2022/23 Roster Thread XIX: 19th Nervous Breakdown

[Beef Invictus]

Anyone buying in to the Tortorella hype and expecting change is setting themselves up for further disappointment. I look forward to having these same conversations with you all in a few years.

Comcast-Spectacor is riding the coattails of the City of Philadelphia - and specificall the Eagles -- "underdog" story and using these pieces simply as the pawns to mimic that rallying cry. Tortorella is the hard-nosed tough guy who isnt afraid to say what he means (despite being fed every line from those above him), and "works hard" to back it up. He's 'tough' on (Read: an asshole to) his players and drives "accountability" (on some players, but not certainly not all). Briere is the former player (cause you HAVE to be a former player to be a good general manager) who was the under-sized clutch player who had the skill to be flashy, but also wasnt afraid to be dirty because that's what he had to do to get to the top. He'll placate the "we need skill" people because thats what they associate him with.

The Flyers being run by the old guard is probably one of the worst kept secrets in hockey, second only maybe to the idea that Lamoriello is actually dead and his corpse is being re-animated through unnatural means to make him look like a functional human. If he didn't know the Flyers were Clarke et all's play thing before he got here, hes dumber than he looks. Him calling that out isnt "revolutionary" by any means. We've all talked about it for years. It's a line hes being told to say to endear himself to the "new" fans, by the people pulling the strings, to attempt to shift the blame to whatever sacrificial lambs they offer up this summer from that old dinosaur advisor crew. Do you really think a guy with such a dinosaur mindset who talks about ending the career of a kid because he did the Michigan is going to willfully speak out against hockey royalty? He's every bit as engrained in the HockeyGuy culture as they are and he knows that isnt a line to cross. Unfortunately for us, he's finally learning how to adapt (in some capacity) past that -- likely out of self-preservation, because he knows the Flyers are the only team archaic enough to think his boring, monotonous brand of hockey still has a prayer of succeeding in a modern NHL.

If you're buying this Tortorella-Briere bill of goods as anything other than a marketing scheme (remind me -- who is the CEO of Spectacor again? Oh, right -- the marketing guru!) but expecting different results -- i'm going to enjoy the look on your face when you see what gets delivered.

It's this transparent.

 

[Beef Invictus]

“We can’t sign Panarin, he’s a winger and we need a center or defensemen”

Current GM was in the middle of a group that believed they were going to get competitive, and instead of having Giroux and JG he wanted Deslauriers. That's what he championed.

Five years away from being a decade away. All we can hope is that Fletcher did so much damage that it kills the rest of his holdouts in a year or two.

 

[Starat327]

It's this transparent.

Topically, what they are doing is no different than what Pepsi just did. They re-branded the logo, but its still the same terrible shit inside. What the Flyers are doing is no different.

 

[FlyerNutter]

The problem is that if they're willing to purge because of his views, they'd be willing to hire for those views too. And that's a nightmare. We are five years away from being a decade away.

The only rebirth that would have worked here was with a complete destruction.

Who they hire after of course is a question - but I’ll take the chance at improvement, instead of the perpetual status quo any day.

Lot more changes need to happen to make that a reality. Blaming the advisors, and putting in more Comcast folk means nothing if they are idiots.

 

[Columbus Hockey Dad]

You need a team that scores. Not a team from 2012.

Tortorella will give you an anti-skill, anti-offense team. That is what you want? Or is it nothing but grinding effort? Because teams don't win Cups on effort alone. There's a reason Tortorella hasn't done a damned thing since the end of the DPE era, and his next rebirth was in a mini-DPE which is long over.

To be fair, what talent does he really have to work with? Where's the skill or offense that's he making "anti-skill" and "anti-offense?" Maybe I missed it, but this team flat out sucks. The only reason we have as many wins we do is Carter Hart. Even with a new GM, even if if that GM gets the ball rolling correctly, it's not going to change anytime soon. By the time we actually are at a point to bring in the young talent, I'm wondering if Torts is moved to pasture...

 

[deadhead]

Every year we have this discussion. I want them to get faster. I want them to play physical. I don’t want to lose the team identity. I think Daddy Ron Chuck Danny sees it exactly the way I do!

And every year, my response is that they haven’t even proven they can prioritize getting and developing good players over fit and finish. Just get good players instead of walking cliches. Don’t create room or establish a culture. Just get good players. No excuses.

What's a good player?

I mean there are maybe a dozen transcendental talents who can make a major contribution with bad fundamentals b/c they're so talented. So you grit your teeth when you get one and hope they grow up the way Sidney did.

The rest are a tradeoff between qualities. The question is which tradeoffs do you make?

 

[Beef Invictus]

The only rebirth that would have worked here was with a complete destruction.

Who they hire after of course is a question - but I’ll take the chance at improvement, instead of the perpetual status quo any day.

Lot more changes need to happen to make that a reality. Blaming the advisors, and putting in more Comcast folk means nothing if they are idiots.

I strongly suspect the status quo lives on and nothing has changed. Observe everyone being demoted back to LHV even when theyre short on F.

 

[Striiker]

But it’s Tippett and Cates who are core pieces. The clear best of the three still needs to prove himself.

 

[Beef Invictus]

To be fair, what talent does he really have to work with? Where's the skill or offense that's he making "anti-skill" and "anti-offense?" Maybe I missed it, but this team flat out sucks. The only reason we have as many wins we do is Carter Hart. Even with a new GM, even if if that GM gets the ball rolling correctly, it's not going to change anytime soon. By the time we actually are at a point to bring in the young talent, I'm wondering if Torts is moved to pasture...

Where is it? If Tortorella can have his way, it will continue being nowhere near this team, that's for sure. He's made that openly clear. He wants more grinders. Less skill. Even less than they have now. All the messaging around Frost sure seems to indicate he'd like to see him moved, probably for another Cates.

This guy would rather have Barkov than McDavid, and for that reason alone he should have never been hired by anyone ever again.

 

[Beef Invictus]

But it’s Tippett and Cates who are core pieces. The clear best of the three still needs to prove himself.

Seeler is also a core piece.

 

[Striiker]

But it’s Tippett and Cates who are core pieces. The clear best of the three still needs to prove himself.

Also, here's for the year as a whole at 5v5.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Toilet Seat. Coach "isn't sure" of him.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

What's a good player?

I mean there are maybe a dozen transcendental talents who can make a major contribution with bad fundamentals b/c they're so talented. So you grit your teeth when you get one and hope they grow up the way Sidney did.

The rest are a tradeoff between qualities. The question is which tradeoffs do you make?

You keep talking about qualities. That's exactly what I'm not talking about.

Show me that the priority is finding effective NHL players, not filling shopping lists. We want more size in the middle rounds of the draft. Nic Deslauriers makes everyone better. We need a steadying vet RHD. I don't want to even get a sniff of those things.

Prioritize effectiveness over attributes.

 

[Chinatown88]

Lap 2132187954784578953429083208923

I know a lot of you do things for a discussion. But I'm starting to believe all of you are Mr. Masochist from (Yakuza: Like A Dragon) because you still expect a different outcome after 321089328032489032908 attempts.

Not posting Mr. Masochist because it might get me in trouble, I know curious minds will look it up.

 

[CerpinTaxt]

Torts is an odd duck. He does things that I both like and hate. The bottom line is that he has this bunch of misfits playing competitive hockey. The product is a lot better than what AV/Yeo had put on the ice.
I’m looking forward to see his additions by subtraction over the summer. Then this fall when he has more of his type of players, what his team can do. Somewhere, somehow we’re going to need to see the base developed for a consistent offense.

As others have said this myth that Tortorella has them playing better is statistically wrong. In fact the PP is worse this year, so in fact he has them playing worse. Goaltending is a hell of a drug.

 

[FlyerNutter]

I strongly suspect the status quo lives on and nothing has changed. Observe everyone being demoted back to LHV even when theyre short on F.

I’m hopeful simply because I’d love for there to be some improvement but the hockey ops president leaks along with Briere being hired screams of ongoing stupidity.

 

[deadhead]

You keep talking about qualities. That's exactly what I'm not talking about.

Show me that the priority is finding effective NHL players, not filling shopping lists. We want more size in the middle rounds of the draft. Nic Deslauriers makes everyone better. We need a steadying vet RHD. I don't want to even get a sniff of those things.

Prioritize effectiveness over attributes.

That's not what I'm talking about, those moves weren't even part of a coherent strategy, more "gee, we could use this" one from column A, two from column B type thinking.

I have a coherent vision of what I want the team to look like, and I think Torts/Briere do as well.
It's not speed for speed's sake, Rinaldo was fast . . .
It's also not skill for skill sake, a lot of NHL skill players leak goals faster than they can score them.

Rather, a style of play that requires speed, and the type of skill players who fit that style (not offense first stat padders). If you have a coherent vision of the type of team you want and the style of hockey you want to play, you should be able to unearth "bargains" that are undervalued by their current teams but good fits for what you want to do.

A coherent philosophy means when you replace the HC, you find someone similar in style but more competent, not go from one scheme to another every three years and have to try and revamp the roster to fit the new guy.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

That's not what I'm talking about, those moves weren't even part of a coherent strategy, more "gee, we could use this" one from column A, two from column B type thinking.

I have a coherent vision of what I want the team to look like, and I think Torts/Briere do as well.
It's not speed for speed's sake, Rinaldo was fast . . .
It's also not skill for skill sake, a lot of NHL skill players leak goals faster than they can score them.

Rather, a style of play that requires speed, and the type of skill players who fit that style (not offense first stat padders). If you have a coherent vision of the type of team you want and the style of hockey you want to play, you should be able to unearth "bargains" that are undervalued by their current teams but good fits for what you want to do.

A coherent philosophy means when you replace the HC, you find someone similar in style but more competent, not go from one scheme to another every three years and have to try and revamp the roster to fit the new guy.

I'm out of ways to tell you this is smelling your own farts. This isn't football. What you're asked to do just isn't different enough to start with this. A coherent NHL strategy does not have to limit the talent pool by design. You cannot talk me out of that position.

Yes, you can pick up small edges here and there by doing this type of fit and finish. But you can get way more by being malleable enough to take what the market is currently undervaluing. Now maybe that changes at some point in the future as the league gets dragged into modernity, but we're not there yet. If on the NHL level, that means you target big, average Defensemen who make peanuts, great. If that's small Defensemen who are average but not DeAngelo bad defensively, great. This is what the market bore, now it's time for the coach to be an adult and make it work.

 

[Audible Velvet]

Also, here's for the year as a whole at 5v5.

Not bad, considering usage, linemates and psychological warfare.

 

[deadhead]

I'm out of ways to tell you this is smelling your own farts. This isn't football. What you're asked to do just isn't different enough to start with this. A coherent NHL strategy does not have to limit the talent pool by design. You cannot talk me out of that position.

Yes, you can pick up small edges here and there by doing this type of fit and finish. But you can get way more by being malleable enough to take what the market is currently undervaluing. Now maybe that changes at some point in the future as the league gets dragged into modernity, but we're not there yet. If on the NHL level, that means you target big, average Defensemen who make peanuts, great. If that's small Defensemen who are average but not DeAngelo bad defensively, great. This is what the market bore, now it's time for the coach to be an adult and make it work.

Fit matters a lot in hockey. There's only one puck, if you have five players on the ice who are better with the puck than without, you're going to have an inefficiency, not just in play, but in salary. Offense gets overpaid relative to defense b/c it's easier to market.

A general philosophy isn't a straitjacket, rather, it's a template. And creates opportunities for arbitrage, b/c the players who don't fit may be valued higher by other organizations, while players elsewhere who are potential good fits (in the draft, on other rosters) may be undervalued by other teams. But if you can get a less than perfect fit for a bargain (relative to the value of the player to your team) of course, jump on it.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Fit matters a lot in hockey. There's only one puck, if you have five players on the ice who are better with the puck than without, you're going to have an inefficiency, not just in play, but in salary. Offense gets overpaid relative to defense b/c it's easier to market.

A general philosophy isn't a straitjacket, rather, it's a template. And creates opportunities for arbitrage, b/c the players who don't fit may be valued higher by other organizations, while players elsewhere who are potential good fits (in the draft, on other rosters) may be undervalued by other teams. But if you can get a less than perfect fit for a bargain (relative to the value of the player to your team) of course, jump on it.

I really thought the Durant Warriors killed this "There's only one ball/puck/shuttlecock" thing. Shows what I know.

But mostly what I want you to think about is that in order for this to be relevant as a counterpoint to what I said, I would have to be diametrically opposed to valuing good possession, no finish players. I think we're clear on that being false given that I've been talking up depth pieces like Zach Aston-Reese who kill O Zone time along the boards for the better part of a decade because of their defensive effectiveness.

 

[deadhead]

I really thought the Durant Warriors killed this "There's only one ball/puck/shuttlecock" thing. Shows what I know.

But mostly what I want you to think about is that in order for this to be relevant as a counterpoint to what I said, I would have to be diametrically opposed to valuing good possession, no finish players. I think we're clear on that being false given that I've been talking up depth pieces like Zach Aston-Reese who kill O Zone time along the boards for the better part of a decade because of their defensive effectiveness.

I think we're more in agreement than you think.
It comes down to arbitrage, but value is relative to the scheme and style of play you employ.

Roster building is a constrained optimization problem, how do I allocate a salary Cap, draft picks, tradeable assets, etc. to build the optimal team.

But it's a highly nonlinear problem b/c fit matters, Would Kane have been as good without Toews? Ovechkin is a great scorer, but he had a great playmaker feeding him the puck on his stick. Couts made both Voracek and TK better players, G made Couts a better offensive player. TDA was much better with Slavin than Provorov. And part of fit is style of play, some guys are better up tempo, creating chaos, some under control, setting up plays.

And price matters, 3 good possession, no finish guys have value on a 4th line at low cost, not so much on a 3rd line with 3rd line salaries. Paying a forward $7M to play on a third line is probably inefficient.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Fit matters a lot in hockey.

I can stop you right here. No it doesn't. You and Fletcher have been proven wrong on this front endlessly for years running.

It just doesn't matter much if at all. Hell, right now all the Carolina fans who shouted in rage at trading for Ghost because he "doesn't fit" are eating crow. Building for fit is building to limit yourself. It's building for failure. It's stupid as hell.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I think we're more in agreement than you think.
It comes down to arbitrage, but value is relative to the scheme and style of play you employ.

Roster building is a constrained optimization problem, how do I allocate a salary Cap, draft picks, tradeable assets, etc. to build the optimal team.

But it's a highly nonlinear problem b/c fit matters, Would Kane have been as good without Toews? Ovechkin is a great scorer, but he had a great playmaker feeding him the puck on his stick. Couts made both Voracek and TK better players, G made Couts a better offensive player. TDA was much better with Slavin than Provorov. And part of fit is style of play, some guys are better up tempo, creating chaos, some under control, setting up plays.

And price matters, 3 good possession, no finish guys have value on a 4th line at low cost, not so much on a 3rd line with 3rd line salaries. Paying a forward $7M to play on a third line is probably inefficient.

Kane would have been extremely good without Toews.

Ovechkin has played away from playmakers and still scored. Famously so. His adaptability is his legend.

The rest aren't issues of fit. It's what happens when you get to play with good players.

"Fit" is nothing more than a terrible justification for bad moves that make no sense in any other way.

 

[Curufinwe]

Imagine still using "fit" as an excuse for the former GM paying thru the nose to get rid of Ghost when the same GM brought in Gustafsson (with Ghost still here!), Yandle and Angelo to replace him.

Speaking of Gus, he has 1 point in 8 games since going to Toronto after being pumped and dumped by the Caps. Ghost has 7 points in 14 games for the Canes.