Monday Morning Fly By: Recaps, Carcillo, and Goaltending News

by Geoff Detweiler on Mar 8, 2010 10:23 AM EST in Morning Fly By

Today's open discussion thread, including your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers news...

Last night's NHL scores... Flyers 3 - Maple Leafs 1; DET 5 - CHI 4; PIT 2 - BOS 1; CGY 5 - MIN 2; VAN 4 - NSH 2; CAR 4 - ATL 0; BUF 2 - NYR 1 (OT); MTL 4 - ANA 3 (SO); EDM 2 - NJ 0
Recaps of last night's win: [BSH] [PPP] [CSNPhilly] [Inquirer] [DelcoTimes] [NHL.com]
Photos from last night's win: [Philly.com]
The Phantoms lost twice this weekend, 5-2 on Friday and 1-0 on Saturday. From Saturday: "[Jeremy] Duchesne, like the five Adirondack goalies before him, was excellent. They aren’t the problem." [PostStar]
Adam Morrison had a bad game on Saturday, surrendering 5 goals on 20 shots in 40 minutes of play. The only redeeming news? They were all scored on the power-play. [Saskatoon Blades]
Joacim Eriksson finished the regular season with a 2.40 gaa, .926 save percentage, and 8 shutouts. That placed him 4th in the league, 3rd, and 1st, respectively. [euroflyers]
Video from Dan Carcillo's post-game interview: [Flyers]
Two stories on Carcillo's impressive discipline: [BSH] [Daily News]
With both Darroll Powe and Oskars Bartulis healthy, the question now is, Who sits? It appears to still be Ville Leino and Bartulis. [Daily News]
A couple of Simon Gagne stories: [Inquirer] [Daily News]
Another Mike Richards Olympic Gold story: [DelcoTimes]
In case you missed it, Matt Cooke sent Marc Savard off the ice on a stretcher. Here's video and reaction. [Puck Daddy]
Tim Panaccio's Week in Review: [CSNPhilly]
This story was talked about around here, but Jonathan Willis takes on Michael Leighton. [Hockey or Die]

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Cooke's Headshot

over at FTR, there is a post on Cooke using his elbow to remove Marc Savard’s consciousness from this planet.

While most are in agreement that it was dirty and illeigal, I still don’t like the comparison to the hit of Mike Richards on David Boothe. More disturbing is that most are equating the two.

In reviewing the Cooke hit, I thought it was pretty clear that Cooke used his elbow. Most are saying Cooke used his shoulder. One commentor even boldly stated that Richards wasn’t suspended because he was the Flyers’ star (guess which fanbase this came from).

Am I missing something? Is my Flyers homerism cranked up to 11, thus seeing a clear distinction between what Richards did (led with shoulder, legal) and what Cooke did (led with elbow, illegal)?

Eat what the monkey eats, then eat the monkey. -U.S. Navy survival guidance

by psudrozz on Mar 8, 2010 10:55 AM EST reply actions

There is NO similarity between the two hits, except that they both resulted in unfortunate head injuries. In Richard’s case, he made every effort to use his shoulder, and was obviously just trying to make a body check. In the criminal act last night, Cooke not only used his elbow (although you could argue he kept it tight to hte body, hence no elbowing) but was obviously targeting Savard’s head – he could have easily hit him in the body but aimed specifically for his outstretched head. In my world, that indicates intent to INJURE, not intent to make a good hockey play. Cooke should be suspended, fined, and possibly drawn and quartered. While the outcomes were both (potentially) equally unfortunate for the afflicted players, my take is that Richard’s instance was one of hockey simply being a violent game and sh*t happens; the Cooke hit was a blatant attempt to injure another player and should be stamped upon by the league with iron boots.

by penguinsfan on Mar 8, 2010 11:56 AM EST up reply actions

what are they complaining about Richards received a major penalty and was kicked out of the game wehere has Cooke “The Headhunter” didn’t even get a call. Shut up Pens fans Kunitz and Cooke have been going high since the our 1st round matchup last season this is nothing new and he deserves what he gets.

by chrislanci on Mar 8, 2010 11:22 AM EST reply actions

Dear Coach Laviolette – please BENCH Scott Hartnell. We’d like to see Carter’s line playing the way it did against Florida and Buffalo, not the lackluster turn-over filled showing last night. That means reinserting Ville Leino to that line, and while normally that would mean either Asham or Powe rides the press box, neither of those two players has done anything but give their usual 100% effort. Arron Asham has played well on the line with Giroux and JVR, while Powe is absolutely essential to victory as part of the "Lucky Charms" Line with Betts and Lappy. Hartnell, on the other hand, has committed turnover after turnover, bad pass following bad pass, missed hit on the tails of missed hit. I think maybe following the Rangers lead on this, and benching players who need it regardless of salary is a good idea. Hell, for all his recent contributions, which in memory since the Olympic break consists of one fight against Phaneuf, you could just as easily dress Riley Cote for the same outcome. The Carter line needs to be firing on all cylinders come the playoffs, and frankly if that means Hartnell is the cylinder that needs replacing so be it. Thank you – A Concerned Fan.

by penguinsfan on Mar 8, 2010 11:49 AM EST reply actions 1 recs

Interesting read about something I’ve discussed here before:

Why did Chicago decline [to trade Huet]? Scotty Bowman believes strongly in the Detroit model: If you don’t have a top-three goalie, you protect him with great team defence and puck possession. The Blackhawks – disciplined and talented – have a shot. But, to duplicate the Red Wings’ success, they will have to show two things: their forwards are as committed to back pressure as Detroit’s and their defensive corps is as good.

Which then, of course, means you should only spend top dollar for a top three netminder.

by MarioD on Mar 8, 2010 2:30 PM EST reply actions

On the same subject, this is pretty interesting:

These are ballpark figures, but I think it’s clear that dropping $3M+ for multiple years on a goalie has not had a good rate of return in recent years. For a variety of reasons – chief among them the short career peaks of goalies and the difficulty teams have in determining a goalie’s true talent level – these contracts underperform. Buying a top goalie is like giving away between half a win and a full win per season. If your team has a league-average goalie signed to a bargain contract today, you’d better hope they don’t decide they need to sign Evgeni Nabokov in the off-season.

Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Travis Hughes on Mar 8, 2010 2:45 PM EST up reply actions

That’s part 1.

But success only stems from re-allocating that money to the right kind of forwards and dmen.

by MarioD on Mar 8, 2010 2:59 PM EST up reply actions

which my argument (as diluted as it got) was that the Flyers have not shown the ability to re-allocate that money correctly for however many years I looked at, which led me to conclude that perhaps it would be much easier for the Flyers to spend top dollar on a goalie and go from there.

In fact, the success rate outside of the Wings in going this route is pretty small, IMO, leading me also to conclude that based on percentages that going forward, we’re going to see a lot more champions with high paid goalies then champions with the Red Wing model.

Managing Editor - HockeyOutsiders.com

by HockeyOutsiders on Mar 8, 2010 3:24 PM EST up reply actions

Don’t know if anyone saw this in Panotch’s piece:

Flyers rookie James van Riemsdyk is within earning a couple +/- and ice time bonuses on his contract that could be worth 5,000. The three bonuses bonus will be applied against next year’s salary cap, the Flyers said this week.

Kinda frustrating when Mario just posted how this now DIDN"T have to happen.

by Kozlowski22 on Mar 8, 2010 2:53 PM EST reply actions

$5,000.

That makes no sense on so many levels…

by MarioD on Mar 8, 2010 2:57 PM EST up reply actions

500,000 I am assuming is the number and why would they not defer to this years cap when we have all the money does LTIR not count for bonuses cushion, that is all I could think of for that explanation.

by chrislanci on Mar 8, 2010 3:30 PM EST up reply actions