Dave Hakstol

[deadhead]

This team the last three years has had a handful of players you'd want on a top playoff team:

Giroux, Voracek, Couts, Simmonds, B Schenn, TK (his second season), Raffl - 7 forwards but not all at the same time
Provorov, Ghost, Gudas?

Who else would you want on a playoff team if you were a GM?

Read, Laughton, White, Gagner, PEB, VdV, Cousins, Weal, Umberger, Weise, Filppula, Leier, Lehtera, Patrick (as an injured rookie)
MDZ, Schultz, Streit, MacDonald, L Schenn, Manning, Hagg

That's a lot of trash.
And let's not get started on the goalies!

 

[Striiker]

So then why did the coach overuse the trash soo much?

MacDonald, Manning, Hagg, Filppula, PEB, VDV.....

All SEVERELY overused.

He had better options. He chose the worse ones.

That means he's a bad coach. Simple.

 

[Audible Velvet]

This season's team has the potential to ice the deepest, most talented lineup we've seen in a while.
Please don't screw it up Jeff.

 

[deadhead]

That's your opinion.

I see someone making the playoffs twice in three years, with a team composed mostly of trash with a few "not ready for prime time" rookies.
"You are what you're record says you are" - given the lack of talent, the record is pretty good.

JUST WIN, BABY

 

[Adam Warlock]

That's your opinion.

I see someone making the playoffs twice in three years, with a team composed mostly of trash with a few "not ready for prime time" rookies.
"You are what you're record says you are" - given the lack of talent, the record is pretty good.

JUST WIN, BABY

Getting blown out by your biggest rival in round 1 of the playoffs doesn't exactly count as winning. At the end of the day the season was a failure.

 

[deadhead]

Talent wise the Penguins were >> than the Flyers.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Talent wise the Penguins were >> than the Flyers.

The disparity wasn't near as wide as the season and playoffs record.


But that's easily explained by the fact that the Penguins get the most out of our roster while Hakstol's horrific choices hold our roster back.

 

[Striiker]

That's your opinion.

I see someone making the playoffs twice in three years, with a team composed mostly of trash with a few "not ready for prime time" rookies.
"You are what you're record says you are" - given the lack of talent, the record is pretty good.

JUST WIN, BABY

Yeah, must have been because of the coach...

Or... you could watch games... and see why they actually made the playoffs...

 

[deadhead]

The disparity wasn't near as wide as the season and playoffs record.
But that's easily explained by the fact that the Penguins get the most out of our roster while Hakstol's horrific choices hold our roster back.

It can be explained by the Penguins having 9 solid forwards (including two HOF centers) with only Geuntzel (23) under 25, and no defensemen under 25.
The entire team had two SC runs under their belt.
The only area where the teams were even was goalie, because Murray had an awful season, and even then he was much better in the playoffs than our dreck.

Meanwhile our forwards were Couts, Giroux, Voracek, Patrick (19), TK (20), Lindblom (21), Filppula, Lehtera, Laughton, Weise.
Our defensemen were Ghost (24), Provorov (21), Gudas, Manning, MacDonald, Hagg, Sanheim (21)

So we basically had four reliable veterans who were 25 or over.
Penguins had more depth, more talent and more experience.
Other than that, it was a fair fight.

 

[Beef Invictus]

It can be explained by the Penguins having 9 solid forwards (including two HOF centers) with only Geuntzel (23) under 25, and no defensemen under 25.
The entire team had two SC runs under their belt.
The only area where the teams were even was goalie, because Murray had an awful season, and even then he was much better in the playoffs than our dreck.

Meanwhile our forwards were Couts, Giroux, Voracek, Patrick (19), TK (20), Lindblom (21), Filppula, Lehtera, Laughton, Weise.
Our defensemen were Ghost (24), Provorov (21), Gudas, Manning, MacDonald, Hagg, Sanheim (21)

So we basically had four reliable veterans who were 25 or over.
Penguins had more depth, more talent and more experience.
Other than that, it was a fair fight.

Actually, that doesn't explain it at all. Especially since you failed to account for our inferior coaching.


Would you say that a coach who purposefully chooses to play inferior players more than superior players is good?

 

[klutch]

 

[deadhead]

I'd say it's your opinion, and not a matter of fact.
Too many amateurs here putting forth their uneducated opinions as the final word on the matter.

"Inferior" is often situational, Filppula actually played better in the playoffs than the regular season (would he have held up over a 20 game run? Probably not, but for one series his experience had value), whereas Lindblom, a more talented player was MIA, and Patrick was meh. Young rosters usually struggle in the playoffs, no matter how talented, look at Toronto, and they brought in a half dozen veterans for just that reason.

Ghost did not play well, and that had more to do with Penguin depth, they could field bottom six wings with speed who could forecheck and harass him.

 

[Striiker]

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Actually, that doesn't explain it at all. Especially since you failed to account for our inferior coaching.


Would you say that a coach who purposefully chooses to play inferior players more than superior players is good?

still waiting for an answer to that question since last year huh...

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

I'm rooting for 105+ points, a 1st rd playoff win and a 5 year extension just to see this place melt down.
And if Hakstol wins a SC, I'm gonna rag you all until the end of time.

Not that I think they'll win one because of Hakstol, rather, he'll be playing the Trotz role, give me enough talent and eventually I'll win despite myself - like most SC winning HCs.

If you don't want Hakstol playing scrubs, it's up to Hextall to supply him with real NHL players.

But I can't hate him no matter how goofy the look, any coach who could take the sad sack team of the last three years to the playoffs twice is OK in my book - so they lost the first round? Uh, a much more talented Toronto team has done the same. And they have a real goalie.

I would gladly buy you a box full of pills if they could fix you.

 

[NYCFlyer]

Actually, that doesn't explain it at all. Especially since you failed to account for our inferior coaching.

Although DH left this out, I don't know how anyone could say that the Pens don't have one of the top three coaching staffs in the the league with a pair of Cups on their resume. Granted they have a couple of HOFers but they motivate well, gameplan well, adjust in game/series well, good feel for the use of goalies etc...real coach stuff.
Would you say that a coach who purposefully chooses to play inferior players more than superior players is good?

Thats your reason for wanting to get rid of the coach that finished third in the conference with crap goalies and a weak bottom six forward group and weak bottom four D. "He played bad players ahead of good ones" .You have no idea what is going on off the ice (Sanhiem) that may lead to benchings. what about keeping Lappy in his position despite an abysmal PK for years or the overuse of goalies or the failure to adjust in game when the initial gameplan isn't working ie consistently coming out flat and having to chase the game.

DH I appreciate how you try and support your positions even though I don't always agree. I wish those who want to discuss your opinions would do the same.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Thats your reason for wanting to get rid of the coach that finished third in the conference with crap goalies and a weak bottom six forward group and weak bottom four D. "He played bad players ahead of good ones" .You have no idea what is going on off the ice (Sanhiem) that may lead to benchings. what about keeping Lappy in his position despite an abysmal PK for years or the overuse of goalies or the failure to adjust in game when the initial gameplan isn't working ie consistently coming out flat and having to chase the game.

DH I appreciate how you try and support your positions even though I don't always agree. I wish those who want to discuss your opinions would do the same.

Yes, playing flagrantly worse players ahead of superior players is absolutely valid reason to fire a coach. It is disasterous roster management. All that matters is game results. He puts players with bad results ahead of players with better results.


It's hilarious you mention the goalie problems. Do you think his tendency to run netminders until they're injured might just aggravate the situation in net? Do you think it is good coaching to play Elliott like he's peak Luongo?

 

[Striiker]

Yeah, nobody has ever supported their position when arguing with him.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I'd say it's your opinion, and not a matter of fact.
Too many amateurs here putting forth their uneducated opinions as the final word on the matter.

"Inferior" is often situational, Filppula actually played better in the playoffs than the regular season (would he have held up over a 20 game run? Probably not, but for one series his experience had value), whereas Lindblom, a more talented player was MIA, and Patrick was meh. Young rosters usually struggle in the playoffs, no matter how talented, look at Toronto, and they brought in a half dozen veterans for just that reason.

Ghost did not play well, and that had more to do with Penguin depth, they could field bottom six wings with speed who could forecheck and harass him.

Flip played well in one game. One. He sucked after that.


It isn't my opinion. It is objective fact. Do you think that Raffl was better last year than TK?

 

[Audible Velvet]

Thats your reason for wanting to get rid of the coach that finished third in the conference with crap goalies and a weak bottom six forward group and weak bottom four D. "He played bad players ahead of good ones" .You have no idea what is going on off the ice (Sanhiem) that may lead to benchings. what about keeping Lappy in his position despite an abysmal PK for years or the overuse of goalies or the failure to adjust in game when the initial gameplan isn't working ie consistently coming out flat and having to chase the game.

DH I appreciate how you try and support your positions even though I don't always agree. I wish those who want to discuss your opinions would do the same.

I don't think you meant to type "third in the conference" and probably better to say the team finished where they did. Sorry to nitpick. Anyway, what people have been saying is that Jeff (or Dan) exacerbated the weak bottom 6 and 4 situations and I tend to agree with that.
As far as anything off ice as a reason to bench Sanheim for example, anyone care to speculate?
What could that possibly be to trump his obviously better on ice performance? Why was it such a (relatively) long lasting issue? Maybe I shouldn't even ask such questions.
Lappy should absolutely be on the hot seat as he's been the constant influence throughout the suckitude.

 

[Prongo]

I'd say it's your opinion, and not a matter of fact.
Too many amateurs here putting forth their uneducated opinions as the final word on the matter.

"Inferior" is often situational, Filppula actually played better in the playoffs than the regular season (would he have held up over a 20 game run? Probably not, but for one series his experience had value), whereas Lindblom, a more talented player was MIA, and Patrick was meh. Young rosters usually struggle in the playoffs, no matter how talented, look at Toronto, and they brought in a half dozen veterans for just that reason.

Ghost did not play well, and that had more to do with Penguin depth, they could field bottom six wings with speed who could forecheck and harass him.

No one else finding this irony funny?

 

[Striiker]

No one else finding this irony funny?

Don’t you worry, irony isn’t lost on us.

It’s just that if we pointed out every bit of hypocricy it’d be a full-time job.

 

[deadhead]

My opinions are opinions, the NHL isn't my area of expertise, nor is it for anyone posting on this board, as far as I know (any professional scouts here? Former NHL coaches?).

The whole playing worse players over better players comes down to two players, Sanheim and Laughton.
I don't think anyone really wants to suggest there's a rat's hair difference between playing Lehtera, Weise, Read, Leier, Weal, Manning, MacDonald, Hagg.

I think they're not happy with Sanheim's development, they love his potential, but compare to how they talk about Myers. He improved when he returned from the AHL, was overmatched in the NHL playoffs and watching Sanheim in the AHL playoffs didn't inspire confidence in him as a top 4 NHL defenseman. He needs to add strength and an edge to his game, even Ghost was more physical last year. We don't know what goes on behind the scenes. But there's something going on. And to me, it's not about "playing favorites" but frustration with a young player.

Laughton just isn't a NHL center, the athleticism is there, he's got decent size, speed, a good shot, but he lacks defensive instincts and is a below average playmaker. On a deeper team that wouldn't matter just give him 8 minutes a night on a 4th line energy group - but if he is our 3C this season we have problems. He should be at LW where he doesn't have as much responsibility - and Hextall will probably ship him out once the next wave of talent hits the beach. Laughton wasn't a player Ron would have drafted. He had good Corsi and bad GF-GA with EVERY line combination they used, so it's unlikely to be a coincidence. I think it reflects his aggression in the O-zone creating shot opportunities and his deficiencies in his D-zone leading to opposition scoring.

 

[hatcher]

Talent wise the Penguins were >> than the Flyers.

And work ethic wise. Rewatching all the games here and there it's worse the second time around. Hak coaches a 1-2-2 without the puck like Gallant and a low to high off the forecheck just like Gallant but 1 team made the finals with less players then the flyers I was told.

 

[Striiker]

Pure ignorance.

You're not going to trick anyone into believing this garbage, so I don't see the point in repeating it.