CHICAGO, IL - DECEMBER 12: Ed Snider talks with reporters during a media availability before the 2011 US Hockey Hall of Fame Induction at the Renaissance Chicago Hotel on December 12, 2011 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo by Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images)
We wrote a story yesterday based off a rumor from Elliotte Friedman of CBC, who essentially said that the Flyers were interested in potentially adding a third goaltender should Sergei Bobrovsky or Ilya Bryzgalov fail to "grab a stranglehold" on the position. Obviously, this ticked a fair amount of us off, considering it's completely silly.
As it turns out, things weren't quite so straight-forward. Friedman himself sent us a note trying to clarify what he meant in the story -- which he didn't have to do at all. Cool of him to make sure we got the story right. See what he had to say after the jump.
First, a refresher on what was written by Friedman yesterday in his weekly 30 Thoughts column:
It's interesting to hear other teams talk about the Flyers. If there's one thing they really respect, it's Philly's willingness to make bold decisions. That's why there's a suspicion that if Ilya Bryzgalov or Sergei Bobrovsky doesn't grab a stranglehold on the net, Philadelphia may look at someone else (on a short-term contract) to calm the position.
And here's Friedman's clarification to us via email yesterday:
Maybe my explanation was muddled, but I have no direct information that Philly is looking for another goalie. But what has happened, though, is that other organizations believe the Flyers will do anything to win. That's said with a lot of respect, because some GMs would kill for an owner like Ed Snider -- who will spend what it takes in support of that goal.
When the Flyers made last summer's Richards/Carter trades, much of the league was blown away. There are very few teams that would have the willingness to trade two talented young players like that -- especially when they'd been promoted as cornerstones of the franchise. "The Flyers have brass balls," one GM told me, and it was a compliment.
So, it's more conjecture than anything. But it shows you how the Flyers are viewed. You couldn't name another team that would want to go anywhere near such an idea. But others think Philly might -- if they thought it gave them the best chance to win.
That's what I was trying to convey.
So, there you have it. Maybe we read it wrong, maybe his explanation could have been better. Doesn't really matter, one way or the other.
It does matter that the correct story gets out, and this one is that the Flyers aren't completely crazy. They're not necessarily looking for a third goalie, thank God. But other teams respect the balls they have, and that they would do something that crazy if they thought it would help.
Does this make you feel better? Or does it make you feel worse?
Personally, I'm not sure how it makes me feel. I absolutely love that Ed Snider and the Flyers are always willing to do whatever they feel necessary to win a Stanley Cup.
Like Friedman said there, other GMs and other organizations would kill for an owner like Mr. Snider. He's responsible for so much good in this city and so much good in the Flyers organization. Hell, so much good in the sport of hockey, for that matter. And there's no questioning that he wants that Cup again more than any other owner in the game.
On the flip side, is what they think will give the team the best chance to win always what's actually best? It's the same conundrum that gets us into reactionary nine-year, $51 million contracts, for example. The difference between spending money and spending it smartly, right?
It can be both a blessing and a curse, the meddling of a ridiculously wealthy, wants-to-win-it-more-than-anything owner. I'm still undecided on whether it's more a blessing or more a curse, what with the 37 years since a Cup thing and all.