Confirmed with Link: The new coach of the Philadelphia Flyers is John Tortorella

[JojoTheWhale]

I think you shouldn't worry nor pretend to know what Columbus expectations are.

I think defensiveness is a sign of insecurity. And so we have it.

The point was not to mock Columbus as a franchise. Rather it was to point to how the Flyers market themselves. They tell you they're above almost every other franchise because they'll spend every dollar. I do not agree with this at all.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I think defensiveness is a sign of insecurity. And so we have it.

I came in here to give you all an honest perspective about Tortorella and what he's like as a coach. At least as the CBJ coach. I didn't come in here for a cultural lesson from people who do not care, pretend to care, or have any knowledge about my team.

If that's defensiveness or insecurity, then so be it. It's like waiving at someone in the street and getting a middle finger back. I didn't come in here pretending to know anything about your team, city, or team culture, Quite the opposite.

 

[deadhead]

You keep making this statement about Hextall not putting money into analytics. They had full-time people and they also had quite a few consultants who were never listed on the website because they weren't full time employees. My source on this is one of the consultants.

How much were they paying those consultants?
Big difference between a short-term low cost consulting deal and a full time employee (with benefits, adds 30-50% to cost).

Proprietary analytics are data (i.e. personnel) intensive, off the shelf stuff is obviously going to be more limited.

 

[FlyerNutter]

Sigh. I need to f*** off again for a while.

Hiring a bunch of new people, while retaining every single loudmouth bastard that’s been here for 20 years - means nothing.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I came in here to give you all an honest perspective about Tortorella and what he's like as a coach. At least as the CBJ coach. I didn't come in here for a cultural lesson from people who do not care, pretend to care, or have any knowledge about my team.

If that's defensiveness or insecurity, then so be it. It's like waiving at someone in the street and getting a middle finger back. I didn't come in here pretending to know anything about your team, city, or new coach, Quite the opposite.

I'm not doing that. I'm telling you how the Flyers market themselves. Hard-core lunatics like you and me that post on message boards and can name 4th liners we would add from the Ducks or Sharks aren't the target market for them.

The in-market public identity of the franchise is to exist on another plane from most NHL teams. It's arrogant and incorrect, but they're sticking to it. If they're not making deep runs in the playoffs, they go back to people with "a bias for action" and toss proverbial bombs everywhere. The original post I responded to spoke of being happy with what they can get. It won't happen as long as Clarke and Holmgren are alive. They don't have that mode.

 

[Magua]

The Avs, for example, had 3 top 10 picks.

MacKinnon
Landeskog
Makar

Let's compare that to the Flyers 3 top 10 picks.

Couturier
Patrick
Provorov

The only close comparable is Couturier to Landeskog.

The Flyers could suck again for the next decade, and there's still no guarantee of them landing a franchise player.

I simply don't understand your point. There is a chasm between the value of a 1st or 2nd or 4th overall and a 7th or 8th overall. Saying both teams had "3 top 10 picks" feels misleading already. But more importantly, where did each team finish in those years? The Avalanche finished 29/30, 29/30, 30/30. The Flyers? 4/30, 19/30, 24/30. The Couturier pick was not even their own, and the Patrick pick was a 13th overall turning into a 2nd. I simply don't understand how you compare both of these situations straight-up to prove a point about rebuilding.

I'm not here to get revisionist like some, but the fact the Flyers passed on franchise players for a couple of those guys proves that there is a likelihood of landing one in that range, not that it needed proof. That it didn't happen 5 years ago has no bearing on tomorrow (and I'll bet money that the Flyers whiff on another one at 5th overall next month). Some teams are better at scouting than others -- usually it's antiquated philosophies more than anything -- but the differences aren't enormous. What a team can do is guarantee they take as many shots as possible. What the Flyers, under Fletcher, do is put their eggs into one basket, pick less than their allotted number each draft (including one of the worst years in franchise history), and still often hunt for floor. If it's guarantees you want, sports are the wrong hobby.

 

[deadhead]

I'm not doing that. I'm telling you how the Flyers market themselves. Hard-core lunatics like you and me that post on message boards and can name 4th liners we would add from the Ducks or Sharks aren't the target market for them.

The in-market public identity of the franchise is to exist on another plane from most NHL teams. It's arrogant and incorrect, but they're sticking to it. If they're not making deep runs in the playoffs, they go back to people with "a bias for action" and toss proverbial bombs everywhere. The original post I responded to spoke of being happy with what they can get. It won't happen as long as Clarke and Holmgren are alive. They don't have that mode.

Which is why Torts is by far the best choice, given the constraints placed by this organization.

I think you'd have the same issue with Trotz as you did with AV, while Trotz might have built Nashville a couple decades ago, he's been in win now mode in Wash and on the Isle, and will almost certainly take a job with the same mindset.

Torts really seems to like the process of building a team as much as the eventual goal.

And I think the PTB doesn't really understand that about him, they think of him as a "turnaround artist," but don't get that for him, turning a team around starts with turning around players, not giving the GM a shopping list.

The question is whether Fletcher does understand that, and will work with him, or feels he has to show a "bias for action," and make moves just to placate the PTB.

 

[freakydallas13]

I'm assuming those of you against a full on rebuild for "pride" reasons are also equally against a team out of the playoff race trading players at the deadline for future assets. For the same reason.

Can't make the team worse, gotta have pride and take the high road and be as competitive as possible at all times. That's what REAL organizations do. Never trade rentals away, because that's LOSER mentality.

This organization is the epitome of a participation trophy.

 

[flyersnorth]

They all knew what they were doing. I don’t think those teams were spending up the cap and trading picks away like we are. That’s not tanking. But just because a team doesnt send out a letter or something does not mean they aren’t tanking. There are teams that are going to be tanking just the same next year like Arizona and Mtl. I was very against tanking and used to make fun of my friends who were pens fans. But it seems to be the most logical way these days. Seeing the pens have 4 of the best players of all time and win a ton of cups just shows that you have to time it right and get lucky but it could be glorious. Imagine having a cup window of nearly 15 years like the pens and Crosby. That would be amazing right now.

It does not pay to acquire assets like those you mentioned. They will tie up you cap and deplete your draft capital which lends to further less cap and less skill. It does not pay to build that way. Either you build from the top end of the draft well by tanking or the bottom of the draft like the blues and bruins.

The closest we've come to anyone associated with the organization having a "long rebuild" mentality was Hextall.

A decade later, and no franchise player was drafted unfortunately. But he mostly had the approach you're talking about - get a lot of draft capital, surround your young guys with some NHL veterans (but not high end expensive ones), take a gamble on a young first-time NHL coach, try and get rid of bad contracts.

For the most part, he succeeded. I was on board with his plan. Sadly the draft didn't yield a MacKinnon, Barkov, Zegras type player... but, it's not like he didn't try.

I'm with you in that I believe that's the right way to build a sustainable franchise.

With the Torts hire, that seems like it's not at all the direction they're taking... so I'm ready for maximum chaos, because that's what they're going to do. And if they're successful, we'll have an exciting team to watch for a few years until it becomes unsustainable and we're right back where we started.

I'm honestly not sure my fandom could survive another 3-5 years of bottom 5-10 finishes, even if the ultimate outcome would hopefully be a more promising organization. The hockey is just so bad.

 

[TheKingPin]

I simply don't understand your point. There is a chasm between the value of a 1st or 2nd or 4th overall and a 7th or 8th overall. Saying both teams had "3 top 10 picks" feels misleading already. But more importantly, where did each team finish in those years? The Avalanche finished 29/30, 29/30, 30/30. The Flyers? 4/30, 19/30, 24/30. The Couturier pick was not even their own, and the Patrick pick was a 13th overall turning into a 2nd. I simply don't understand how you compare both of these situations straight-up to prove a point about rebuilding.

I'm not here to get revisionist like some, but the fact the Flyers passed on franchise players for a couple of those guys proves that there is a likelihood of landing one in that range, not that it needed proof. That it didn't happen 5 years ago has no bearing on tomorrow (and I'll bet money that the Flyers whiff on another one at 5th overall next month). Some teams are better at scouting than others -- usually it's antiquated philosophies more than anything -- but the differences aren't enormous. What a team can do is guarantee they take as many shots as possible. What the Flyers, under Fletcher, do is put their eggs into one basket, pick less than their allotted number each draft (including one of the worst years in franchise history), and still often hunt for floor. If it's guarantees you want, sports are the wrong hobby.

If we got the first pick and another 1st next year and kept all the rest we could alter the franchise. That’s worth it. It’s not too much off getting Richards and Carter the same draft. We should have been targeting 2023 firsts for awhile now.

 

[Beef Invictus]

The closest we've come to anyone associated with the organization having a "long rebuild" mentality was Hextall.

A decade later, and no franchise player was drafted unfortunately. But he mostly had the approach you're talking about - get a lot of draft capital, surround your young guys with some NHL veterans (but not high end expensive ones), take a gamble on a young first-time NHL coach, try and get rid of bad contracts.

For the most part, he succeeded. I was on board with his plan. Sadly the draft didn't yield a MacKinnon, Barkov, Zegras type player... but, it's not like he didn't try.

I'm with you in that I believe that's the right way to build a sustainable franchise.

With the Torts hire, that seems like it's not at all the direction they're taking... so I'm ready for maximum chaos, because that's what they're going to do. And if they're successful, we'll have an exciting team to watch for a few years until it becomes unsustainable and we're right back where we started.

I'm honestly not sure my fandom could survive another 3-5 years of bottom 5-10 finishes, even if the ultimate outcome would hopefully be a more promising organization. The hockey is just so bad.

Wretched development values sure didn't help.

 

[TheKingPin]

The closest we've come to anyone associated with the organization having a "long rebuild" mentality was Hextall.

A decade later, and no franchise player was drafted unfortunately. But he mostly had the approach you're talking about - get a lot of draft capital, surround your young guys with some NHL veterans (but not high end expensive ones), take a gamble on a young first-time NHL coach, try and get rid of bad contracts.

For the most part, he succeeded. I was on board with his plan. Sadly the draft didn't yield a MacKinnon, Barkov, Zegras type player... but, it's not like he didn't try.

I'm with you in that I believe that's the right way to build a sustainable franchise.

With the Torts hire, that seems like it's not at all the direction they're taking... so I'm ready for maximum chaos, because that's what they're going to do. And if they're successful, we'll have an exciting team to watch for a few years until it becomes unsustainable and we're right back where we started.

I'm honestly not sure my fandom could survive another 3-5 years of bottom 5-10 finishes, even if the ultimate outcome would hopefully be a more promising organization. The hockey is just so bad.

Hextall didn’t draft very well, but we didn’t have a lot of shots at top 3 picks where most of the talent is. That’s what I want, but it would require Ellis staying out and imo trading Couts.

I am ready for the chaos too, but I can’t see Fletcher winning even one trade. Had he won a trade yet here or minny? Probably we pay too much to get better on paper and doesn’t impact things over what Torts will do. Then we stay a bubble team until Couts breaks down and is a 40-50 pt player as our 1C and Hayes even further. That is when we will have another chance to rebuild and likely have no option given what the team will be left with if they don’t tank this coming year and get lucky or aquire more 2023 picks.

To me it’s simple. You’ve already tanked this year and could get a player that will be an impact player for the next 10-15 years. Tanking next year will be very valuable and piggy backs on this year so not as big a deal or step back. You trade guys for 2023 picks and build up a lot of ground. Then you tank one more year and have already ours and likely the Florida 1st. So that’s just 3 years and gaining a lot of picks. Yes you have to hit and develop, but it’s the point of a plan instead of this slop.

 

[Hextallent63]

at the top of my wishlist would be the removal of me banging my head against the walls dozens of times a game because the flyers, especially in the defensive zone, played like they didnt know what they were doing. i hope torts with all his without the puck talk can help with that. but honestly i have no expectations. just hate it when the whole team plays like they have the iq of fisto.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Wretched development values sure didn't help.

I will die on this hill. The drafting was largely fine. Everything that happened in-house afterward was an unmitigated disaster.

 

[thedjpd]

I came in here to give you all an honest perspective about Tortorella and what he's like as a coach. At least as the CBJ coach. I didn't come in here for a cultural lesson from people who do not care, pretend to care, or have any knowledge about my team.

If that's defensiveness or insecurity, then so be it. It's like waiving at someone in the street and getting a middle finger back. I didn't come in here pretending to know anything about your team, city, or team culture, Quite the opposite.

Don’t worry about it. If you’re not here complaining or whining about the team, or say anything remotely resembling positivity, this board will jump all over you.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

I will die on this hill. The drafting was largely fine. Everything that happened in-house afterward was an unmitigated disaster.

GIVE AN EXAMPLE!

*gives an example*

NOT HIM! HE’S IN THE NHL STOP COMPLAINING!

 

[kudymen]

*Guy gets overly defensive over a simple statement he misread*

> random white knight strolls in with "Dont worry, people on here are assholes!"

 

[deadhead]

I'm not doing that. I'm telling you how the Flyers market themselves. Hard-core lunatics like you and me that post on message boards and can name 4th liners we would add from the Ducks or Sharks aren't the target market for them.

The in-market public identity of the franchise is to exist on another plane from most NHL teams. It's arrogant and incorrect, but they're sticking to it. If they're not making deep runs in the playoffs, they go back to people with "a bias for action" and toss proverbial bombs everywhere. The original post I responded to spoke of being happy with what they can get. It won't happen as long as Clarke and Holmgren are alive. They don't have that mode.

Which is why Torts is by far the best choice, given the constraints placed by this organization.

I think you'd have the same issue with Trotz as you did with AV, while Trotz might have built Nashville a couple decades ago, he's been in win now mode in Wash and on the Isle, and will almost certainly take a job with the same mindset.

Torts really seems to like the process of building a team as much as the eventual goal.

And I think the PTB doesn't really understand that about him, they think of him as a "turnaround artist," but don't get that for him, turning a team around starts with turning around players, not giving the GM a shopping list.

The question is whether Fletcher does understand that, and will work with him, or feels he has to show a "bias for action," and make moves just to placate the PTB.

I will die on this hill. The drafting was largely fine. Everything that happened in-house afterward was an unmitigated disaster.

You're dead. Go back and look at the D+1, D+2 seasons, BEFORE they were in-house.
The guys who flopped, for the most part, flopped before the organization got their mitts on them.
The guys who succeeded, shone in those seasons.
The one exception was Patrick, and that was bad scouting/luck.
The only one who shone before they entered the organization was Frost, but he also lost a year to injury, book isn't finished on him.
They may not have done a great job developing players, but it's not like they ruined top prospects, either.

Relative to draft position, the only "underachiever' might be Provorov, Farabee (#14), Sanheim (#17), TK (#24), Hart (#48) are what you'd expect or better. Lindblom was a steal, but he performed in the SHL.
Laberge was bad luck, Rubtsov bad scouting, Ratcliffe, Ginning, JOB the same. Allison is good player, bad luck.

The Fletcher/Flahr picks so far have had better D+1, D+2 campaigns except for Touamaala.

 

[Boxscore]

I mean, the only team that legitimately tanked in your list is the Leafs. And they still haven't won a single playoff round since 2004.

I don't think any other team deliberately laid out a 10-year suckage plan. They just sucked and got incrementally better all while acquiring high talent players.

The Avs, for example, had 3 top 10 picks.

MacKinnon
Landeskog
Makar

Let's compare that to the Flyers 3 top 10 picks.

Couturier
Patrick
Provorov

The only close comparable is Couturier to Landeskog.

The Flyers could suck again for the next decade, and there's still no guarantee of them landing a franchise player.

All those teams were absolutely brutal for years. The scary thing is, the Oilers missed on some elite picks or they could have been unbeatable.

Drafting I also an issue with the Flyers. And a lot of that comes back to philosophy. For example, I think if they keep their pick at 5 this year, their pick will be Geekie, when there's higher upside talent on the board. These guys passed on Caufield TWICE in the same draft.

Consider if they drafted...

Pastrnak over Sanheim
Rantanen over Provorov
Makar over Patrick

You're talking about 3 elite superstars compared to two good defensemen and a cast off. So, yes, they need to hit on their picks, which is a problem in itself.

But the recipe for success, marketability, and extended contention is to hit rock bottom and rebuild.

 

[deadhead]

All those teams were absolutely brutal for years. The scary thing is, the Oilers missed on some elite picks or they could have been unbeatable.

Drafting I also an issue with the Flyers. And a lot of that comes back to philosophy. For example, I think if they keep their pick at 5 this year, their pick will be Geekie, when there's higher upside talent on the board. These guys passed on Caufield TWICE in the same draft.

Consider if they drafted...

Pastrnak over Sanheim
Rantanen over Provorov
Makar over Patrick

You're talking about 3 elite superstars compared to two good defensemen and a cast off. So, yes, they need to hit on their picks, which is a problem in itself.

But the recipe for success, marketability, and extended contention is to hit rock bottom and rebuild.

I'll take York and Brink over Caufield.
Caufield will be a high scoring, one dimensional forward, who isn't nearly as good as JG.

 

[Flyerfan18]

You do know this is a gate revenue driven league, right?

Corporations/companies aren’t sinking money into this shithole either.

It still is in Canada, but not as much in the US anymore. If you lose 20 million but the team value increases by 40 million it’s not a loss to them

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

It still is in Canada, but not as much in the US anymore. If you lose 20 million but the team value increases by 40 million it’s not a loss to them

Oh, honey.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Which is why Torts is by far the best choice, given the constraints placed by this organization.

I think you'd have the same issue with Trotz as you did with AV, while Trotz might have built Nashville a couple decades ago, he's been in win now mode in Wash and on the Isle, and will almost certainly take a job with the same mindset.

Torts really seems to like the process of building a team as much as the eventual goal.

And I think the PTB doesn't really understand that about him, they think of him as a "turnaround artist," but don't get that for him, turning a team around starts with turning around players, not giving the GM a shopping list.

The question is whether Fletcher does understand that, and will work with him, or feels he has to show a "bias for action," and make moves just to placate the PTB.

You're dead. Go back and look at the D+1, D+2 seasons, BEFORE they were in-house.
The guys who flopped, for the most part, flopped before the organization got their mitts on them.
The guys who succeeded, shone in those seasons.
The one exception was Patrick, and that was bad scouting/luck.
The only one who shone before they entered the organization was Frost, but he also lost a year to injury, book isn't finished on him.
They may not have done a great job developing players, but it's not like they ruined top prospects, either.

Relative to draft position, the only "underachiever' might be Provorov, Farabee (#14), Sanheim (#17), TK (#24), Hart (#48) are what you'd expect or better. Lindblom was a steal, but he performed in the SHL.
Laberge was bad luck, Rubtsov bad scouting, Ratcliffe, Ginning, JOB the same. Allison is good player, bad luck.

The Fletcher/Flahr picks so far have had better D+1, D+2 campaigns except for Touamaala.

Deady, if you say Laberge was bad injury luck one more time, I'm sending you the bill for my nervous breakdown. He wasn't very good in his D-1. He wasn't very good the first half of his Draft year. He wasn't very good before the concussion in his D+1. Pascal Laberge randomly got hot for two months once and he timed it well. That's the entire story.

 

[Boxscore]

I'll take York and Brink over Caufield.
Caufield will be a high scoring, one dimensional forward, who isn't nearly as good as JG.

I understand that, but we need to see how it shakes out. The fact is, the Flyers made the trade for the extra pick and then still passed on Caufield. So it's really York over Caufield and the jury is still out. But once St. Louis was hired, Caufield returned and scored like 20 goals in a month and a half or whatever it was lol.

The thing that cannot be denied however, is the Flyers constantly have this "we're smarter than everyone else" mentality and it constantly seems to backfire. How many fans here were screaming at the TV when Holmgren traded the 1st round pick that should have been John Carlson to Washington for Steve Eminger? I know I was one of them.

The Patrick draft was no different. Most fans knew it was a trap pick for the Flyers and they just couldn't help themselves. I mean, TSN did an entire spread before the draft pointing to all of his injures and saying he already has more injuries than the average NHLer sustains by the time they retire at 34. Of course the Flyers picked him though.

What they do this year at 5 will be telling. At this point, they likely move the pick. If not, they go big with a little more jam and take Geekie over someone with more upside like Savoie or Kemell.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Yeah, I think Laberge was a bad pick at 36 overall regardless of his injury.