Confirmed with Link: Attard Traded to Edmonton for Ben Gleason

[Tripod]

Could have swore I saw him on a certain someone's top pairing prediction just 1 year ago.

 

[deadhead]

Who is he better than when the Flyers are healthy? No one is the answer.


Based on the Flyers history with defensemen. Pretty easy where to place the blame.

So it is impossible to answer if the Flyers hold any of the blame? Wow

Flyers D-men picked in the first 3 rounds:
2012: Ghost #78
2013: Morin #11, Hagg #41
2014: Friedman #86
2015: Provorov #7
2018: Ginning #50
2019: York #14
2020: Andre #54
2023: Bonk #22
2024: Gill #59

Their drafting record is pretty normal, one bad draft in 2013, but I suspect most of the people involved are retired by now.
The better question is why they've drafted so few D-men.
Last 10 years, (2) 1sts, (3) 2nds, (0) 3rds
out of (11) 1sts, (11) 2nds, (7) 3rds

Deadhead never answers questions. The trick is to not care what deadhead thinks. One post he goes on for paragraphs about how something is wrong, the next, he explains how he can’t answer because he is ill informed.

I don't answer "gotcha" questions.
Because those aren't about discussion, they're about someone trying to be clever and snarky.

Sooo....he didn't become the next Erik Cernak?

Was never the biggest fan, but Attard actually has good NHL numbers in his sample. The Flyers, always sound in their process, valued one preseason game over ~30 regular season NHL games.

So the eyeball test doesn't matter? Just metrics?
On those grounds, Myers is a top 4 D-man.

 

[freakydallas13]

I don't answer "gotcha" questions.
Because those aren't about discussion, they're about someone trying to be clever and snarky.

Sometimes these questions are about someone being snarky (I'm guilty of this), but other times they are just straight up questions, and you don't answer them because you have to give an answer that contradicts something else you've said to defend this team, so you just say nothing.

 

[deadhead]

Sometimes these questions are about someone being snarky (I'm guilty of this), but other times they are just straight up questions, and you don't answer them because you have to give an answer that contradicts something else you've said to defend this team, so you just say nothing.

No. People demand yes or no because they're being snarky.
Few things in life are binary except for stupid people, and I don't think most people here are stupid.

People who actually ask why I think a certain way I try to respectfully answer.

 

[freakydallas13]

No. People demand yes or no because they're being snarky.
Few things in life are binary except for stupid people, and I don't think most people here are stupid.

Well first off I post here and I'm stupid, so jot that down. You could argue anyone who subjects themselves to this team to the degree they post on a message board dedicated to the Flyers has something wrong with them at some level.

People who actually ask why I think a certain way I try to respectfully answer.

You're usually pretty good at replying, credit where credit is due. But it does definitely seem like you avoid particular questions you don't want to answer sometimes, though maybe that is just my biased view of the events.

I don't have an example of the top of my head, just a casual observation.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

Flyers D-men picked in the first 3 rounds:
2012: Ghost #78
2013: Morin #11, Hagg #41
2014: Friedman #86
2015: Provorov #7
2018: Ginning #50
2019: York #14
2020: Andre #54
2023: Bonk #22
2024: Gill #59

Their drafting record is pretty normal, one bad draft in 2013, but I suspect most of the people involved are retired by now.
The better question is why they've drafted so few D-men.
Last 10 years, (2) 1sts, (3) 2nds, (0) 3rds
out of (11) 1sts, (11) 2nds, (7) 3rds


I don't answer "gotcha" questions.
Because those aren't about discussion, they're about someone trying to be clever and snarky.

So the eyeball test doesn't matter? Just metrics?
On those grounds, Myers is a top 4 D-man.

Their draft record isn't very good. Remove the 1st rd picks what are you left with? Naming Gill and Bonk is comical at this point. Are you really impressed by that list?

Flyers D-men picked in the first 3 rounds:
2012: Ghost #78
2013: Morin #11, Hagg #41
2014: Friedman #86
2015: Provorov #7
2018: Ginning #50
2019: York #14
2020: Andre #54
2023: Bonk #22
2024: Gill #59

Their drafting record is pretty normal, one bad draft in 2013, but I suspect most of the people involved are retired by now.
The better question is why they've drafted so few D-men.
Last 10 years, (2) 1sts, (3) 2nds, (0) 3rds
out of (11) 1sts, (11) 2nds, (7) 3rds


I don't answer "gotcha" questions.
Because those aren't about discussion, they're about someone trying to be clever and snarky.

So the eyeball test doesn't matter? Just metrics?
On those grounds, Myers is a top 4 D-man.

apply the bold to your recent EJ comments where you posted his metrics.

No. People demand yes or no because they're being snarky.
Few things in life are binary except for stupid people, and I don't think most people here are stupid.

People who actually ask why I think a certain way I try to respectfully answer.

Wrong. Maybe they just want a simple answer to a simple question that doesn't need nor require several paragraphs.

 

[Flyer lurker]

well i am ready for the parade.




GIF

 

[FLYguy3911]

So the eyeball test doesn't matter? Just metrics?
On those grounds, Myers is a top 4 D-man.

Whose eyeballs though? The ones that saw Robert Hagg, a minor leaguer before turning 30, play hockey and thought it was a good idea to play him for 250 games and in high leverage situations at that? Why because he always went on sustainable PDO heaters at the start of a season and padded non-impact stats like hits and blocked shots because he couldn't get out of his own zone? How about the eyeballs of the person that defended that decision countless times?

Or how bout the person that proclaimed Myers a "Unicorn" and better than Sanheim? I seem to recall certain eyeballs point out Myers' flaws and suggest he was lacking in certain areas for that to be the case...

Perhaps Attard stinks. But we have another example of a fringe NHLer that we don't know for sure is terrible, out of the origination. For what? Erik Johnson's presence? Even if you think the results were fluky, shouldn't you want to know for sure?

Just consider this the next time you are hyping up a fringe prospect when they have their (older) 4th line already locked up with term. 4th line forwards and 3rd pair defensemen should be flexible spots so that you can churn and exhaust through all options - waivers, minors, Euro UDFAs, etc.. This is the bucket that ~90% of prospects will likely fall under. It's team building 101.

 

[IronMarshal]

I prob overrated Attard but still wish we saw him a little more in the NHL.

best of luck

I'm with you on this

 

[TCTC]

Cutter gone. Attard gone. At least we're getting rid of the stupid names Fletcher drafted. That's progress in my opinion.

 

[Boocowski]

There is that. Getting rid of Fletcher guys. Might be the main reason. Otherwise it's nothing for nothing. Get rid of one guy you've given up on and bring in a different guy maybe you think you can make into what you thought the other guy was. But likely nothing for nothing.

 

[deadhead]

Remove the 1st rd picks what are you left with? Naming Gill and Bonk is comical at this point. Are you really impressed by that list?

So what team does well outside the 1st rd?
There's a reason 1st rd picks (I'd say top 40) are valued much higher than later picks.

 

[Shrike]

Whose eyeballs though? The ones that saw Robert Hagg, a minor leaguer before turning 30, play hockey and thought it was a good idea to play him for 250 games and in high leverage situations at that? Why because he always went on sustainable PDO heaters at the start of a season and padded non-impact stats like hits and blocked shots because he couldn't get out of his own zone? How about the eyeballs of the person that defended that decision countless times?

Or how bout the person that proclaimed Myers a "Unicorn" and better than Sanheim? I seem to recall certain eyeballs point out Myers' flaws and suggest he was lacking in certain areas for that to be the case...

Perhaps Attard stinks. But we have another example of a fringe NHLer that we don't know for sure is terrible, out of the origination. For what? Erik Johnson's presence? Even if you think the results were fluky, shouldn't you want to know for sure?

Just consider this the next time you are hyping up a fringe prospect when they have their (older) 4th line already locked up with term. 4th line forwards and 3rd pair defensemen should be flexible spots so that you can churn and exhaust through all options - waivers, minors, Euro UDFAs, etc.. This is the bucket that ~90% of prospects will likely fall under. It's team building 101.

 

[deadhead]

Whose eyeballs though? The ones that saw Robert Hagg, a minor leaguer before turning 30, play hockey and thought it was a good idea to play him for 250 games and in high leverage situations at that? Why because he always went on sustainable PDO heaters at the start of a season and padded non-impact stats like hits and blocked shots because he couldn't get out of his own zone? How about the eyeballs of the person that defended that decision countless times?

Or how bout the person that proclaimed Myers a "Unicorn" and better than Sanheim? I seem to recall certain eyeballs point out Myers' flaws and suggest he was lacking in certain areas for that to be the case...

Perhaps Attard stinks. But we have another example of a fringe NHLer that we don't know for sure is terrible, out of the origination. For what? Erik Johnson's presence? Even if you think the results were fluky, shouldn't you want to know for sure?

Just consider this the next time you are hyping up a fringe prospect when they have their (older) 4th line already locked up with term. 4th line forwards and 3rd pair defensemen should be flexible spots so that you can churn and exhaust through all options - waivers, minors, Euro UDFAs, etc.. This is the bucket that ~90% of prospects will likely fall under. It's team building 101.

The difference between a 22-23 year old player and a 25-26 year old player is potential upside.

By 22-23 players are physically mature, but some improve with a couple years of experience.
By 25-26, it's rare for a player to make a significant jump.

So it's one thing to be hopeful that a young player can improve, but the older prospect is likely the player you're looking at right now. What is acceptable in a prospect with a runway ahead of them is not enough for a guy at an age where potential becomes a dirty word.

Attard flashed potential a couple years ago, size, above average shot, good burst in the O-zone, the same way Myers flashed potential. Both failed to build upon it. Both flatlined.

Some players are able to improve with experience and hard work in the film room. Others either lack the mental capacity or aren't willing to work that hard. This holds in any sport.

It's easy to recognize the great athlete or the guy with great instincts (the puck follows them). It's harder to identify the ones who have just enough IQ/physical talent to be marginal prospects but also have the work ethic, motor and competitiveness to rise above their raw talent package.

 

[FLYguy3911]

View attachment 926701

The balls on an individual to get a fake Brandon Manning jersey signed.

The difference between a 22-23 year old player and a 25-26 year old player is potential upside.

By 22-23 players are physically mature, but some improve with a couple years of experience.
By 25-26, it's rare for a player to make a significant jump.

Literally three days ago...

Generally, the prime for most athletes is 25-30.
Top players are more 23-32, elite players 20-35.

So when "rebuilding," you want a core of players who are between 23-28

This is why no one takes anything you write seriously.

 

[freakydallas13]

By 22-23 players are physically mature, but some improve with a couple years of experience.
By 25-26, it's rare for a player to make a significant jump.

That is bad news for Tippet (26 in February) and Farabee (25 in February), seeing as both are signed long term and each has barely cracked 50 points exactly once.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

So what team does well outside the 1st rd?
There's a reason 1st rd picks (I'd say top 40) are valued much higher than later picks.

Not talking abut other teams. Talkng about the Flyers.

Wow that is great observation.

 

[deadhead]

The balls on an individual to get a fake Brandon Manning jersey signed.



Literally three days ago...


This is why no one takes anything you write seriously.

If your prime is 25-30, then by 25 you "are what you are." Which is what I said.

With top players, they're top players b/c they arrive early and stay late, that is, have longer careers at a high level of play.

But even then, if you look at the scoring leaders and the year they hit their peak production, it was generally around 24-26. It's just that they're good enough to start at a young age and still be better than most players.

 

[VladDrag]

Attard is a good example not to take SSS heaters seriously (Lesson to self).
He flashed his skills, he is a very good goal scorer for a defenseman, he's got size.
But the longer he played, the more his defensive and skating deficiencies were revealed.
And after three years, they probably have a good idea if he'll ever compensate for them.

Same applies to Andrae right now, he looks smooth out there, but the league will challenge him in the D-zone physically, hoping to panic him into mistakes. We'll see if he is exposed or rises to the challenge and keeps improving.

There's an interview with Middleton and he's got a great story that applies to any pro sport, about the need for players to adjust:

In 2010, we’re playing the Rockies out in Denver. Roy Halladay is pitching one of those days. His father lives about an hour away. And his father and I are sitting there watching Doc mow them down. I turned to his father and say, “I understand that you were Doc’s first pitching coach.” He said, “That’s right.” I said, “How many of his pitches that he uses today did you teach him?” And he said, “None.” None? “None.” Not even a fastball? “No.” He said when (Roy) was sent back down to the low minors, he jettisoned every pitch and he learned five new pitches. He said, “I’m not going to be successful (in the majors) if I don’t change.” So I said, “Oh, he’s using those pitches?” No. Over time, he was afraid he was too predictable. People knew his pitches. He either completely changed or materially altered every single pitch.

So I’m kind of incredulous about this whole thing. Two weeks later, I’m sitting with Mike Schmidt at a game. I relate this story about Doc’s father. And Mike just looks at me and he goes, “Yeah, I can understand that.” I said, “Really? All that change?” He goes, “John, in my career, I had three completely different swings. Every one of those three swings, I made a significant adjustment to the swing about halfway through. People adjust to you. You have to adjust to them.”

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5899085/2024/11/05/john-middleton-phillies-organization-interview/

I am going to hold you to the bolded.