Post-Game Talk: ECQF 3 (Flyers lead series 2-1): FLYERS 1 vs. Canadiens 0, Sunday, Aug. 16, 2020

[Beef Invictus]

Out of curiosity, how would judge a coach's success or failure?

If that coach is making good decisions.

 

[flyersnorth]

The idea of being this risk averse is baffling to me. The Canadiens have a 4th round pick from 2016 currently playing 15 mins a night. But out first rounder from 2017 is clearly not ready.

To be fair, we would have a 5th round pick playing the same minutes. And hopefully we will again soon

 

[flyersnorth]

If that coach is making good decisions.

Ok. So that is important information to know when people are arguing about the coach. It already differs from @Starat327 though I suspect he was being facetious lol

But still not enough. How do you define "good decisions"?

 

[Starat327]

To be fair, we would have a 5th round pick playing the same minutes. And hopefully we will again soon

Sure. And if we had played Frost all season, as we should have, given we lost our presumed 2/3C to migraines at the beginning of the year, we wouldnt have wasted a 5th round pick on "he sucks, but at least we know he sucks". This so much not about "I want to see Frost play", and its 100% about "we called out all thjese little things that should have been done earlier in the season, and were told it wouldnt matter...except now it does".

 

[Psuhockey]

It's not just Flyers management.

It tends not to be the mindset of teams that succeed.

I wouldn’t go that far. You see a lot of teams add subpar vets at the deadline who end up winning it.

The one thing the Flyers have not done that a lot of teams who have won it do is accept a crappy season to let a lot of kids play at once. If they weren’t so concerned with just making the playoffs this year, Frost would have played the whole season. Same with Bunnaman,NAK and whoever else and the team would have been better for it now and in the future.

 

[Starat327]

Ok. So that is important information to know when people are arguing about the coach. It already differs from @Starat327 though I suspect he was being facetious lol

But still not enough. How do you define "good decisions"?

I was. And I agree with Beef, you have to analyze a coach's deciusions to understand if hes a good coach. If you just look at wins/losses and PO appearances, Dan Byslma is a modern day 90s babcock. There is no 'simple' measure of who a good coach is.

 

[Striiker]

Out of curiosity, how would judge a coach's success or failure?

If they do the best they can with what they've got.

Do they ice the best possible lineup?
Do they use each player in a way that makes sense?
Do they take advantage of the type of team they have?
Do they hold players accountable or do they play favorites?
Can they adapt to different situations?

Team results don't tell us how the coach did. Hypothetically, a coach with a 0-82 team could have done a better job than a coach who went 82-0, depending on what they had to work with.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Ok. So that is important information to know when people are arguing about the coach. It already differs from @Starat327 though I suspect he was being facetious lol

But still not enough. How do you define "good decisions"?

Decisions that put the team in position to win. Decisions that make winning easier.

Decisions that make winning harder qualify as bad coaching.

 

[flyersnorth]

Sure. And if we had played Frost all season, as we should have, given we lost our presumed 2/3C to migraines at the beginning of the year, we wouldnt have wasted a 5th round pick on "he sucks, but at least we know he sucks". This so much not about "I want to see Frost play", and its 100% about "we called out all thjese little things that should have been done earlier in the season, and were told it wouldnt matter...except now it does".

Yeah, maybe you're right. I'd love to see Frost too.

Would you agree that there are several different ways to win a Cup (or at least have playoff success)? As in, different approaches to different variables like deployment, roster decisions, schemes, gameplay adjustments, etc?

In other words, would you agree that it's possible to achieve similar outcomes with a different approach to those variables?

 

[flyerslducks]

I didn’t really think I could be this annoyed or disappointed after a win. Hart and a number of posts stole that game, as imo Montreal kind of outplayed the boys.

What I mean by that is their system catered more to creating chances where I feel as the Flyers simply tried to shut everything down. As a long term strategy, I’m not sure that’s a sustainable path to success.

They got butchered in game 2, but the pendulum swung extremely far toward conservative play.

same man, definitely haven't been that annoyed after a win. Which sucks because we should be talking more about how amazing hart, provorov, myers, and sanheim are.

 

[flyersnorth]

I was. And I agree with Beef, you have to analyze a coach's deciusions to understand if hes a good coach. If you just look at wins/losses and PO appearances, Dan Byslma is a modern day 90s babcock. There is no 'simple' measure of who a good coach is.

Absolutely. I agree that one measure of a coach's ability would be replicability. Can he be successful with different teams, different rosters, different challenges?

 

[Jtown]

Which is the fault of coachs considering we had 1 exhibition game and 3 round robin games to get him into a game.

Also, everyone expects Lindblom to jump in at some point after even longer off. Hockey is like riding a bike for these guys. Wouldn't be hard for him to get up to speed.

the difference is that lindblom before his cancer was our best 2 way winger and frost was a rookie who still hadn't found his footing.

 

[Starat327]

Yeah, maybe you're right. I'd love to see Frost too.

Would you agree that there are several different ways to win a Cup (or at least have playoff success)? As in, different approaches to different variables like deployment, roster decisions, schemes, gameplay adjustments, etc?

In other words, would you agree that it's possible to achieve similar outcomes with a different approach to those variables?

Of course. If there was only one way to the cup, every team would follow the same mindset and do the same thing.

What makes a good coach to me, is making decisions to adjust a gameplan when it isnt working. At this juncture, whatever gameplan AV and his assistants had isnt working. We're being outworked just about every period, we cant buy a PP goal if we wanted to, and out bottom 6 has no answer to the Canadiens game play. This would be a different story if we were going out there and dominating play, like we were in the RRs. But we arent, and if your gameplan is to "put your head down, work, and figure it out", then I think thats a terrible coaching directive.

 

[Striiker]

Decisions that put the team in position to win. Decisions that make winning easier.

Decisions that make winning harder qualify as bad coaching.

Hold on, you can't say that. We haven't had this question answered yet.

 

[Jtown]

Thanks for pointing out this massive failure on the part of coaching and management, it helps establish that these people are very fallible and might just be making a series of bad mistakes.


Frost can almost certainly come in and be better off Thompson off the bat, you don't seem to grasp how terribly he has been. He is threatening to unseat Stewart as worst player.

beef you want frost to come in as a 4th line center and take all the dzone faceoffs and matchup against the best centers from the other teams? That sounds like a nightmare scenario to put a rookie who is in no way up for that type of challenge.

 

[flyersnorth]

Decisions that put the team in position to win. Decisions that make winning easier.

Decisions that make winning harder qualify as bad coaching.

Ok, I agree with that. Obviously, the decisions a coach makes - across a range of areas that go way beyond the ice - are important to defining success.

Given that, would you say that AV was successful or unsuccessful in his decisions for the Flyers to end up with a 41-21-7 record (6th) and 5-1 in the playoffs so far?

Now, obviously, there is a LOT of subjectivity here. So maybe it's fairer to ask if he was largely successful or largely unsuccessful as a whole, in your view?

 

[flyerslducks]

hagg saw the most TOI with the 4th line..recipe for disaster. I actually thought hagg had a pretty decent game outside of a few blunders. He played the minutes he is supposed to be playing..around 13. Just don't have him out with the 4th line please.

 

[Starat327]

beef you want frost to come in as a 4th line center and take all the dzone faceoffs and matchup against the best centers from the other teams? That sounds like a nightmare scenario to put a rookie who is in no way up for that type of challenge.

Why are we assuming he has to take teams best players on? If he was played in games 1 and 2, we could have actively deployed him against the other teams bottom 6.

Why are we acting like things like "4th line" are static and cant be adjusted?

Also, we already know - or, should know, based on evidence weve gathered in 3 games - we dont want Thompson out there, and we continue to do that, so......

 

[Striiker]

hagg saw the most TOI with the 4th line..recipe for disaster. I actually thought hagg had a pretty decent game outside of a few blunders. He played the minutes he is supposed to be playing..around 13. Just don't have him out with the 4th line please.

edit: wrong stats

But I'm keeping this here.

 

[flyerslducks]

Ok, I agree with that. Obviously, the decisions a coach makes - across a range of areas that go way beyond the ice - are important to defining success.

Given that, would you say that AV was successful or unsuccessful in his decisions for the Flyers to end up with a 41-21-7 record (6th) and 5-1 in the playoffs so far?

Now, obviously, there is a LOT of subjectivity here. So maybe it's fairer to ask if he was largely successful or largely unsuccessful as a whole, in your view?

for having lindblom and patrick out...it has been ok. Can definitely be better with how he uses the players

 

[Striiker]

Why are we assuming he has to take teams best players on? If he was played in games 1 and 2, we could have actively deployed him against the other teams bottom 6.

Why are we acting like things like "4th line" are static and cant be adjusted?

Also, we already know - or, should know, based on evidence weve gathered in 3 games - we dont want Thompson out there, and we continue to do that, so......

Thompson only had 0:43 against Danault last night.

 

[Jtown]

This is exactly why I was trying to avoid specifics.

I do understand that it's a tricky because the specifics involved unquestionably matter, but I think we just disagree on a broad level as to whether both the front office and the coaching staff bear some responsibility in player outcomes. Now we'll never know the degrees without inside info and I don't particularly care what is said to the media, but I think it would be an extremely positive mindset for an org to have. Everyone likely made some mistakes when high profile guys flame out.

what mindset would that be?
At the professional level you will be surprised by how little development actually occurs. Development is an offseason thing that organizations have a clear hands off approach but do things like recommendations. I know an athlete after their first pro year was told what they needed to improve on and then given a phone number of a skill coach that would work on that neccessary skill .

Player unions in all sports have fought for less practice, more rest etc etc . So time spent with the team is garnered towards practice. If you think alain vigneault is working with nolan patrick and joel farabee after practice on their shot you are mistaken. Players have their mandatory organizational time , any time after that is up to the players. Player development is rapidly becoming a 1 sided affair

 

[flyerslducks]

All the 4th liners had better stats away from Hagg than with him.

For example...

Pitlick with Hagg
27.27 CF%
22.09 xGF%

Pitlick without Hagg
55.56 CF%
92.32 xGF%

He's just horrible. As I posted before...

but why is he even with the 4th line for so many minutes..AV obviously thought they were doing well and thats scary. Are you sure those numbers are right? I don't see pitlicks CF without hagg that high on natrual stat..

 

[Beef Invictus]

beef you want frost to come in as a 4th line center and take all the dzone faceoffs and matchup against the best centers from the other teams? That sounds like a nightmare scenario to put a rookie who is in no way up for that type of challenge.

Yes, I do, because he is better than Thompson.

We already have a nightmare scenario. Thompson is that nightmare. You aren't grasping how horrible he has been.

 

[Jtown]

Why are we assuming he has to take teams best players on? If he was played in games 1 and 2, we could have actively deployed him against the other teams bottom 6.

Why are we acting like things like "4th line" are static and cant be adjusted?

Also, we already know - or, should know, based on evidence weve gathered in 3 games - we dont want Thompson out there, and we continue to do that, so......

well first off why would you put out a frost line against the bottom 6 when you can put out the couturier line?