I don't see how Crouse played his way ahead of Hanifin
- aflyerpower8

He's no Chram Pronorin.

You don't have to pay up. I sure hope you're not too used to having 2 working knees, though,
- jmatchett383

Damn it. Back into witness protection...

Let's first see if we can figure out why Hamburglar has yet to visit the press box, then we can dive into everything else.
- 3flyerkids

My take on it, and this is just speculation, is that a couple of different factors may be at play...

-Berube probably had some input into the Hartnell>RJ trade...thus he could feel partly responsible and, like Hextall, would love it if RJ made him (them) look better by playing his way out of poor play as opposed to benching him, which could cause the trade to be perceived even worse, which would, in turn, reflect worse on Berube/Hexy...OR perhaps Hexy himself has requested RJ not be benched to try and make him more tradeable and make the move not look as bad.

-RJ has complained about demotions in the past, on multiple teams. It could be that he's made some sort of argument (internally) that has kept him from being benched/demoted for any length of time.

The good thing is, regardless of the reason his play has improved from corpse to zombie.

My take on it, and this is just speculation, is that a couple of different factors may be at play...

-Berube probably had some input into the Hartnell>RJ trade...thus he could feel partly responsible and, like Hextall, would love it if RJ made him (them) look better by playing his way out of poor play as opposed to benching him, which could cause the trade to be perceived even worse, which would, in turn, reflect worse on Berube/Hexy...OR perhaps Hexy himself has requested RJ not be benched to try and make him more tradeable and make the move not look as bad.

-RJ has complained about demotions in the past, on multiple teams. It could be that he's made some sort of argument (internally) that has kept him from being benched/demoted for any length of time.

The good thing is, regardless of the reason his play has improved from corpse to zombie.
- exlund

Two thoughts to this, one, I seriously doubt Berube cares one bit about perceptions. A coach wouldn't work his way up the ladder as Berube has, if he made player decisions based on perceptions. I don't think it has anything to do with any internal argument either.
Coaches bench players and use icetime as a tool to accomplish something. When looking at scratching a player, first thing that has to be considered, is who is going to replace the player. Secondly, what does scratching the player accomplish? My speculation is that there isn't a better option in Umberger's role to replace him with, and Berube doesn't think that scratching him would make Umberger better. And that he feels the best approach is to let him try and play his way out of it, and hope that he does.
There is one tell tale quote from Berube on scratching players, and that's that it is on an individual player basis. Meaning that the Lecavalier wasn't scratched for the same reason that Del Zotto was.

On G as a leader etc.

I like G's fire on the ice...when he's determined and maybe a bit pissed off, there are few players I'd rather have out there...I think he sets a good example on the ice in that respect. Off the ice, there have been multiple accounts of him not being a particularly vocal type of captain, so I get the impression he's not the type to get in a guy's face and call players out and hold them accountable etc. That's where a guy like Pronger or say a Keith Primeau had exceptional leadership qualities. Those guys were much more likely to act as a coach might act, being vocal and getting in your face if you were slacking and thereby creating accountability acrosss the board. G just isn't that type of leader, at least at this point. Factor in also, the absence of Timonen and Hartnell, both of whom had tenure and likely the full respect of the room, and there may be a deficiency there in terms of leadership.

Two thoughts to this, one, I seriously doubt Berube cares one bit about perceptions. A coach wouldn't work his way up the ladder as Berube has, if he made player decisions based on perceptions. I don't think it has anything to do with any internal argument either.
Coaches bench players and use icetime as a tool to accomplish something. When looking at scratching a player, first thing that has to be considered, is who is going to replace the player. Secondly, what does scratching the player accomplish? My speculation is that there isn't a better option in Umberger's role to replace him with, and Berube doesn't think that scratching him would make Umberger better. And that he feels the best approach is to let him try and play his way out of it, and hope that he does.
There is one tell tale quote from Berube on scratching players, and that's that it is on an individual player basis. Meaning that the Lecavalier wasn't scratched for the same reason that Del Zotto was.
- MJL

Practically everyone who is human cares about perceptions...whether they admit it or not. Also, I don't subscribe to your incessant Berube apologist narrative, but don't let that stop you from carrying it on (which I know it won't).

Practically everyone who is human cares about perceptions...whether they admit it or not. Also, I don't subscribe to your incessant Berube apologist narrative, but don't let that stop you from carrying it on (which I know it won't).
- exlund

Caring about it and having it impact a person's decisions, are two different things. As for the rest, I could reply in kind, but instead, I'll just rack it up to my post just made too much sense and explained the situation too well.

Do you think that Toews, Messier, or Pronger could make THIS team win by sheer will? I don't.
- MJL

I politely ask that we refrain from sullying this forum any more by mentioning Mark Messier's name in the same sentences as Pronger, Primeau, Toews, and Crosby (whom I don't even care for). Mess is one of the most over-rated leaders in the history of professional sports.

Just because you've got a mean scowl; or predict a win (at home) over a team below you in the standings (while playing on a decent team yourself); or even go on to end a decades-long Stanley Cup drought on a pretty talented team with an unreal tendy, it doesn't mean you're a great captain. A great captain wouldn't let that same team miss the playoffs the next year and then 'lead' other teams to numerous sub .500 seasons.



As far as Flyers' leadership goes, I think G was thrust into it a little too early but he is doing an admirable job in spite of what's happening. Over the last few weeks, Simmonds seems to be the vocal guy by referring to Gretzky as being unable to help; saying that if Mase wasn't otherworldly they would have lost; and by explaining that his fight was in response to what he viewed as a sleepy team that needed a boost.

I politely ask that we refrain from sullying this forum any more by mentioning Mark Messier's name in the same sentences as Pronger, Primeau, Toews, and Crosby (whom I don't even care for). Mess is one of the most over-rated leaders in the history of professional sports.

Just because you've got a mean scowl; or predict a win (at home) over a team below you in the standings (while playing on a decent team yourself); or even go on to end a decades-long Stanley Cup drought on a pretty talented team with an unreal tendy, it doesn't mean you're a great captain. A great captain wouldn't let that same team miss the playoffs the next year and then 'lead' other teams to numerous sub .500 seasons.



As far as Flyers' leadership goes, I think G was thrust into it a little too early but he is doing an admirable job in spite of what's happening. Over the last few weeks, Simmonds seems to be the vocal guy by referring to Gretzky as being unable to help; saying that if Mase wasn't otherworldly they would have lost; and by explaining that his fight was in response to what he viewed as a sleepy team that needed a boost.
- dmorin

We disagree on Messier.

I think Simmonds is developing into a leader also.

We disagree on Messier.

I think Simmonds is developing into a leader also.
- MJL

Fair enough....

Someone alluded to the fact that the void in the locker room left by the absence of Kimmo and Hartnell is tough to overcome.

After losing Pronger, I was hoping Grandpa Timmonen would've been given the 'C' to lessen Giroux's load as the future of the franchise. It's one thing to come in to an organization that has high expectations for you to produce as a player....Its a whole other ball game when you have to assume a fair share of responsibility for a minimum of 24 other players as well.

Again...not knocking Giroux by any stretch, I just wish things would've been a little different a few years back.

Caring about it and having it impact a person's decisions, are two different things. As for the rest, I could reply in kind, but instead, I'll just rack it up to my post just made too much sense and explained the situation too well.
- MJL

That, is why you fail.

Prior to yesterday's game, Wayne Simmonds was asked about his recent goal slump (one in nine games). He could have made excuses like "hot goalies" etc but said he didn't think he was getting to the scoring areas efficiently enough of late -- a very honest and self-effacing answer -- and so he was getting checked or goalies were getting over whereas in his hot run before that, he was getting to the scoring areas a little better.

I mentioned that on Twitter and some well-meaning poster said something like, "That's wrong... his Shooting Heat chart proves otherwise. He's just run into an abnormally high goalie save percentage."

That's were the analytics crowd doesn't do itself any favors sometimes. When in doubt, I take an insightful player's own self-analysis over that of a chart. There were split-second things happening of late -- being just a hair off in his timing -- that were behind why he had just one goal in nine games. Simmonds tends to be a little streaky like that, anyway, although the effort is beyond reproach. He scores in bunches and also has a few lengthy droughts each season.

I also got argued with over whether Simmonds fighting in the second period -- expressly for the purpose of trying to inject some emotion and energy into a pretty lifeless game up to that point -- was a good thing for him to do. Several teammates -- B. Schenn, Giroux, Voracek -- and Berube all pointed to it as something that kick-started the bench when energy was ebbing, yet ppl were arguing with me that "it's stupid for the team's top scorer to remove himself for five minutes in a scoreless game and risk injury."

There are still elements of emotion and team psychology very specific to hockey that play out very differently on the bench and the dressing room than they may seem from upstairs in the press box or on television.

It's a similar thing with goaltending. Not even raw save percentage is always a perfect indicator of how much the goaltending lifts or deflates a team. Goals against average alone is a very poor indicator, actually.

Mason said after last night's game that he always feels like he can do more any time there isn't a W at the end of the night. He feels like any goal -- power play or otherwise -- is at least partially on his own shoulders.

I love that attitude in a goalie. It resonates, and also puts the goalie in position to speak up (within the internal dressing room context) when other guys aren't pulling their weight. Part of the reason why Bryzgalov was so disliked by teammates in Phoenix and Philly was that he was quick to entirely dismiss himself from blame on any goal that was deflected or screened but quick to pin it on others.

These intangibles are still very real and still part of the game. Combining these things with the more quantifiable analytics gives you something closer to a panoramic picture of the sport.
- bmeltzer

First let me say that Tuesday's game was one of Mason's top five games of the season. I'd still argue the 2-0 loss against the Rangers might rank number one. With this said, the saves made in the shootout were on convincing and with authority.

Simmonds on the other hand I feel has as might right to the "C" as Giroux does most night. He'll never lead the league in points but he gives his all, says all the right things and he's clutch. There isa ddifferent between super star and being just flat out important. Wayne Simmonds is important above anything else.