About Hakstol
- Thread starter VoiceOfTheFlyers
- Start date
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
no offense to any of you but if some of you were the GM we would probably go thru about 20 coaches a year 
Foggy14
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2017
- 1,902
- 5,735
no offense to any of you but if some of you were the GM we would probably go thru about 20 coaches a year
No way ... 16, max.
kelmitchell
Registered User
I thought lavi needed a longer leash....the only 2 coaches i wanted gone so fast is berube and haktard! Lol i didnt even want berube to coach at all let alone be an assistant coach/ hc.no offense to any of you but if some of you were the GM we would probably go thru about 20 coaches a year
However i gave haktard a chance and hes failed miserably in my opinion, so yes some may want to fire a lot of coaches but not me....but i really hate and hak and wish hed f*** off and go back to the cornfields
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
I think honestly unless this season completely goes off the rails Hak will be here for the season. So we are probably going to be a lot of angry around here. I don't hate Hak. Do I think he is a good coach? No. But I hated Berube. I haven't reached that level with Hakstol.
I am not convinced that Chuck is the answer either as HC. He came here as an assistant with zero NHL coaching experience. Like Hak.
Striiker
Earthquake Survivor
If the season goes to shit it'll be blamed on the players for sure, even if it's clearly Hakstols fault.
deadhead
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2014
- 49,215
- 21,617
Hakstol isn't getting fired on something as minor as that challenge.
And he's unlikely to get fired before the end of the season.
My expectations is the Flyers will get 40-45 points the first half of the season, then 50-55 points the second half.
If the Flyers don't show significant improvement, especially the younger players, then Hakstol might get canned.
But if they miss the playoffs b/c the goalies suck, that won't be held against him (Hextall's fault).
Half of this roster has less than 3 years experience, so Hakstol's real job is to bring these kids along.
If a veteran or two is unhappy, Hextall will be happy to find them new addresses.
And he's unlikely to get fired before the end of the season.
My expectations is the Flyers will get 40-45 points the first half of the season, then 50-55 points the second half.
If the Flyers don't show significant improvement, especially the younger players, then Hakstol might get canned.
But if they miss the playoffs b/c the goalies suck, that won't be held against him (Hextall's fault).
Half of this roster has less than 3 years experience, so Hakstol's real job is to bring these kids along.
If a veteran or two is unhappy, Hextall will be happy to find them new addresses.
Embiid
Off IR for now
AHA! Hextall settled for a mediocre goalie in Elliott and injury proned goalie in Neuvy as scapegoats to keep Hak for another season....
Captain Dave Poulin
Imaginary Cat
I'm worried that because Hakstok coached Brett, nothing will be held against him and he will be our (awful) coach in perpetuity. I'm only being about 99% serious, so don't get your panties in a bunch. Love you, Hexy! I'm going to get a life soon, don't worry.
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
AHA! Hextall settled for a mediocre goalie in Elliott and injury proned goalie in Neuvy as scapegoats to keep Hak for another season....
disagree, Elliot is Mason's equal. whether or not you want to consider both mediocre or not.
Elliot came here willingly knowing there could be a platoon situation. Something Mason was not willing to accept. Now early indications are that may very well be the case in Winnipeg.
deadhead
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2014
- 49,215
- 21,617
Hextall is here to win a cup(s), not to build a team to sneak into the playoffs.
So his focus the next two years (when 2/3 of the team will have 3 or fewer years of experience), will be on player development.
If players develop as expected, Hextall will get a shot at coaching them deep into the playoffs, only then will he be fired over team performance.
In the short-term if players don't develop as expected, he'll be fired over his failure to accomplish what he was hired to do, lay the foundation for a winning team.
So his focus the next two years (when 2/3 of the team will have 3 or fewer years of experience), will be on player development.
If players develop as expected, Hextall will get a shot at coaching them deep into the playoffs, only then will he be fired over team performance.
In the short-term if players don't develop as expected, he'll be fired over his failure to accomplish what he was hired to do, lay the foundation for a winning team.
joez86
Registered User
- Jan 20, 2006
- 1,103
- 74
It's funny how everyone wants to throw Hakstol under the bus here based on a failed offside challenge.
If they would've won that game, how many would give him any credit for the 3-1 start?
It's comical how some can ONLY be critical of the coach. It's even more comical than the guys who only ever see a problem with the players.
That game was lost 75% on the backs of the refs, 15% on the backs of the coaching staff (the challenge) and 10% on the players who couldn't close out the game despite the other 90% of fail.
If they would've won that game, how many would give him any credit for the 3-1 start?
It's comical how some can ONLY be critical of the coach. It's even more comical than the guys who only ever see a problem with the players.
That game was lost 75% on the backs of the refs, 15% on the backs of the coaching staff (the challenge) and 10% on the players who couldn't close out the game despite the other 90% of fail.
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
The last time we fired a coach a handful of games into a season and promoted an assistant we got Berube.
Berube was objectively worse.
Let's not do a Berube again please.
CanadianFlyer88
Knublin' PPs
75% on the refs and you're calling out those who are hard on Hak?
The Weise penalty was a joke, especially since the Preds weren't called for a coincidental penalty, but reffing did not cost the Flyers 1 or 2 points.
It's mainly on the players, Elliot in particular, who couldn't hold down the fort after scoring the 5th goal.
However, Hak's decision to challenge that potential offside was as dumb a move you can make in that situation, knowing that if you're wrong you're going right back to killing a 5-on-3 with the new penalty extending into OT if you survive regulation. No awareness whatsoever to the circumstances.
Striiker
Earthquake Survivor
Credit for the 3-1 start?
How many goals did he score? Saves? Odd man rushes stopped? Zone clears?
Coaches don't win games, players do. Best case scenario is the coach puts the players in a position to succeed and then gets out of their way. This one doesn't, so giving him credit for wins makes no sense.
Winston Wolf
Registered User
I try to keep a level head, but I've wanted Hakstol gone since Game 3 against the Capitals. I've been through some embarrassing stuff as a Flyers' fan, but that game takes the cake. I didn't need to see anything else to know that he wasn't an NHL caliber coach.
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
agreed. hot knives across my eyelids sounds like more fun than a Berube coached team
which makes you wonder if they would of fired Lavy and hired Berube if the Flyers lose that SO in the last game of the season to the Rangers in 2010.
ugh, why did that thought even come across my mind. ack.
deadhead
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2014
- 49,215
- 21,617
As far as last season:
Giroux and Ghost had subpar seasons due to injury
Couts missed 15 games
And the depth was awful, here's where half the team ended up:
Schenn, good start in St Louis
PEB - same role in LV, 11 minute a night
Cousins - played in 3 games, o points, -2, 13 minutes a night
VdV - out of the NHL
Luby - KHL
Read - AHL
Streit - waived
Schultz - out of the NHL
MDZ - Vancouver, 3g, 0 points, -4
Mason, benched, 2 awful games to start the season
So what coach could have taken that mess of a roster to the playoffs?
Giroux and Ghost had subpar seasons due to injury
Couts missed 15 games
And the depth was awful, here's where half the team ended up:
Schenn, good start in St Louis
PEB - same role in LV, 11 minute a night
Cousins - played in 3 games, o points, -2, 13 minutes a night
VdV - out of the NHL
Luby - KHL
Read - AHL
Streit - waived
Schultz - out of the NHL
MDZ - Vancouver, 3g, 0 points, -4
Mason, benched, 2 awful games to start the season
So what coach could have taken that mess of a roster to the playoffs?
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
going by how much Ranger fans hate his roster decisions I dont think he would be well received around here.
Captain Dave Poulin
Imaginary Cat
He wouldn't be much of an improvement, really, I guess, which is pretty sad lol.
Captain Dave Poulin
Imaginary Cat
I'm usually not someone who criticizes coaches over single in-game decisions but calling the challenge "minor" is absurd. It clearly illustrates a fundamental problem with this administration and should be worrying to everyone.
The league clearly has stated that the rule is there to eliminate almost all offsides challenges. This is something the coach should understand. It was also a terrible spot to risk a penalty. What Hakstol did is as bad or worse than MacDonald's play that was penalized.
It also illustrates that Hakstol does not have a firm grasp on risk-reward evaluations or being able to properly analyze the state of the team and game situation. The last thing his beleaguered goalie and PK units needed was to be put in another 5-3.
Furthermore, if Hakstol is here to "bring along the young players,' he is clearly failing at that. He's putting a guy who is 31 and objectively one of the worst players in the league in a priority role for no apparent reason. One of the original narratives surrounding MacDonald when he first came to the Flyers was that the Islanders used him too much, and just maybe, if given a limited role, he would be more "effective."
The league clearly has stated that the rule is there to eliminate almost all offsides challenges. This is something the coach should understand. It was also a terrible spot to risk a penalty. What Hakstol did is as bad or worse than MacDonald's play that was penalized.
It also illustrates that Hakstol does not have a firm grasp on risk-reward evaluations or being able to properly analyze the state of the team and game situation. The last thing his beleaguered goalie and PK units needed was to be put in another 5-3.
Furthermore, if Hakstol is here to "bring along the young players,' he is clearly failing at that. He's putting a guy who is 31 and objectively one of the worst players in the league in a priority role for no apparent reason. One of the original narratives surrounding MacDonald when he first came to the Flyers was that the Islanders used him too much, and just maybe, if given a limited role, he would be more "effective."
