2023-24 Roster Thread 1: Entering the Starting Gate

[Ghosts Beer]

No, I was taking the stance that you spoke so glowingly about him and were taking victory laps about the man and yet every time you were asked to explain what exactly you liked about what Hakstol was doing you avoiding the questions because "you don't like to answer questions from assholes."

You can see how that would make someone a little weary of things. So I appreciate you actually answering the question for once.

What's wrong with Toronto? Nothing.

Once again, small sample sizes shouldn't erase good processes and good teams. That happens every single year where people get jumpy and want to blow things up. The Maple Leafs are a well built team that follows good processes who have ran into some misfortune and great teams over the years. It's no different than a number of other teams in recent memory that "can't get it done" until well, they get it done (including the Avalanche) but it's much more fun to say "LOL LEAFS."

Thank you for proving my point.

Since then, Hakstol has defeated the defending Cup champ in round 1, taken a 2 games to 1 lead in round 2, been named a coach-of-the-year finalist AND had me describe his tactics, &, yet, it doesn’t matter because it’s all just trolling from a-holes who weren’t actually looking for an answer.

 

[Columbus Hockey Dad]

The thing with Hakstol is.....he was a terrible coach with the Flyers. That stated, it IS possible to go on to your second coaching gig having learned important lessons from your first. That is what happened here. Good for him!

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Thank you for proving my point.

Since then, Hakstol has defeated the defending Cup champ in round 1, taken a 2 games to 1 lead in round 2, been named a coach-of-the-year finalist AND had me describe his tactics, &, yet, it doesn’t matter because it’s all just trolling from a-holes who weren’t actually looking for an answer.

Um, I and others were in fact looking for an answer because we wanted to see if you were just trolling, which the constant ducking of the question made it seem more and more like it was strictly trolling on your part.

We weren't the ones doing victory laps about how great Hakstol is and how we're all morons for doubting him.

 

[bobbythebrain]

Why do the Tortorella fans ever cite Frost? The only reason Frost got usage that allowed him to produce is because Tortorella was ordered to give him that usage. It was against his will. Why would anyone give him credit for that?

There's also the little fact that Tortorella proudly bragged about how he hates communicating with players these days, so he wouldn't bother. And we had players confirming he wasn't giving them any direct coaching. So how can he get credit when every indication is that these players had to figure it out themselves?

Ya i don't buy this angle at all. Frost was in Torts doghouse like many other players until he improved on other areas and gained his trust.
So Torts had carte blanche over everyone except Frost? Not buyin it.

I'm really not even a big Torts fan but it's easy to see he got a terrible roster to play harder, protect Hart more and the players i mentioned...all had suprisingly good seasons considering the lack of talent around them.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

The thing with Hakstol is.....he was a terrible coach with the Flyers. That stated, it IS possible to go on to your second coaching gig having learned important lessons from your first. That is what happened here. Good for him!

Berube won a cup as HC for the Blues. Hak was not good here. Berube was not good here. Both are on their 2nd gigs as HC elsewhere.

 

[deadhead]

The thing with Hakstol is.....he was a terrible coach with the Flyers. That stated, it IS possible to go on to your second coaching gig having learned important lessons from your first. That is what happened here. Good for him!

He wasn't a terrible coach, far from it.
He had a boring style of play, but that was dictated by a roster that was below average in talent.

Now, would the team have been better off with a more wide open style of play that would have resulted in better draft position and evaluation of young players?

I doubt Holmgren would have accepted that, and probably not Hextall.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

He wasn't a terrible coach, far from it.
He had a boring style of play, but that was dictated by a roster that was below average in talent.

Now, would the team have been better off with a more wide open style of play that would have resulted in better draft position and evaluation of young players?

I doubt Holmgren would have accepted that, and probably not Hextall.

Is it good coaching to play bad players over good players?

 

[Starat327]

Is it good coaching to play bad players over good players?

He was going for better draft positi--- shit no, we just said he WASNT doing that. Damnit. I hate when my arguments contradict each other.

 

[FlyerNutter]

Has anyone not accepted that Lappy is definitely the next HC after Torts gets promoted to a FO role in a few years?

I'd bet some money on that.

 

[kudymen]

Has anyone not accepted that Lappy is definitely the next HC after Torts gets promoted to a FO role in a few years?

I'd bet some money on that.

I would bet money on someone defending it.

 

[deadhead]

Is it good coaching to play bad players over good players?

What good players?

 

[kudymen]

He had no other option

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

What good players?

Just at it's very core.

We've had this discussion many times and we know that you think that this organization brings any and all players along properly so any player that I bring up I will be told that he was a nobody because if he was a somebody he would have played. I'd rather just skip that part.

So I just want to keep the question in it's most basic form: Is it good coaching to play bad players over good players?

Or hell, another favorite of mine, is it better to play players that you know are shit or players that might be shit but we don't know yet?

 

[Magua]

Hakstol got career years from Giroux, Couturier, Provorov, Gostisbehere, Voracek. At the same time! We still had Schenn and Simmonds (the good version) for multiple years under Hakstol. Gudas, Sanheim, Konecny, and so on.

“He had below average talent.” Please. The Flyers had serious issues in chance creating with him, stunk on the PK, and he overplayed every replacement level player he could. This narrative that Hakstol willed that talentless group into the playoffs is pathetic.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Ya i don't buy this angle at all. Frost was in Torts doghouse like many other players until he improved on other areas and gained his trust.
So Torts had carte blanche over everyone except Frost? Not buyin it.

I'm really not even a big Torts fan but it's easy to see he got a terrible roster to play harder, protect Hart more and the players i mentioned...all had suprisingly good seasons considering the lack of talent around them.

It was leaked that it was exactly what happened.

Supposedly playing harder didn't make them any better. The only difference is that they played cohesively. Effort wasn't different, but they played as a unit instead of the AV/Eakins special where F and D may as well be two different teams.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Hakstol got career years from Giroux, Couturier, Provorov, Gostisbehere, Voracek. At the same time! We still had Schenn and Simmonds (the good version) for multiple years under Hakstol. Gudas, Sanheim, Konecny, and so on.

“He had below average talent.” Please. The Flyers had serious issues in chance creating with him, stunk on the PK, and he overplayed every JAG he could. This narrative that Hakstol willed that talentless group into the playoffs is pathetic.

For a long time now, defending Flyers management requires lying because they haven't done much good in a decade. There's no merit to any defense without lying about what happened.

At least Holmgren defenders didn't have to lie to defend him.

 

[Tripod]

Is it good coaching to play bad players over good players?

And he had a guy capable of scoring 100 points, another over PPG, another 75+ while being a Selke candidate, 65 point Dman, 40 point dman, etc...

No need to pretend the Flyers had to play a boring grind it out game that was unwatchable win or lose.

Edit....should have kept reading...what Magua said.

 

[flyersnorth]

It’s beyond tiring seeing this franchise try to model themselves after these kind of clubs.

The Blues. Columbus. Islanders.

It’s just a personal thing for me, but it’s actually a beautiful game. The Flyers just seem destined to try to WANT to make a team Bobby Clarke would be proud of. Defense. Grit. Bunch of try hard secondary guys.

It’s just stale. Try something new. It’s not as if this shit has worked, and it’s boring AF.

Bedard would help yeah, but they keep trying to build a reliable station wagon, instead of even daring to try for a Ferrari. That horseshit old school Flyer brand is destroying this thing year after year.

So I go back to my original question.... what's the problem *here*?

Why can Seattle make things work with middling talent, no stars, and a coach that most people concluded was in way over his head, and yet the Flyers can't?

Did the Blues and Berube just catch lightning in a bottle on their Cup run? I mean, they finished 3rd, 5th (no playoffs), 1st (SC), 4th, 3rd, 6th (no playoffs). So, not a great team by any means. An opportunistic one, for sure.

To be fair, I guess Hak did make the playoffs in Philly... once or twice? Can't remember now. All this mediocrity is starting to blend in together.

I'm just ready for more pain tonight at the lottery draft.

 

[Beef Invictus]

It's interesting how every coach from Lavi on sees improvement after they crank up offense and aggressiveness after settling into a safety-minded game.

Almost like they've all been getting pressure from the same people to go in the bad direction.

 

[Beef Invictus]

So I go back to my original question.... what's the problem *here*?

Why can Seattle make things work with middling talent, no stars, and a coach that most people concluded was in way over his head, and yet the Flyers can't?

Did the Blues and Berube just catch lightning in a bottle on their Cup run? I mean, they finished 3rd, 5th (no playoffs), 1st (SC), 4th, 3rd, 6th (no playoffs). So, not a great team by any means. An opportunistic one, for sure.

To be fair, I guess Hak did make the playoffs in Philly... once or twice? Can't remember now. All this mediocrity is starting to blend in together.

I'm just ready for more pain tonight at the lottery draft.

We have enough of a trend with how our coaches devolve during their time here that I suspect my above post has a lot of merit.

I mean, AV turned into a safety-minded coach while also trying to do stretch hockey. AV hasn't worried about safety ever. They also tried to have Lavi turn into Tortorella.

They all leave and all end up coaching more offensively assertive systems than they were running here. The common denominator is the people who've been in charge the entire time and have been allowed to set organizational values and outlook with impunity.

 

[Curufinwe]

Hakstol got career years from Giroux, Couturier, Provorov, Gostisbehere, Voracek. At the same time! We still had Schenn and Simmonds (the good version) for multiple years under Hakstol. Gudas, Sanheim, Konecny, and so on.

“He had below average talent.” Please. The Flyers had serious issues in chance creating with him, stunk on the PK, and he overplayed every replacement level player he could. This narrative that Hakstol willed that talentless group into the playoffs is pathetic.

Giroux was 6 points behind McDavid in 17-18 as the NHL’s second highest scorer.

But this is similar to when he downplayed MSL who lead the league in scoring by 7 points in 03-04. Alternate reality nonsense.

 

[FlyerNutter]

So I go back to my original question.... what's the problem *here*?

Why can Seattle make things work with middling talent, no stars, and a coach that most people concluded was in way over his head, and yet the Flyers can't?

Did the Blues and Berube just catch lightning in a bottle on their Cup run? I mean, they finished 3rd, 5th (no playoffs), 1st (SC), 4th, 3rd, 6th (no playoffs). So, not a great team by any means. An opportunistic one, for sure.

To be fair, I guess Hak did make the playoffs in Philly... once or twice? Can't remember now. All this mediocrity is starting to blend in together.

I'm just ready for more pain tonight at the lottery draft.

Ahhhh I gotcha.

I'll just say, I don't think they get by Colorado is the Avs are healthy. That team was beat up as hell all year long, and Georgiev ridden like a mule down the stretch. Credit though, they did beat them - and seem to be taking it to Dallas quite well. I am not arrogant enough to ignore the success they have had.

Regarding the problem here, that's a long ass answer that's multi layered. In short form, I just think they hire the wrong people far too often, because those doing the hiring really don't want to admit their approach is/has been wrong.

Regarding coaching, Torts has some pros sure. Say all NHL coaches are fired tomorrow. Do the elite clubs chase John Tortorella? The Flyers never pillage FO talent from these teams, because it would directly oppose the beliefs of so many entrenched in this org.

We are about to be sold some fallacy that they are rebuilding by drafting 5th, and 7th in back to back years. With likely a pick even worse next season, and voila its showtime. As always, who believes this shit?

 

[Flyerfan4life]

The thing with Hakstol is.....he was a terrible coach with the Flyers. That stated, it IS possible to go on to your second coaching gig having learned important lessons from your first. That is what happened here. Good for him!

same with Berube... he might have won a cup elsewere. but HERE he was out of his depths.

but im glad he managed to hoist a cup elsewere... its what everyone who leaves here tends do to. cuz ur never hoistin it here

 

[ponder719]

Has anyone not accepted that Lappy is definitely the next HC after Torts gets promoted to a FO role in a few years?

I'd bet some money on that.

I haven't.

It'll be Shaw or Thompson.

 

[deadhead]

Hakstol got career years from Giroux, Couturier, Provorov, Gostisbehere, Voracek. At the same time! We still had Schenn and Simmonds (the good version) for multiple years under Hakstol. Gudas, Sanheim, Konecny, and so on.

“He had below average talent.” Please. The Flyers had serious issues in chance creating with him, stunk on the PK, and he overplayed every replacement level player he could. This narrative that Hakstol willed that talentless group into the playoffs is pathetic.

He got "career years" - in other words, got players to play above their norm.
G was dinged/injured for most of Hakstol's tenure, moving him to LW revived his career.
Gudas was a 3rd pair D-man, Provorov and Ghost 2nd pair on a top team.

We also started players like AMac, MDZ, Manning, Hagg, Filppula, Weal, Weise, Lehtera, over the hill Read, VdV, Lyubimov.

There was never a set 2nd line, the bottom six was full of scrubs, and not one D-man anyone would consider 1st pair quality.