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

Phantoms Game 3: Notes & Quotes

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-08-2005, 11:37 PM
  #1
Bill_Meltzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 479
vCash: 500
Phantoms Game 3: Notes & Quotes

The Phantoms are such a well-oiled machine right now that nothing seems to phase them-- 5-on-3s, injuries, etc. After the game, Stevens repeated several times, "you can't look ahead to the result; you have to love the process." Everyone on the club is really buying into that.

* How huge was that breakaway save by Niittymäki-- I believe it was on Vigier-- right after Richards' goal game the Phantoms a 1-0 lead? Niittymäki was sharp as a tack tonight; almost no rebounds. He should have been 2nd, rather than 3rd star, in my opinion.

* Another poised effort by Picard tonight. Stevens said the Flyers people, including Hitch, had done some pre-scouting on him and had said weeks ago if Picard was needed, he could probably step right in and play in the AHL.

* Funny moment in the postgame press conference, Stevens was asked what the difference has been in winning three one goal games in the series. His reply: "One goal."

* Stevens on Mike Richards: "The more pressure he faces, the more poised he plays. When you have his kind of talent, along with that kind of character and work ethic, you've got a special player."

* Tonight was the first time I've ever seen a goaltender interference penalty and an allowed goal at the same time. If Santala's penalty was roughing after the goal, fine. But if it was goaltender inteference-- which, of course, can only happen during play-- why was the goal allowed? There was no explanation given about why that call was made as of the time I left the arena (about 10:15 pm).

* The Phantoms lockerroom was brimming with confidence after the game, but it was also remarkable just how calm and focused they are. They were very matter-of-fact about the win tonight and commented as much on the second period stretch where Chicago got through the NZ with speed several times as they did on the win. Once again, it's an indication of how just plugged in they are to executing the system. More than anywhere else, it's shown on the penalty kill. They've really kept Chicago to the perimeter and given Niittymäki a favorable angle and sightline on most every powerplay shot.

* Patrick Sharp commented after the game that several players noted there was a different vibe about the crowd tonight, and not just that there were more people there (12,412) than had been showing up for previous games. Even when they came out for warmups, the crowd was loud.

* Jeff Carter said he thought both he and Sharp touched the puck on the goal credited to Sharp; both of them swiped at the puck and their stick blades actually grazed.

* Bob Clarke held court during the first intermission. Regarding the way the NHL draft will work when there's finally an agreement, Clarke complained about the likely weighted lottery.

He said, "Why should teams like Washington, which tried to lose [late in the 2003-2004 season after a firesale of players] get rewarded TWICE? Why should teams like Pittsburgh that don't try to be competitive- and we know WHY, but still-- get an advantage? For this year, I think everyone should have the same chance."

Clarke on Sidney Crosby: "I do think he'll be a really good NHL player, but let's not annoint him yet. There've been a lot of guys who were supposed to be great NHL players that it didn't work out for."

Clarke on Mark Howe not being considered for the HHOF: "Mark Howe was better than some guys who are already in the Hall. I think he belongs there."

[Clarke was asked specifically by Wayne Fish why Howe's name never seems to come up for induction in Toronto. Clarke quickly dodged the first part of the question- likely because the WHL is still an oddly taboo subject for old school NHL lifers and the undercurrent of animosity among some hockey people toward Gordie Howe is an even more taboo subject. But Clarke did speak up with the aforementioned endorsement for Howe's worthiness].

Bill_Meltzer is offline  
Old
06-08-2005, 11:48 PM
  #2
Erack82
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 945
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Erack82
Quote:
* Tonight was the first time I've ever seen a goaltender interference penalty and an allowed goal at the same time. If Santala's penalty was roughing after the goal, fine. But if it was goaltender inteference-- which, of course, can only happen during play-- why was the goal allowed? There was no explanation given about why that call was made as of the time I left the arena (about 10:15 pm).
Santala was clearly pushed into Niitymaki, IMO Santala did nothing and was given a penalty.

Erack82 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 07:28 AM
  #3
iceman42
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bethlehem, NH
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,206
vCash: 500
Some notes from the recap:

The Phantoms have allowed just six combined first-period goals in 20 playoff games, including none by Chicago in the Finals.
Philadelphia is now 16-1 this season when wearing its purple third jerseys.
The Phantoms’ 10 straight home wins ties an AHL single-season record, matching Providence in 1999.
Slaney became the Phantoms’ all-time playoff points leader (27) by a defenseman.

iceman42 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 07:30 AM
  #4
iceman42
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bethlehem, NH
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_Meltzer
* Another poised effort by Picard tonight. Stevens said the Flyers people, including Hitch, had done some pre-scouting on him and had said weeks ago if Picard was needed, he could probably step right in and play in the AHL.
Thats great, cant teach poise. Hopefully he will add to that growing number of excellent prospects from the class of 2003.

iceman42 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 07:34 AM
  #5
DaveBrown21
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 460
vCash: 500
Thanks so much, Meltz, for the Phantoms recap. As a south Jersey native/lifelong Flyers fan, now living in VA, it's like home cooking to read how well the Phantoms are doing.

Please tell me...what current NHL players would you compare Carter and Richards to? Are these kids sure-fire talents that will stay on the Flyers roster once the season begins in Oct (fingers crossed)?

DaveBrown21 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 07:46 AM
  #6
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 115,744
vCash: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveBrown21
Are these kids sure-fire talents that will stay on the Flyers roster once the season begins in Oct (fingers crossed)?

Yes. Carter and Richards have both been men among boys during the postseason. Both of them, especially Carter are better than some of the guys on the Flyers right now.

GKJ is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 07:56 AM
  #7
VaFlyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lynchburg, VA
Posts: 448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson
Yes. Carter and Richards have both been men among boys during the postseason. Both of them, especially Carter are better than some of the guys on the Flyers right now.
In case anyone is curious, the Phantoms have scored 60 goals so far in the playoffs. Carter and Richards have been involved with 37 of those goals, not involved in 23. Roughly 2/3.

VaFlyer is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 08:13 AM
  #8
Bill_Meltzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveBrown21
Please tell me...what current NHL players would you compare Carter and Richards to? Are these kids sure-fire talents that will stay on the Flyers roster once the season begins in Oct (fingers crossed)?
I'm usually very conservative when it comes to projecting players, but yes, I think both Carter and Richards could be in the NHL right now and both have the potential to be nucleus players at the NHL level.

The following comparisons are in terms of general playing style ONLY-- I'm not saying either player will the "next [insert name].

Richards is usually compared with either Mike Peca or Mike Ricci. Those who think he has a higher offensive upside throw out Doug Gilmour's name. I've been surprised by how well Richards handles himself against bigger players (he's listed at 6-0 but is no taller than 5-10). He also sees the ice really well. I think he has higher offensive upside than Ricci, at least.

Carter is often compared stylistically to the young Mats Sundin or Joe Nieuwendyk. He's got a great wrist shot and is a very smooth stickhandler and skater.

Bill_Meltzer is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 08:44 AM
  #9
DaveBrown21
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 460
vCash: 500
Thanks for the scouting reports on Carter and Richards. I'm really looking forward to seeing them play this upcoming season.

I imagine the Flyers roster as a whole will reflect a lot of youth, especially given the predicted buyouts of Amonte and LeClair. If the Flyers do add a piece or two to the puzzle, I'd like to see them sign Cory Stillman...and take maybe ink Adrian Aucoin to fill out the D.

DaveBrown21 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 08:53 AM
  #10
Stonehands77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waltham, MA
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveBrown21
Thanks for the scouting reports on Carter and Richards. I'm really looking forward to seeing them play this upcoming season.
Agreed on that, thanks Bill. The one time I've seen Carter and Richards play so far (Game 3 in Providence), was not the Phantoms best game. But I was VERY impressed with Carter's skating and puckhandling abilities, and the speed both he and Richards showed. Very promising. They looked good out there, and Richards certainly showed he's not above getting into it with people. I could see why people think they'll be good/great NHL players.

Quote:
I imagine the Flyers roster as a whole will reflect a lot of youth, especially given the predicted buyouts of Amonte and LeClair. If the Flyers do add a piece or two to the puzzle, I'd like to see them sign Cory Stillman...and take maybe ink Adrian Aucoin to fill out the D.
Adrian Aucoin in an interesting suggestion, and one I haven't heard before around here (Stillman plenty of times, and I do think he'd be a good signing). Haven't watched him much, but from the stats and what little I've seen of him, that guy is willing to play a lot of minutes, and he seems like he's got a good shot. Could be a nice addition to the Flyers. Of course, we'll have to see what the UFA market looks like, but Aucoin may be a better use of the limited dollars available than a higher priced guy like a Pronger or whoever.

Stonehands77 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 08:54 AM
  #11
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Richards PP goal was an absolutely beautiful wrist shot...

Jester is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 08:59 AM
  #12
DaveBrown21
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by G_Love
...Aucoin may be a better use of the limited dollars available than a higher priced guy like a Pronger or whoever.
Aucoin has a great shot from the point...and he's not afraid to mix it up.

DaveBrown21 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 09:24 AM
  #13
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_Meltzer
* Bob Clarke held court during the first intermission. Regarding the way the NHL draft will work when there's finally an agreement, Clarke complained about the likely weighted lottery.

He said, "Why should teams like Washington, which tried to lose [late in the 2003-2004 season after a firesale of players] get rewarded TWICE? Why should teams like Pittsburgh that don't try to be competitive- and we know WHY, but still-- get an advantage? For this year, I think everyone should have the same chance."
That's a good point. I don't think it would be fair for the Flyers to have the same chances as the Pens, but Clarke's got a good point--Washington purposely tanked, why should they benefit from that?

Dr Love is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 09:50 AM
  #14
iceman42
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bethlehem, NH
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Love
That's a good point. I don't think it would be fair for the Flyers to have the same chances as the Pens, but Clarke's got a good point--Washington purposely tanked, why should they benefit from that?
Me either, while they should get a better shot, maybe the line should be drawn at playoff teams vs non-playoff teams. So non-playoff teams get 4 balls, and playoff teams get 1 ball, or something like that.

iceman42 is offline  
Old
06-09-2005, 11:19 AM
  #15
stanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman42
Me either, while they should get a better shot, maybe the line should be drawn at playoff teams vs non-playoff teams. So non-playoff teams get 4 balls, and playoff teams get 1 ball, or something like that.
Simply using the same order as 2004 seems unfair, because it presumes that all 2004 draft picks were equal and that all teams would have finished in the same order. On the other hand, throwing ping pong balls in an air machine is probably even worse. We need to use our brains here. What do we know? We have no team results to work with from last year, so we're going to have to use previous seasons (not just 2003-04). We know that under the previous bargaining agreement, organizations retained exclusive, arbitration-ineligible rights to drafted players for five years (presuming that they were drafted at 18 and signed with their first team). If that's a fair presumption, then perhaps a five-year weighted system, where the most recent years weigh the most, might be a good start. Maybe something weighted along the lines of 50, 25, 12, 8, 5 percent, for example.

At any rate, the numbers I've listed here aren't important. Pay attention to the concept. The weighted percentages should be determined objectively, perhaps through a statistical analysis of the contribution of draft picks to a team. These weighted percentages should be based on a league-wide average of drafted player contribution. Subsequently, these weighted averages should be applied to a team's won-loss record, or perhaps point total, in the given year. Better yet, a point total derived with consideration of the point total of their opposition in any given year. Whatever it might be, it should be FAIR and equitable, not something determined by somebody's whim, geographic location, or favorite color.

To review briefly:
1) determine the weighted percentage
2) apply it to won-loss record

Let's say a team had the following point totals:

2004 - 50 pts
2003 - 90 pts
2002 - 90 pts
2001 - 90 pts
2000 - 100 pts

We'd have the following weighted point totals (not considering an opposition coefficient I suggested):

2004 - 50 * (.50) = 25
2003 - 90 * (.25) = 22.5
2002 - 90 * (.13) = 11.25
2001 - 90 * (.08) = 7.2
2000 - 100 * (.05) = 5.0

The sum of these totals is 70.95. This total could be used to determine a team's chances of finishing in a lottery, or it could be used directly to determine draft position, which is what I would think is the most fair. Lottery shlottery. Do we still bloodlet people when they have a fever? No, we do not, and we shouldn't use quantitative information only to bow to the qualitative at the end.

Anywho, let me try another one:

2004 - 100 pts
2003 - 50 pts
2002 - 50 pts
2001 - 50 pts
2000 - 50 pts

We'd have the following weighted point totals (not considering an opposition coefficient I suggested):

2004 - 100 * (.50) = 25
2003 - 50 * (.25) = 22.5
2002 - 50 * (.13) = 11.25
2001 - 50 * (.08) = 7.2
2000 - 50 * (.05) = 5.0

Which gives us 75.5, which is higher than the team that had greater success over the five-year period. This team would draft after the first team. One positive I can see from such a system is that teams that "tanked," as Clarke insinuated the Caps did (well, they did blow money on the free agent market then salavaged what they could at the trade deadline without regard for team won-loss record), is that it considers the success of the franchise over a period of time instead of the most recent year. Missing all of 2004-05 poses an unusual problem that I don't think something as simple as the previous draft's order or a completely random lottery addresses fairly.

It's merely an idea, a starting point. Again, the details would have to be worked out. Input and open discussion welcome.

stanley is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:34 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.