looks like our goaltending prospects got lit up last night against Syracuse
Speaking of goaltending prospects getting lit up, Hovinen was pulled the other day after allowing 4 goals on 12 shots. He made up for it by shutting out HPK 5-0.
Maybe Philadelphia did a misstake not signing Joacim Eriksson. He has started this season very well, 95,8% and 1 gaa in 6 games in SEL. I never fully understod why you let him go, he was one of your top prospects right?
Maybe Philadelphia did a misstake not signing Joacim Eriksson. He has started this season very well, 95,8% and 1 gaa in 6 games in SEL. I never fully understod why you let him go, he was one of your top prospects right?
Trying to understand many of the moves of the Flyers organization is like trying to think up a new color. Or a new noise. After a while, you just give up trying.
Maybe Philadelphia did a misstake not signing Joacim Eriksson. He has started this season very well, 95,8% and 1 gaa in 6 games in SEL. I never fully understod why you let him go, he was one of your top prospects right?
We signed another goalie from Finland and I guess they thought he was better. I think if Eriksson does well this season another team will sign him. He wants to play in the NHL and it was known he was very excited to play for the Flyers but they let him go.
We signed another goalie from Finland and I guess they thought he was better. I think if Eriksson does well this season another team will sign him. He wants to play in the NHL and it was known he was very excited to play for the Flyers but they let him go.
IMO a mistake that should have never happened...They handcuffed themselves if Bryz ever does start to fall off a bit in the later end of his deal. Bob won't be here to save the organization, and we won't have Eriksson, who was next in line after Bob.
IMO a mistake that should have never happened...They handcuffed themselves if Bryz ever does start to fall off a bit in the later end of his deal. Bob won't be here to save the organization, and we won't have Eriksson, who was next in line after Bob.
And how do you know that they would have still had Eriksson in 1018,19,20? Or that Eriksson will even make it to the NHL? Are you just ignoring that they have Hoivenen? And how about the possibility that they draft another Goalie, or as they did with Bobrovsky, sign an undrafted Free Agent that works out in the next 9 years from now?
So saying that they handcuffed themselves isn't a credible statement
And how do you know that they would have still had Eriksson in 1018,19,20? Or that Eriksson will even make it to the NHL? Are you just ignoring that they have Hoivenen? And how about the possibility that they draft another Goalie, or as they did with Bobrovsky, sign an undrafted Free Agent that works out in the next 9 years from now?
So saying that they handcuffed themselves isn't a credible statement
No saying that they didn't handcuff themselves when they let a perfectly viable future option walk because they felt like is not a credible statement when that is exactly what they did.
YOU NEVER LET SOLID ASSETS WALK FOR NO REASON.
By the very definition of handcuff (to restrain/restrict movement or flexibility), the Flyers handcuffed themselves.
No saying that they didn't handcuff themselves when they let a perfectly viable future option walk because they felt like is not a credible statement when that is exactly what they did.
YOU NEVER LET SOLID ASSETS WALK FOR NO REASON.
That's what you think they did. And they didn't let a solid asset walk for no reason. The chose not to sign him because they felt he wasn't worth signing. And that they felt that Hoivenen was better. This is a decision made by professional qualified talent evaluators. Which you are not.
That's what you think they did. And they didn't let a solid asset walk for no reason. The chose not to sign him because they felt he wasn't worth signing. And that they felt that Hoivenen was better. This is a decision made by professional qualified talent evaluators. Which you are not.
It will be interesting to see if these professional qualified talent evaluators are correct or a bunch of fans on a message board are correct. Right now he is one of the best goalies in the SEL. I think if he continues to perform like this, a team will easily try to sign him next summer. Eriksson and Hovinen are about the same right now. Only difference is Hovinen is 2 years older and it took him till he was 22 to put up better numbers in what most would say a worse league. He was also forgotten by the team that drafted him.
Honestly, I think they see Hovinen as just an AHL guy. After Bob is either traded or his contract runs out, I wouldnt be surprised if we go out and sign cheap backups for a few years. Breezy will most likely get hurt and we will be rolling with backups for abit.
That's what you think they did. And they didn't let a solid asset walk for no reason. The chose not to sign him because they felt he wasn't worth signing. And that they felt that Hoivenen was better. This is a decision made by professional qualified talent evaluators. Which you are not.
Professional qualified talent evaluators picked Sanguinetti over Giroux in the 2006 draft.
You sit here and complain about my qualifications. What the hell are your qualifications to tell me that my opinions don't matter?
I never bring out my position here and use it to claim to have some opinion better than anyone else here on this board. Yet, you have the balls to tell me that you're better than me just because I'm apparently some person "pretending" to be a qualified talent evaluator? I have this job because I write well, I like writing, I like watching hockey, and I'm willing to put in the work. It's not because my opinion is better than anyone else's here who watches hockey for themselves on a regular basis.
I have to tell you though that doesn't mean that don't I hold my own opinion in higher regard than other people on this board; namely yourself. You're quickly earning a poor reputation.
It will be interesting to see if these professional qualified talent evaluators are correct or a bunch of fans on a message board are correct. Right now he is one of the best goalies in the SEL. I think if he continues to perform like this, a team will easily try to sign him next summer. Eriksson and Hovinen are about the same right now. Only difference is Hovinen is 2 years older and it took him till he was 22 to put up better numbers in what most would say a worse league. He was also forgotten by the team that drafted him.
Honestly, I think they see Hovinen as just an AHL guy. After Bob is either traded or his contract runs out, I wouldnt be surprised if we go out and sign cheap backups for a few years. Breezy will most likely get hurt and we will be rolling with backups for abit.
I doubt very seriously that they see Hovinen as just an AHL. Bill Meltzer wrote that the Flyers see Hovinen closer to the NHL than Ericksson.
Player evaluations are never an exact science. But someone sitting home in Lumberton NJ doesn't have more insight into a player than the Scouts and talent evaluators who actually scout the players and are paid to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
Professional qualified talent evaluators picked Sanguinetti over Giroux in the 2006 draft.
This is another statement that isn't credible. Are you telling me that I have to explain to someone who writes for Hockey futures that player evaluations aren't an exact science? And don't say your aware of it, because someone who is aware of it would never make that statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
You sit here and complain about my qualifications. What the hell are your qualifications to tell me that my opinions don't matter?
I didn't say your opinions don't matter. What I said was that your statement wasn't credible. And it's not. All you need to have is some simple common sense to know that not signing one prospect doesn't handcuff a team 7,8,9 years down the road from now. You don't have to have any qualifications to know that.Just simple common sense
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
I never bring out my position here and use it to claim to have some opinion better than anyone else here on this board. Yet, you have the balls to tell me that you're better than me just because I'm apparently some person "pretending" to be a qualified talent evaluator? I have this job because I write well, I like writing, I like watching hockey, and I'm willing to put in the work. It's not because my opinion is better than anyone else's here who watches hockey for themselves on a regular basis.
No where in my post did I tell you that I'm better than you. So I have no idea where your getting that from. I think it's pretty evident that your not a qualified talent evaluator, or you wouldn't be making statements like you made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
I have to tell you though that doesn't mean that don't I hold my own opinion in higher regard than other people on this board; namely yourself. You're quickly earning a poor reputation.
What it comes down to is simply being right. And I'm right. Other than that, who cares about a reputation. Nobody can change that. I'm not a prospect guy, don't invest the time in it. But in any other areas of the pro game, I'll put my knowledge up against yours any day of the week and twice on Sundays. It's not much of a challenge.
The truth is that the Flyers were extremely high on Eriksson. He struggled slightly in his first SEL season, something that was almost bound to happen. The Flyers organization then saw that Hovinen was playing well in what I consider to be a lesser league. They jumped on Hovinen, who had only had one strong professional season believing that his size could make him a formidable asset going forward.
At this point the Flyers also forfeited their rights to Eriksson. I said at the time that it was a mistake, that Eriksson would rebound.
I don't believe Hovinen to be as talented as Eriksson, something that's obvious in my prospect grades/rankings.
Therefore, in letting go of a better goalie and a more legitimate prospect in Eriksson, the Flyers have handcuffed themselves to Hovinen. Even if Hovinen has some moderate success, I don't believe it will be significant enough to warrant dropping a better prospect.
Now, seeing as how Bobrovsky is almost assured not to be in the mix 4-5 years down the line should Bryzgalov start to falter, all that will currently be left in the prospect pool (unless of course the Flyers make a move to fix that) will be Hovinen, who pretty much everyone (except for the Flyers organization) considers to be a lesser prospect than Eriksson, who is younger and would've theoretically been ready by the time Bryzgalov is starting into the end run of his contract.
It doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what the Flyers' organization thinks.
The truth is that they made is mistake in the eyes of everyone who believes Eriksson to be a better prospect than Hovinen, not to mention younger and now proving himself by competing at a higher level against a higher level of competition compared to Hovinen.
So basically, everyone I can think of who covers prospects understands that the Flyers probably made a mistake.
Yet you believe that the Flyers didn't make a mistake just because they say so?
The Flyers were a victim of circumstance over the loss of Eriksson's rights more than anything. The way the CBA and transfer agreement is set up is not conducive for developing prospects from Europe.
I don't believe Hovinen to be as talented as Eriksson, something that's obvious in my prospect grades/rankings.
Therefore, in letting go of a better goalie and a more legitimate prospect in Eriksson, the Flyers have handcuffed themselves to Hovinen. Even if Hovinen has some moderate success, I don't believe it will be significant enough to warrant dropping a better prospect.
The problem here is that your posting that Eriksson is a better Goalie and a more legitimate prospect, as if it is a fact. It's not. Your not qualified sitting in Lumberton NJ to make that determination. Simple as that. In the Flyers view, who are professional Hockey people, Ericksson wasn't a good enough prospect to warrant an EL Contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
Now, seeing as how Bobrovsky is almost assured not to be in the mix 4-5 years down the line should Bryzgalov start to falter, all that will currently be left in the prospect pool (unless of course the Flyers make a move to fix that) will be Hovinen, who pretty much everyone (except for the Flyers organization) considers to be a lesser prospect than Eriksson, who is younger and would've theoretically been ready by the time Bryzgalov is starting into the end run of his contract.
I'm amazed by this. I really am. So in the next 4-5 years, the Flyers don't have the ability to draft a Goalie, sign any undrafted UFA's, which Bobrovsky was? Who is everyone? Qualify who everyone is? Because one of the top local analysts, who quite frankly has far more credibility than you do, and is one of the top local authorities on Euorpean Hockey, agrees that Hovinen is the better prospect and is more likely to reach the NHL sooner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
It doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what the Flyers' organization thinks.
But it matter what you think? And not what the Flyers, who are the professionals think? I see! LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
The truth is that they made is mistake in the eyes of everyone who believes Eriksson to be a better prospect than Hovinen, not to mention younger and now proving himself by competing at a higher level against a higher level of competition compared to Hovinen.
Again, who is everyone? No, it is not a truth that they made a mistake. It may be your opinion. But that is not a truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer
So basically, everyone I can think of who covers prospects understands that the Flyers probably made a mistake.
Yet you believe that the Flyers didn't make a mistake just because they say so?
Awesome...
No, not everyone as I already alluded to. I never said the Flyers didn't make a mistake. I just said they are more qualified than you or I, or any other person posting on here, to make that determination about a player.You are not qualifed to say that they made a mistake as a fact. You can have that opinion, but it is just an opinion. Maybe they did make a mistake. Maybe they didn't. But you can't make that determination from Lumberton NJ.
And to say that the Flyers handcuffed themselves for the next 4-5-7-9 years or whatever, is ridiculous. Not when there is so much that is unknown.
The Flyers were a victim of circumstance over the loss of Eriksson's rights more than anything. The way the CBA and transfer agreement is set up is not conducive for developing prospects from Europe.
Eriksson was also a player who had shown interest in playing in the NHL already. There isn't much of a stretch to believe that nothing had changed in that department. What's the harm in signing him over Hovinen that being the case?
Here is a recent report that Bill Meltzer gave on Hovinen's current Season.
* In Finland, Niko Hovinen recorded a 19-save shutout in the Lahti Pelicans' 5-0 win over HPK Hämeenlinna. It was the second shutout of the season for Hovinen, who lowered his GAA to 1.67 GAA and raised his save percentage to .936 in 12 starts.
No saying that they didn't handcuff themselves when they let a perfectly viable future option walk because they felt like is not a credible statement when that is exactly what they did.
YOU NEVER LET SOLID ASSETS WALK FOR NO REASON.
By the very definition of handcuff (to restrain/restrict movement or flexibility), the Flyers handcuffed themselves.
Do you know where I can get some Popcorn?
If I had a bucket of popcorn, I could sit here and watch you and Van catfight all night. Seriously, this is good stuff.
As to the issue at hand, I really think you're making a lot of assumptions about a situation that you know NOTHING about.
#1: You've never actually scouted the player in question
#2: You have no idea what kind of efforts were made by the Flyers to re-sign him.
#3: You're acting like you have perfect information both about what type of player Eriksson is, and what efforts the Flyers made to re-sign him.
Isn't it possible that after several years in the Flyers' prospect pool that Eriksson looked @ the goaltending situation in Philadelphia, saw very little chance to ever be a part of the team, and just said "No" when the Flyers tried to offer him a deal?
Or isn't it possible that Eriksson asked for some type of commitment from the Flyers (ie. a 1-way deal after a certain point in the contract), and that type of deal wouldn't best serve the Flyers' interests?
I mean seriously, you're blaming the Flyers 100% for this situation, but you have no idea what was going down. If you were in Eriksson's shoes, you know you're a highly touted goalie prospect, and your current team looks like they won't have room for you in the future as a starting goaltender, then what would you do? If it were me, and I was 1 month away from free agency, there's absolutely no way I'd sign with the Flyers. I'd become a free agent... just like Eriksson did.
I already told you what Bill Meltzer said. Challenge answered. If your going to challenge me, at least make it a challenge.
So I guess you know the opinion of every scout or talent evaluator currently covering European Hockey? Your tapped into all of them and know all of their opinions?
You can't provide any evidence that it's not true. You can only offer an opinion.
But let's not get sidetracked here. The original point that I replied to was your ridiculous comment that not signing Ericksson has handcuffed the Flyers in the future. I think I've provided some simple points that shows how silly that comment was.
Oh really?
Joacim Eriksson was drafted as a technically sound butterfly who uses positioning to play the puck. He has always read the game well and played aggressive on the angles. He is averaged sized but always made up for that well.
Niko Hovinen was always a timid goaltender in net, more like the re-imagined Leighton after he was convinced to play deeper in the crease. Both Hovinen and Leighton can get away with that because they have the size to cut down the openings whereas smaller goalies need to be better at playing angles. He is not particularly quick, and he has a history of letting players in the crease throw off his game.
Neither are strong on rebounds and instead average, but that is a work in progress for both.
That's the scouting reports. Next order of business is the history.
Joacim Eriksson was drafted in the 7th round of 2008 and showed immediate success in his junior league. He was promoted to the next tier league (SEL-B league) and showed even more success. Finally he played his first season as a back-up in the SEL, which many believe to be the third strongest league in the world. He struggled early but rebounded during the season in order to finish with respectable numbers. In this time he went from an unranked prospect to the number one prospect on the Flyers top 20 according to HF. In order for that to happen, it has to be read and approved by all writers and editors before being published on the site for all to see.
Niko Hovinen was drafted in the 5th round of 2006 by the Minnesota Wild, granted an organization known for being good at finding goalies. Though it would be a stretch to believe them to be a superior force in the NHL world in terms of drafting/finding goalies, they certainly have found a couple since their inception. That of course came with many drafting blunders at that same position they have had success with. In fact, their entire draft reputation is particularly poor.
Hovinen had an average post-draft year in the finnish junior league followed by an even worse season the year after. While he was never ranked in the top 20 prospects for the Wild on HF, his grade reflected that. Compared to the 7.5C that Eriksson rose to, Hovinen had fallen to a 6.5D. In 2008-09 he was promoted to the back-up for the Pelicans, one of the worst teams in the league. Unlike Bobrovsky, who put up spectacular numbers on the worst team in the KHL, Hovinen failed to have any ground-breaking success in the SM-liiga. Though he played less games in 2009-10, his numbers slightly improved; by now they were respectable for a back-up in the league. It was not until this past season, the first year that Joacim Eriksson became to show even the slightest bit of humanity, that Hovinen, a prospect two years older than Eriksson, had a strong season professional in Finland. Once again on the Pelicans, one of the lesser teams, he had a very strong year.
Most people would immediately liken him to Bobrovsky in that both had a strong year on professional teams in their respective leagues that were not as competitive as others. Unfortunately Bobrovsky is far more like Eriksson in that his success has been consistent from an early age. Hovinen's success has been more of a momentous awakening now that he has had a few years in the SM-liiga. That's not to say that most and all goalies more than likely will need a chance to adapt, but Hovinen's track record does not particularly scream success.
Eriksson is now 21 years old and dominating the SEL as he splits with Hadelov with Skelleftea to the tune of 1.00 GAA and a 0.958 SV% (a much better showing than even the veteran Hadelov's whose numbers are very good but not astronomical like Eriksson's) now no longer cushioned by his prized defensemen prospects Adam Larsson, David Rundblad, and Tim Erixon (all of which have left him to go overseas).
Hovinen is now 23 years old and dominating the SM-liiga, a lesser league than the SEL, as a starter for the Pelicans to the tune of a 1.97 GAA and a 0.925 SV%.
There is not one thing that points to Hovinen even remotely being in the same sphere of talent as Eriksson until he was signed in place of Eriksson by the Flyers this past offseason. Now we're suddenly supposed to believe that he's better than Eriksson despite the fact that Eriksson has always had a better scouting report, a strong relationship with the organization, better numbers throughout his career, a much higher ranking by every single scout to the point where I don't even believe many if any listed Hovinen anymore, and happens to be two years younger?
Honestly, I probably read what Meltzer said. I also probably didn't buy it or didn't care. I respect the hell out of Meltzer, but nobody really believes that Hovinen is more talented than Eriksson. The numbers just don't add up.
While there may be some other reason why the organization decided to go forward with Hovinen, a prospect already dropped by another organization, as opposed to the goaltending prospect already within their system who by all measures was a superior prospect in every single way, their decision was not based on talent.
I mean seriously, you're blaming the Flyers 100% for this situation, but you have no idea what was going down. If you were in Eriksson's shoes, you know you're a highly touted goalie prospect, and your current team looks like they won't have room for you in the future as a starting goaltender, then what would you do? If it were me, and I was 1 month away from free agency, there's absolutely no way I'd sign with the Flyers. I'd become a free agent... just like Eriksson did.
Yes, you're right. It is actually wrong of me to blame the Flyers for this decision. It is possible and likely that we don't know all the facts.
I also believe that if it was actually the Flyers' decision and not Eriksson's, then the Flyers made a mistake.
Eriksson is still, and has been for quite some time, a better goaltender than Niko Hovinen.
This argument with Van is over the idea that Hovinen is a better prospect than Eriksson, which is 100% not true.
Last edited by GKJ: 10-16-2011 at 10:54 PM.
Reason: QDP
I'm hesitant to enter into this--and I'm sure its been addressed elsewhere, but I'm not able to search the archives at the moment...
My understanding is that Eriksson was eligible for this past year's draft. Is that right? If so, any sense why no one took a chance on him?
I guess this is my roundabout way of asking whether it isn't likely that a plurality of NHL scouting departments came to share the Flyers view on Eriksson--for better or worse. His recent performance makes the decision look bad, no doubt, and I don't dispute the claim that he is a better prospect than Hovinen--but it is interesting that no one used a late-round pick to take a chance on one such a bright prospect.
Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 10-16-2011 at 10:38 PM.
I'm hesitant to enter into this--and I'm sure its been addressed elsewhere, but I'm not able to search the archives at the moment...
My understanding is that Eriksson was eligible for this past year's draft. Is that right? If so, any sense why no one took a chance on him?
I guess this is my roundabout way of asking whether it isn't likely that a plurality of NHL scouting departments came to share the Flyers view on Eriksson--for better or worse. His recent performance makes the decision look bad, no doubt, and I don't dispute the claim that he is a better prospect than Hovinen--but it isn't interesting that no one used a late-round pick to take a chance on one such a bright prospect.
I'm curious as well, but it does not prove that Hovinen is a superior prospect just because the Flyers took a chance on him. Whether or not teams need goaltending or whether or not they're content with what they have or whether they're looking for younger or different style or different league goaltenders....all of that factors in as well.
It's not like people were knocking down Hovinen's door after the Wild let go of him either.
If the Flyers hadn't come calling, would Hovinen have an NHL suitor? Doubtful.
I also really believe that unless there is something wrong within the Eriksson situation that we don't know, some team is going to get ahold of him eventually. Which team that is and when I can't say.
Last edited by Chris Shafer: 10-16-2011 at 10:40 PM.
