Except that the GM discovered him in the first place. Probably was not real happy about giving Bob away except that, as in the trade of Patrick Sharp, it gave him a chance to blossom elsewhere. This whole mess is at the hands of the meddling of the owner.
- Flyskippy

Why not just make Snider the GM then?

Anyway, Bob was probably only traded because of Bryz. But again, what a terrible contract. And after the first season of Bryz, they were again pinning their hopes on someone catching fire again...this time, Bryz.

This team loves to pin their hopes on goalies catching fire. Biron, Emery, Leighton, Boucher, Bob. That is not a recipe for success.

I have a hard time holding a coach responsible for a mishandling of goalies which resulted in more bad decisions in goaltending which has been par the course for years here.

- hammarby31

guy's face was covered in friggin omelettes

Why not just make Snider the GM then?

Anyway, Bob was probably only traded because of Bryz. But again, what a terrible contract. And after the first season of Bryz, they were again pinning their hopes on someone catching fire again...this time, Bryz.

This team loves to pin their hopes on goalies catching fire. Biron, Emery, Leighton, Boucher, Bob. That is not a recipe for success.

I have a hard time holding a coach responsible for a mishandling of goalies which resulted in more bad decisions in goaltending which has been par the course for years here.
- feelingkettle

You are putting the blame in the place where I have been for a little longer now.

For all the knocks on Lava for playing veterans too much, especially after errors. Or not playing the kids enough, or panicking with certain moves.

How long would he have lasted in the organization if he told management they may have to accept a building year, or he started benching vets that cost the team a win here or there.

Why not just make Snider the GM then?

Anyway, Bob was probably only traded because of Bryz. But again, what a terrible contract. And after the first season of Bryz, they were again pinning their hopes on someone catching fire again...this time, Bryz.

This team loves to pin their hopes on goalies catching fire. Biron, Emery, Leighton, Boucher, Bob. That is not a recipe for success.

I have a hard time holding a coach responsible for a mishandling of goalies which resulted in more bad decisions in goaltending which has been par the course for years here.
- feelingkettle

While Snider came out and made his comments to the press or whatever, I'm still not sure why it seems impossible that Holmgren thought the exact same things Snider did and wanted to give Bryz a big contract too, independent of owner "meddling".

While Snider came out and made his comments to the press or whatever, I'm still not sure why it seems impossible that Holmgren thought the exact same things Snider did and wanted to give Bryz a big contract too, independent of owner "meddling".
- eayost

It's not impossible. He might've. Either way, the front office is to blame.

While Snider came out and made his comments to the press or whatever, I'm still not sure why it seems impossible that Holmgren thought the exact same things Snider did and wanted to give Bryz a big contract too, independent of owner "meddling".
- eayost

We will never know

Cant one of you losers just sleep with somebody in the Flyers organization already and get inside info?

And the quotes I posted totally back up that opinion.

What if Laviolette realized Bob was totally in over his head? I remember hearing Bob saying that he was not mentally prepared for the playoffs. At least I would assume something like that might've happened instead of blaming it on the coach.

And if Laviolette was to blame for Snider's overreacting, do we really want a coach to manage the team so he doesn't make his owner do something incredibly stupid? The fact that we are even discussing things like that show how ridiculous this team handles goalies or anything that involves lots of patience and development.
- feelingkettle

Not arguing that the Flyers have done a bad job in handling goalies over the years. Because they have. There's no question about it.

Again, I'm not just blaming Laviolette. I've said that part before, but it seems to be getting ignored or missed. I'm simply saying that the manner in which Laviolette handled the situation made it far worse than it had to be. Snider's been around long enough to know the risks of a knee jerk reaction.

I've also been really clear about wanting Laviolette to be fired. Bobrovsky is not the only decision of his I take issue with. It's one of several situations I feel he's badly mismanaged over the last couple/few years.

I also totally agree with the organization needed to be more patient and let players develop, and hang onto draft picks.

What if it was Snider's idea to get Pronger? :o!

really wish i had saved all his "gutless pukes" posts from 2010 just before the run to the Finals
- Crimsoninja

You know what I've been thinking.

What happens if you have to take a poop in the middle of an overtime period as a player.

guy's face was covered in friggin omelettes
- Crimsoninja

Not arguing that the Flyers have done a bad job in handling goalies over the years. Because they have. There's no question about it.

Again, I'm not just blaming Laviolette. I've said that part before, but it seems to be getting ignored or missed. I'm simply saying that the manner in which Laviolette handled the situation made it far worse than it had to be. Snider's been around long enough to know the risks of a knee jerk reaction.

I've also been really clear about wanting Laviolette to be fired. Bobrovsky is not the only decision of his I take issue with. It's one of several situations I feel he's badly mismanaged over the last couple/few years.

I also totally agree with the organization needed to be more patient and let players develop, and hang onto draft picks.
- Jsaquella

I have no problem with any of these things. I just dont' agree that Lavi's handling of Bob was the beginning of the end for him here.

What in my opinion led to it was the years of mishandling of goalies. Who was going to be our #1 that year before Bob lit things up? Leighton. That's just (frank)ing sad. Michael Leighton was our #1 penciled in that year.

I'm sorry, but I am gonna give the coach some slack if his #1 is Michael Leighton. The org also put Bob in a tough spot with no one substantial to back him up incase he hit his ceiling that year.

You know what I've been thinking.

What happens if you have to take a poop in the middle of an overtime period as a player.
- flyer_nutter

Ask Luongo...happened at the start for him, though.

While Snider came out and made his comments to the press or whatever, I'm still not sure why it seems impossible that Holmgren thought the exact same things Snider did and wanted to give Bryz a big contract too, independent of owner "meddling".
- eayost

Holmgren may well have felt the same way that Snider did. But Snider's public declaration tied Holmgren's hands regardless.

Why not just make Snider the GM then?

Anyway, Bob was probably only traded because of Bryz. But again, what a terrible contract. And after the first season of Bryz, they were again pinning their hopes on someone catching fire again...this time, Bryz.

This team loves to pin their hopes on goalies catching fire. Biron, Emery, Leighton, Boucher, Bob. That is not a recipe for success.

I have a hard time holding a coach responsible for a mishandling of goalies which resulted in more bad decisions in goaltending which has been par the course for years here.
- feelingkettle

"The whole damn team stinks." -- Ed Snider

Holmgren may well have felt the same way that Snider did. But Snider's public declaration tied Holmgren's hands regardless.
- Jsaquella

Tied his hands now? If Holmgren already wanted the "best" goalie available that offseason before Snider said anything, I'm not sure what Snider has to do with it. Holmgren invented trading for rights and signing guys to big deals (Timonen/Hartnall) before they hit the open market. He's already done it again this offseason. It's how he rolls, for good and bad

You know what I've been thinking.

What happens if you have to take a poop in the middle of an overtime period as a player.
- flyer_nutter

Score a goal, race to the wash room.

Score a goal, race to the wash room.
- Flyskippy

Well said fertility man, well said.

Tied his hands now? If Holmgren already wanted the "best" goalie available that offseason before Snider said anything, I'm not sure what Snider has to do with it. Holmgren invented trading for rights and signing guys to big deals (Timonen/Hartnall) before they hit the open market. He's already done it again this offseason. It's how he rolls, for good and bad
- eayost

Sure is a lot of conjecture proffered as fact in this post.

Overtime again in Chicago.

If this was the Flyers I'd have moved on from the hair on my head to pulling out that which is on my ass.

I have no problem with any of these things. I just dont' agree that Lavi's handling of Bob was the beginning of the end for him here.

What in my opinion led to it was the years of mishandling of goalies. Who was going to be our #1 that year before Bob lit things up? Leighton. That's just (frank)ing sad. Michael Leighton was our #1 penciled in that year.

I'm sorry, but I am gonna give the coach some slack if his #1 is Michael Leighton. The org also put Bob in a tough spot with no one substantial to back him up incase he hit his ceiling that year.
- feelingkettle

His number one was Sergei Bobrovsky. Leighton played one game all season long. Bob played 58 games, was the starter for most of the year and played very solidly.

He started the playoff opener and lost 1-0. Then he had a bad 1st period in game two, and was demoted to 3rd string, behind the guy who played 1 game for the team all year.

I agree that it was sad that Leighton was re-signed. But Leighton played one game all year. Regardless of what his role was in October, the job was Bobrovsky's when the playoffs started.

I am willing to give the coach slack, too. Had he simply made Bobrovsky the back-up, fine, no problem. But he didn't. He scratched the kid for Leighton. Then as soon as Boucher had a bad game, Leighton was the starter. Then when Leighton had a bad game, Boucher was back in.

Sorry, that exceeds my slack cutting ability. Bobrovsky was doing the job all season, and Boucher was providing solid work as the backup. Laviolette deviated from that at the first sign of trouble.

That was the impetus for the overreactions of the front office and Snider.

Does anyone think we were able to get Mason for so cheap as a sort of favor from Columbus? I'm sure Mason, who's still a young goalie with a bunch of potential, has more market value than a bad backup goalie and a 4th round pick. Any clue why we were able to get him for next to nothing?

Tied his hands now? If Holmgren already wanted the "best" goalie available that offseason before Snider said anything, I'm not sure what Snider has to do with it. Holmgren invented trading for rights and signing guys to big deals (Timonen/Hartnall) before they hit the open market. He's already done it again this offseason. It's how he rolls, for good and bad
- eayost

Certainly. If Holmgren was determined to go out and get a goalie anyhow, any agent worth his salt was going to point at Snider's comments and demand top dollar.

And if Holmgren was simply interested in adding a solid veteran mentor for Bobrovsky, Snider's declaration made that route impossible.

My point is, once Snider made those comments, the die was cast, regardless of what the GM wanted to do.

Damn!!! Jagr with those hands

His number one was Sergei Bobrovsky. Leighton played one game all season long. Bob played 58 games, was the starter for most of the year and played very solidly.

He started the playoff opener and lost 1-0. Then he had a bad 1st period in game two, and was demoted to 3rd string, behind the guy who played 1 game for the team all year.

I agree that it was sad that Leighton was re-signed. But Leighton played one game all year. Regardless of what his role was in October, the job was Bobrovsky's when the playoffs started.

I am willing to give the coach slack, too. Had he simply made Bobrovsky the back-up, fine, no problem. But he didn't. He scratched the kid for Leighton. Then as soon as Boucher had a bad game, Leighton was the starter. Then when Leighton had a bad game, Boucher was back in.

Sorry, that exceeds my slack cutting ability. Bobrovsky was doing the job all season, and Boucher was providing solid work as the backup. Laviolette deviated from that at the first sign of trouble.

That was the impetus for the overreactions of the front office and Snider.
- Jsaquella

Again, you are just assuming he demoted him because of one bad period. From Bill's blog during that series:

By his own admission, Sergei Bobrovsky has not felt mentally up to par since losing game one. Despite playing will in the team's 1-0 loss, he took the defeat hard (and had to be coaxed to speak afterwards) and then pressed in game two.

Speaking to Philadelphia-based Sovetsky Sport writer Natalia Bragilevskaya (who sometimes serves as his translator), Bobrovsky said after Game 2, "Physically, I feel normal. Mentally, not so much. But I will be OK soon."

Bobrovsky's pledge to bounce right back may have said one thing but his body language said something different. I suspect that Jeff Reese and Peter Laviolette picked up on it, and that figured in why Michael Leighton was chosen to back up Boucher.

I feel for Bobrovsky. He's a 22-year-old kid who still speaks limited English -- making it impossible for him to have a heart-to-heart with Reese or Boucher about the mental aspects of playoff hockey. The NHL season is longer than European seasons (which are now over, including the playoffs) and the Stanley Cup playoff atmosphere is different than the regular season. Bobrovsky entered the series knowing he was looking over his shoulder and would be yanked at the first sign of trouble. Those are pretty tough conditions under which to excel, but Bobrovsky played quite well in the first game.

Over the long haul, Bobrovsky should be fine. In the short term, it cannot help his psyche to have been demoted to third goalie. But the first concern of Laviolette and the team has to be to win. Yes, the rookie goaltender showed resiliency and mental toughness throughout the regular season whenever he had tough games. But if the coaching staff got the sense that Bobrovsky has been mentally "off" the last few days, they really had no choice but to scratch him.

It is only natural for young players, even the most confident and mentally strong ones, to go through times of self-doubt. It's normal to press and try to do a little too much. In Bobrovsky's case, the player has had too much time to be in his own head and dwell on things. Eventually, he should figure out that a bad game -- even in the playoffs -- can be put aside. Will that happen right away? We'll see, but if I were Peter Laviolette, I'd have reservations about turning back to Bobrovsky in this series.


http://www.hockeybuzz.com...911/45/35335#.Ub0svvbEqkI