Fire Hakstol

[Hakroach]

He always makes things worse than they need to be. Every single time. What the opposite of the word optimize is should be on Hakstols business card.

You can't spell "Hakstol" without "incoherent mess".

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Even worse is that he could have easily gotten Hagg back in for Manning and made the D pairs work.

Provorov - Gudas (has NEVER been tried once despite conventional wisdom suggesting it would make a heck of a shutdown pair)

Sanheim - MacDonald (Actually played well together with Sanheim dragging up MacDonalds metrics)

Ghost - Hagg (not my favorite partner for Ghost because he has tunnel vision and doesn't get Shayne the puck but it's work as a 3rd pair)

Instead we got..

Provorov - MacDonald (Farmer drags Provy down every time)
Manning - Gudas (GOD ****ING AWFUL)
Ghost - Hagg (see above)

He always makes things worse than they need to be. Every single time. What the opposite of the word optimize is should be on Hakstols business card.

"instead of trying something. we just lived for the next shift"..

that should be on his tombstone...

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

Easily was and that why the coach made the change.

Just wasn't good enough. You need to make the save when your team needs you the most.

 

[Striiker]

Not in the playoffs, as we saw.
Our best line was Laughton - Couts - Simmonds.

Wrong.

In the playoffs we saw that Raffl being heavy meant nothing.

Konecny to the top line was the correct move but never tried.

And that line worked for one game and it was when they weren’t against Crosby and Malkin was out injured.

 

[deadhead]

And any line with Ghost and Voracek struggled, Ghost struggled even against the Pen's checking line.
What the Laughton - Couts - Simmonds line showed was the value of three lines, and one that was "heavy," to set up better matchups in the playoffs.

Which is why I think the #1 priority this offseason, if Ron doesn't deem Frost ready, is to upgrade 3C and field a real 3rd line next year. Which is why I want Laughton at LW.

With a solid 3rd line, you can keep the top six intact.

4th line can just have three guys who can skate and check (no Leier) and if they score, it's a bonus. Next year they'll only be playing 8 ES minutes a night.

Down the road, when you add Frost and a few other young forwards, you can mix and match against different opponents, love to see something like Ratcliffe - Frost - TK/Laczynski as a speed line option against teams like TB. Lindblom - Patrick - Allison as a "heavy" line. Sushko - Rubtsov - NAK as a speedy checking line. When you have 10-11 top 9 quality forwards (like 2011-12) you can dictate matchups with lines with different skills.

 

[Striiker]

What that line showed is what a big difference it is to not be matched against Crosby.

 

[hatcher]

Wrong.

In the playoffs we saw that Raffl being heavy meant nothing.

Konecny to the top line was the correct move but never tried.

And that line worked for one game and it was when they weren’t against Crosby and Malkin was out injured.

Raffl heavy hahaha. Your a good man striker but raffl if a soft players who does f*** all good but his line mates were worse considering they were are top two players.

 

[Tripod]

Raffl was a desperation move because that line struggled to match up physically with the Crosby line and they had no viable 3rd line.

Sigh.....why bother lying again?

That line(G, Couts and TK) NEVER GOT THE CHANCE TO PLAY AGAINST THE CROSBY LINE IN THE PLAYOFFS before it was broken up. It was broken up at teh end of the regular season.

You can be a good poster, no need to post blatent lies. And as before, you WILL be called out on them when you do it.

Hakstol made the change, and stuck with it despite losing the match up until Couts got hurt. And yes, once Couts got away from going against Sid...and Malkin, his line did well.

You know what ALSO could have been an option...take that small 185 lb Giroux 185 that you said can't win a board battle, and protect him as the #3C behind those other 2 big centers who could focus on shutting down Sid and Malkin. You know...what you think Frost could do next year....instead do it with an All Star.

 

[Rebels57]

Sigh.....why bother lying again?

That line(G, Couts and TK) NEVER GOT THE CHANCE TO PLAY AGAINST THE CROSBY LINE IN THE PLAYOFFS before it was broken up. It was broken up at teh end of the regular season.

You can be a good poster, no need to post blatent lies. And as before, you WILL be called out on them when you do it.

Hakstol made the change, and stuck with it despite losing the match up until Couts got hurt. And yes, once Couts got away from going against Sid...and Malkin, his line did well.

You know what ALSO could have been an option...take that small 185 lb Giroux 185 that you said can't win a board battle, and protect him as the #3C behind those other 2 big centers who could focus on shutting down Sid and Malkin. You know...what you think Frost could do next year....instead do it with an All Star.

Having Konecny on that line would have likely meant Crosby spending more time defending in his zone instead of feasting on our defense in our zone. That line dominated top lines the entire 2nd half of the season, including the Bergeron line in the 4th to last game of the season.

 

[deadhead]

Shuffle the lines all you want, we didn't have the horses in the top 9 when Lindblom couldn't handle playoff competition. He's not the only rookie who was MIA in the playoffs, it's tough to handle playoff intensity.
Raffl wasn't an answer, Simmonds was hobbled, moving up Laughton helped, but that meant Weise on the 4th line.
Filppula actually played better than the regular season, but not much left, and Patrick tried, but wasn't ready for those kinds of matchups.

It comes down to talent, when you have enough talent you can mix and match, when you don't, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul.

And it wasn't like TK was guaranteed to be the same player on the 1st line in the playoffs that he was in the regular season, you can hope, but this was his first playoff and he certainly didn't stand out. I would have left him there, but I understand the move - if you can make it work with Raffl like it had in the past you might be able to put three decent lines out there - if not, you're going to have a glaring mismatch for 15 minutes every night.

It's all part of the learning curve, a lot of young players found out why playoffs are different than regular season, Sixers going through the same process.

But it's also why this nonsense that some hypothetical coach would have made a difference is silly, unless that coach could bring along a top nine forward and an above average goalie with him, our chances were slim and none.

 

[Tripod]

Raffl heavy hahaha. Your a good man striker but raffl if a soft players who does **** all good but his line mates were worse considering they were are top two players.

The "heavy" part was that is what HAKSTOL said as to why he put Raffl on the top line...to be more heavy.

All he ended up doing was break up arguably the top line since X-Mas.

Hak logic.

 

[Tripod]

Shuffle the lines all you want, we didn't have the horses in the top 9 when Lindblom couldn't handle playoff competition. He's not the only rookie who was MIA in the playoffs, it's tough to handle playoff intensity.
Raffl wasn't an answer, Simmonds was hobbled, moving up Laughton helped, but that meant Weise on the 4th line.
Filppula actually played better than the regular season, but not much left, and Patrick tried, but wasn't ready for those kinds of matchups.

It comes down to talent, when you have enough talent you can mix and match, when you don't, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul.

And it wasn't like TK was guaranteed to be the same player on the 1st line in the playoffs that he was in the regular season, you can hope, but this was his first playoff and he certainly didn't stand out. I would have left him there, but I understand the move - if you can make it work with Raffl like it had in the past you might be able to put three decent lines out there - if not, you're going to have a glaring mismatch for 15 minutes every night.

It's all part of the learning curve, a lot of young players found out why playoffs are different than regular season, Sixers going through the same process.

But it's also why this nonsense that some hypothetical coach would have made a difference is silly, unless that coach could bring along a top nine forward and an above average goalie with him, our chances were slim and none.

So to recap....no apology for lying.

And Hak made a bad lineup decision breakup up a top line, that even you didn't agree with yet you refuse to blame him for that move and instead blame it on the players.

Do you see why people say you are a Hak apologist?

What id he left that line in and it DID compete against Sid head to head and won the battle? Would that make a difference? It's just f***ing stupid that it never even got the CHANCE. A stupid decision that your boy made.

But keep defending his moves and blame the players.

 

[Rebels57]

The "heavy" part was that is what HAKSTOL said as to why he put Raffl on the top line...to be more heavy.

All he ended up doing was break up arguably the top line since X-Mas.

Hak logic.

Yep. He specifically said he wanted that to be a heavy grinding line. Unfathomable stupidity.

 

[deadhead]

No, I understand taking a chance when you have no good choices.

Had the first line been left intact, it's unlikely it would have played that much better, that's wishful thinking given that Giroux - Couts didn't exactly hold their own. TK right now can't carry a line, he's a complementary player.
And your third line would have been that much weaker, as your second line became when Lindblom showed he wasn't ready.

I don't agree with every move any coach makes, but usually there's a reasonable explanation - the Flyers were softer and slower than the Pens, Hak couldn't make them faster, he could make them "heavier." Wasn't going to work, but face it, any combination, give the limited options, wasn't going to work.

Just because something is reasonable doesn't make it optimal, but it means it wasn't foolish either.

 

[Tripod]

Breaking up the the best ES scoring line from X-Mas onward is bullshit....yet here you are defending the move.

Hak can't make them faster...oh wait...he could play faster guys like TK more. Instead he played him less.

What does he have to do for you to say, "what a dumb f***ing move"

 

[Striiker]

Raffl heavy hahaha. Your a good man striker but raffl if a soft players who does **** all good but his line mates were worse considering they were are top two players.

I’m just repeating Hakstols words. He said Raffl was put on the top line to make the line “heavier”.

And I’m not even going to get into the star player thing with you again. I’m doing my best to let you rant about them without pulling my hair out and yelling at you every time.

 

[hatcher]

I’m just repeating Hakstols words. He said Raffl was put on the top line to make the line “heavier”.

And I’m not even going to get into the star player thing with you again. I’m doing my best to let you rant about them without pulling my hair out and yelling at you every time.

Hahahaha you know we're good bro.

 

[Striiker]

Hahahaha you know we're good bro.

That’s why I’m trying so hard

But you still give me chest pains

 

[BrindamoursNose]

Breaking up the the best ES scoring line from X-Mas onward is bull****....yet here you are defending the move.

Hak can't make them faster...oh wait...he could play faster guys like TK more. Instead he played him less.

What does he have to do for you to say, "what a dumb ****ing move"

You know, I'll start off by saying I'm not a Hak fan. I'm a staunch Hexy fan, but don't care for Hak at all.

I do have to say though: I understand the logic behind moving Konecny, while also not understanding it.

Once Konecny became a top scorer this year, I think Hak decided to utilize him in a role where he'd hopefully carry the line -- give him a chance to become a star away from G and Coots. This makes sense because it'd provide MUCH needed balance in the top 3 lines..IF it worked (which it didn't).

However of course, the obvious of "Why ruin a GREAT thing?!??" also weighs on me.

If it had worked, Hak would've been a genius. But it didn't, so he is an idiot.

This is one of those odd times where I can't blame Hak too much for the logic of the move despite the results blowing so hard. In a perfect world: he would've switched Konecny back after a few games of it not working.

Cest la vie. Hopefully he learns moving forward.

 

[Starat327]

Breaking up the the best ES scoring line from X-Mas onward is bull****....yet here you are defending the move.

Hak can't make them faster...oh wait...he could play faster guys like TK more. Instead he played him less.

What does he have to do for you to say, "what a dumb ****ing move"

You're wrong Tri. He could've sent them all down to the AHL for 18 games. They'd have come back like beasts, like Sanheim did.

 

[Tripod]

You know, I'll start off by saying I'm not a Hak fan. I'm a staunch Hexy fan, but don't care for Hak at all.

I do have to say though: I understand the logic behind moving Konecny, while also not understanding it.

Once Konecny became a top scorer this year, I think Hak decided to utilize him in a role where he'd hopefully carry the line -- give him a chance to become a star away from G and Coots. This makes sense because it'd provide MUCH needed balance in the top 3 lines..IF it worked (which it didn't).

However of course, the obvious of "Why ruin a GREAT thing?!??" also weighs on me.

If it had worked, Hak would've been a genius. But it didn't, so he is an idiot.

This is one of those odd times where I can't blame Hak too much for the logic of the move despite the results blowing so hard. In a perfect world: he would've switched Konecny back after a few games of it not working.

Cest la vie. Hopefully he learns moving forward.

I have said it before, Haks biggest issue is he can't adapt quickly, and he gets in his own way.

This is the perfect example.

 

[Travat]

Raffl was a desperation move because that line struggled to match up physically with the Crosby line and they had no viable 3rd line.

Coaching is much easier when you're fitting 10 top 9 forwards (Lavi) into the top 3 lines than 7 top 9 forwards (Hakstol).

Which is why a veteran 3C is crucial next year if Frost isn't deemed ready, then Laughton at LW and Simmonds at RW gives you a viable 3rd line, Vorobyev can remain in LHV to start the season, and you put 3 skaters who can hit on the 3rd line, Raffl, Bardreau, NAK, MV (if you want an offensive center), Knight, free agent/trade.

Raffl and Filppula in the top 9, and Weal and Lindblom in the playoffs was too much dead weight.
Hopefully Lindblom will take a step up, Raffl will be on the 4th line and Filppula and Weal will have new addresses.

You say Raffl was a "desperation move" that clearly wasn't working and the Flyers needed scoring in the series for the most part, yet Hak would not put TK back with G and Couts during the entire series, not even for a period, looked to me like Hak's ego took over!

 

[Striiker]

Raffl was put on the top line before the playoffs even started, so it was clearly not a ”desperation move”.

Hakstol just likes to ruin good things.

The only desperation was Hakstol desperately trying to kill the teams offense.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I didn't like taking Konecny away from Couturier and Giroux.

I understood the thought process -- the team is thin on scoring depth and the coach wanted each line to be a threat to score -- but I'd rather rely on my best players and let them play together as opposed to watering everything down.

 

[Harhis]

I didn't like taking Konecny away from Couturier and Giroux.

I understood the thought process -- the team is thin on scoring depth and the coach wanted each line to be a threat to score -- but I'd rather rely on my best players and let them play together as opposed to watering everything down.

Makes no sense trying to play the depth game against pens who have one of the deepest forward groups of the league.