Dave Hakstol

[deadhead]

I'm not sure I see the parallel, but as far as Couturier is concerned he played with Giroux and Konecny largely. I can't think of any center in the league who would have had a better set of wingers flanking him off-hand (I'm sure there are some comparables, none that spring to mind immediately). Especially considering that Couturier is best on offense when he's driving the net and the play as opposed to playmaking or creating openings, which are what Konecny and Giroux excel at.

Personally, I also see Couturier's output last year as a bit of an aberration, I wouldn't expect him to have a season like that again ever honestly. He shot a career-high shooting percentage, over 3% above his career average, Giroux is only going to get older, it's going to be hard to ever beat winger setup of Giroux-Konecny, and Giroux himself has some advanced stats that would indicate that his season was a bit of an anomaly as well.

Note, I'm not disparaging any player here.

Couts may not score like last year, but if you look at the two previous seasons, his advanced metrics were slightly WORSE.
That is, his play was the same, but his minutes (he stayed healthy and got 1C minutes) and his linemates were better.

Which shows you why you have to use context, Voracek scored at close to the same rate as TK on the 1st line, but his scoring really fell off on other lines, far more than his advanced metrics - suggesting his linemates weren't closing the deal for him. Whereas TK's play really fell off before he was with Giroux and Couts, he was playing down to his linemates.

 

[FLYguy3911]

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

What a f***ing lineup out there from Hakstok.

 

[deadhead]

You mean because a veteran forward doesn't flip the puck off the boards and out of the zone?
Last time I checked that was a pretty routine play.

 

[Striiker]

What a ****ing lineup out there from Hakstok.

HE HAD NO CHOICE

 

[Garbage Goal]

Was that the game he put Simmonds and every bad player on our team out at the end of a game for a D zone face-off? I'm no good with jersey numbers.

Why would you remind me of that game? You're a horrible person.

 

[deadhead]

Lehtera makes a good play, all Simmonds has to do is flip it across the blue line and game over, instead he tries to do ???

 

[Ghosts Beer]

What a ****ing lineup out there from Hakstok.

I jumped on Hakstol for that, too, in the moment.

Then I realized it was after an icing & it wasn’t possible to get Simmonds off the ice for the d-zone draw.

If you want to blame him for playing Simmonds at all in the last two minutes, OK.

 

[Striiker]

Can’t get caught out because of an icing if you’re on the bench where you belong.

Lehtera even being dressed is inexcusable too.

Imagine thinking those two, plus Filppula, make sense to close out a game...

Yikes

MacDonald is of course out there... and Manning And people defend this coach

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Complimentary player: Someone with major weaknesses in his game being tauted by announcers for his boardwork, heavy forechecking, wily veteran presence or any other nonsense there is.

Put Manning and Amac together to see how well they compliment each other.

Same thing couple years ago with Grossman and Coburn when their steady defense was enabling Streit and Timomen to truly excel with the puck on their stick, ehh?

Edit: I see flyguy made the same argument lol.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Can’t get caught out because of an icing if you’re on the bench where you belong.

Lehtera even being dressed is inexcusable too.

Imagine thinking those two, plus Filppula, make sense to close out a game...

Yikes

Simmonds cost them that game. Not Lehtera. Like I said, if you want to blame Hakstol for playing Simmonds at all in the last 2 minutes, I won’t argue. He was a disaster defensively. But don’t say Hakstol actively chose that line for the dzone faceoff, because that’s flat out incorrect.

And if you want to cite Filppula, go ahead. It’s another example where I was called a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, because the board consensus liked his acquisition, & I ended up completely right. You can add Weise & Gordon to that (once I learned Weise’s terms).

 

[FlyTimmo]

Simmonds cost them that game. Not Lehtera. Like I said, if you want to blame Hakstol for playing Simmonds at all in the last 2 minutes, I won’t argue. He was a disaster defensively. But don’t say Hakstol actively chose that line for the dzone faceoff, because that’s flat out incorrect.

And if you want to cite Filppula, go ahead. It’s another example where I was called a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, because the board consensus liked his acquisition, & I ended up completely right. You can add Weise & Gordon to that (once I learned Weise’s terms).

Simmonds' didn't cost them the game whatsoever , considering they won that game.

Simmonds was one of several players who made terrible plays in that sequence.

 

[Striiker]

Simmonds cost them that game. Not Lehtera. Like I said, if you want to blame Hakstol for playing Simmonds at all in the last 2 minutes, I won’t argue. He was a disaster defensively. But don’t say Hakstol actively chose that line for the dzone faceoff, because that’s flat out incorrect.

OH, well since Lehtera wasn't the one that cost them the game then clearly it was a coaching choice that can't be criticized.

Whether or not he put them all out together is completely irrelevant... the fact is he put them out individually and it ended up like this. Doesn't matter if they started together or not, individually they should never have been on the ice to start. He CHOSE them to close out the game... there's no defending that.

And if you want to cite Filppula, go ahead. It’s another example where I was called a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, because the board consensus liked his acquisition, & I ended up completely right. You can add Weise & Gordon to that (once I learned Weise’s terms).

Nope, you weren't right. The trade/addition was fine, it was Hakstols use of him that was the problem.

If Filppula was used properly, as 3C or 4C, he isn't even close to the problem that he was. Instead he w used as 2C and defensive ace.

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Our worst players being on the ice in most critical moment of the game shitting the bed? Who to blame? Players, coaches for using them or management for bringing such inept combination of coaches and players into our lives?

 

[Magua]

What a ****ing lineup out there from Hakstok.

Just giving the fans what they want on "Star Sunday."

 

[bauer]

the exact same thing also happened in a game against Columbus. i think we were up 2-1 with a minute left and Hak put the 5 worst players on the ice to hold the lead, and guess what? same result, we got scored on.

Hak is a f**king moron. worst player management i've ever seen by a coach.

 

[Garbage Goal]

Simmonds cost them that game. Not Lehtera. Like I said, if you want to blame Hakstol for playing Simmonds at all in the last 2 minutes, I won’t argue. He was a disaster defensively. But don’t say Hakstol actively chose that line for the dzone faceoff, because that’s flat out incorrect.

Point is he had arguably the worst five man unit, out of every possible combination, out and at the end of a close game to boot. There is no defending that whatsoever. Does not matter who ends up at fault specifically on the play, there is no smart coach out there that actively chooses to have his five worst player combination out, at least in terms of defense, on the ice at any point in the game let alone at the end of a close one. If it were an erroneous deployment in isolation it could be assume a to be a mistake, but we regularly see do similar things.

Such as arbitrarily playing goalies in back-to-back starts consistently whenever they win the former half of it. Or giving Lehtera an average of 33 seconds of PP time last year. That's 33 seconds more than it should be. That's just an average too, which means there's games where it is way more than that. Just scanning through the season log, I see one game where he logged 3+, one where he logged 2+, and a four out of five game stretch where he logged over 1 minute per.

Tell me, please, what good coach chooses to have his five worst defensive players out at the closing seconds of a one-goal game, gives Jori Lethera PP and PK time, or consistently plays his goalies in B2B starts? There is no reasonable defense of it.

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

OH, well since Lehtera wasn't the one that cost them the game then clearly it was a coaching choice that can't be criticized.

Whether or not he put them all out together is completely irrelevant... the fact is he put them out individually and it ended up like this. Doesn't matter if they started together or not, individually they should never have been on the ice to start. He CHOSE them to close out the game... there's no defending that.



Nope, you weren't right. The trade/addition was fine, it was Hakstols use of him that was the problem.

If Filppula was used properly, as 3C or 4C, he isn't even close to the problem that he was. Instead he w used as 2C and defensive ace.

 

[Garbage Goal]

That's the Islanders' 2C right there. Be afraid when we have empty nets.

 

[Striiker]

Forgot about that one.

He really is the king of the empty net, isn't he?

 

[Stizzle]

Watching Hakstol coach a 3v3 period is ****ing awful.

Never forget 2 seasons ago Quenneville got Toews, Kane, and Keith out against PEB, Weise, and Manning. Shockingly, that was the last shift of the game.

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Forgot about that one.

He really is the king of the empty net, isn't he?

Yeah, king of doom. Cant wait to see him center martin and komarov.

 

[orangecrush8]

Point is he had arguably the worst five man unit, out of every possible combination, out and at the end of a close game to boot. There is no defending that whatsoever. Does not matter who ends up at fault specifically on the play, there is no smart coach out there that actively chooses to have his five worst player combination out, at least in terms of defense, on the ice at any point in the game let alone at the end of a close one. If it were an erroneous deployment in isolation it could be assume a to be a mistake, but we regularly see do similar things.

Such as arbitrarily playing goalies in back-to-back starts consistently whenever they win the former half of it. Or giving Lehtera an average of 33 seconds of PP time last year. That's 33 seconds more than it should be. That's just an average too, which means there's games where it is way more than that. Just scanning through the season log, I see one game where he logged 3+, one where he logged 2+, and a four out of five game stretch where he logged over 1 minute per.

Tell me, please, what good coach chooses to have his five worst defensive players out at the closing seconds of a one-goal game, gives Jori Lethera PP and PK time, or consistently plays his goalies in B2B starts? There is no reasonable defense of it.

These discussions are eerily similar to those with the Bryz defenders a few years back.

Bryz would shit the bed but people would blame the skaters for not scoring more. People ignore Bryz’s play.

The coach puts out the worst 5 man unit possible but people blame Simmonds. People ignore Hak.

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Never forget 2 seasons ago Quenneville got Toews, Kane, and Keith out against PEB, Weise, and Manning. Shockingly, that was the last shift of the game.

Jesus Hextall really pulled a stealth tank on us didn't he?

 

[Striiker]

Yeah, king of doom. Cant wait to see him center martin and komarov.

For Hakstol, a Tavares for Filppula swap wouldn't be seen as a downgrade.