man edmonton is just pathetic on defense

man edmonton is just pathetic on defense
- 2Real

Because they don't have a Grossmann type

Because they don't have a Grossmann type
- wilsonecho91

if only that team would trade someone for grossmann

HE'S A MARKSMAN
- wilsonecho91

there's only one marksman. and his name is ilkka sinisalo.

- Jsaquella

oh. my. god.

looks like another world series coming for the giants

poor phillies
- 2Real

i kind of wanted the giants to win only because they are black and orange. i pretend they're the flyers.

Third base coach should have sent Gordon home the way Bumgardner was pitching
- Jsaquella

agree.

This guy from Chevy sounds like the doctor that died while hypnotizing Peter in "Office Space"
- Jsaquella

way, waaaaaaaaay down.

So...Canseco. How is it just coming to my attention now?

i kind of wanted the giants to win only because they are black and orange. i pretend they're the flyers.
- hammarby31

dude that's just sad you need a bro hug

To make it closer to apples to apples, look at Akeson's numbers when he played on the same slot as Umberger last season (w Read and Coots), on a bigger stage under more pressure. Still a small sample size, but they were much better. Akeson is better with the puck than Umberger and that helps him drive possession better.



I completely disagree. Did you even watch the games? If he was a passenger, why was he behind only Giroux in pts per 60 mins (not counting PP)? If he was a passenger why were his possession stats tops on the team?


If he was a passenger, who was it that skated into position in the low slot and potted the rebound goal (pp) that tied things up at 2 in game 2?

See: 1:33 of this video
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,141&lang=en




If he was a passenger, who was it that carried the puck up the left side ice and into the offensive zone before making a perfect "shot-pass" that banked off the back boards and right out to streaking Read for a goal (Game 4)?

See :28 seconds into this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,144&lang=en



If he was a passenger, who was it that showed excellent strength on the puck in winning a battle along the wall against Zuccarello before kicking the puck to the point to the set up Voracek's game winning (pp) goal in Game 4? Akeson didn't get a point on the play, but it likely doesn't happen if he doesn't make that strong play.

See 1:26 of this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,144&lang=en


If he was just a passenger, who rushed into the zone and scored the only goal against the Rangers in game 7?

See 3:47 of this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,141&lang=en

Passenger my a$$.




That's primarily because, this year, he's slotted in a role for which he's not well suited. The things that are most positive about his game go largely wasted when he's playing on a checking line with the team's lowest skilled players and getting no PP time. He's made a go of it...works hard and shows some grit and fight out there, but Akeson isn't going to excel or thrive longer term in that kind of role. Look, I'm not against a rookie breaking his teeth on the fourth line for a while before moving up the lineup. But I am concerned that, in this particular situation, there's a risk of Akeson getting out of favor with the coach and perhaps the Flyers brass as the player struggles to fulfill what seem like (Berube's) unreasonable expectations to be something he's not. This team has a history of this kind of thing, sometimes with the player being traded away only to blossom elsewhere.



But I don't think Akeson is THAT bad in those areas. Some people have this perception that he's a small, soft player who isn't capable of holding his own on the back end and on the forecheck. This is not accurate imo. I go back to that play against Zuccarello from that link above. Soft players don't make that play.




Coaches often make decisions regarding who they think plays good with who (chemistry) based on a lot less than seven games. At times, you can just see chemistry in a line, almost instantly. Maybe it's lost on you, but I and others certainly noticed the good chemistry that was evident between Akeson Read and Coots. There was nothing to indicate that wouldn't continue. Ohh but RJ Umberger, now a reject from CBus, gets the spot because he's taller and being paid 6 times more. Pfft.



Akeson worked his way up the hard way and ascended through the ranks as a potent point producer. He's not some kid right out of Junior. He worked hard and paid his dues to make the NHL and was an impact player in the playoffs last season (despite what you say). He earned his shot. I disagree with the notion that Akeson has so many weaknesses in his game that the only path to his success is if he improves those areas. I believe, rather, that a player like Akeson's success will come from putting him in a position to fully exploit his best assets. So, I don't agree with Berube's decisions to slot him in the fourth line with no pp time, to reduce minutes and to publicly criticize him, nit-picking on him for dubious reasons, when guys like Vandevelde make worse mistakes and get promoted.



This is your opinion, siding with Berube. I don't agree.
- exlund

Cogent and compelling post.

Awful call. Holtby fell well after Glendening skated away. Refs just plain missed it.
- PhillySportsGuy

That's European Soccer level bad.

Because they don't have a Grossmann type
- wilsonecho91

Don't we have a spare Luke Schenn to throw Edmonton for a young creative forward?

So...Canseco. How is it just coming to my attention now?
- tangent_man

What happened?

Don't we have a spare Luke Schenn to throw Edmonton for a young creative forward?
- johndewar

Done.

The clone of L Schenn for Taylor Hall.

No take backs.

So...Canseco. How is it just coming to my attention now?
- tangent_man

What happened?
- Giroux_Is_God

He shot off his middle finger cleaning his gun

To make it closer to apples to apples, look at Akeson's numbers when he played on the same slot as Umberger last season (w Read and Coots), on a bigger stage under more pressure. Still a small sample size, but they were much better. Akeson is better with the puck than Umberger and that helps him drive possession better.



I completely disagree. Did you even watch the games? If he was a passenger, why was he behind only Giroux in pts per 60 mins (not counting PP)? If he was a passenger why were his possession stats tops on the team?


If he was a passenger, who was it that skated into position in the low slot and potted the rebound goal (pp) that tied things up at 2 in game 2?

See: 1:33 of this video
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,141&lang=en




If he was a passenger, who was it that carried the puck up the left side ice and into the offensive zone before making a perfect "shot-pass" that banked off the back boards and right out to streaking Read for a goal (Game 4)?

See :28 seconds into this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,144&lang=en



If he was a passenger, who was it that showed excellent strength on the puck in winning a battle along the wall against Zuccarello before kicking the puck to the point to the set up Voracek's game winning (pp) goal in Game 4? Akeson didn't get a point on the play, but it likely doesn't happen if he doesn't make that strong play.

See 1:26 of this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,144&lang=en


If he was just a passenger, who rushed into the zone and scored the only goal against the Rangers in game 7?

See 3:47 of this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,141&lang=en

Passenger my a$$.




That's primarily because, this year, he's slotted in a role for which he's not well suited. The things that are most positive about his game go largely wasted when he's playing on a checking line with the team's lowest skilled players and getting no PP time. He's made a go of it...works hard and shows some grit and fight out there, but Akeson isn't going to excel or thrive longer term in that kind of role. Look, I'm not against a rookie breaking his teeth on the fourth line for a while before moving up the lineup. But I am concerned that, in this particular situation, there's a risk of Akeson getting out of favor with the coach and perhaps the Flyers brass as the player struggles to fulfill what seem like (Berube's) unreasonable expectations to be something he's not. This team has a history of this kind of thing, sometimes with the player being traded away only to blossom elsewhere.



But I don't think Akeson is THAT bad in those areas. Some people have this perception that he's a small, soft player who isn't capable of holding his own on the back end and on the forecheck. This is not accurate imo. I go back to that play against Zuccarello from that link above. Soft players don't make that play.




Coaches often make decisions regarding who they think plays good with who (chemistry) based on a lot less than seven games. At times, you can just see chemistry in a line, almost instantly. Maybe it's lost on you, but I and others certainly noticed the good chemistry that was evident between Akeson Read and Coots. There was nothing to indicate that wouldn't continue. Ohh but RJ Umberger, now a reject from CBus, gets the spot because he's taller and being paid 6 times more. Pfft.



Akeson worked his way up the hard way and ascended through the ranks as a potent point producer. He's not some kid right out of Junior. He worked hard and paid his dues to make the NHL and was an impact player in the playoffs last season (despite what you say). He earned his shot. I disagree with the notion that Akeson has so many weaknesses in his game that the only path to his success is if he improves those areas. I believe, rather, that a player like Akeson's success will come from putting him in a position to fully exploit his best assets. So, I don't agree with Berube's decisions to slot him in the fourth line with no pp time, to reduce minutes and to publicly criticize him, nit-picking on him for dubious reasons, when guys like Vandevelde make worse mistakes and get promoted.



This is your opinion, siding with Berube. I don't agree.
- exlund

Akeson is not better then Umberger in any way. Akeson has played less then 20 NHL games in his entire career. I could show you videos of Akeson making nice plays this year, such as in the first period of the LA game where he had a couple of nice plays. But this is the 14/15 season. Not the 13/14 season. That is over. All that did was help earn Akeson earn a spot on the team. What he does with that spot, is up to him. And right now, he's not doing enough to earn more ice time or a larger role. It's that simple. Vandevelde while certainly not mistake free, has played better, and has been more involved lately . Umberger has the spot simply because he is a better player. Not because he is taller or is paid more. Berube has shown he is not against or afraid to relegate a veteran to the 4th line if he isn't doing the job.

And for your enjoyment, here is some Chris Vandelvelde video:

Here he gets an excellent scoring chance against Dallas, and Lehtonen has to make a big save,

http://video.flyers.nhl.c...hlg=20142015,2,70&lang=en

Here Vandevelde wins a board battle, works the cycle and makes a tremendous pass to set up a goal by Nick Grossmann

http://video.flyers.nhl.c...lg=20142015,2,126&lang=en

Here Vandevelde gets to the front of the net and snipes in a goal against one of the best defensive teams in the League, and one of the best goalies.


I did this in about 5 minutes. You can find video for any player and make them look good. A player is judged on the whole of his play. Not just a few plays.

I have a question and this isn't my way of stirring the pot, as much as it is getting some clarification.

Last night and it continued today it was said that Luke Schenn had another one of his notoriously terrible games. So my question is, by standards of Luke Schenn, what is considered a bad game for him?

Now maybe my idea of a bad game for Luke differs from others. For example, if Schenn misses an outlet passes that he probably should have made that results into an icing a couple of times in one game doesn't reflect on his overall game in an evening to me because we already know he's not very good with the puck. If he makes one or two bad reads in a game also doesn't tell the story of an entire game because it happens and in a team sport such as Hockey, you might need your teammates to support you should a bad reaction is made by everyone on the ice with you.

For me an example of a bad game is a player who is directly at fault for a goal and/or continues to allow this to happen throughout. Basically what I'm saying is, if one player is giving away opportunities to the other team, that player is having a bad game. Last night Matt Read took a chance by making a risky pass that hopped over the stick of Michael Del Zotto that directly lead to a goal. I can forgive this, except Matt Read went for the same play later in the same game and it almost had the same result. To me, Matt Read had a bad game.

Last night I wasn't on edge when Luke Schenn was on the ice. Keep in mind we were practically playing with 5 defenseman because Gostisbehere was only really being spotted.

Now, I am aware that he could be better but I've actually seen improvement since MacDonald was hurt and we've had to give players such as Grossmann, Streit, Schultz, Del Zotto and Schenn much larger roles.

I'm just curious and not in the least looking to stir the pot.
- SuperSchennBros

The issue I have with Schenn is not that he's bad, because he isn't. It's that he's average. And he's not improving. He's not challenging the older Grossmann for ice time. So far he's only getting more ice time because of the injuries. I want him to seize the opportunity and show the coaches that he deserves a bigger role.

He shot off his middle finger cleaning his gun
- Jsaquella

The only thing I did when I read this was sigh

To make it closer to apples to apples, look at Akeson's numbers when he played on the same slot as Umberger last season (w Read and Coots), on a bigger stage under more pressure. Still a small sample size, but they were much better. Akeson is better with the puck than Umberger and that helps him drive possession better.



I completely disagree. Did you even watch the games? If he was a passenger, why was he behind only Giroux in pts per 60 mins (not counting PP)? If he was a passenger why were his possession stats tops on the team?


If he was a passenger, who was it that skated into position in the low slot and potted the rebound goal (pp) that tied things up at 2 in game 2?

See: 1:33 of this video
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,141&lang=en




If he was a passenger, who was it that carried the puck up the left side ice and into the offensive zone before making a perfect "shot-pass" that banked off the back boards and right out to streaking Read for a goal (Game 4)?

See :28 seconds into this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,144&lang=en



If he was a passenger, who was it that showed excellent strength on the puck in winning a battle along the wall against Zuccarello before kicking the puck to the point to the set up Voracek's game winning (pp) goal in Game 4? Akeson didn't get a point on the play, but it likely doesn't happen if he doesn't make that strong play.

See 1:26 of this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,144&lang=en


If he was just a passenger, who rushed into the zone and scored the only goal against the Rangers in game 7?

See 3:47 of this video:
http://video.nhl.com/vide...lg=20132014,3,141&lang=en

Passenger my a$$.




That's primarily because, this year, he's slotted in a role for which he's not well suited. The things that are most positive about his game go largely wasted when he's playing on a checking line with the team's lowest skilled players and getting no PP time. He's made a go of it...works hard and shows some grit and fight out there, but Akeson isn't going to excel or thrive longer term in that kind of role. Look, I'm not against a rookie breaking his teeth on the fourth line for a while before moving up the lineup. But I am concerned that, in this particular situation, there's a risk of Akeson getting out of favor with the coach and perhaps the Flyers brass as the player struggles to fulfill what seem like (Berube's) unreasonable expectations to be something he's not. This team has a history of this kind of thing, sometimes with the player being traded away only to blossom elsewhere.



But I don't think Akeson is THAT bad in those areas. Some people have this perception that he's a small, soft player who isn't capable of holding his own on the back end and on the forecheck. This is not accurate imo. I go back to that play against Zuccarello from that link above. Soft players don't make that play.




Coaches often make decisions regarding who they think plays good with who (chemistry) based on a lot less than seven games. At times, you can just see chemistry in a line, almost instantly. Maybe it's lost on you, but I and others certainly noticed the good chemistry that was evident between Akeson Read and Coots. There was nothing to indicate that wouldn't continue. Ohh but RJ Umberger, now a reject from CBus, gets the spot because he's taller and being paid 6 times more. Pfft.



Akeson worked his way up the hard way and ascended through the ranks as a potent point producer. He's not some kid right out of Junior. He worked hard and paid his dues to make the NHL and was an impact player in the playoffs last season (despite what you say). He earned his shot. I disagree with the notion that Akeson has so many weaknesses in his game that the only path to his success is if he improves those areas. I believe, rather, that a player like Akeson's success will come from putting him in a position to fully exploit his best assets. So, I don't agree with Berube's decisions to slot him in the fourth line with no pp time, to reduce minutes and to publicly criticize him, nit-picking on him for dubious reasons, when guys like Vandevelde make worse mistakes and get promoted.



This is your opinion, siding with Berube. I don't agree.
- exlund

R. Umberger 9 1 2 3 -5 7 0 0

Second worst +/- only to L Schenn and tied for most penalty minutes on the team with Luke Schenn (MORE THEN F*ING RINALDO!). He had one good game but thus far (it is still early) he has looked mediocre at best. I agree with putting him on the fourth line and moving Akeson to the third line. He has 'earned it'

As has been said, if it doesn't work out, then move him back up.

The issue I have with Schenn is not that he's bad, because he isn't. It's that he's average. And he's not improving. He's not challenging the older Grossmann for ice time. So far he's only getting more ice time because of the injuries. I want him to seize the opportunity and show the coaches that he deserves a bigger role.
- MJL

To me this is nothing more then reasonable but I guess I have to ask get better how? Regardless of how or why he's getting more ice time, he just is and isn't hurting the team. If he saw time with more talented partners I think he would get better. The current complains of Schenn are all the same as Grossmann from last January to last week. Mostly because he can't carry the puck out of the zone. Grossmann still can't but it doesn't mean Grossmann isn't playing well.

I am glad you stepped by responding at all because there are some I don't think can show examples of a bad game coming from Luke Schenn. Asking him to step up is reasonable though.

R. Umberger 9 1 2 3 -5 7 0 0

Second worst +/- only to L Schenn and tied for most penalty minutes on the team with Luke Schenn (MORE THEN F*ING RINALDO!). He had one good game but thus far (it is still early) he has looked mediocre at best. I agree with putting him on the fourth line and moving Akeson to the third line. He has 'earned it'

As has been said, if it doesn't work out, then move him back up.
- coffee junkie

+/- is a team number, not an individual number. He's had more then one good game. And it's not uncommon for a UFA to need some adjustment time. That's been happening, and Umberger's play is getting better and better.

The only thing I did when I read this was sigh
- Giroux_Is_God

I laughed

Akeson is not better then Umberger in any way.
- MJL

Ridiculous statements like this do nothing more than undermine your already suspect credibility.

Akeson has played less then 20 NHL games in his entire career. I could show you videos of Akeson making nice plays this year, such as in the first period of the LA game where he had a couple of nice plays. But this is the 14/15 season. Not the 13/14 season. That is over. All that did was help earn Akeson earn a spot on the team. What he does with that spot, is up to him. And right now, he's not doing enough to earn more ice time or a larger role. It's that simple.
- MJL

If they put him in position to make the most of his strengths instead of one that he's not well suited for, he would likely show he's worthy of a larger role. Even in the role they have him in, he's done better than Berube has portrayed in his statements on the player. He's made plays/passes that could have been goals if they landed on the stick of say a Matt Read or Brayden Schenn as opposed to the worst shooter on the team in Zac Rinaldo. There's a reason Zac was avergaing more than twice the amount of shots on goal than he did before playing with Akeson and got no shots on goal when Akeson was scratched for two games.

And for your enjoyment, here is some Chris Vandelvelde video:

I did this in about 5 minutes. You can find video for any player and make them look good. A player is judged on the whole of his play. Not just a few plays.
- MJL

You said Akeson wasn't a standout in the Rangers series and was a passenger and did nothing to drive the play etc. I posted the videos to specifically to show you that this was clearly not the case (not to show he "looks good" in general). What did you link CV videos for?