Not that I'm advocating the Flyers signing him. Because I don't think that's the biggest need.
- MJL

while i agree with you on your point, i do think there is too much importance on "need" from outside observers on these matters. July 1st and at the draft are usually when deal can and will get made, and you need to make the best move for your team...which i honestly think doesn't ALWAYS take your biggest "need" into consideration.

the season is so long, and so many things can happen during it (PLUS the trade deadline). so if you can add a Parise when it makes the most financial sense without putting you at a disservice....you do it. more moves can be made at a later time (edit) to sure up that need.

if it even exists at the time!

while i agree with you on your point, i do think there is too much importance on "need" from outside observers on these matters. July 1st and at the draft are usually when deal can and will get made, and you need to make the best move for your team...which i honestly think doesn't ALWAYS take your biggest "need" into consideration.

the season is so long, and so many things can happen during it (PLUS the trade deadline). so if you can add a Parise when it makes the most financial sense without putting you at a disservice....you do it. more moves can be made at a later time (edit) to sure up that need.

if it even exists at the time!
- eshake

Top defenseman normally aren't moved "at a later time". Which is their biggest need.

There's been a lot of talk about systems in here today. Remember when Stevens got fired, and Laviolette got hired. What was said? How much better this system is, and it's more aggressive, etc, etc. What happened to that? And Laviolette's great system? Now I'm reading Laviolette needs to change his system.
- MJL

Hmmm.. I must have missed those posts. I was thinking about this same thing. The question of does the big defensive style of BOS and LA now win over fast offensive game of PIT and CHI. Doesn't even make me critically think. It is so situational (matchups, etc) and completely due to thousands of variables it is impossible to say. I see the short term questioning of Lavy's system and I think it needs at least 2 more seasons (it has worked before). As a larger organization, Yes, the Flyers system has not worked for them for over 30 years now, but teams playing a similar style have. Cans and ANA come to mind of most recently. I truly think that it is so situational that if you put yourself in a position to compete enough you will eventual come up big. The Flyers have done that over the years. Since their inception in 1967 they have had 43 seasons. In those they have not made the POs in:
69-70
71-72
90-91
91-92
92-93
93-94
06-07
7X.

They made the POs 34 times (check my math). This is something to celebrate. Not losing but being one of, if not the, most competitive teams in the league. If you fish the same hole with fish enough you will eventually catch something. I have faith.

This article somewhat supports my thoughts:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=634032

Hmmm.. I must have missed those posts. I was thinking about this same thing. The question of does the big defensive style of BOS and LA now win over fast offensive game of PIT and CHI. Doesn't even make me critically think. It is so situational (matchups, etc) and completely due to thousands of variables it is impossible to say. I see the short term questioning of Lavy's system and I think it needs at least 2 more seasons (it has worked before). As a larger organization, Yes, the Flyers system has not worked for them for over 30 years now, but teams playing a similar style have. Cans and ANA come to mind of most recently. I truly think that it is so situational that if you put yourself in a position to compete enough you will eventual come up big. The Flyers have done that over the years. Since their inception in 1967 they have had 43 seasons. In those they have not made the POs in:
69-70
71-72
90-91
91-92
92-93
93-94
06-07
7X.

They made the POs 34 times (check my math). This is something to celebrate. Not losing but being one of, if not the, most competitive teams in the league. If you fish the same hole with fish enough you will eventually catch something. I have faith.

This article somewhat supports my thoughts:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=634032
- coffee junkie

I understand completely what your saying. It's all situational. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm not a fan of Laviolette's system and style of play. Never have been. However that doesn't mean you can't win playing that way. You certainly can. LA won playing their system for one reason only. They had good players who committed to playing it. And the gave the work ethic behind it. You can do a lot when a bunch of factors come together. Health, good fortune, good matchups, etc. You get on a role and you catch a wave and ride it. LA tweaked their team and made some key moves. But Murray laid the foundation, and Sutter tweaked it, and the Kings won. Because they were a team. The Kings system would have been just another loser without the players behind it.

My god.....


http://www.getrealhockey..../flyers-off-season-needs/

My favorite part:

Barret Jackman- The former Blue would be an excellent stay at home defenseman addition to the roster. Jackman only had 1 goal last year, but has had 3 seasons of at least a +20. Plays well positionally and doesn’t turn the puck over too much. Jackman would probably get somewhere around $4 million a season and be a nice replacement for Matt Carle.

Adorable.

The positioning of the forwards is part of the system. Asking them to stay back is changing it.
- bradleyc4

The Flyers have had games where they are more defensively responsible in their own end and in the neutral zone and backcheck more aggressively. I often look at the level of backchecking commitment as a proxy for how the team is playing in a given game etc. I don't think it's a big adjustment to have the forwards give support. Laviolette's go-go system and "jam" needs to be applied on the backcheck as fiercely as on the forecheck.

The Flyers have had games where they are more defensively responsible in their own end and in the neutral zone and backcheck more aggressively. I often look at the level of backchecking commitment as a proxy for how the team is playing in a given game etc. I don't think it's a big adjustment to have the forwards give support. Laviolette's go-go system and "jam" needs to be applied on the backcheck as fiercely as on the forecheck.
- phantasm

Playing defense as a forward is not fun -- it's hard work and requires a mental commitment to it.

It doesn't necessarily entail giving up a lot of your offensive game but you can't hang over the blue line waiting for a pass from behind the net and you can't float around in your own end with no plan waiting for someone else to make a play.

We should sign parise and schultz
Trade jvr read and bob to Toronto for schenn and the 5th overall pick

See? Those roomers were so nonsensical that they were deleted!

We should sign parise and schultz
Trade jvr read and bob to Toronto for schenn and the 5th overall pick
- griouxmvp2012

Your not going to get the 5th pick from Toronto for that.

See? Those roomers were so nonsensical that they were deleted!
- Giroux_Is_God

looks that way. just another example of the man keepin' us down.

might be leight, but:

Hockey Break ‏@HockeyBreak
Expected the Devils to forfeit this years 1st, but as per @TGfireandice, they have elected to keep it. Team must forfeit 2013 or 2014 1st.

looks that way. just another example of the man keepin' us down.



- BringBack25

might be leight, but:

Hockey Break ‏@HockeyBreak
Expected the Devils to forfeit this years 1st, but as per @TGfireandice, they have elected to keep it. Team must forfeit 2013 or 2014 1st.
- flyerscup2011

Why??

might be leight, but:

Hockey Break ‏@HockeyBreak
Expected the Devils to forfeit this years 1st, but as per @TGfireandice, they have elected to keep it. Team must forfeit 2013 or 2014 1st.
- flyerscup2011

Next years draft should be LOADED, it won't likely happen next year. I'd bet they try to land a 1st rounder for 2014 from another team & then give up their own at that point.

Why??
- Giroux_Is_God

beats me, but (frank) them, i hope they lose a top 10 pick

Why??
- Giroux_Is_God

http://www.sportsnet.ca/h...10/09/13/nhl_devils_fine/

- ob18

figured it was you.

figured it was you.
- BringBack25

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2010/09/13/nhl_devils_fine/
- ob18

Wait I thought they forfeited their pick last year? Or did they have to give up more than one?

Wait I thought they forfeited their pick last year? Or did they have to give up more than one?
- Giroux_Is_God

uhhh no they drafted this guy named adam larsson

- ob18

So you didn't delete JSaq's post and all the replies to it? If not, please accept my apologies sir.

But somebody deleted half a page worth of posts, many of which (well, at least mine) were absolutely hilarious.

Wait I thought they forfeited their pick last year? Or did they have to give up more than one?
- Giroux_Is_God

That was the 3rd rounder they gave up. Last year they pick Adam Larrson at #4

So you didn't delete JSaq's post and all the replies to it? If not, please accept my apologies sir.

But somebody deleted half a page worth of posts, many of which (well, at least mine) were absolutely hilarious.

- BringBack25

I am not at liberty to pass along such information.