyone jumps back in and says, "Oh, god, that is terrible!". Such a fickle an base sometimes.

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:30 PM
  #31
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Yes, because Halls, Gills, and Rinaldos are all we have aside from Giroux, Couturier, and Mason


There are more than a few teams in the league desperate for a player like Simmonds. As frustrating as he is, there are GMs who would give up value to land him. Same goes for Voracek, B. Schenn, and Downie. I'm not advocating a big more, but to act like the team is full of no value players is misguided. Even Hartnell could get moderate value at the deadline if the team falls off the rails and goes that route.


Also, I find it funny how after the Caps game we have an explosion of, "I hate this team! Everyone should be available!" remarks, then when the owner says that he'll explore whatever options necessary everyone jumps back in and says, "Oh, god, that is terrible!". Such a fickle an base sometimes.
It's possible to dislike the team and not think it will be successful while also wanting management to be patient and not make rash moves. They're not mutually exclusive ideas.

Snider also isn't the GM. People would rather him not be involved with anything regarding the running of the team aside from hiring and firing GM's and keeping the team running financially.

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:30 PM
  #32
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schenntacular Duo View Post
Article written by Tim P. Hahaha is all that needs to be said
While it is true that Panaccio wrote the article and is adding intrigue just like my heading about hiding the women and children....I doubt he made up Snider's words. That is what I'm inferring from and I think there is something there in a sense that he wants to see some improvement pronto.....more evidence the guy is impatient and is probably adding undue pressure on his GM. If he's smart he'll ask for Holmgren's resignation and turn the keys over to another GM...even if it's Hextall which may or may not be a fresh perspective but the least worst option at this point...

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:33 PM
  #33
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Yes, because Halls, Gills, and Rinaldos are all we have aside from Giroux, Couturier, and Mason


There are more than a few teams in the league desperate for a player like Simmonds. As frustrating as he is, there are GMs who would give up value to land him. Same goes for Voracek, B. Schenn, and Downie. I'm not advocating a big more, but to act like the team is full of no value players is misguided. Even Hartnell could get moderate value at the deadline if the team falls off the rails and goes that route.


Also, I find it funny how after the Caps game we have an explosion of, "I hate this team! Everyone should be available!" remarks, then when the owner says that he'll explore whatever options necessary everyone jumps back in and says, "Oh, god, that is terrible!". Such a fickle an base sometimes.
No..what is terrible is having to be reactionary all the time. Again there is no measured approach to to this team and now the chicken's are coming home to roost. They kept Lavi too long and they are keeping Holmgren too long.....this is my gripe personally.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:37 PM
  #34
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
It's possible to dislike the team and not think it will be successful while also wanting management to be patient and not make rash moves. They're not mutually exclusive ideas.
How are those not mutually exclusive? If you don't think the team has the potential to be successful, by definition, wouldn't you want management to explore all possible options? I just don't understand how one who has no faith in the team's construction can be upset by Snider's remarks.

Quote:
Snider also isn't the GM. People would rather him not be involved with anything regarding the running of the team aside from hiring and firing GM's and keeping the team running financially.
This is a more legitimate concern, but still a bit misguided. I agree, Snider has no place micromanaging the day to day operations of the team. But is that really what he's doing here? He did that with Bryzgalov, and it was a massive failure. Obviously I agree with that.

But in this case, he's simply repeating what a majority of the fan base was saying after Sunday's loss. Now many of those same fans are upset that he would say such things. It doesn't make any sense.

EDIT: Wouldn't you be more upset if Snider was content with the team?

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:42 PM
  #35
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreshPerspective View Post
No..what is terrible is having to be reactionary all the time. Again there is no measured approach to to this team and now the chicken's are coming home to roost. They kept Lavi too long and they are keeping Holmgren too long.....this is my gripe personally.
Okay, so you, like many others, advocate patience. That's a valid stance. But perhaps the decision to hang onto Holmgren is the measured approach that you're not seeing. Clearly there was a future oriented approach to the 2011 shakeup. If Snider were to let Holmgren go before that plan can mature, wouldn't that be the opposite of patience? Giving up on the operation in the middle of it because it's not paying immediate dividends would be counterproductive as it relates to what (I think) you're suggesting. If you're not advocating patience, then please, correct me if I'm wrong.


EDIT: For the record, I'm not advocating hanging onto Holmgren. I just don't understand how these opinions can be consistent with each other.

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:57 PM
  #36
RJ8812
Gunner Stahl #9
 
RJ8812's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,162
vCash: 769
No trade this season should be made with the intension of saving the season. Every move should be made to help this team in the future

RJ8812 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 01:58 PM
  #37
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Yes, because Halls, Gills, and Rinaldos are all we have aside from Giroux, Couturier, and Mason

There are more than a few teams in the league desperate for a player like Simmonds. As frustrating as he is, there are GMs who would give up value to land him. Same goes for Voracek, B. Schenn, and Downie. I'm not advocating a big more, but to act like the team is full of no value players is misguided. Even Hartnell could get moderate value at the deadline if the team falls off the rails and goes that route.
Let me spell it out for you.

No one on the planet wants Gill, Hall, Rinaldo, Rosehill, VandeVelde (who?), Raffl (they will, but no one knows who he is yet), Streit ($+age issue), Vinny ($+age+injury).

Underperforming or underwhelming:
Hartnell, Simmonds, BSchenn, Voracek

NTC/NMC:
Hartnell, Kimmo (not sure about Vinny/Streit).

Question marks (in terms of other teams' interest):
Downie, Read (I suspect he would be appealing; also someone I'd prefer on the keeper list), Coburn, Grossman, Gus, Mesz, LSchenn.

If the Flyers are looking to upgrade at any position other than in net (wow, how's that for something different?), the first thing an opposing GM will want is one of the untouchables, or Read. It's up to Homer to make it work for both sides, without gutting his team. I'm not sure that's possible without him throwing in a bunch of picks.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:03 PM
  #38
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Let me spell it out for you.

No one on the planet wants Gill, Hall, Rinaldo, Rosehill, VandeVelde (who?), Raffl (they will, but no one knows who he is yet), Streit ($+age issue), Vinny ($+age+injury).

Underperforming or underwhelming:
Hartnell, Simmonds, BSchenn, Voracek

NTC/NMC:
Hartnell, Kimmo (not sure about Vinny/Streit).

Question marks (in terms of other teams' interest):
Downie, Read (I suspect he would be appealing; also someone I'd prefer on the keeper list), Coburn, Grossman, Gus, Mesz, LSchenn.

If the Flyers are looking to upgrade at any position other than in net (wow, how's that for something different?), the first thing an opposing GM will want is one of the untouchables, or Read. It's up to Homer to make it work for both sides, without gutting his team. I'm not sure that's possible without him throwing in a bunch of picks.
You have spelled out nothing.


Just because a player is underperforming other GMs won't consider acquiring them? Seriously?

If Simmonds, BSchenn, or Voracek were made available, you can bet teams would be calling Holmgren. The Habs are literally desperate for a player of Simmonds's skill set. Don't act like the market completely dries up just because a player is underperforming on an underperforming team.

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:05 PM
  #39
RJ8812
Gunner Stahl #9
 
RJ8812's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,162
vCash: 769
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Let me spell it out for you.

No one on the planet wants Gill, Hall, Rinaldo, Rosehill, VandeVelde (who?), Raffl (they will, but no one knows who he is yet), Streit ($+age issue), Vinny ($+age+injury).

Underperforming or underwhelming:
Hartnell, Simmonds, BSchenn, Voracek

NTC/NMC:
Hartnell, Kimmo (not sure about Vinny/Streit).

Question marks (in terms of other teams' interest):
Downie, Read (I suspect he would be appealing; also someone I'd prefer on the keeper list), Coburn, Grossman, Gus, Mesz, LSchenn.

If the Flyers are looking to upgrade at any position other than in net (wow, how's that for something different?), the first thing an opposing GM will want is one of the untouchables, or Read. It's up to Homer to make it work for both sides, without gutting his team. I'm not sure that's possible without him throwing in a bunch of picks.
This means nothing. Just because a player is underperforming, doesn't mean no other GM would want them

RJ8812 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:06 PM
  #40
orange is better
than other colors...
 
orange is better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Your list includes pretty much the only players and pick that would be attractive to other teams. No one wants Adam Hall, Hal Gill, or Zac Rinaldo. Everyone else is either not appealing, underperforming, or has a No Trade clause.
both Schenns, Simmonds, Voracek, read, Hartnell, Coburn, Timonen, Grossmann have no value? I'm pretty sure there are teams out there that would love to have Simmonds or Voracwk especially.

orange is better is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:10 PM
  #41
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
both Schenns, Simmonds, Voracek, read, Hartnell, Coburn, Timonen, Grossmann have no value? I'm pretty sure there are teams out there that would love to have Simmonds or Voracwk especially.
No one wants young 2nd line wingers or minute eating vet defensemen!

FlyersFan61290 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:13 PM
  #42
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,876
vCash: 500
Okay, you guys win.

It's a complete mystery to me why the Flyers aren't in first place with all this fantastic talent.

The Flyers could trade just one of these gems for a superstar.






Or maybe not...

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:13 PM
  #43
Mota
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
The last thing they should do is force a trade that isn't there. I know people don't think Homer knows what he is doing, but I am sure if there was a winning trade out there he would make it (see Talbot for Downie). I just think any player available right now has a price tag that is way too steep to be worth it.

Mota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:17 PM
  #44
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Okay, you guys win.

It's a complete mystery to me why the Flyers aren't in first place with all this fantastic talent.

The Flyers could trade just one of these gems for a superstar.






Or maybe not...
Please, just stop.

Even the Sabres had (and have) talent that would be intriguing for other teams. Why was there a market for Vanek?

Nobody said the Flyers could land superstars in exchange for Voracek or Simmonds or Coburn. We're just refuting the assertion you made that no GM would be interested in them.

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:24 PM
  #45
MP92
Ginger Jesus
 
MP92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Okay, you guys win.

It's a complete mystery to me why the Flyers aren't in first place with all this fantastic talent.

The Flyers could trade just one of these gems for a superstar.






Or maybe not...
I love how you just put words in people's mouth because your mad people disagree with your ridiculous claim.

MP92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:27 PM
  #46
flyershockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,897
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Okay, you guys win.

It's a complete mystery to me why the Flyers aren't in first place with all this fantastic talent.

The Flyers could trade just one of these gems for a superstar.






Or maybe not...
You know there's a middle ground between being an elite team and a team devoid of talent, right?

That was a "take your ball and go home" post if I've ever seen one.

Edit: The Flyers have a lot of pieces that could be packaged to bring in a superstar winger/defensemen, if they wanted to. The problem is they have zero organizational depth at pretty much every position. What you see is pretty much what you got from a talent stand point. They can't throw a package together of Schenn/Voracek to get a Bobby Ryan type, because there's almost no one down in Adirondack that could replace the lost roster spot. Things are starting to get better as they build their prospect pool back up, but it's going to be a long time before the Flyers can be real players in the trade market. Any trades until then are filling one hole while opening up another.

flyershockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:27 PM
  #47
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCOREacek View Post
I love how you just put words in people's mouth because your mad people disagree with your ridiculous claim.
Seriously, one of the more ridiculous straw men I've ever seen. These players aren't necessarily gems, but they're quite obviously not worthless either.

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:29 PM
  #48
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,876
vCash: 500
What I said was that most GM's are going to want the guys on the initial protected list.

I was challenged, because apparently that was incorrect. I said that there are a number of players that are questionable - not that they're not worthwhile players, but they're far from the first guys another GM will ask about. Is that incorrect also?

Personally, I'd drive Simmonds out of town if it meant that a strong smart two-way forward was coming back. I'd drive LSchenn out of town if it meant that a very good young puck moving defenseman was coming back. I just don't see that happening. Maybe you all do, and I'm undervaluing these players. Or maybe I'm not wrong.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:30 PM
  #49
MP92
Ginger Jesus
 
MP92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Seriously, one of the more ridiculous straw men I've ever seen. These players aren't necessarily gems, but they're quite obviously not worthless either.
Exactly. Im glad you confronted CH about it too because I wanted to but then got sidetracked with something else regarding work.

We may not get full value for them, but we could still get decent returns.

MP92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2013, 02:37 PM
  #50
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Okay, so you, like many others, advocate patience. That's a valid stance. But perhaps the decision to hang onto Holmgren is the measured approach that you're not seeing. Clearly there was a future oriented approach to the 2011 shakeup. If Snider were to let Holmgren go before that plan can mature, wouldn't that be the opposite of patience? Giving up on the operation in the middle of it because it's not paying immediate dividends would be counterproductive as it relates to what (I think) you're suggesting. If you're not advocating patience, then please, correct me if I'm wrong.


EDIT: For the record, I'm not advocating hanging onto Holmgren. I just don't understand how these opinions can be consistent with each other.
What is the plan exactly? I'm still trying to figure it out. I kind of saw it with the Richards and Carter trades and then as I've previously said, Holmgren hasn't followed them up properly. He wasn't measured with his high stakes bet on Parise, Suter and Weber and it set this team back since he didn't have a plan B or it was too late to implement one. This past offseason he tried to address the mistakes of the previous (two) season(s) because he was able to buy himself out of them with the amenesties. As I suspected they were lateral moves that simply stabilized the team but didn't necessarily put them on the path forward. They are pretty much stuck in neutral and if the goaltending goes again they will regress to last year's futility.

Either way, they are looking at two seasons of not making the playoffs. At some point the GM has to assume some responsibility for that. Keeping Holmgren is not a measured plan....at best Holmgren will just continue to be inconsistent..he will win some of his gambles and lose them since that is how he GM's. I still think part of it is because Snider meddles too much and doesn't empower his GM enough to be his own man..the other part is that I don't particularly think Holmgren is the type of GM to assemble a Stanley Cup contender any longer. He is frazzled IMO...time for a fresh perspective.

FreshPerspective 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 10:22 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.