Funny how when a team is winning suddenly people think it's because of the coach. It's equally as stupid as people praising Hakstol when the Flyers were on fire in January and February.
In reality, it's just players having unsustainable years. If Vegas' coach was actually able to have this kind of effect on players then the Panthers would have done much better when he was there.
Anyone who has no patience only has themselves to blame. If you think this is taking too long then you had unrealistic expectations to start with.
How many times did they make the cup finals or win the cup?After just missing the Playoffs in his 1st season as coach, the Panthers had their best regular season in franchise history in Gallant's 2nd year as coach. They lost to the Islanders team in the 1st round but they did outplay them that series.
Florida Panthers hockey team statistics and history at hockeydb.com
He was fired 22 games into the following season with a record above .500 despite numerous significant injuries because of front-office meddling and drama.
He is a terrific coach.
How many times did they make the cup finals or win the cup?
Big looks like it wins again and it does in everything including this sport. Tampa should dismantle to from the sissy little boys.Gallant has done a good job in Vegas, but he got fired because he was an old fashioned coach who liked "veteranish" players over speed youngsters.
Now in Vegas, he has a whole team of veterans and only has to play two kids (under 25). And a bunch of big veterans.
In other words, the kind of coach most of the posters here hate with a passion.
"As Rowe said on a conference call Monday, Gallant and the front office had a "philosophical divide," Gallant wanting more size, the front office more speed."
"Some of this has to do with a clash between the Panthers' analytics group and old-school guys such as Tallon and Gallant."
"There had been whispers of friction between Gallant and the front office over the latter’s emphasis on advanced analytics, which dictated some of the controversial off-season moves such as trading rugged defenceman Erik Gudbranson to the Vancouver Canucks for unproven 20-year-old forward Jared McCann, now in the minors."
"There was definitely a philosophical divide and conflict,” Rowe added, referring to analytics. “We wanted to develop a fast team, move the puck quickly and attack the net, and pressure the puck in all three zones. Gerard wanted a little more size. We decided to go in a different direction."
Gallant told a story about how an unnamed former Florida player looked great to the analytics staff but wasn't the sort of player he wanted.
"I couldn't stand watching him on the ice," Gallant said that night in Canada. "I didn't like the way he played one bit."
Now imagine the Flyers had fired Hakstol last year and hired Gallant, and the stories about how he doesn't like analytics came out and how he preferred size over speed - most of the people here would have blasted Hextall for hiring another Hakstol!!!!!
That's correct, zero times.
That's correct, zero times.
And why is that? Because the players didn't perform well enough.
So, now that he's coach of a team where the players are performing well enough, it makes no sense to attribute the success to his coaching and system.
He's a good coach and I'd obviously rather have him than Hak, but the post I was responding to gave him way too much credit, as if he was the main reason Vegas is where they are. In reality, it's the players performances that have made this possible, which is something he doesn't have control over. Having a good system is great and his philosophy seems smart, but that isn't what's responsible for their success this year. If it was, it would have shown the same, or better, results in Florida. It wasn't enough to get Florida to a cup final, it wasn't what got Vegas there. The difference in results proves the variable is the players.
Yeah, of course he has some kind of impact, even if only staying out of their way (which is what I wish Hakstol would do). But I was disagreeing with this:I agree that player performances are the deciding factor at the end of the day, but...
I disagree that he doesn't have some control over that.
It's well known that great coachs can get more out of players than terrible coachs.
It's a combination of great coaching / great player performance.
LV has shown that a good coach and system can make mediocre players into a contender
In reality, it's the players performances that have made this possible, which is something he doesn't have control over.
You're embarrassing yourself, as usual.why are you wasting your time ???
Well obviously because there's things that need to be done that the players can't/shouldn't do themselves. They can't be the ones deciding who plays or not, who plays with who, or how much each person plays. There has to be someone they answer to.If the only thing that contributes to a team's success is its players' performances, which you assert are independent of coaching and something a coach "doesn't have control over," then why should teams even bother with coaching staffs? After all, you seem to think coaches can hold teams back, yet cannot contribute significantly to their success. So why not just eliminate all coaches?
And why were the Islanders so bad this year despite so many of their players having good statistical seasons?
Imagine if Filppula was three years younger
When he had 31 points in a season?
Imagine if Filppula didn’t play here is where I begin this fantasy.
This^^^^It wasn’t a matter of depth, Hakstol severely overrated Filppula.
If he realized how bad he is, he wouldn’t have been playing more than Patrick and sure as **** wouldn’t have been the 1C in playoff elimination games.
It wasn’t a matter of depth, Hakstol severely overrated Filppula.
If he realized how bad he is, he wouldn’t have been playing more than Patrick and sure as **** wouldn’t have been the 1C in playoff elimination games.
I could argue the rest, but I already gave an example that proves my point, so there’s really no need.Oh come on, he sees the players every day in practice and in games.
Patrick was awful until January, if they could have sent him down to the AHL they would have.
After that he steadily improved, and so did his minutes, he averaged about 15:35 from February onward, despite lacking strength and stamina.
In fact, from February 1:
Nico 16:15 33g 12-10 22: 11-10 21 ES 1-0 PP
Patrick 15:35 32g 9-10 19: 4-9 13 ES 5-1 PP
Patrick played as much as you could expect from a 19 year old who wasn't physically ready for the NHL because he hadn't worked out for two summers.
Laughton from Jan 1: 43g 4-5 9 -13
He regressed at center, especially after Raffl moved up.
Best combination without Raffl, Laughton - Lehtera - Read.
So not a lot of good options, Laughton played better at LW, Lehtera was too slow for anything but limited 4C duties, Patrick had to be sheltered and Couts was playing 21+ minutes a night.
This is what happens when you trade a solid 3C, but when someone offers you 2 1st rd picks for a 3C, you go for it when you're rebuilding.
If they keep Schenn, Filppula ends up at LW or 4C and we don't have these issues.