What a waste of keystrokes lol.
- Tomahawk

Everything on hockeybuzz is waste of keystrokes. Lmao

2. Correct. The hypothesis is odds based, meaning it will be very largely – but not necessarily always – correct. That does not mean however that it cannot be refuted. If teams constructed like the Isles/Habs keep winning cups, sure, that would be a refutation.

3. Of course it changes from year to year, depending on who moves in and out of those superstar statuses, and how team rosters change.

This year, Tampa is the only remaining team that would fit my model to a T (no pun intended). Vegas would just fit it. (Pietro finished #4 in Norris last year and is a consensus very top player. But only him - not Stone). Isles and Habs would not fit it.

4. My bet last year (which btw, you misremember: it was 11 victories or less in any playoff year) had very little to do with the 'theory' above. It was not general, but specific to this Flyers team, their cap situation and contracts, their management, their fans, their young players, and their rosters.

Now dude, I am happy to engage on specific clarifications, but I cannot endlessly clarify misreadings, so ...
- PT21

2. Yes, so if the data changes...so does the hypothesis of the requirements for a cup contender.

3. 18 mil more dollars spent does play a role in the level of talent on TB compared to their opponents this playoffs...even within the rules.

4. Oh come on! I remember the 11 games, but the conference finals clears that with at least 12 wins. I wasn’t being technical.

I think the thing that bothers me the most is that I agree that the Flyers need to add a top defenseman. If you have read my comments over the last few years as I was criticized for saying getting a top RHD was as important as our center depth hole. My pining for Doughty and wishing that contract would fit. The pipe dream of Pietrangelo last offseason, or my statement of support for getting Hamilton or Jones. Or at the very least two guys like Ekholm and Larsson. Certainly, NOT doing nothing.

I know that more needs to be squeezed from the wingers but the plan has to be to find better fit and youth growth to fill that hole. Maybe hockey trades or prospects like Allison or Frost help. We have talked about candidates before like Farabee, TK and Giroux.

I think that I do have a higher opinion of Couturier than most; however, even I worry about his durability.

That said...why is it you are so negative about the team’s future even if all of the above goes as well as possible? Do you just not think those 3 items are remotely possible?...Flyers with a true top pairing, healthy centermen, and at least one wingers who performs at the top of his position. Is it that you don’t think those things will happen or that those items are still not enough to win 11 games postseason?

2. Yes, so if the data changes...so does the hypothesis of the requirements for a cup contender.

3. 18 mil more dollars spent does play a role in the level of talent on TB compared to their opponents this playoffs...even within the rules.

4. Oh come on! I remember the 11 games, but the conference finals clears that with at least 12 wins. I wasn’t being technical.

I think the thing that bothers me the most is that I agree that the Flyers need to add a top defenseman. If you have read my comments over the last few years as I was criticized for saying getting a top RHD was as important as our center depth hole. My pining for Doughty and wishing that contract would fit. The pipe dream of Pietrangelo last offseason, or my statement of support for getting Hamilton or Jones. Or at the very least two guys like Ekholm and Larsson. Certainly, NOT doing nothing.

I know that more needs to be squeezed from the wingers but the plan has to be to find better fit and youth growth to fill that hole. Maybe hockey trades or prospects like Allison or Frost help. We have talked about candidates before like Farabee, TK and Giroux.

I think that I do have a higher opinion of Couturier than most; however, even I worry about his durability.

That said...why is it you are so negative about the team’s future even if all of the above goes as well as possible? Do you just not think those 3 items are remotely possible?...Flyers with a true top pairing, healthy centermen, and at least one wingers who performs at the top of his position. Is it that you don’t think those things will happen or that those items are still not enough to win 11 games postseason?
- NC Flyers Fan

Status quo is what EVERY flyers fan should worry about. Because the bean counter knows as long as g/Jake/coots here the excuse will be made and THE MONEY spent and that’s the priority

Status quo is what EVERY flyers fan should worry about. Because the bean counter knows as long as g/Jake/coots here the excuse will be made and THE MONEY spent and that’s the priority
- Stayin alive

I don’t know what you mean here...please elaborate. I am definitely for making changes to improve....not running it back. I realize in a cap world that means money in, money out. I am okay with losing players if the end result it a better team that fits, doesn’t create new larger holes in the roster and plays with identity as a team. It also should not be a one and done type of fix...the expectation is ongoing growth of a young team with a wide window of contention with and beyond the current vets.

No I wouldn’t break the cycle. For example hart drafted in 16 so we should be drafting top goalie prospect in 20’ or ‘21 or ‘22 if you hit from another later round pick for example Ersson in ‘18 draft you won’t know until probably around 2023 (5years) or probably a little later so say Ersson is good and breaks into nhl around ‘23/‘24. And is really good that gives you option with hart and his bridge deal. Or his 2nd bridge deal. Think about it say Ersson in 3 years on roster and playing really good do you give hart that big deal? That 4/5/6 year 25/30 mil deal? Especially at expense of cap space and losing other players? Well if you stay true to draft cycle and have taken wallstedt in the ‘21 draft you’d have 3 years of development and evaluation on him. If you have that pipeline you don’t need to spend big cap dollars on hart in that case. It gives you options. Or for another option in the scenario you could move Ersson as an asset also. Premium high on good young goalies. In which case you hit on 5 th rounder say you trade him for a 1st or 2nd round pick. Not bad return
- Stayin alive

I think you answer your own question about why fans might have a problem with the approach of choosing a goalie in the first round. Sticking with the Flyers as the example here, fans see a young Hart, and prospects like Sandstrom, Ustimenko and Ersson and the lack of depth in the system at RHD, center and sniper and think “why are we not getting the best prospect possible in those areas when more goalie options are still available in the next round?” I understand if it’s really best player available, but if you target the goalie position as your first pick, that’s it, you are not filling other areas that appear to be bigger needs.

Edit: Fedotov too.

2. Yes, so if the data changes...so does the hypothesis of the requirements for a cup contender.

3. 18 mil more dollars spent does play a role in the level of talent on TB compared to their opponents this playoffs...even within the rules.

4. Oh come on! I remember the 11 games, but the conference finals clears that with at least 12 wins. I wasn’t being technical.
.
.
(some general stuff deleted here)
.
.

That said...why is it you are so negative about the team’s future even if all of the above goes as well as possible? Do you just not think those 3 items are remotely possible?...Flyers with a true top pairing, healthy centermen, and at least one wingers who performs at the top of his position. Is it that you don’t think those things will happen or that those items are still not enough to win 11 games postseason?
- NC Flyers Fan

2. No. The requirements, as you will observe, is not year-dependent. Who meets the requirements are.
3. Irrelevant for the purposes of our discussion.
4. You said: "You claim the Flyers won’t make it to the conference finals in the next 3 year" - well, No, since I said 11 wins or less, which means Flyers won't make it to the Championship finals.

Bolded:

Because, in life, and in hockey, all never goes 'as well as possible." What it would require for Flyers to be a serious contender is essentially throwing up say ten die, one at a time, where each die represents a variable (like future production of Hart, Tk, Bee, Couturier etc) and having all of them come up sixes.

Thats not just Die Hard, dude, that's wildly improbable.

Everything on hockeybuzz is waste of keystrokes. Lmao
- Stayin alive

Pretty much every general discussion on the Internet is like that, sadly.

What a waste of keystrokes lol.
- Tomahawk

Translation: I will keep refuting historical patterns that are demonstrably correct by pointing out dubious counter examples, most of which do not withstand scrutiny.

I will then use elementary terms like "variance", without knowing/forgetting what it means.

2. No. The requirements, as you will observe, is not year-dependent. Who meets the requirements are.
3. Irrelevant for the purposes of our discussion.
4. You said: "You claim the Flyers won’t make it to the conference finals in the next 3 year" - well, No, since I said 11 wins or less, which means Flyers won't make it to the Championship finals.

Bolded:

Because, in life, and in hockey, all never goes 'as well as possible." What it would require for Flyers to be a serious contender is essentially throwing up say ten die, one at a time, where each die represents a variable (like future production of Hart, Tk, Bee, Couturier etc) and having all of them come up sixes.

Thats not just Die Hard, dude, that's wildly improbable.
- PT21

3. Nevertheless, if they win, I will always have the mental asterisk on this year’s TB team.

4. Got it, I misspoke.

I don’t believe it to be wildly improbable. I will await Fletcher changes and see.

2. No. The requirements, as you will observe, is not year-dependent. Who meets the requirements are.
3. Irrelevant for the purposes of our discussion.
4. You said: "You claim the Flyers won’t make it to the conference finals in the next 3 year" - well, No, since I said 11 wins or less, which means Flyers won't make it to the Championship finals.

Bolded:

Because, in life, and in hockey, all never goes 'as well as possible." What it would require for Flyers to be a serious contender is essentially throwing up say ten die, one at a time, where each die represents a variable (like future production of Hart, Tk, Bee, Couturier etc) and having all of them come up sixes.

Thats not just Die Hard, dude, that's wildly improbable.
- PT21

3. Nevertheless, if they win, I will always have the mental asterisk on this year’s TB team.

4. Got it, I misspoke. I should have said winning the conference final.

I don’t believe it to be wildly improbable. I will await Fletcher changes and see.

3. Nevertheless, if they win, I will always have the mental asterisk on this year’s TB team.

4. Got it, I misspoke. I should have said winning the conference final.

I don’t believe it to be wildly improbable. I will await Fletcher changes and see.
- NC Flyers Fan

I don't really care about the stupid bet (though I am pretty sure I will win it).

I want them to win the cup. And here, look who has won it with trading for a superstar in a key position. Only one team, that's Boston, and Chara was not quite the superstar at the time of trade as he turned out to be.

So, perhaps you don't see history as a guide for the future (which I think is a mistake because the NHL playoffs are pretty much the same year to year and history does have some predictive value), in which case you could say, well, because it has happened only once in the past doesn't mean anything for the future.

But if you do, you see why I consider it very improbable simply based on history, even without the added variables of player development.

I don't really care about the stupid bet (though I am pretty sure I will win it).

I want them to win the cup. And here, look who has won it with trading for a superstar in a key position. Only one team, that's Boston, and Chara was not quite the superstar at the time of trade as he turned out to be.
- PT21

Well, I do, so I hope I win.

If Vegas wins, you have to count Pietrangelo even if the rest of the team didn’t meet your qualifications. Vegas really has no choice but to have a FA star for defense because as a new expansion team, they haven’t had time to develop defense through the draft.

Also, Provy hasn’t topped out. Seeing him with a right fit top pairing guy could change things. Honestly, if sticking a guy like Jones besides him makes him the best version of himself, Provy could end up being the guy after all.

I think you answer your own question about why fans might have a problem with the approach of choosing a goalie in the first round. Sticking with the Flyers as the example here, fans see a young Hart, and prospects like Sandstrom, Ustimenko and Ersson and the lack of depth in the system at RHD, center and sniper and think “why are we not getting the best prospect possible in those areas when more goalie options are still available in the next round?” I understand if it’s really best player available, but if you target the goalie position as your first pick, that’s it, you are not filling other areas that appear to be bigger needs.

Edit: Fedotov too.
- NC Flyers Fan

Again the only reason for my theory is because most teams won’t draft goalie in round 1. And it’s an investment with the odds for the future.

Nerris is trash

Nerris is trash
- 2Real

Phils and Flyers are a lot alike. They're both done in May

Phils and Flyers are a lot alike. They're both done in May
- DaveofYork

lol

I think you answer your own question about why fans might have a problem with the approach of choosing a goalie in the first round. Sticking with the Flyers as the example here, fans see a young Hart, and prospects like Sandstrom, Ustimenko and Ersson and the lack of depth in the system at RHD, center and sniper and think “why are we not getting the best prospect possible in those areas when more goalie options are still available in the next round?” I understand if it’s really best player available, but if you target the goalie position as your first pick, that’s it, you are not filling other areas that appear to be bigger needs.

Edit: Fedotov too.
- NC Flyers Fan

And while the goalies you mention are nice prospects they aren’t top prospects. For example do you look at any of those like you did hart as he progressed? I hope not. And again over last 20 years how many goalies we draft that panned out? 2? Out of how many? And 1 of those were only in the league for what 3 years? If ever there is a time to realize something needs to change in the philosophy of how we obtain and develop goalie prospects I’d think it’s now. What they have does not work. And the odds are extremely low. Even my theory only raises the odds some but at least it’s different

Well, I do, so I hope I win.

If Vegas wins, you have to count Pietrangelo even if the rest of the team didn’t meet your qualifications. Vegas really has no choice but to have a FA star for defense because as a new expansion team, they haven’t had time to develop defense through the draft.

Also, Provy hasn’t topped out. Seeing him with a right fit top pairing guy could change things. Honestly, if sticking a guy like Jones besides him makes him the best version of himself, Provy could end up being the guy after all.
- NC Flyers Fan

If Vegas wins, certainly that would be one more. In 2001, Avs traded for Bourque the year before, and Blake that year, so that's three. Boyle came to Tampa Bay a couple of years before they won, lets count that as 4. That's all I recall from my fan days the past 25 years. Its possible I am forgetting someone. If not, that's a 16% chance, so quite unusual.

But its even lower, I believe. Tampa was stacked up front, we are not. Avs were a legendary team in those days, we are really very average.

The Pietro trade to Vegas is especially interesting: Vegas plays a style of play very much like Blues did, so it is a great fit. They have a bunch of cohesive parts. In our case, different parts of our team have different strengths - the personnel are not really fitted to any style. They don't have the guys for a heavy possession game, or a fast game, or a relentless forechecking game, or a very defensive game.

Further, Vegas already had a highly competitive team, but they lacked that specific piece of a high end D guy ever since they came into league. We are not competitive and don't have one specific missing part - we have more missing parts than Swiss Cheese.


I don't enjoy wallowing in negativity (I am excited about the Eagles season and near future). I just don't see it happening with the Flyers -way too many ifs. The only way out is amputation, and they are not gonna do it.

I find your optimism interesting and admirable, but misguided and not rooted in any firm foundation other than "this can happen" and "that can happen". Remember, every time you add a 'can', the probability of all those cans rolling down the street together diminishes.

Phils and Flyers are a lot alike. They're both done in May
- DaveofYork

And while the goalies you mention are nice prospects they aren’t top prospects. For example do you look at any of those like you did hart as he progressed? I hope not. And again over last 20 years how many goalies we draft that panned out? 2? Out of how many? And 1 of those were only in the league for what 3 years? If ever there is a time to realize something needs to change in the philosophy of how we obtain and develop goalie prospects I’d think it’s now. What they have does not work. And the odds are extremely low. Even my theory only raises the odds some but at least it’s different
- Stayin alive

We agree on that...bolded. That discussion will raise my blood pressure so I’ll pass for tonight. It is sure to stir up a hornet’s nest.

To be clear, I still have full confidence in Hart.

...The Pietro trade to Vegas is especially interesting: Vegas plays a style of play very much like Blues did, so it is a great fit. They have a bunch of cohesive parts. In our case, different parts of our team have different strengths - the personnel are not really fitted to any style. They don't have the guys for a heavy possession game, or a fast game, or a relentless forechecking game, or a very defensive game...

I find your optimism interesting and admirable, but misguided and not rooted in any firm foundation other than "this can happen" and "that can happen". Remember, every time you add a 'can', the probability of all those cans rolling down the street together diminishes.
- PT21

Bold-I have thought that most of the Flyers personnel is more geared towards a strong possession game...Fletcher and AV better pick a card to collect. The fit and style must be improved. You’re absolutely right about that.

Umm, thanks. Cans on 3 guys, let’s roll...1...2...3

Phils and Flyers are a lot alike. They're both done in March
- DaveofYork

FTFY

https://youtu.be/SL8Il6wJF6Q

I know the Phanatic is just for kids, but Stanton did not seem entertained at all.

Lighten up, Francis.

Come to think of it, there might not be a bigger popcorn throwing culprit in all of sports than the Phanatic

Translation
- PT21

No translation needed. It was really a total waste of keystrokes.

There were too many issues with what you wrote, and I really don't have the energy to help you dig your head out of your butt.

We agree on that...bolded. That discussion will raise my blood pressure so I’ll pass for tonight. It is sure to stir up a hornet’s nest.

To be clear, I still have full confidence in Hart.
- NC Flyers Fan

Lol. I still have absolute full confidence in hart to fully develop. Him being top goalie prospect in his draft year helps me believe this season was to be thrown out among all the weird stuff. Plus he was brought up probably too early( not that he couldn’t compete) but definitely early.