Flyers end Yandles ironman streak at 989 games.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Why the F did the Flyers played Yandle again tonight, after benching him for what, 2 games? What did that accomplish? Killing a streak that took like 12 years to build to show who's boss?

Maybe he’s actually just a 6/7/8 D-man and should be in/out of the lineup as situations dictate.


I think the Kessel thing was particularly stupid. As a man, I would be so proud to skip out on a meaningless footnote to demonstrate my true life priorities.

I think it’s noteworthy that Yandle only had 2 fairly deep playoff runs and 4 first rd exits during this 14 yr streak. Kessel is similar, though his back to back cups are more impressive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PeteMoss]

I agree with both sides here.

You shouldn't play a guy just so he can keep a streak. If Yandle wasn't good enough (and he probably wasn't) - they should have sat him early in the season when the games matter.

Scratching him at this point in meaningless games is pointless. You let him play when the games matter.. why scratch him now.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I agree with both sides here.

You shouldn't play a guy just so he can keep a streak. If Yandle wasn't good enough (and he probably wasn't) - they should have sat him early in the season when the games matter.

Scratching him at this point in meaningless games is pointless. You let him play when the games matter.. why scratch him now.

I'm going to assume that they didn't want the outrage if they sat him before the record was set, and the figured nobody would much care if they sat him after.

Doesn't matter, as we see how much Kessel wants the record, so it will be his soon enough.
At least Yandle gets to enjoy it for a bit.

it's a dumb stat. I don't see how Marleau should have had his streak still going, either. The moment he wasn't playing in the first game of a season, the streak should have been over.

[shadowlord]

Worthless stat.

Phil Kessel played a 30-second shift and took one shot on goal before leaving the game, but at least he had a decent excuse to be with his wife for the birth of his child.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nhl/...o8j206rcalweuv

Henrik Sedin played 22 seconds and then left the game solely so that he woudn't get hurt ahead of the playoffs and keep his streak alive.

https://nhl.nbcsports.com/2013/04/28...ronman-streak/

[1991 Canadian]

If this was a longstanding Flyer like Giroux or Timonen, I’d agree with the folks saying let him ride out his streak. It’s a cool story and sometimes the bigger picture is more important than fully optimizing an NHL lineup.

That said, I disagree with the folks saying these games are meaningless. The game results may be meaningless, but the ability to burn RFA/contract years, reward prospects and evaluate prospects in real NHL games have meaning.

For the Flyers, this means a 23 year old Ronnie Attard gets some NHL game reps in now that his NCAA season is over. He can burn off a contract year and both team and player can see how ready he is for the NHL. Maybe he’s the next Rasmus Andersson. Maybe he’s the next Patrick Sieloff. But if you don’t play them at the NHL level, how do you know?

[jmac98]

I’m not entirely sure how to fit this into the narrative, but I find as I read about the Yandle story and how both the Flyers and many views in support speak about making decisions that are best for the team versus an individuals interests, that I’ve been thinking about ‘1 day contract’ signings by comparison and how that fits in to the equation, in terms of optics.

I realize that below the surface these are entirely different scenarios with completely diffferent impacts, however, at face value they are essentially both for the benefit of the player. For one day signings, players don’t even hit the ice yet state they retired as a player on that team. Is that really all that different than an iron man streak playing 1 shift to keep the consecutive games going?

And what does a team, say Chicago w/Hossa, have to gain as a benefit to their organization by signing him to a one day contract if organizations need to make decisions that best befit their club and not individuals.

Again, I’m not trying to compare the two nor am I terribly disrupted either way on the Yandke decision. It’s just that as I was reading thoughts both on here and wherever else online about Yandle, then reading about a one day contract signing, the two events just kind of crossed one another in my mind as scenarios that organizations face and elect to handle, and wanted to share thoughts for better or worse to contribute to the conversation.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by jmac98

I’m not entirely sure how to fit this into the narrative, but I find as I read about the Yandle story and how both the Flyers and many views in support speak about making decisions that are best for the team versus an individuals interests, that I’ve been thinking about ‘1 day contract’ signings by comparison and how that fits in to the equation, in terms of optics.

I realize that below the surface these are entirely different scenarios with completely diffferent impacts, however, at face value they are essentially both for the benefit of the player. For one day signings, players don’t even hit the ice yet state they retired as a player on that team. Is that really all that different than an iron man streak playing 1 shift to keep the consecutive games going?

And what does a team, say Chicago w/Hossa, have to gain as a benefit to their organization by signing him to a one day contract if organizations need to make decisions that best befit their club and not individuals.

Again, I’m not trying to compare the two nor am I terribly disrupted either way on the Yandke decision. It’s just that as I was reading thoughts both on here and wherever else online about Yandle, then reading about a one day contract signing, the two events just kind of crossed one another in my mind as scenarios that organizations face and elect to handle, and wanted to share thoughts for better or worse to contribute to the conversation.

I don't see them as comparable as the one day contract thing is just ceremonial and doesn't impact anything. I'm not even sure its a real contract or just something similar to the make a wish type contract where a kid signs with the team.