Thoughts in Emery, Giroux and Vinny Deals

[flyercanuck]

@aziz

Boston and the Pens are legit contenders who are filling in holes. The Bruins need scoring. Iginla fits their style AND signed for ONE year. The Pens can use a good shutdown type. And none of the 3 teams you mentioned have a habit of making this a yearly ritual of team building.

As I said, I'm sure they'll help for a couple of years. Just like Briere helped. Or Pronger. Or...ok Bryz didn't.

The point I'm trying to make (again, as I have for 7 or 8 years now) is why not just leave the damn high priced over the hill guys alone and let the young guys figure it out and grow together, Yes there would be some tougher years as opposed to us always being in the playoffs. And with those tougher years would also come some better draft picks. Maybe instead of signing Briere we have another bad season. And instead of buying Briere out this past week, we're all wondering if Stamkos and Giroux are going to light it up again. Or aren't we glad we have Doughty or Pietrangelo instead of having to bring in Mark Streit, because we were actually patient back then?

But that doesn't make any sense when you're a Flyer fan does it?

[aziz]

<br />Boston and the Pens are legit contenders who are filling in holes.<br />

what does that mean? the penguins have a flake goalie and a petulant brat for a leader, and a roster that basically says, "yeah, what Crosby said, you meanieheads" and collectively go off the rails every spring. why are they "legit contenders" where the flyers aren't? boston, yeah, can't argue with that. the definition of a solidly built team. still, i'm not sure why FA signings are ok for plugging holes but not for fundamental construction. Giroux looked overwhelmed last season, and the addition of lecavalier will take some of the offensive heat off of him. I call that a good thing, both for the team and for Giroux's continued development. streit, well, I don't like it. not because of the signing, but because i'm not a fan of offensive defensemen, but whatever. this, too, will let the younger players on the team be what they are and improve on that. Coburn can be a stay at home guy, as the obvious example.

And none of the 3 teams you mentioned have a habit of making this a yearly ritual of team building.

wow, really? if adding an FA winger, an FA dman and an FA goalie is part of the "yearly ritual of team building"...how can you say Pittsburgh and Detroit don't make a habit of it? you know that kunitz, neal, martin, cooke, adams, and vokoun were not Pittsburgh draft picks, right? rupp, asham, comrie, do you really want to go through all of the offseason adds Pittsburgh has made over the years? and Detroit? Detroit, famous for adding aging players like its their job? that list would go on forever. they won three cups by doing exactly that. haven't been nearly as active on that front over the last five years, but then haven't been the absolute cream of the crop over the last five years, either. and their last cup team included rafalski, stuart, hasek, Samuelsson. arguably, that's 4 cups largely on the backs of imported talent.

The point I'm trying to make (again, as I have for 7 or 8 years now) is why not just leave the damn high priced over the hill guys alone and let the young guys figure it out and grow together

if you are shipping young guys out to bring old guys in, I agree with you. if you are blocking young guys by stuffing old guys in front of them on the depth chart, I agree with you. if you are bringing in old guys to reinforce and add support for young guys as the develop, then I disagree with you completely. as I said in an argument I just had here a few days ago, throwing young players to the wolves and expecting them to pull themselves forward is a disastrous way to build a team. Pittsburgh didn't do it (Guerin, sykora, fedotenko, satan, cooke, gonchar, kunitz, gill). boston didn't do it (chara, recchi, sturm, ryder, savard, Seidenberg, thornton, satan). Detroit didn't do it (lang, Schneider, rafalski, stuart, hasek). why should the flyers do it? wanna know what teams have gone that route, staying away from meaningful vets, letting the kids live or die by themselves? Edmonton, Columbus, altanta/Winnipeg, florida, phoenix, NYI. Washington. Toronto for several years. good plan, that?

Or aren't we glad we have Doughty or Pietrangelo instead of having to bring in Mark Streit, because we were actually patient back then?

point taken. kind of. maybe we'd have ended up with bogosian. or the 5th pick that seaon...luke schenn. or maybe filatov. it's a rough thing counting purely on the draft to build your team. firstly, because draftees are die rolls. secondly, because if you don't surround with vet talent, you end up with, well, bogosian. or schenn. or colin Wilson. some teams had their fallow time and it worked out for them. Pittsburgh and Chicago come to mind immediately. others it hasn't worked out at all. and still others never left the competitive echelon of the league and managed to transition from one core to another by leveraging talented imports to bridge the gap. Detroit is the postchild there.

there is no right way to do it. Detroit, boston, Pittsburgh, LA, Chicago each carved their own path to a cup, each took different routes. you don't want to shoot your team in the foot, a la bryzgalov, but I don't think the flyers have come even close to doing that this summer.

[flyercanuck]

what does that mean? the penguins have a flake goalie and a petulant brat for a leader, and a roster that basically says, "yeah, what Crosby said, you meanieheads" and collectively go off the rails every spring. why are they "legit contenders" where the flyers aren't? boston, yeah, can't argue with that. the definition of a solidly built team. still, i'm not sure why FA signings are ok for plugging holes but not for fundamental construction. Giroux looked overwhelmed last season, and the addition of lecavalier will take some of the offensive heat off of him. I call that a good thing, both for the team and for Giroux's continued development. streit, well, I don't like it. not because of the signing, but because i'm not a fan of offensive defensemen, but whatever. this, too, will let the younger players on the team be what they are and improve on that. Coburn can be a stay at home guy, as the obvious example.

Well the Pens HAVE won a cup or two over the last 4 decades. Or even the last few years. And I don't think you're a contender if you can't make the playoffs.

wow, really? if adding an FA winger, an FA dman and an FA goalie is part of the "yearly ritual of team building"...how can you say Pittsburgh and Detroit don't make a habit of it? you know that kunitz, neal, martin, cooke, adams, and vokoun were not Pittsburgh draft picks, right? rupp, asham, comrie, do you really want to go through all of the offseason adds Pittsburgh has made over the years? and Detroit? Detroit, famous for adding aging players like its their job? that list would go on forever. they won three cups by doing exactly that. haven't been nearly as active on that front over the last five years, but then haven't been the absolute cream of the crop over the last five years, either. and their last cup team included rafalski, stuart, hasek, Samuelsson. arguably, that's 4 cups largely on the backs of imported talent.

Whoa! I don't have a problem with signing free agents. I have a problem with constantly signing over 30 year old free agents to longterm contracts with NTCs for big money. And every year we all complain about NOT being able to trade this guy or we're stuck with that contract. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

if you are shipping young guys out to bring old guys in, I agree with you. if you are blocking young guys by stuffing old guys in front of them on the depth chart, I agree with you. if you are bringing in old guys to reinforce and add support for young guys as the develop, then I disagree with you completely. as I said in an argument I just had here a few days ago, throwing young players to the wolves and expecting them to pull themselves forward is a disastrous way to build a team. Pittsburgh didn't do it (Guerin, sykora, fedotenko, satan, cooke, gonchar, kunitz, gill). boston didn't do it (chara, recchi, sturm, ryder, savard, Seidenberg, thornton, satan). Detroit didn't do it (lang, Schneider, rafalski, stuart, hasek). why should the flyers do it? wanna know what teams have gone that route, staying away from meaningful vets, letting the kids live or die by themselves? Edmonton, Columbus, altanta/Winnipeg, florida, phoenix, NYI. Washington. Toronto for several years. good plan, that?

I'm talking about the how consistantly Homer and Clarke before him go about chasing the biggest name in free agency year after year and usually it's guys past their Best Before date. It's not about "tweaking" like a contender does to try and win a cup. Or bringing in a useful longterm piece (Chara wins a Norris IN Boston, not for someone else) Seidenberg a great shutdown Dman for years and years etc.

point taken. kind of. maybe we'd have ended up with bogosian. or the 5th pick that seaon...luke schenn. or maybe filatov. it's a rough thing counting purely on the draft to build your team. firstly, because draftees are die rolls. secondly, because if you don't surround with vet talent, you end up with, well, bogosian. or schenn. or colin Wilson. some teams had their fallow time and it worked out for them. Pittsburgh and Chicago come to mind immediately. others it hasn't worked out at all. and still others never left the competitive echelon of the league and managed to transition from one core to another by leveraging talented imports to bridge the gap. Detroit is the postchild there.

there is no right way to do it. Detroit, boston, Pittsburgh, LA, Chicago each carved their own path to a cup, each took different routes. you don't want to shoot your team in the foot, a la bryzgalov, but I don't think the flyers have come even close to doing that this summer.

One thing ALL of those teams have done that Philly hasn't is bottomed out for a few years. Does Detroit come back from the Dead Things without Yzerman? Pittsburgh is Columbus without Crosby and Malkin. How many cups does Chicago win over the last few years without Toews and Kane? LA without Doughty and Brown and Kopitar, not to mention the pieces they used to trade for Carter and Richards? The other thing is you have to have great management. Chicago isn't great JUST because of Toews and Kane. But they help. And you're right, maybe we get Bogosian instead of Stamkos, Doughty or Pietrangelo. Or maybe we'd have got one of them. We'll never know cause our management doesn't have the patience to build that way. Maybe this year we miss the playoffs again and get Aaron Ekblad, the best defensive prospect I've seen in a long time. But we won't, cause we needed 5 years of Vinny and 4 of Streit. And 5 years from now when they're both done, and Ekblad is wowing us all. I'll STILL be saying the same thing. And Philly will be buying Chara and St Louis.

[idahophilly]

@Mad Dog

No, but when a player is going into an over 35 contract (and your gm doesn't even know) who's played a very physical game for 17 years in the NHL AND more going back to his junior days, you might think his body is going to start breaking down. So maybe it's not a great idea to sign that type of player to a SEVEN year deal? Brieres contract looked fine for a few years. The problem is, he wasn't worth anywhere near that money for the last THREE. Bryz looked fine until he got on the ice.

LOL ! I like that. Good analysis (sp?)....

[idahophilly]

The point I'm trying to make (again, as I have for 7 or 8 years now) is why not just leave the damn high priced over the hill guys alone and let the young guys figure it out and grow together,

Why? For the same reason you don't send a platoon of privates into battle. They need leadership. They need the Gunny to be that stabilizing force. You have to have a balance....

[Phillygrump]

Sure. But I heard the same thing about Briere. How'd that work out? Pronger. How'd that work out? Bryzgalov? How'd that work out?

Briere worked out pretty well actually. He had success here and when it was over got bought out right after he be and ineffective.

The Flyers weren't the only team to use compliance buyouts.

[jammer2]

Briere worked out pretty well actually. He had success here and when it was over got bought out right after he be and ineffective.

The Flyers weren't the only team to use compliance buyouts.

I don't think Briere worked out well at all. More than half his time here, he sucked, he was lazy, didn't play with any fire or enthusiam. Sure, the other 40% was fun, when Danny boy was on, he was electric. I lose respect when guys don't hustle for entire months at a time. It's very unprofessional in my line of thinking......because of that, I won't type many good things about him. He was the vet, supposed to set the example for the kids? Pfffft, no wonder we sucked.

[aziz]

<br />Well the Pens HAVE won a cup or two over the last 4 decades. Or even the last few years. And I don't think you're a contender if you can't make the playoffs. <br />

Anaheim won a couple years before that. and Carolina before that. and tampa before that. not really thinking past accomplishments mean a whole lot heading into 2013-14. as for the playoffs, we can each have our points of view on it, but missing the playoffs this year to me was not a general condemnation of the entire team. it was -again, to me- a combination of injury, bryzgalov, and a shortened season that didn't allow a full storyline to play out. playoff participants were essentially chosen in what would have been early January in a normal season. as I recall, the kings wouldn't have made the playoffs in their cup year had the top 8 in west been set in early January. so. there is context there. to me.

Whoa! I don't have a problem with signing free agents. I have a problem with constantly signing over 30 year old free agents to longterm contracts with NTCs for big money. And every year we all complain about NOT being able to trade this guy or we're stuck with that contract. And the wheels on the bus go round and round.

you aren't wrong, but these particular signings, while indicative of the same approach maybe, are not that bad. they are not 8+ years. they are not $6+mil. they are appropriate money for their talent, and their term is not such that the flyers will be carrying them for 4 years after they become truly terrible. so, in general I get it and agree, in specific I don't see the issue.

I'm talking about the how consistantly Homer and Clarke before him go about chasing the biggest name in free agency year after year and usually it's guys past their Best Before date. It's not about "tweaking" like a contender does to try and win a cup.

here again, I agree in general, but I do see these specific adds as the kind of tweaking a contender does to win a cup. I suppose an issue here is how you perceive the team overall at this point. if you think there are years and years before there is an outside chance they are capable of winning, then, fine. I think you're wrong, but fine. even there, though, I think Giroux's future is brighter for having lecavalier on the team. I think Coburn and the rest are more likely to solidify their particular games for having streit around. emery, well, that goes to what you think mason is gonna do, and I have no idea on that front. emery is a "give us the best chance to win now" move, with not real "our future is brighter for having him" to it. so, maybe I can see where that makes no sense. again, if you think the flyers are toast anyway.

One thing ALL of those teams have done that Philly hasn't is bottomed out for a few years. Does Detroit come back from the Dead Things without Yzerman?

really? you're gonna reach back to 1982? Chicago and Pittsburgh, I can see what you are saying, but Detroit is on MY side of this argument. they haven't missed the playoffs in 22 seasons. they haven't drafted inside the top 19 in...I don't know how long. at least 13 years. and have a tendency of trading their 1st round picks away as part of their annual outside-of-the-draft rebuilding. alongside heavy free agent signing. most recently with Daniel alfredsson. talk about past their best-by date. and Stephen Weiss. who is 30. and signed for 5 years for just shy of $5mil per...even though he's never scored more than 61 points. and tends to be more in the 50 point range. how bad is lecalavier's signing next to that??

We'll never know cause our management doesn't have the patience to build that way. Maybe this year we miss the playoffs again and get Aaron Ekblad, the best defensive prospect I've seen in a long time. But we won't, cause we needed 5 years of Vinny and 4 of Streit. And 5 years from now when they're both done, and Ekblad is wowing us all. I'll STILL be saying the same thing. And Philly will be buying Chara and St Louis.

let me ask this: would you *really* want the flyers to go that route? would you *really* want the flyers to play .300 hockey for the next several years? for me, they are entertainment. I take it way more seriously than I should, but ultimately it is about entertainment. years and years of having no illusion that the flyers are going to lose 2 out of 3 games, of *knowing* that my team is going to be out of the playoffs by early march, of having no hope that i'll get to see them *maybe* pull something off in the postseason...because there is no way they'll be in the postseason....i'll pass on that, thank you. maybe I need to change the emphasis in my first question: would you really *want* the flyers to go that route? would you really *want* the flyers to play .300 hockey for several years? from October through april, guaranteed losses...from april through june, not a part of the post season drama...from june through September nothing to do but hope their high draft pick turns into something in the next 5 years. October-april: depressing, april-june-nothing, june-September: on-the-horizon glimmer, rinse, repeat.

not winning a cup is frustrating, of course. not winning at all, for years, would be more frustrating. and, doesn't guarantee anything at the end, anyway. st Louis and Vancouver and florida and Washington and phoenix and san jose and Nashville and Minnesota and Columbus and Winnipeg and Ottawa and Toronto have all had their extended sucking periods, and none have a thing to show for it.

[flyercanuck]

@idahophilly

Isn't that what Timonen, Giroux, Hartnell, Talbot, Grossmann, Gagne, Coburn bring?

And again, if Homer signs guys in their 20s to reasonable contracts WITHOUT NMCs or older guys to short term (see Emery) I have zero issue with it.

[jammer2]

@aziz "let me ask this: would you *really* want the flyers to go that route? would you *really* want the flyers to play .300 hockey for the next several years? for me, they are entertainment. I take it way more seriously than I should, but ultimately it is about entertainment. years and years of having no illusion that the flyers are going to lose 2 out of 3 games, of *knowing* that my team is going to be out of the playoffs by early march, of having no hope that i'll get to see them *maybe* pull something off in the postseason...because there is no way they'll be in the postseason....i'll pass on that, thank you. maybe I need to change the emphasis in my first question: would you really *want* the flyers to go that route? would you really *want* the flyers to play .300 hockey for several years? from October through april, guaranteed losses...from april through june, not a part of the post season drama...from june through September nothing to do but hope their high draft pick turns into something in the next 5 years. October-april: depressing, april-june-nothing, june-September: on-the-horizon glimmer, rinse, repeat."

The end justifies the means.

[aziz]

<br />The end justifies the means. <br />

huh? what end and what means?

[jammer2]

@aziz The end is the Cup, and the means is sucking if necessary. Don't care how we get there, just wanna win.

[aziz]

@aziz The end is the Cup, and the means is sucking if necessary. Don't care how we get there, just wanna win.

two things.

one: again: sucking doesn't promise you anything at all except sucking. if sucking were a sure road to a cup, then expansion teams would always have rings within 8 years of entering the league. here, i'll post my list of teams that have sucked but bad for extended periods over the last 15 years, tell me if you wish oh how you wish you were a fan of one of them: st Louis and Vancouver and florida and Washington and phoenix and san jose and Nashville and Minnesota and Columbus and Winnipeg and Ottawa and Toronto

two: the cup. is the grail. it's what the whole thing is about. it also is awarded once, celebrated for a few months, and then means nothing again the following October. you'd trade years of enjoyable hockey watching for that? it doesn't go on your resume, it doesn't get you a raise, it doesn't do anything for you other than continue your enjoyment of this entertainment we all partake in. to me, it is crazy to want to not enjoy something for years so I can have a month or two of really happy.

we all approach it our own ways, so all good. I hope against hope the flyers never spend season after season after season as bottom dwellers, even if there is a one time, short lived payoff at the end. I want to look forward to each and every season, and I want to enjoy each and every game. and i'd like a cup, but I don't want that so much that i'd be excited to forgo the previous two.

[aziz]

let me put that a different way.

to me, it's like playing golf with people. the point is to win. the shots I decide to attempt (attempt) I decide on because they may help me shoot a low score on the hole, help me win in the end. but. while the point to playing golf is to win the match, to shoot a lower score than everyone else....the real actual point is to have fun, to enjoy the 4 hours. if I have a risky shot in front of me, need to carry 220 to the green, or lay up 100 yards out and play it safe...at my skill level, the lay up is the better shot. more likely to result in a lower score on the hole, more likely to help win the round. the thing is really actually about having fun, though, so i'm likely to pull out a 3 wood and see what happens. i'm not a professional, I will get nothing real from winning the round. the most I can really get from the outing is an enjoyable 4 hours. my dad, brothers and I have a cup we pass back and forth to the winner of the latest round. nice thing, good for some temporary bragging rights, but it's just the icing on the cake. the bigger goal is to enjoy the time.

we aren't professional hockey players. our name isn't going on a cup, we'll get no ring, our future contracts will not be positively influenced by a cup win. we're fans. we are involved to be entertained. to obsess, to study, memorize, but all of it in the pursuit of entertainment. to me, the real actual point is to enjoy the season. 7 months, maybe. possibly 9. the cup at the end is nice thing, good for some temporary bragging rights, but it's just the icing on the cake. the bigger goal is to enjoy the time. I am not in the least bit desirous of sacrificing those 7 months repeatedly for the possibility of that icing on the cake one day. especially because that sacrifice doesn't make anything certain, and because the possibility is there regardless.

Edited July 7, 2013 by aziz

[jammer2]

@aziz I was speaking in more of a hypothetical sense. If God talked to me tomorrow and said "you will suck for 5 years and then the cup is promised"....well, in that pipedream of a scenario, I'd be all in. Don't care how we get there, as long as we do get there. Thus, the ends justifiy's the means. The means has kinda been a sticking point...I think I'd much rather outright suck and build through the draft than sign every old geezer out there, and watch life slowly getting sucked out the team. I mean, that way didn't work, 50 times in a row, so I'd be thrilled to take the suckage route just for the sake of trying something new....cause using old vets to plug fundamental flaws in the teams roster aint working for me anymore, decades have kinda soured me on that route.

[idahophilly]

@aziz The end is the Cup, and the means is sucking if necessary. Don't care how we get there, just wanna win.

"just wanna win" isn't the question. In what time frame is the question. I don't have the answer and won't pretend to. It's the tortoise and the hare race. I admit I'm iimpatiencent so that means I'll have some exciting seasons but will lose the race...

[Dynamo 47]

@aziz

Boston and the Pens are legit contenders who are filling in holes. The Bruins need scoring. Iginla fits their style AND signed for ONE year. The Pens can use a good shutdown type. And none of the 3 teams you mentioned have a habit of making this a yearly ritual of team building.

As I said, I'm sure they'll help for a couple of years. Just like Briere helped. Or Pronger. Or...ok Bryz didn't.

The point I'm trying to make (again, as I have for 7 or 8 years now) is why not just leave the damn high priced over the hill guys alone and let the young guys figure it out and grow together, Yes there would be some tougher years as opposed to us always being in the playoffs. And with those tougher years would also come some better draft picks. Maybe instead of signing Briere we have another bad season. And instead of buying Briere out this past week, we're all wondering if Stamkos and Giroux are going to light it up again. Or aren't we glad we have Doughty or Pietrangelo instead of having to bring in Mark Streit, because we were actually patient back then?

But that doesn't make any sense when you're a Flyer fan does it?

Sorry to jump in but hard to argue with your logic. I always use the Pens as an example. They were dreadful for half a decade but they didn't buy any and every free agent out there and were patient with the draft. Shero stuck to his plan and got the building blocks for a Stanley Cup winner.by getting Crosby, Malkin, Fluery, Staal, etc. Had they used the Flyers blueprint they would have overspent on free agents and weakened their draft position.

Another good example was Chicago and Boston. Look at the percentage of players who were on the finals roster who were actually drafted by them. A hell of a lot higher percentage than the Flyers for sure.

[mojo1917]

@dynamo47

i think the best example would be the Blackhawks and not the Penguins. Pittsburgh had good fortune to suck when they did and wound up with Lemeiux after 20 years of sucking and then Crosby/Malkin after a solid seven years on the suck wagon. they managed to suck when generational talents were available.

the Blackhawks lot of sucking didn't really get better until the owner died and the team got some new competent management, that drafted shrewdly ,kept their assets without signing "the next one" Even they still had to jettison players because they couldn't afford to keep them ; so even the team that did it best still has to shed quality players at some point.

you see my avatar, the Orioles sucked for 15 long years that's 15 years of being a fan of a team that played no meaningful baseball after June 15 or so , they didn't get better until Peter Angelos got the hell out of the mix and let the baseball people make the decisions. the downfall of that club was spending big on washed up free agents , will clark, albert belle, ugh... so they got off that tip but the prolonged sucking didn't yield any good result on the field until halfway through 2010. All they did was suck, they were truly horrid, like one major league player on the roster horrid.

Snider and Homer have their faults but i appreciate that the team they mismanage doesn't suck , and if it starts to they apply any means necessary to stop the sucking.

[aziz]

Another good example was Chicago and Boston. Look at the percentage of players who were on the finals roster who were actually drafted by them. A hell of a lot higher percentage than the Flyers for sure.

fwiw, by my count, here are the number and percentage of players either drafted by or signed as undrafted FAs by those three teams who dressed for at least one game last season

flyers - 17 of 39 - 43.5%

bruins - 10 of 32 - 31.2%

chicago - 18 of 32 - 56.2%

so, once again, there is no single right way to do it. the flyers played more home grown talent than boston, but less than chicago.

final's rosters are tough, as the flyers weren't in the finals, but here it is for boston and chicago, from the roster for the final game:

Boston - 6 of 20 - 30.0%

Chicago - 11 of 20 - 55.0%

to repeat, no single way to do it. boston has done more importing of talent, lean more on other people's draft picks than the flyers. chicago, less. there is no formula answer as to how to win a cup.

[AJgoal]

Sorry to jump in but hard to argue with your logic. I always use the Pens as an example. They were dreadful for half a decade but they didn't buy any and every free agent out there and were patient with the draft. Shero stuck to his plan and got the building blocks for a Stanley Cup winner.by getting Crosby, Malkin, Fluery, Staal, etc. Had they used the Flyers blueprint they would have overspent on free agents and weakened their draft position.

Another good example was Chicago and Boston. Look at the percentage of players who were on the finals roster who were actually drafted by them. A hell of a lot higher percentage than the Flyers for sure.

Shero didn't get Malkin, Crosby, Fluery - Staal was his first draft pick. Craig Patrick drafted those other guys, Crosby in 2005, Malkin in 2004, and Fleury in 2003 - and was not extended in 2006 for trying to do exactly what you claim the Penguins weren't - signing Recchi, Palffy, and other "big names," and failing to get results. When Shero came on board, he had two generational talents and several others who have played for the team, including Goligoski, Kennedy, Vitale, Orpik, and Letang. The Penguins weren't "patient," they just did a poorer job of fitting free agents and trade acquisitions to their draftees than the Flyers did over that period. Shero has done markedly better in those respects, like getting Neal and Niskanen for Goligosky, and bringing in guys like Dupuis.

Players drafted by the Bruins on the Bruins' active roster in the 2013 finals - Bergeron, Krejci, Krug, Lucic, Marchand, Seguin.

Players drafted by the Flyers on their active roster in 2013 - Lauridson, Gagne, Giroux, Couturier, McGinn. Add in Gustafsson, Read, and Zolniercyk who were undrafted FAs where Philly was their first club, and the Flyers have more. Even if you don't, those numbers are close. Boston has better quality among those named, however - that is what is important. Note that neither team drafted either of their goalies. Also note that Boston had all of one defenseman that they drafted, the same as Philly if you discount Gus.

Chicago is much better than either team - Bickell, Bolland, Bollig, Crawford, Hjalmarsson, Kane, Keith, Kruger (undrafted), Saad, Seabrook, Shaw, Smith, Toews.

There are many paths to the Cup. You need a coherent plan - Boston's has been to trade older guys for good young players (Rask, Peverley), Chicago's was (by necessity, thanks to Wirth) to draft - both supplement via free agency (Hossa, Chara). That's where I think the Flyers are failing - they have flopped around on trying to decide WHAT their plan is. Be it impatience or incompetence or whatever, they just don't seem to stick to one direction for very long.

[Polaris922]

Shero didn't get Malkin, Crosby, Fluery - Staal was his first draft pick. Craig Patrick drafted those other guys, Crosby in 2005, Malkin in 2004, and Fleury in 2003 - and was not extended in 2006 for trying to do exactly what you claim the Penguins weren't - signing Recchi, Palffy, and other "big names," and failing to get results. When Shero came on board, he had two generational talents and several others who have played for the team, including Goligoski, Kennedy, Vitale, Orpik, and Letang. The Penguins weren't "patient," they just did a poorer job of fitting free agents and trade acquisitions to their draftees than the Flyers did over that period. Shero has done markedly better in those respects, like getting Neal and Niskanen for Goligosky, and bringing in guys like Dupuis.

I'll strongly disagree with your comment. The Penguins had ten of their own draft selections on the roster when they won in 2009. Yes, Crosby and Malkin were no brainers... But they also had Letang, Orpik, Fleury, Kennedy, Goligoski, Scuderi, Staal, and Talbot. Nearly half the roster was home grown. As for free agency, every time the Pens have won the Cup, they brought in one or two free agent veterans, and succeeded. Sure it fails sometimes, but to say the Pens weren't patient is incorrect. They developed a core that's key components are together to this day. One Cup, and a couple conference finals to show for it. Hopefully more to come

[aziz]

The Penguins had ten of their own draft selections on the roster when they won in 2009.

i think he's talking about the years of sucking that led to the "development" of that core. the pens tried to not be god awful, but couldn't help it. other teams have managed the trick, though.

[Vincent05]

Well their win now no matter what cost us a top 5 pick this year. If we had the 4th pick and drafted Jones, wouldn't that make up for the horrible year and possibly have our franchise dman we been craving for? Sometimes it's good to go for it when you have a team that is set. But that's not the case with the Flyers, they always have a hole either it be in goal or defense. I wouldn't be against them going for it every year if they have a solid goalie but they never do.

This year we still have the same question mark in goal. Schneider was available, I would've traded the first plus whatever to beat out NJ. If they had picked up Schneider, I see no problem going for it all and would be excited as we would have a better shot to win. With Mason and Emery, I have no confidence that they will be able to get the job done. And yes they are better then Bryz. They had a chance again at solidifying the position this offseason but for whatever reason they are back to signing journeymans as their goalie. If the Bryz factor scared them then they are idiots.

And we as diehard fans suffer yet again from their failed efforts of going "all in" every year.

[radoran]

This year we still have the same question mark in goal. Schneider was available, I would've traded the first plus whatever to beat out NJ. If they had picked up Schneider, I see no problem going for it all and would be excited as we would have a better shot to win. With Mason and Emery, I have no confidence that they will be able to get the job done. And yes they are better then Bryz. They had a chance again at solidifying the position this offseason but for whatever reason they are back to signing journeymans as their goalie. If the Bryz factor scared them then they are idiots.

I'm guessing Vancouver was asking for far more before they got told they were not buying out Luongo and Homer had committed to Mason as a tandem (not that Homer's not one to change plans shortly after making them without asking).

9 does beat 11, but I just might have dealt the 2 to keep Schneider out of New Jersey - if that was a potential price. He's signed for two more at $4M.

But he strikes me as exactly the kind of guy who's going to thrive in a defense-heavy system like the Devils.

[Vincent05]

@radoran

I think a 1st and 3rd or 4th would've gotten it done. I don't get this team at all, they will give up alot for a forward or dman they love who is over the hill but they won't trade for a proven goalie. We've seen Florida trade Luongo for crap before and now Schneider for a 1st. Until their mindset change or they are no longer around we can't expect much different.

I can see him kicking our ass just like Brodeur has for all this year. We will be regretting we didn't get him.