2024-25 Roster Thread #1: The Beginninging

[Adtar02]

People keep saying this like it's some kind of fact.

It's an unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence.

Provy was best his first two or three years
Then they coached him to play differently.
Specifcly the last three coaches have done this. And their ahl staff If the players wouldn’t change their style their style they’d get rid of them.

Ghost developed just fine, considered he missed an entire AHL season with a knee injury.
His problem is he physically broke down, had both knees scoped and went from a 2nd pair D-man to a 3rd pair D-man over time.

You said no one they moved on from was any good anywhere else

 

[FlyerNutter]

People keep saying this like it's some kind of fact.

It's an unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence.

Flyers are an incompetent, and incestous country club that’s more concerned with employment for old friends - than present day success.

/unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence

 

[freakydallas13]

People keep saying this like it's some kind of fact.

It's an unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence.

No, it isn't unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Nothing says "no development problems!" like a steady stream of prospects who look promising and then either stagnate or regress the longer the team has them.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

Stretching. How did Forsling or Verhaeghe develop after they were held back? And not just into NHL players, but top NHL players.

NAK is a 4th line forward, period. If that's the best player you've let walk . . .

It's not an incomplete data set, I went through every draft since 2011.

I've seen Lycksell play, he's a decent forward, but lacks speed, and doesn't have Cates' defensive instincts. Which makes him a tough fit on this team, he's really not ideal for a forechecker role, nor good enough to push someone like Brink out of the top 9. A year from now I'll bet Avon or Desnoyers will take that 4LW job. Neither is as skilled, but both are faster and better suited to a forechecking role.

Attard still struggles on defense, Ginning is just limited. They're not being held back, they're just not that good, which I'm told when people want to criticize drafting, but then they are fluffed when they want to criticize development. Go figure.

Then you look at someone like York, who has steadily progressed since he went pro. How did that happen? Or Foerester:? Maybe it's a combination of talent and development - it's hard to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

I will bet any number you like that doesn't happen. In fact both will be early cute again next camp.

4th line is set for next year. You know this.

NAK rules.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Once the Flyers hold a player back, they tend to be held back forever unless injuries force them to make a move and then the player is so good they can't be ignored any more. Even then, the Flyers routinely try. Good teams look for reasons to give guys a chance. The Flyers spend all their time looking for reasons to hold guys back.

yea you get 1 chance to make an impression.. from there its all downhill...

 

[blackjackmulligan]

No one held Attard back, he showed good offensive skills, below average speed but decent burst and lacked the instincts to play defense. They've taught other D-men, he's just clueless.

A 3rd rd gamble on size and skill isn't a mistake, sometimes you just can't get a player to raise their game. The problem comes when you take these gambles in the 1st rd.

What I wonder is why no other NHL sees an NHL player in the ones the Flyers are holding back. Surely one wuold have some trade value.

Who have they taught? Should have just let Attard play to his strengths. Maybe he could help that sad ass PP

You penciled him into the starting lineup for what, the two seasons before this one? And then later insisted he'd play after the deadline. Insisting he was good enough.

So if you thought he was good enough, and the Flyers never game him a chance, it is goofy for you to argue he wasn't held back.

Tru Dat

 

[CerpinTaxt]

Flyers are an incompetent, and incestous country club that’s more concerned with employment for old friends - than present day success.

/unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence

Quit making stuff up to make the org look bad.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

Still think the drafting is the main culprit. Not development.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Still think the drafting is the main culprit. Not development.

It's definitely both

 

[deadhead]

No, it isn't unsubstantiated opinion.

As he says without providing any substantiation.

 

[Cody Webster]

People keep saying this like it's some kind of fact.

It's an unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence.

 

[deadhead]

Nothing says "no development problems!" like a steady stream of prospects who look promising and then either stagnate or regress the longer the team has them.

A steady stream of middle round picks?

Who exactly dominated at lower levels (looked promising) and then flopped (excepting those whose careers were cut short by injury like Patrick, Laberge or Allison).

 

[BiggE]

A steady stream of middle round picks?

Who exactly dominated at lower levels (looked promising) and then flopped (excepting those whose careers were cut short by injury like Patrick, Laberge or Allison).

Just curious, do thing the Flyer’s organization ever makes mistakes?

Honestly, going by your posts, if I didn’t know the facts, I would think the Flyers were a Cup contender who makes the playoffs every season.

It’s truly mind boggling to me that anyone could be a fan of this team and, at the very least, not be mildly pessimistic that the hockey operations dept is not doing a good job.

 

[freakydallas13]

As he says without providing any substantiation.

Some of us don't have time to watch CHL games, others don't have time to be a full time fact checker for contrarians.

 

[Beef Invictus]

A steady stream of middle round picks?

Who exactly dominated at lower levels (looked promising) and then flopped (excepting those whose careers were cut short by injury like Patrick, Laberge or Allison).

You don't need to dominate at lower levels. Very few players actually do. This is a fake standard you've invented. Specifically, you invented it for Frost and he's pretty handily demolished it.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I have no interest in the larger discussion here, but Attard's problem isn't really defensive. They have indeed taught him that, just as they've taught others. The problem is that the way they achieve it usually craters the other end. I consider this giving them credit for accomplishing something while acknowledging that it comes at a cost. Whether it was worth it has to be determined on a case by case basis.

Attard isn't a particularly good player or a piece worth arguing over heavily. I just think the discussion around his particulars is interesting because it fits a pattern we could see cascading in real time from Risto to Zamula to Attard.

Also, this is historicism and a logical fallacy. AND an incomplete data set. You're assuming based on the past that things will be the same in the future. We could have players now who could be better than plugs like Deslauriers (Lyksell?), but we'll never know because we don't actually give them a proper chance.

Also, it could be the case that these players never developed because the Flyers held them back. Development is weird, it's easy to botch and sometimes comes down to instilling confidence. You can ruin a player for good just by setting them up to fail. Now, there are some players who can excel no matter how much you set them up to fail, but I'd say the majority are more susceptible to being ruined through poor development.

You can't look at a list of failed prospects and pat yourself on the back with "well no NHL'ers in there, so clearly the Flyers aren't at fault" because it totally ignores the fact that maybe they failed because of the way the Flyers treated them. It's a line of thinking rife with and suffering from survivorship bias.

Edit: I forgot about the fact that the Flyers only ever move on from prospects after it is abundantly clear they have little to no value. They absolutely never trade prospects if there is even a shred of hope of becoming a decent NHL'er, and (unless forced) couldn't sell high if their lives depended on it.

Every word of this is gold. We have got to stop inferring all roads lead to where they ended up.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I have no interest in the larger discussion here, but Attard's problem isn't really defensive. They have indeed taught him that, just as they've taught others. The problem is that the way they achieve it usually craters the other end. I consider this giving them credit for accomplishing something while acknowledging that it comes at a cost. Whether it was worth it has to be determined on a case by case basis.

Attard isn't a particularly good player or a piece worth arguing over heavily. I just think the discussion around his particulars is interesting because it fits a pattern we could see cascading in real time from Risto to Zamula to Attard.



Every word of this is gold. We have got to stop inferring all roads lead to where they ended up.

The players they become happiest with are the ones who crater one side of the game in service to defense. The players they traditionally develop problems with are the ones who don't crater offensively. It's truly a bizarre way to approach a sport where scoring is how you win.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

The players they become happiest with are the ones who crater one side of the game in service to defense. The players they traditionally develop problems with are the ones who don't crater offensively. It's truly a bizarre way to approach a sport where scoring is how you win.

It's so hard for me to even have these discussion because if we take a player like Risto, what I said at the time was that if you think a guy like that can be rehabilitated into a serviceable depth piece, it's an excellent flyer on a 1 year cheap deal. Obviously you don't trade an absurd heap of assets for him nor give him that contract. But by sG, here's Risto's career with '23-24 at the top:

They did it. They actually made him fine as a cheap depth piece. I want to give them credit for it, but I don't think they've learned the bigger lesson which matters far more than the player. It's infuriating. And then they repeated it with Seeler. They cannot change who they are.

 

[Adtar02]

Drafting may have something to do with the issues. I think injury bad luck is in there. But definitely they seem to focus on perceived weaknesses and correct those in a way that changes a player.

 

[deadhead]

Just curious, do thing the Flyer’s organization ever makes mistakes?

Honestly, going by your posts, if I didn’t know the facts, I would think the Flyers were a Cup contender who makes the playoffs every season.

It’s truly mind boggling to me that anyone could be a fan of this team and, at the very least, not be mildly pessimistic that the hockey operations dept is not doing a good job.

It's not that they don't make mistakes, it's just that some people here exaggerate everything.
Zito traded 2 1st rd picks and Tippett and got swept in the second rd of the playoffs.
Boston traded Wheeler and Seguin for peanuts.
Every organization makes mistakes, has high picks that fail to develop, etc.

The problem is the Flyers HAVEN'T been terrible, they've been consistently mediocre.
And that's primarily due to muddled strategy, neither committing to rebuilding, unable to patch effectively and poor cap management. This has been a problem since 2010. "Win now" became "win never."

At least the current group has a consistent vision. It may not be exactly what I'd do (and certainly not what many here would do) but it's a big step up from the Holmgren/Clarke dominated FO.

They've changed about 1/3 of the organizational personnel over the last few years.
Whether this will improve scouting and development won't be known for 2-3 more years.
The Phillies did the same, and after a false start, their farm system started to improve.

They've accumulated young players (12 of 20 starters 25 and under) and draft picks (probably 5 in the top 40 in the 2025 draft). Whether they'll maximize these assets remains to be seen.

At worst, they build up a base of young assets but fail to deliver - in which case the next management group will be in much better shape than Briere when he took over.

 

[deadhead]

I have no interest in the larger discussion here, but Attard's problem isn't really defensive. They have indeed taught him that, just as they've taught others. The problem is that the way they achieve it usually craters the other end. I consider this giving them credit for accomplishing something while acknowledging that it comes at a cost. Whether it was worth it has to be determined on a case by case basis.

Attard isn't a particularly good player or a piece worth arguing over heavily. I just think the discussion around his particulars is interesting because it fits a pattern we could see cascading in real time from Risto to Zamula to Attard.



Every word of this is gold. We have got to stop inferring all roads lead to where they ended up.

Attard's problems are both defense (he's not that good after years of coaching) and situational awareness. The key to offensive defensemen is knowing when to be aggressive on offense and when not to take chances - and part of that is self-awareness, "I'm not a great skater so this risk is too dangerous."

Under Briere, there seems to be a greater emphasis on hockey IQ, To me, the keys to development are IQ and work ethic, unless you're an uber talent, your edge is understanding the game and working hard to maximize your physical talent. Without those two qualities, the greatest coaches will struggle to get players to improve.

 

[Adtar02]

It's not that they don't make mistakes, it's just that some people here exaggerate everything.
Zito traded 2 1st rd picks and Tippett and got swept in the second rd of the playoffs.
Boston traded Wheeler and Seguin for peanuts.
Every organization makes mistakes, has high picks that fail to develop, etc.

The problem is the Flyers HAVEN'T been terrible, they've been consistently mediocre.
And that's primarily due to muddled strategy, neither committing to rebuilding, unable to patch effectively and poor cap management. This has been a problem since 2010. "Win now" became "win never."

At least the current group has a consistent vision. It may not be exactly what I'd do (and certainly not what many here would do) but it's a big step up from the Holmgren/Clarke dominated FO.

They've changed about 1/3 of the organizational personnel over the last few years.
Whether this will improve scouting and development won't be known for 2-3 more years.
The Phillies did the same, and after a false start, their farm system started to improve.

They've accumulated young players (12 of 20 starters 25 and under) and draft picks (probably 5 in the top 40 in the 2025 draft). Whether they'll maximize these assets remains to be seen.

At worst, they build up a base of young assets but fail to deliver - in which case the next management group will be in much better shape than Briere when he took over.

Maybe it’s the management and process they have had since basicly holmgren.

You say that this group has a clear vision. So did hextal. He was the one that cut off Clark. His biggest problem was not given the players shots young. Injuries helped some get on the team. Maybe he valued the wrong type of player in drafting or he was drafting based off the profile the coach wanted.

The came av and eventually chunky cheese and traded away talent and pick for crap. And had no direction. Then we got another coach that values effort players over skill and smarts. Our current coach is another retread that likes to see effort you know the players that are trying hard or skating hard because they are a step behind.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Flyers are an incompetent, and incestous country club that’s more concerned with employment for old friends - than present day success.

/unsubstantiated opinion with zero evidence

you are correct thou

 

[Magua]

Imagining that Attard could turn into Cernak encapsulated everything wrong with their prospect development. His skill-set was always an edge case. I wasn't a big fan of his, although I thought he looked respectable last season in his stint....

They've drafted a bunch of 6'3 RHD (+McDonald) of late, and they'll keep hammering away at finding a Cernak, skill-sets and flaws be damned, because they believe they have the Coca-Cola formula for defensive defensemen. We know they work backwards in development.