Dave Hakstol

[Striiker]

Deadhead incoming to defend Hakstols honor in 3...2...1...

 

[JojoTheWhale]

When it's the whole team, he has to have a share of the blame. Not all, of course, but as I said in another thread, his risk management scale is completely off.

They barely (especially Giroux) even attack the high danger areas anymore, and that's a team wide Hak thing too.

Giroux took shots from a greater distance than most stars before Hakstol got here unless I'm remembering completely wrong, but look at this abomination:

When the eye test and the numbers match, there's not much left to argue.

 

[Striiker]

Individual player slumps are usually their own fault or bad luck... but the entire team breaking down for two whole months???? Even if he didn't cause it, directly or indirectly, he has to find a way to break them out of it. Push the right buttons, make the right changes, something.

If anything, he made it worse by stifling creativity and benching young super-skilled guys for no reason.

 

[deadhead]

So how come Weal attacked the net? Maybe Giroux is undersized and as he gets older doesn't want to deal with contact?

There is something to G & V not being good fits, I think they're used to a scheme where the D-men cover their butt so they can be aggressive in the O-zone, whereas in Hakstol's scheme the forwards have to be aware and defensively responsible, which isn't Voracek's game - he wants the puck and to control the play, not cycle.

However, whether or not Hakstol stays, I'd rather dump G & V than change the scheme. We're adding a whole group of offensively skilled, highly mobile defensemen in Provorov, Sanheim, Myers and Friedman. Gudas, Morin and Hagg are good enough to get the puck on net from the point. Do you really want to go back to a conservative scheme built around big, slow defensemen that limited how far they had to skate (Grossman, Schenn, et al)?

We saw in the playoffs what a great offensive defenseman can do, defenses struggle to matchup - but to allow these kind of defensemen to impact a game, the forwards have to cycle and be defensively responsible - which can hurt their statistics - so you need forwards more focused on winning than their numbers.

One thing I noticed about Filpulla, he instinctly cycled back when a defenseman attacked the O-zone, not sure if TB does that as part of their scheme but it was obvious he had done it before.

As far as defensemen shooting from the point, depends what forwards are on the ice, Simmonds and Weise (with Couts) are big guys who are willing to take punishment in the crease, in that case, having your defensemen shoot from the point through traffic makes sense to generate rebounds - but if a line lacks that kind of forward you want to work the puck into the O-zone. I suspect Lindblom will also be effective operating in the crease with his quick hands and strength.

And yes, size and strength matters for PFs, let's see, Hextall has drafted Allison, Bunnyman, Ratcliffe and Strome. Coincidence?

 

[NYCFlyer]

Don't know how you can say it isn't. Not entirely, maybe not even to start, but he's a big part of their funk, or the inability to get out of it. Teams don't **** the bed scoring, to the very last man, and it doesn't fall back on the coach. Too many players dropped hints by the end of the year (Jake, Simmer, Schenn) that the present offensive system stifled scoring/chances.

Same time both have had bad injuries the last 2 years, so that matters and obfuscates things.......but even when healthy, it's beyond that. They're not playing like themselves and look confused, like they're second guessing and thinking too hard. They're super talented creators who are best when holding onto the puck, but they've often been reduced to non-instinctual, simple low-high plays. They're all bland structure, playing with such little creativity and feel. They barely (especially Giroux) even attack the high danger areas anymore, and that's a team wide Hak thing too.

One thing that also has to be considered is the beginning of the season we were playing a much more agressive system and we were definitely scoring. The problem was the goalies were left high and dry several times a game and we were consistently outscored. Then they completely changed to a totally defensive style and we starting winning for a bit but our forwards couldn't really score at even strength. I don't really know what to expect this year but our D last year had to be one of the 5 worst and I think the coach over focused on just preventing goals similar to Ottawa. Ghost, TK, Giroux all were surpressed to some extent but I think the coach felt it was his best chance to win given the weak D and poor Goalie play. I can understand that and his benching of players who were freelancing.

The tiresome dialog here on the 4th line in my mind isn't really relevant to the issues the team faced or his ability as a coach.

My big issue with Hak is his handling of the goalies. Seemed like a lot of head scratching moves of over playing and long stretches of no play with both goalies having horrible years. I'm glad Mason is gone and am really curious how this works out because Elliot was terrible in Calgary last year.

Its easy to blame the coach but he was hired to coach the incredible 24 and under team Hextall has built and will be a third of the team this year with a lot more on the way.

 

[hatcher]

Good coach just doesn't have the horses. Certain players are perimeter and others aren't. We'll be better soon and lets hope this yr.

 

[Alex K]

Well, I understand that Haks is trying to find a way to win and I believe he's a solid coach, but you cannot afford to pay two players 16.5M combined and not to use them 100%.

 

[Magua]

Giroux took shots from a greater distance than most stars before Hakstol got here unless I'm remembering completely wrong

No, I'm positive that's true. But you can attack HD areas with passes too, and Giroux has always graded out well in assists on shots. But his shot numbers have been going down (which he can't afford), especially this year, and since I can't find any individual high danger stats with Corsica down, I'm going by feel that his game has increasingly become more perimeter 5v5. I'd love to see puck tracking evidence for him. Not like he's ever been more than an OK 5v5 goal scorer riding percentages some years. He shoots his career average, he cracks 20 goals again.....though it's been below average 3 years in a row, now coming off a career low (5v5 and overall). Easiest way to score is to get to the net more. But low assist totals (primary and secondary) are a different story, and I find them hard to explain other than he is erring more towards the safe play. Combine that with Hak's offensive systems, other players struggling......and you get 4th line scoring.

It looks like a sad face with a tear coming down the right side.

 

[FatTugboatFlahr]

So how come Weal attacked the net? Maybe Giroux is undersized and as he gets older doesn't want to deal with contact?

There is something to G & V not being good fits, I think they're used to a scheme where the D-men cover their butt so they can be aggressive in the O-zone, whereas in Hakstol's scheme the forwards have to be aware and defensively responsible, which isn't Voracek's game - he wants the puck and to control the play, not cycle.

However, whether or not Hakstol stays, I'd rather dump G & V than change the scheme. We're adding a whole group of offensively skilled, highly mobile defensemen in Provorov, Sanheim, Myers and Friedman. Gudas, Morin and Hagg are good enough to get the puck on net from the point. Do you really want to go back to a conservative scheme built around big, slow defensemen that limited how far they had to skate (Grossman, Schenn, et al)?

We saw in the playoffs what a great offensive defenseman can do, defenses struggle to matchup - but to allow these kind of defensemen to impact a game, the forwards have to cycle and be defensively responsible - which can hurt their statistics - so you need forwards more focused on winning than their numbers.

One thing I noticed about Filpulla, he instinctly cycled back when a defenseman attacked the O-zone, not sure if TB does that as part of their scheme but it was obvious he had done it before.

As far as defensemen shooting from the point, depends what forwards are on the ice, Simmonds and Weise (with Couts) are big guys who are willing to take punishment in the crease, in that case, having your defensemen shoot from the point through traffic makes sense to generate rebounds - but if a line lacks that kind of forward you want to work the puck into the O-zone. I suspect Lindblom will also be effective operating in the crease with his quick hands and strength.

And yes, size and strength matters for PFs, let's see, Hextall has drafted Allison, Bunnyman, Ratcliffe and Strome. Coincidence?

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

I don't hate Hakstol. but I don't like him either.
I could be swayed in either direction depending on how this season shakes out.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

No, I'm positive that's true. But you can attack HD areas with passes too, and Giroux has always graded out well in assists on shots. But his shot numbers have been going down (which he can't afford), especially this year, and since I can't find any individual high danger stats with Corsica down, I'm going by feel that his game has increasingly become more perimeter 5v5. I'd love to see puck tracking evidence for him. Not like he's ever been more than an OK 5v5 goal scorer riding percentages some years. He shoots his career average, he cracks 20 goals again.....though it's been below average 3 years in a row, now coming off a career low (5v5 and overall). Easiest way to score is to get to the net more. But low assist totals (primary and secondary) are a different story, and I find them hard to explain other than he is erring more towards the safe play. Combine that with Hak's offensive systems, other players struggling......and you get 4th line scoring.




It looks like a sad face with a tear coming down the right side.

Corsica being down for the summer makes everything more difficult, but NaturalStatTrick does have HD numbers. Go to the Individual sections, then hit the Show/Hide Columns button. They don't have HD for individual goalies (just team goalies), but DispellingVoodoo has those.

You will find no argument from me on the rest. It's too difficult to score to not try to generate shots from the high danger areas. When it applies almost universally to the team, there's more than just a problem with the players.

 

[deadhead]

I do think we all underestimate Hextall's influence. There's a tendency to see the coach and GM as oppositional figures (Lavi v Holmgren), but Hextall had to convince Hakstol to take the job, and gave him a 5 year contract in the top 10 of coaching salaries, so there must have been mutual agreement on what they wanted to accomplish long-term.

Hextall has full power over the organization it seems, and I think he is doing more than merely running the draft and making final roster decisions.

Hextall seems to have a well thought out philosophy he wants to implement, from culture to scheme to personnel. So while I don't think he micromanages Hakstol, I do think he frequently talks with Hakstol (and Gordon) in terms of what kind of scheme he wants (I presume he hired Hakstol both to work with young players and install an aggressive scheme) and how players should be used.

So when a player gets moved it's probably more Hextall and Hakstol agreeing that he doesn't fit what they want to do moving forward than Hakstol asking Hextall to get rid of so and so. Hextall was the one who got PEB and kept VdV on the roster before Hakstol arrived, so he must have seen value in them, probably as low cost "bridge" players when he was dealing with a cap strapped roster. And when he had money and opportunity, he got rid of them (along with a bunch of other marginal talents over the last few years).

The only way Hakstol could be comfortable with this arrangement is that he was hired for the long-term, with the understanding that Hextall was not going to get him the players he needed to compete his first couple years. So the odds are he'll really have to fall on his face to get fired, because he's doing what Hextall asked him to do when he hired Hakstol.

I also think Hextall is on board with a lot of Hakstol's decisions, like benching Ghost and Konecny, Hextall is the one who exiled Laughton to the AHL. Hextall is a bit "old school" (and highly competitive) in that he wants two-way players, and he may be encouraging both Hakstol and Gordon to "sit" on young offensive players who want to skimp on their defensive responsibilities. Heck, he's a former goalie, do you think he likes "offensive only" players who leave their goalie out on an island?

 

[bauer]

It looks like a sad face with a tear coming down the right side.

haha i was just gonna say it looks like a sad clown face.

 

[Magua]

Corsica being down for the summer makes everything more difficult, but NaturalStatTrick does have HD numbers. Go to the Individual sections, then hit the Show/Hide Columns button

I don't know why, but I can only find what look like on-ice HD stats, not individual HD stats on NaturalStatTrick. I did go there earlier trying to find the numbers.

 

[Alex K]

I do think we all underestimate Hextall's influence. There's a tendency to see the coach and GM as oppositional figures (Lavi v Holmgren), but Hextall had to convince Hakstol to take the job, and gave him a 5 year contract in the top 10 of coaching salaries, so there must have been mutual agreement on what they wanted to accomplish long-term.

Hextall has full power over the organization it seems, and I think he is doing more than merely running the draft and making final roster decisions.

Hextall seems to have a well thought out philosophy he wants to implement, from culture to scheme to personnel. So while I don't think he micromanages Hakstol, I do think he frequently talks with Hakstol (and Gordon) in terms of what kind of scheme he wants (I presume he hired Hakstol both to work with young players and install an aggressive scheme) and how players should be used.

So when a player gets moved it's probably more Hextall and Hakstol agreeing that he doesn't fit what they want to do moving forward than Hakstol asking Hextall to get rid of so and so. Hextall was the one who got PEB and kept VdV on the roster before Hakstol arrived, so he must have seen value in them, probably as low cost "bridge" players when he was dealing with a cap strapped roster. And when he had money and opportunity, he got rid of them (along with a bunch of other marginal talents over the last few years).

The only way Hakstol could be comfortable with this arrangement is that he was hired for the long-term, with the understanding that Hextall was not going to get him the players he needed to compete his first couple years. So the odds are he'll really have to fall on his face to get fired, because he's doing what Hextall asked him to do when he hired Hakstol.

I also think Hextall is on board with a lot of Hakstol's decisions, like benching Ghost and Konecny, Hextall is the one who exiled Laughton to the AHL. Hextall is a bit "old school" (and highly competitive) in that he wants two-way players, and he may be encouraging both Hakstol and Gordon to "sit" on young offensive players who want to skimp on their defensive responsibilities. Heck, he's a former goalie, do you think he likes "offensive only" players who leave their goalie out on an island?

Well, maybe it makes sense, maybe it doesn't, but the question is still open, what to do with CG and JV? If they don't fit the Hextall/Hakstol's system then why Hextall gave Voracek 8M/8yr contract?

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I just wonder, is Hakstol to blame for Giroux and Voracek issues? I mean their degradation began as soon as Hakstol came, maybe they just don't fit his ideas?

I don't think so. Giroux and Voracek are older and not as good. Giroux barely moves his feet five on five anymore. He's a stationary PP guy now. Voracek had a terrific season when he was younger and got in great shape, but for most of his career he's been inconsistent and dogged by conditioning questions, not just since Hakstol took over.

The reason the team doesn't get more shots from high danger areas is because the team doesn't have the players to get to those areas. Hakstol can't magically install a system that circumvents the limited talent of his forwards. When Weal got called up, Hakstol's "system" certainly didn't hold him back from getting to high danger areas. This is mostly a personnel issue, not a coaching issue.

 

[deadhead]

Voracek was signed a month after Hakstol was hired, so Hextall didn't know how he'd fit, but wasn't going to let a major asset walk (and probably didn't expect the cap to flatline the next few years).

I suspect if G or V or Ghost come to Hextall and complain about Hakstol, he'll find them a new address if they so desire. Not because he's wed to Hakstol, but because once players push out a coach, it becomes difficult for a new coach to establish control without being a martinet. Easier to deal the malcontent players, and make the coaching decision on its own merits, establishing the precedent for a new coach that the players don't run the asylum.

Hextall wants Hakstol to run his scheme, he knew what he was getting, there was only about two decades worth of film of ND to study. So if a player isn't happy in the scheme, they probably won't be happy with whomever replaces Hakstol, because Hextall will probably hire a HC who runs a similar system - because that's the philosophy that has guided his player acquisition decisions.

When you look at the wave of talent coming the next few years, it is the veteran core that will have to adjust, because they can all be replaced in a couple years. If you're Hextall, are you going to commit to a 30 year old veteran who bucks the system or a highly talented 22 who you personally chose because of his fit with what you want to accomplish?

 

[Flyers1987]

So how come Weal attacked the net? Maybe Giroux is undersized and as he gets older doesn't want to deal with contact?

There is something to G & V not being good fits, I think they're used to a scheme where the D-men cover their butt so they can be aggressive in the O-zone, whereas in Hakstol's scheme the forwards have to be aware and defensively responsible, which isn't Voracek's game - he wants the puck and to control the play, not cycle.

However, whether or not Hakstol stays, I'd rather dump G & V than change the scheme. We're adding a whole group of offensively skilled, highly mobile defensemen in Provorov, Sanheim, Myers and Friedman. Gudas, Morin and Hagg are good enough to get the puck on net from the point. Do you really want to go back to a conservative scheme built around big, slow defensemen that limited how far they had to skate (Grossman, Schenn, et al)?

We saw in the playoffs what a great offensive defenseman can do, defenses struggle to matchup - but to allow these kind of defensemen to impact a game, the forwards have to cycle and be defensively responsible - which can hurt their statistics - so you need forwards more focused on winning than their numbers.

One thing I noticed about Filpulla, he instinctly cycled back when a defenseman attacked the O-zone, not sure if TB does that as part of their scheme but it was obvious he had done it before.

As far as defensemen shooting from the point, depends what forwards are on the ice, Simmonds and Weise (with Couts) are big guys who are willing to take punishment in the crease, in that case, having your defensemen shoot from the point through traffic makes sense to generate rebounds - but if a line lacks that kind of forward you want to work the puck into the O-zone. I suspect Lindblom will also be effective operating in the crease with his quick hands and strength.

And yes, size and strength matters for PFs, let's see, Hextall has drafted Allison, Bunnyman, Ratcliffe and Strome. Coincidence?

When Weal and Fippilua came on board. It appeared the team started playing better smarter hockey. Maybe their high IQ rubs off on others players and coaching staff.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

I don't hate Hakstol. but I don't like him either.
I could be swayed in either direction depending on how this season shakes out.

Somehow I knew you would feel this way

 

[Striiker]

I don't hate Hakstol. but I don't like him either.
I could be swayed in either direction depending on how this season shakes out.

I don't really have super strong feelings about him either, positive or negative. I think he does some really stupid ****, but all coaches do.

That said, if he benches Weal all year long I'll get his face tattooed across my entire back. It'll be Mount Rushmore, but all four faces are Hakstol.

 

[Starat327]

I do think we all underestimate Hextall's influence. There's a tendency to see the coach and GM as oppositional figures (Lavi v Holmgren), but Hextall had to convince Hakstol to take the job, and gave him a 5 year contract in the top 10 of coaching salaries, so there must have been mutual agreement on what they wanted to accomplish long-term.

Hextall has full power over the organization it seems, and I think he is doing more than merely running the draft and making final roster decisions.

Hextall seems to have a well thought out philosophy he wants to implement, from culture to scheme to personnel. So while I don't think he micromanages Hakstol, I do think he frequently talks with Hakstol (and Gordon) in terms of what kind of scheme he wants (I presume he hired Hakstol both to work with young players and install an aggressive scheme) and how players should be used.

So when a player gets moved it's probably more Hextall and Hakstol agreeing that he doesn't fit what they want to do moving forward than Hakstol asking Hextall to get rid of so and so. Hextall was the one who got PEB and kept VdV on the roster before Hakstol arrived, so he must have seen value in them, probably as low cost "bridge" players when he was dealing with a cap strapped roster. And when he had money and opportunity, he got rid of them (along with a bunch of other marginal talents over the last few years).

The only way Hakstol could be comfortable with this arrangement is that he was hired for the long-term, with the understanding that Hextall was not going to get him the players he needed to compete his first couple years. So the odds are he'll really have to fall on his face to get fired, because he's doing what Hextall asked him to do when he hired Hakstol.

I also think Hextall is on board with a lot of Hakstol's decisions, like benching Ghost and Konecny, Hextall is the one who exiled Laughton to the AHL. Hextall is a bit "old school" (and highly competitive) in that he wants two-way players, and he may be encouraging both Hakstol and Gordon to "sit" on young offensive players who want to skimp on their defensive responsibilities. Heck, he's a former goalie, do you think he likes "offensive only" players who leave their goalie out on an island?

This isn't soccer, where teams go out to find players that suit a coach's ideology. Coach's come up with an ideology that fits the players they have, because of cap and the rather minimal player transactions that occur.

HAkstol cant adapt, and he cant get the players to do so. Players are to blame, for sure. But the coach is at least equally to blame, if not moreso, for not playing to available personnel's strengths.

 

[GhostOfVandeVelde]

Well, I think Dave Hakstol is a fine head coach.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Somehow I knew you would feel this way

it takes quite a bit for me to really hate someone. I have calmed down in recent years with that. I dont like **** bother me like I used to. Think we have discussed this before.

I don't really have super strong feelings about him either, positive or negative. I think he does some really stupid ****, but all coaches do.

That said, if he benches Weal all year long I'll get his face tattooed across my entire back. It'll be Mount Rushmore, but all four faces are Hakstol.

 

[Lotusflower]

Yes, let's choose the coach/scheme over our franchise center and winger. That sounds like a prudent organizational decision.

Im not on the fire Hak train as of yet and I agree that Giroux and Voracek have to get in gear but I cant see a reason why we would trade players of this caliber because they dont fit the system.

Systems, schemes, and team concepts come and go but its talent that executes and powers them. You trade G and V if you feel like you can get great value for them which sets you up better to compete down the road not because you have a rigid concept in mind and they dont fit.

 

[NYCFlyer]

This isn't soccer, where teams go out to find players that suit a coach's ideology. Coach's come up with an ideology that fits the players they have, because of cap and the rather minimal player transactions that occur.

HAkstol cant adapt, and he cant get the players to do so. Players are to blame, for sure. But the coach is at least equally to blame, if not moreso, for not playing to available personnel's strengths.

What coach could play to that D's strength. There is no debate whether he tried to adapt a system to the personnel by starting the season trying to run and gun and then switching to full on lock down. Toward the end of the season he modified agan and the team finally played a little better but our personnel just wasn't that good.