What if the flyers fired Dick Hakfart prior to the season....
History will be made.
Changing coaches often helps when a team is in a funk, which is why you should be wary of evaluating a coach off that rebound.
Berube got the Flyers to the playoffs, and is getting the Blues to the playoffs, both in rebound situations.
Does that make Berube a good coach? Lavi a bad coach?
People tend to go to extremes - I see little evidence of "miracle" coaches in ice hockey (NFL is a different matter, Belicheck is maybe the best of all time).
What's more common are bad coaches (Weight last year with the Islanders), and bad fits (Lavi his last couple years in Philly).
Sometimes the fit is scheme v players, sometimes the fit is personality v locker room.
I think Hakstol's personality wasn't a good fit for a team in a funk.
I also won't be surprised to see Hakstol land somewhere and do well, because coaches often learn from their first gig and improve.
You seem to forget last year TK playing on the top line last year essentially winning games for the Flyers and getting them in the playoffs with Giroux but then getting taken off the top line and then getting one shift the last 8 minutes of games last season even when they were behind for the likes of the usual 3rd and 4th line plugs.I doubt Hakstol thought they were better, maybe you don't follow the NHL, but find me a veteran coach who hasn't demoted a top young talent at times to try to get them to play more disciplined, look at Laine in Vancouver, for example. Young players often resist coaching, get into mental funks, or just drift for a while because they're not used to playing at a high level over 80 games against top competition (SHL season is much shorter, juniors you can float through half the games on your schedule, etc.).
And it's not surprising that young players often respond to demotions by playing better when they subsequently get promoted - the ones that don't get their wake up call are the ones soon traded and replaced by another young player with more fire in the belly or fewer bats in the belfry.
And that’s why they play the gamesHakstol:
5x5: CF 51.25, GF/GA 2.66/2.78, SCF/CA 25.0/23.9, Sv% 83.94%, HDCF/CA 11.2/9.8, Sv% 81.72
PP: CF 86.54, GF/GA 4.22/2.11, SCF/CA 48.6/8.5, Sh% 10.11%, HDCF/CA 25.4/4.9, Sh% 14.81
PK: CF 17.48, GF/GA 1.06/9.57, SCF/CA 7.4/45.4, Sv% 75.78%, HDCF/CA 3.9/20.9, Sv% 70.00
Gordon's hot streak (26 games since 1/10/19):
5x5: CF 45.53, GF/GA 2.95/2.61, SCF/CA 24.3/28.8, Sv% 87.33%, HDCF/CA 10.1/11.3, Sv% 85.79
PP: CF 84.05, GF/GA 7.94/0.93, SCF/CA 46.7/6.5, Sh% 13.33%, HDCF/CA 22.9/1.9, Sh% 20.51
PK: CF 11.90, GF/GA 0.54/5.37, SCF/CA 7.0/48.9, Sv% 86.00%, HDCF/CA 2.7/20.4, Sv% 92.31
These numbers are almost unbelievable.
Outside the goalies, and a much improved shooting percentage, the team is playing WORSE under Gordon.
Corsi is worse in every situation. At 5x5 it's dramatically worse.
They allow far more scoring chances, and high danger chances, at 5x5.
On the PP, they're generating fewer scoring and high danger chances, but they're scoring at a much higher rate.
On the PK, they're allowing more scoring chances, and only slightly fewer high danger chances, but the goalies are playing out of their gourds.
The one substantial improvement is they're allowing fewer breakaways and high danger scoring chances against them on the PP.
Good goaltending masks a lot of issues, but it isn't the reason a lot of their players started playing well again. I do believe there is a confidence in trusting your goalies, but the team is playing better in front of them too.
No one specific reason why they went from complete trash to one of the hottest teams in the league. Good goaltending and getting rid of Hakstol are the top 2 reasons though. IMHO
This is very unexpected discussion after months and months of posts saying "You are what your record says you are". All of a sudden they are not what their record says they are.
Sounds like I'm missing some titillating essay's
Free yourselves and remember it can all go away.
View attachment 198795
I doubt Fletcher is fooled.
Deadhead’s excuse for everything is SV% and goaltending. If only it were so simple.
Of course it isn't unfounded. Saying nothing else has changed is thoughIt's not entirely unfounded, though. The Islanders had some exquisitely good looks in close and fired a ton of them wide and Elliott stopped most of the others. He didn't make highlight-reel stops but just got body parts in front of shots that weren't perfectly placed. As a goalie, I find some of the most difficult stops on shots closer to the body rather than stretching out for them. Several of Elliott's saves were squeezing the gaps between his arms and body fast enough or closing the hole just over the pad.
Well, in fairness, their recent record, with better goaltending and better personnel decisions, is very good. Is it sustainable for a whole year? We'll see next year.This is very unexpected discussion after months and months of posts saying "You are what your record says you are". All of a sudden they are not what their record says they are.
You seem to forget last year TK playing on the top line last year essentially winning games for the Flyers and getting them in the playoffs with Giroux but then getting taken off the top line and then getting one shift the last 8 minutes of games last season even when they were behind for the likes of the usual 3rd and 4th line plugs.
Dude, c'mon. Really? This is you, being serious, for real now? What side of the bed did you get out of? Do you even sleep in a bed? Such a tired, tired response.Patrick continues to learn from Jake on entries, playmaking vision, and hardnosed power hockey. You see a lot of similarities emerging. Patrick has better hair though.