Toggle sidebar

Dave Hakstol Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Magua

Magua

Entirely Palatable Product
Apr 25, 2016
37,593
155,839
Huron of the Lakes
2340242263_09dc2a3dc5_z.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: freakydallas13, Stizzle, Jtown and 2 others
tictactoe

tictactoe

Registered User
Jan 15, 2017
18,685
9,754
GoneFullHextall said:
There was a story about it somewhere on yahoo. Hextall basically said I am a patient guy but things need to start happening on a positive note. Or something to thay effect
Click to expand...
He wants something positive on PK after he did dick during off season to help the team? ha ha... this is awesome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beef Invictus
deadhead

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
49,215
21,617
Beef Invictus said:
@deadhead we ended the last thread with you objecting to my claim that you think Hakstol is a flawless coach. I asked you to name a flaw with his coaching.

You've been unable to so far. Have you managed to think of one yet, or is he without flaws?
Click to expand...

I live on Diet Mountain Dew, though now that's the weather's turned cold, time to fire up the coffee maker.

Hakstol biggest flaw is probably being too rigid, which comes out of college where you have to get a bunch of HS kids on the same page in two years.

And I think it's why his best accomplishment has been to develop Ghost, TK, Laughton and Provorov to some extent, and now you can see the progress with Patrick. He's comfortable pushing young players to focus on playing without the puck, something that young talented players rarely are asked to do until they get to the NHL (though Hextall is pushing that in the AHL now). The idea that Ghost became a responsible two way player on his own is laughable, this is a kid who made it through "hero hockey" (go back and look at him on Mt Union) and had to learn to not try and skate through the opposing team, not take unnecessary chances, and learn to run the offense, not be the offense. And he certainly didn't know how to play defense when he first came up. The benching, etc., is all about the teaching process, learning to play the right way.

That same structured approach doesn't really fit established veterans who are used to doing it their way for a decade. Which may be why he may be more comfortable with less talented veterans who play a structured game than someone like Voracek who has always free lanced and always will. And it's why he doesn't bench veterans, what works with kids would just generate resentment with veterans. Instead, Hextall just gets rid of them.

I'd point in many ways what Hakstol does scheme wise is not that different from Gallant in Vegas, but Gallant got to work with a GM and build his roster from scratch with veterans who were coachable (many happy to have a shot to start) - I think Hextall made a big mistake not blowing it up and just going with youth when he hired Hakstol - trying to blend a veteran team with an increasingly large group of prospects is awkward. If you're going with a developmental coach, build a young team that will grow with him - if you want to win now, get a veteran coach who knows how to scheme to win games. Hextall tried to have his cake and eat it too.

Given the youth coming up, Hextall needs to replace Hakstol with another developmental coach (unless he wants to trade a bunch of prospects and try to win now) - and clear out the veterans who aren't comfortable with that scenario.

As Grace Slick once sang: "Either go way or go all the way in . . ."
 
  • Like
Reactions: freakydallas13 and Beef Invictus
Beef Invictus

Beef Invictus

Revolutionary Positivity
Dec 21, 2009
128,106
166,050
Armored Train
deadhead said:
I live on Diet Mountain Dew, though now that's the weather's turned cold, time to fire up the coffee maker.

Hakstol biggest flaw is probably being too rigid, which comes out of college where you have to get a bunch of HS kids on the same page in two years.

And I think it's why his best accomplishment has been to develop Ghost, TK, Laughton and Provorov to some extent, and now you can see the progress with Patrick. He's comfortable pushing young players to focus on playing without the puck, something that young talented players rarely are asked to do until they get to the NHL (though Hextall is pushing that in the AHL now). The idea that Ghost became a responsible two way player on his own is laughable, this is a kid who made it through "hero hockey" (go back and look at him on Mt Union) and had to learn to not try and skate through the opposing team, not take unnecessary chances, and learn to run the offense, not be the offense. And he certainly didn't know how to play defense when he first came up. The benching, etc., is all about the teaching process, learning to play the right way.

That same structured approach doesn't really fit established veterans who are used to doing it their way for a decade. Which may be why he may be more comfortable with less talented veterans who play a structured game than someone like Voracek who has always free lanced and always will. And it's why he doesn't bench veterans, what works with kids would just generate resentment with veterans. Instead, Hextall just gets rid of them.

I'd point in many ways what Hakstol does scheme wise is not that different from Gallant in Vegas, but Gallant got to work with a GM and build his roster from scratch with veterans who were coachable (many happy to have a shot to start) - I think Hextall made a big mistake not blowing it up and just going with youth when he hired Hakstol - trying to blend a veteran team with an increasingly large group of prospects is awkward. If you're going with a developmental coach, build a young team that will grow with him - if you want to win now, get a veteran coach who knows how to scheme to win games. Hextall tried to have his cake and eat it too.

Given the youth coming up, Hextall needs to replace Hakstol with another developmental coach (unless he wants to trade a bunch of prospects and try to win now) - and clear out the veterans who aren't comfortable with that scenario.

As Grace Slick once sang: "Either go way or go all the way in . . ."
Click to expand...

It is good that you do not consider him flawless. I am well-pleased.

I can't agree with the vets being uncomfortably with structure; these people played within Berube's structure just fine for a while, and within Hakstol's. I think where the issue arises is when the structure is failing. For instance, players who want to win will naturally tire of a system that only sets up low-percentage chances. That's when you get guys like TK and Voracek trying to do more no their own to make better chances.

Their choice is to stay within the system and not score, or freelance a bit and make something happen.

You should try putting Mountain Dew in your coffee. Let us know how it goes.
 
deadhead

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
49,215
21,617
I don't think the system only sets up low-percentage chances, I think however you need certain types of players to make the system work. Each line needs at least one physical forward with the hands to make plays down low, and that's what this team lacks right now.

Voracek is not a good fit, one reason I think they should have traded him, a younger Simmonds would be (he goes to the net aggressively) but the current version is a liability at ES. Voracek's skill package would be perfect for a play making center, but he's an awkward fit at wing, he's not a Giroux who can run a "half court" offense, he's best in open ice making plays, but has never developed a reliable shot.

Patrick fits very well, he has great hands in the slot, provides a target to pass to, and if the play is blocked off, will go to the net to set screens and score off rebounds from point shots. Same with Couts, not sure about Vorobyev, who is more of a passer, it'll be interesting to see how Rubtsov develops. JVR was probably signed for just this reason, big boy who has great hands around the net.

Laughton is more of an open ice forechecker, but not a net presence.
Weal is strictly a Giroux perimeter playmaker but without the vision and elite passing.
TK has become much more physical, and while he can't plant himself near the net for obvious reasons, doesn't shy away from dirty areas like Weal.

Look at teams like Winnipeg, they crash the net with big forwards, and that both opens up the ice (by forcing defensemen to collapse to the net) and provides screens for shooters.
 
Beef Invictus

Beef Invictus

Revolutionary Positivity
Dec 21, 2009
128,106
166,050
Armored Train
deadhead said:
I don't think the system only sets up low-percentage chances, I think however you need certain types of players to make the system work. Each line needs at least one physical forward with the hands to make plays down low, and that's what this team lacks right now.

Voracek is not a good fit, one reason I think they should have traded him, a younger Simmonds would be (he goes to the net aggressively) but the current version is a liability at ES. Voracek's skill package would be perfect for a play making center, but he's an awkward fit at wing, he's not a Giroux who can run a "half court" offense, he's best in open ice making plays, but has never developed a reliable shot.

Patrick fits very well, he has great hands in the slot, provides a target to pass to, and if the play is blocked off, will go to the net to set screens and score off rebounds from point shots. Same with Couts, not sure about Vorobyev, who is more of a passer, it'll be interesting to see how Rubtsov develops. JVR was probably signed for just this reason, big boy who has great hands around the net.

Laughton is more of an open ice forechecker, but not a net presence.
Weal is strictly a Giroux perimeter playmaker but without the vision and elite passing.
TK has become much more physical, and while he can't plant himself near the net for obvious reasons, doesn't shy away from dirty areas like Weal.

Look at teams like Winnipeg, they crash the net with big forwards, and that both opens up the ice (by forcing defensemen to collapse to the net) and provides screens for shooters.
Click to expand...

The system serves to set up point shots from the D. To dominate the cycle and make it easier to move the puck back to them our forwards don't go to the slot. Look at where our shots come from. They come from terrible angles or long range with little in the high percentage areas.

Personnel don't matter. There isn't roster that can be built which can make that work. It's a failed concept.

It doesn't matter who is out there. Their goal isn't setting up the slot. We have multiple players who can play there. They don't, by design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adtar02, Embiid, gertbfrobe16 and 1 other person
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom