Confirmed with Link: The new coach of the Philadelphia Flyers is John Tortorella

[VladDrag]

Since there is a lot of Tocchet talk here, make of this what you will.

I like what he said, apart from saying you can win in the NHL with any system, because you can't. You can win with a variety of systems, but not any system.

 

[Curufinwe]

Just think, our heir apparent GM Briere was actually on the team with Lappy when he blocked those two shots with his face. He's going to be a part of this organization for many more years.

Briere is a competitor, though. He actually wants to win, which won't happen with a charity case as coach.

 

[Rebels57]

Briere is a competitor, though. He actually wants to win, which won't happen with a charity case as coach.

Hope you're right. Lappy has been able to fool a lot of different people the last 10 years.

 

[deadhead]

His personality makes things interesting while he also is a very good hockey coach.

Most of his players respect him, even if they don't always see eye-to-eye. Fact is, a lot of players need the tough love, even if they don't like it in the moment.

His style of play still wins. People think of Tampa as a freewheeling team, and that is completely wrong. They won the Cup last season with stifling defense.

Dino HCs like Torts often get a one to two year bounce, then they wear off on their players who stop listening, this happened to AV, it's happened to Gallant twice (given him 2+ years in NY before it happens again), and so on. Even Trotz has worn thin on the Island.

Look at the HCs with long successful tenures: Sullivan, Bednar, Brind'Amour, Cassidy, Cooper.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Personality generally doesn't mean shit. He may be outward and candid, but that doesn't mean he's a good coach.

At this point, I'm not sure if that many people have respect for him. More like he demands respect and acts like he gets it.

He last won a cup in 2004 and while he got some wins out of his teams, I think this will end up just like AV. His ego will take over and people will want to be traded. Just look at the shit with AV and Jake.

Also, this team is not built for the kind of team he wants to put together, which is generally defense first. If I wanted defense first, I'd rather go for Trotz or Lambert.

Personality means something to me as a fan.

Having a coach with Tortorella’s fiery personality is more fun.

And he’s a good coach who has had substantial success with non-elite teams.

But I’m sure some fans see it differently, & don’t want him because he might dare say something critical about one of their favorite players.

In reality, I doubt the Flyers will hire Tortorella, out of fear he might not connect with all of the young players they have. And maybe that’s a legitimate concern.

But man it seems like he’d be a great fit for the city & a great way to re-instill a team identity.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Dino HCs like Torts often get a one to two year bounce, then they wear off on their players who stop listening, this happened to AV, it's happened to Gallant twice (given him 2+ years in NY before it happens again), and so on. Even Trotz has worn thin on the Island.

Look at the HCs with long successful tenures: Sullivan, Bednar, Brind'Amour, Cassidy, Cooper.

The HCs with long successful tenures with one team have had the best long-term rosters.

Without the rare luxury of coaching loaded rosters for long stretches, coaches have short shelf lives. It comes with the territory.

 

[TB87]

They’ll pick the least imaginative and disappointing choice among all of the available options.

This is the Flyers way of doing business (regrettably).

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Personality means something to me as a fan.

Having a coach with Tortorella’s fiery personality is more fun.

And he’s a good coach who has had substantial success with non-elite teams.

But I’m sure some fans see it differently, & don’t want him because he might dare say something critical about one of their favorite players.

In reality, I doubt the Flyers will hire Tortorella, out of fear he might not connect with all of the young players they have. And maybe that’s a legitimate concern.

But man it seems like he’d be a great fit for the city & a great way to re-instill a team identity.

Considering where the Flyers are, team identity means so much less compared to actually being a properly functioning hockey team. Even middle of the standings for this team next year would be an improvement and you go from there. We don't need a culture or an identity, we need results and a showing that we have management that allows for our team to be fun, creative, entertaining and of course, capable of winning. There's a lot to fix with this team, and identity should be low on that list. If anything identity comes later after we and the league know what kind of team we are. If you go in with the identity in mind rather than fixing what needs to be fixed, we'll be right back to where we started.

 

[Curufinwe]

Damn straight.

If you want a Culture Club, hire Boy George.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Considering where the Flyers are, team identity means so much less compared to actually being a properly functioning hockey team. Even middle of the standings for this team next year would be an improvement and you go from there. We don't need a culture or an identity, we need results and a showing that we have management that allows for our team to be fun, creative, entertaining and of course, capable of winning. There's a lot to fix with this team, and identity should be low on that list. If anything identity comes later after we and the league know what kind of team we are. If you go in with the identity in mind rather than fixing what needs to be fixed, we'll be right back to where we started.

Identity comes with doing the difficult things you don’t want to do, & doing them consistently. And ultimately taking pride in it.

The disjointed Flyers have a major problem in this area, & the solution isn’t to have them freewheel even more. They need to be re-coached from the ground up.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Identity comes with doing the difficult things you don’t want to do, & doing them consistently. And ultimately taking pride in it.

The disjointed Flyers have a major problem in this area, & the solution isn’t to have them freewheel even more. They need to be re-coached from the ground up.

Yes, they need a coach that will be able to work with each player and fix the overall problems of the team. As I said before, going in with an identity is a recipe for disaster and we'll be right back where we started. However, if you try to get the players and the systems fixed up and be more respectable, the identity will come with it.

Yes, we need a coaching change to get the players into a proper mind set and back into proper systems, but identity is not part of the base, identity is the outcome of the work in the end.

 

[deadhead]

The HCs with long successful tenures with one team have had the best long-term rosters.

Without the rare luxury of coaching loaded rosters for long stretches, coaches have short shelf lives. It comes with the territory.

One reason they have the best rosters is their ability to coach up and nurture young talent.
The "my way or the highway" guys burn out players and crush young players without confidence.
The younger, more modern HCs know how to deal with players, many have AHL HC experience where they learned to work with kids, and bring that patience and ability to listen to the NHL.

Good teams tend to have a mix of a few high draft picks, some other teams' failures and retreads, and later draft picks, waiver wire pickups and marginal players. The ability to elevate the play of "lesser talents" is one key to sustaining competitive advantage.

 

[trostol]

whoever it is...they will be complained about after the first period

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Flyers aren’t competing anytime soon, so I would take a chance on a coach that is great at developing young players. If he fails, the Flyers still suck anyway. Personally I think X’s and O’s Coaches are overrated in hockey. It’s more fluid than other sports, so great players will make things happen regardless. We all know it’s gonna be Torts though

 

[wasup]

Personality means something to me as a fan.

Having a coach with Tortorella’s fiery personality is more fun.

And he’s a good coach who has had substantial success with non-elite teams.

But I’m sure some fans see it differently, & don’t want him because he might dare say something critical about one of their favorite players.

In reality, I doubt the Flyers will hire Tortorella, out of fear he might not connect with all of the young players they have. And maybe that’s a legitimate concern.

But man it seems like he’d be a great fit for the city & a great way to re-instill a team identity.

You would not be able to attract any free agents and you would have players demanding trades like PLD . Bob would not resign there under any circumstance Parnin would not resign .

He is a pos and players hate him , he would completely wreck a team just like he did the last two teams he coached . You are just pissy the Flyers suck which is fine but hiring Torts just for his tantrums is no way to go .

 

[Ghosts Beer]

You would not be able to attract any free agents and you would have players demanding trades like PLD . Bob would not resign there under any circumstance Parnin would not resign .

He is a pos and players hate him , he would completely wreck a team just like he did the last two teams he coached . You are just pissy the Flyers suck which is fine but hiring Torts just for his tantrums is no way to go .

The UFA thing is a consideration, I’ll grant you that.

Bob is another in a long line of head case goalies. I’m not going to refuse to hire someone because Bobrovsky didn’t like him.

Panarin didn’t re-sign because he didn’t want to play in Columbus. He wasn’t re-signing regardless of the coach. Had his eyes on the Big Apple.

He didn’t “wreck” the Rangers or Columbus. He got the most he could out of both franchises & had success with non-elite rosters. In the end of both tenures the rosters were too bad to overcome.

Most players who played for Torts respect him. He’s not a POS. He’s just fiery, demanding, & blunt. Werenski, for example, said he loved Torts, even though Torts was hard on him. Atkinson is pro-Torts, as well.

Anyway, like I said, I think it’s moot because I doubt they’re hiring him. Especially if they plan to keep Hart, who would probably fold mentally under Tortorella.

My guess is you end up with Maurice or Montgomery.

 

[Magua]

Montgomery has coached a top PP for a few years in St. Louis. I can't help but feel Fletcher would weigh something like that heavily. Again, I'm not even saying he couldn't be good. But it's a lot of boxes Mr. Inside the Box can check with that hire.

You have really intriguing up and comers like Carbery and Warsofsky, but it's hard for me to picture a team that is bat shit crazy delusional with their short and long term vision taking that much of a risk. Someone like Montgomery is the middle ground between retread and developmental hire.

Since there is a lot of Tocchet talk here, make of this what you will.

I think this is a worthwhile example of the difference between a great assistant (like with the Penguins) and a great head coach. I don't doubt that Tocchet can be a good player's coach, and I'm not underestimating that part of the equation. But he just seems so woefully inadequate in the Xs and Os -- his Arizona teams played boring turgid hockey. I look at someone like Brind'Amour, and he's the gold standard of player's coach. I'm not sure he's individually some tactical savant, but he's so invested into the Canes way of business, surrounded by brilliant people, that it balances. If Rod spent his time bouncing from franchise to franchise, I'm not sure he's what he is today.

 

[GKJ]

Jim Montgomery would be the sweet spot between ‘someone people Voorhees know’ and ‘would be fine regardless of our direction’

 

[deadhead]

He didn’t “wreck” the Rangers or Columbus. He got the most he could out of both franchises & had success with non-elite rosters. In the end of both tenures the rosters were too bad to overcome.

Uh, AV did better with the same players and Lundqvist slowly declining.

Torts might get you a one or two year "jump," which basically means making the playoffs and losing in the 1st or 2nd rd, followed by a collapse as the veterans tune him out and the kids fail to develop.

 

[Rich Nixon]

Flyers aren’t competing anytime soon, so I would take a chance on a coach that is great at developing young players. If he fails, the Flyers still suck anyway. Personally I think X’s and O’s Coaches are overrated in hockey. It’s more fluid than other sports, so great players will make things happen regardless. We all know it’s gonna be Torts though

X's and O's in hockey are tricky, because no one is finding new ways to play the game. You have a handful of options, but the nature of the game and actions of your opponent end up melting them down to relatively basic concepts: You're either doing things that are aggressive or protective, in a handful of different flavors. You can't reinvent the hockey wheel, so to speak, it isn't like football where you can come up with innovative schemes or alter the pace of play dramatically or whatever. Like 99% of on-ice decisions are right in every system or wrong in every system.

Hockey is almost more about archetypes than systems. You're a low-event conservative team, you're a fast-flyin' offensive transition team, you're an offensive zone possession team/, you're PP-reliant, etc. What does matter is accountability and buy-in. If you're going to be a heavy forecheck team, then you've got to have every forward committing and cycling their pressure correctly on every shift...that sort of thing.

So you've got to figure out who you are and build the roster accordingly, and then find a coach who can enforce that ethos ruthlessly. Meaning there needs to be a cohesive vision from the top down that impacts the coach you hire and the players you fill the roster with. The Flyers tried to do that backwards with Vigneault—acquire a coach and rip up the team based on what he wanted—and ended up ass-awful.

Looking at what they have, it's hard to figure out what type of team you can build. Their players don't really fit into any consolidated buckets. Not a ton of high-skill guys. Not a ton of defensive savvy. No stalwart defenders or flashy transition guys. Certainly not a ton of speed. Their "youth movement" is a bunch of hard-working middle-6 wingers. Their defense is a shitshow.

Since the players are the ones who...play, you almost need a handful of guys to emerge to show you where you can go with things. Building blocks for the rest of the roster, guys who you know can be effective-to-dominant impact players if they have the right linemates and are allowed to play the game they're best at.

Basically, it all comes down from the President/GM to start molding the roster into something cohesive, so they're f***ed and they'll hire some idiot who also has no idea what to do with this jumble of NHLish Guys.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

X's and O's in hockey are tricky, because no one is finding new ways to play the game. You have a handful of options, but the nature of the game and actions of your opponent end up melting them down to relatively basic concepts: You're either doing things that are aggressive or protective, in a handful of different flavors. You can't reinvent the hockey wheel, so to speak, it isn't like football where you can come up with innovative schemes or alter the pace of play dramatically or whatever. Like 99% of on-ice decisions are right in every system or wrong in every system.

Hockey is almost more about archetypes than systems. You're a low-event conservative team, you're a fast-flyin' offensive transition team, you're an offensive zone possession team, etc. What does matter is accountability and buy-in. If you're going to be a heavy forecheck team, then you've got to have every forward committing and cycling their pressure correctly on every shift...that sort of thing.

So you've got to figure out who you are and build the roster accordingly, and then find a coach who can enforce that ethos ruthlessly. Meaning there needs to be a cohesive vision from the top down that impacts the coach you hire and the players you fill the roster with. The Flyers tried to do that backwards with Vigneault—acquire a coach and rip up the team based on what he wanted—and ended up ass-awful.

Looking at what they have, it's hard to figure out what type of team you can build. Their players don't really fit into any consolidated buckets. Not a ton of high-skill guys. Not a ton of defensive savvy. No stalwart defenders or flashy transition guys. Certainly not a ton of speed. Their "youth movement" is a bunch of hard-working middle-6 wingers. Their defense is a shitshow.

Basically, it all comes down from the President/GM to start molding the roster into something cohesive, so they're f***ed and they'll hire some idiot who also has no idea what to do with this jumble of NHLish Guys.

Nice reply. I feel the same way regarding systems but I think a lot of posters are in denial of a coaching change fixing everything. I see few high end players or prospects on the team. I’d be shocked if there is anyone in the system who could be 90+ point players. I realize points are everything but you need to score to win. Basically my theory regarding hockey coaches is:

(Insert worst coach ever) coaching the 70’s Candiens>>>(insert greatest coach ever) coaching the Flyers this year

I would love to be wrong and see a new coach turn it around in a couple years, but I think we don’t have the high end players to be a successful team. Farabee, Frost, Sanheim, etc are nice but every team has those types of players

 

[Rich Nixon]

Nice reply. I feel the same way regarding systems but I think a lot of posters are in denial of a coaching change fixing everything. I see few high end players or prospects on the team. I’d be shocked if there is anyone in the system who could be 90+ point players. I realize points are everything but you need to score to win. Basically my theory regarding hockey coaches is:

(Insert worst coach ever) coaching the 70’s Candiens>>>(insert greatest coach ever) coaching the Flyers this year

I would love to be wrong and see a new coach turn it around in a couple years, but I think we don’t have the high end players to be a successful team. Farabee, Frost, Sanheim, etc are nice but every team has those types of players

I don't think anyone's really in denial about that or thinks a coaching change covers up the heinous roster building they've done.

I think if they really want to compete (which they shouldn't) they should be gunning for major, major talent and then hiring a coach from there—both current and future talent. See if they can tear the dead weight out of the roster and go get their stupid Gaudreau, or hope the Oilers get embarrassed and decide it's time to swap Draisatl for a huge package. See if they can trade a current decent player for a high-potential youth. Use every draft pick on skill, even if there's high boom-bust probability. Basically, if they want a turnaround they need to swing repeatedly for massive talent and use that to center their approach and vision.

Otherwise, they should keep slapping crap out there, hire some moron retread, and hope they get that talent infusion from Bedard.

I agree though. I like Farabee, Frost, and Sanheim a lot. I like what I see in Brink. I think York could be pretty good. But none of those guys are centerpieces, they're just really good support.

The Flyers have almost always had some central star talent driving their success. Outside of the mid-late 80's, though you can argue Hextall was that guy and Kerr/Howe were up there, and maybe the Aging All-Star Brigade in 2004. This might be the first time they've looked around and gone "huh, who do we build this thing around?" There isn't an answer right now. Until they find The Guy or two, the coach doesn't change much, because they're still a visionless, identity-less glob of mediocre talent.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

I don't think anyone's really in denial about that or thinks a coaching change covers up the heinous roster building they've done.

I think if they really want to compete (which they shouldn't) they should be gunning for major, major talent and then hiring a coach from there—both current and future talent. See if they can tear the dead weight out of the roster and go get their stupid Gaudreau, or hope the Oilers get embarrassed and decide it's time to swap Draisatl for a huge package. See if they can trade a current decent player for a high-potential youth. Use every draft pick on skill, even if there's high boom-bust probability. Basically, if they want a turnaround they need to swing repeatedly for massive talent and use that to center their approach and vision.

Otherwise, they should keep slapping crap out there, hire some moron retread, and hope they get that talent infusion from Bedard.

I agree though. I like Farabee, Frost, and Sanheim a lot. I like what I see in Brink. I think York could be pretty good. But none of those guys are centerpieces, they're just really good support.

The Flyers have almost always had some central star talent driving their success. Outside of the mid-late 80's, though you can argue Hextall was that guy and Kerr/Howe were up there, and maybe the Aging All-Star Brigade in 2004. This might be the first time they've looked around and gone "huh, who do we build this thing around?" There isn't an answer right now. Until they find The Guy or two, the coach doesn't change much, because they're still a visionless, identity-less glob of mediocre talent.

Yeah it’s depressing because the outlook is bleak. Organization needs a major shakeup from the top down, and I don’t see Comc*st Scott doing anything if the money is still coming in.

It’s gross to say but id be in favor of the retread and slapping players out there. Tired of mediocrity. Would rather be bad and hopefully get that young centerpiece on an ELC, and then spend big money and get a coach that can win.

The Flyers really owe to their fans to go for it when the chance presents itself

 

[Larry44]

Going to return to Kevin Dineen as a potential coach who has paid his dues, had success and won a Cup as an Assistant to Quenneville. He is also a former Flyer captain, which should make the cronies happy (assuming they aren't all cleaned out).

Paul Maurice is also a good coach as well as being a former Flyer draft pick!

 

[swami24]

Hard no for Torts, that never changes for me. I really hope they go off script for an outside new approach, but........