Dave Hakstol Part V

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Fire Hakstok.

 

[Limeyjim]

Hakstol wouldn't know what momentum was if it came up behind him and bit him in the bum!
Fire him NOW!.......AND THE REST OF THE COACHING STAFF AS WELL!

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Hakstol wouldn't know what momentum was if it came up behind him and bit him in the bum!
Fire him NOW!.......AND THE REST OF THE COACHING STAFF AS WELL!

In his eternal quest to root out and devour farts, Hakstok is known to sniff bums.

 

[Magua]

Intangibles are important, and anyone who says they aren’t is wrong. Playoff hockey requires added physical and mental toughness on a greater scale than regular season hockey. Obviously each round is more difficult than the last.

In the case of Simmonds, he is a guy who can be a leader on the ice. He is a guy you want in your team in the thick of it. It doesn’t mean I want to resign him, as I think should have already been moved. He is going to make too much on his next deal for too long. I stress the too long part. I honestly wouldn’t be mad if he was signed to a high cap/short, but it’s gotta be 3 years or less.

I didn't say intangibles aren't important -- not that you said I did -- but it's all about weighing the cost of them vs. the on-ice ability. As we know, this team (probably most teams tbf) has a tendency to overvalue them even with the lack thereof of the latter.

This talk has tended to die down, but everywhere you looked on fan forums, you'd see chatter of Simmonds being the "true" captain or more important than someone like Voracek, etc. He was the rug that really tied the room together. I'm sure the organization wouldn't entirely disagree. He was good -- in the right usage, for a limited number of years, probably still can be.....mostly (read: not here where he's already odd man out) -- but his on-ice play was always a tad overrated.

It's curious that his leadership abilities never faced the brunt of the criticism over feckless playoff performances, unlike certain players. He's been here through all the sh*tty years too; all the bipolar play. I'm not daft enough to use that as a criticism of those intangibles/leadership qualities; I'm only saying that they didn't get us anywhere either; they didn't make up lost ground. Because you always need more, on an individual or team basis. Will they make up lost ground this season? In the following few seasons? He's never been a big playoff performer, where 5v5 play and speedy of play get emphasized. So, with track record and play style, I'm just a tad skeptical he's even as essential as made out in some dream scenario we can win a playoff round.

 

[baudib1]

I didn't say intangibles aren't important -- not that you said I did -- but it's all about weighing the cost of them vs. the on-ice ability. As we know, this team (probably most teams tbf) has a tendency to overvalue them even with the lack thereof of the latter.

This talk has tended to die down, but everywhere you looked on fan forums, you'd see chatter of Simmonds being the "true" captain or more important than someone like Voracek, etc. He was the rug that really tied the room together. I'm sure the organization wouldn't entirely disagree. He was good -- in the right usage, for a limited number of years, probably still can be.....mostly (read: not here where he's already odd man out) -- but his on-ice play was always a tad overrated.

It's curious that his leadership abilities never faced the brunt of the criticism over feckless playoff performances, unlike certain players. He's been here through all the sh*tty years too; all the bipolar play. I'm not daft enough to use that as a criticism of those intangibles/leadership qualities; I'm only saying that they didn't get us anywhere either; they didn't make up lost ground. Because you always need more, on an individual or team basis. Will they make up lost ground this season? In the following few seasons? He's never been a big playoff performer, where 5v5 play and speedy of play get emphasized. So, with track record and play style, I'm just a tad skeptical he's even as essential as made out in some dream scenario we can win a playoff round.

Strangely enough there was more of this talk when Simmonds was scoring 30 goals and making All-Star teams while Giroux was in his "decline" phase.

 

[VladDrag]

I didn't say intangibles aren't important -- not that you said I did -- but it's all about weighing the cost of them vs. the on-ice ability. As we know, this team (probably most teams tbf) has a tendency to overvalue them even with the lack thereof of the latter.

This talk has tended to die down, but everywhere you looked on fan forums, you'd see chatter of Simmonds being the "true" captain or more important than someone like Voracek, etc. He was the rug that really tied the room together. I'm sure the organization wouldn't entirely disagree. He was good -- in the right usage, for a limited number of years, probably still can be.....mostly (read: not here where he's already odd man out) -- but his on-ice play was always a tad overrated.

It's curious that his leadership abilities never faced the brunt of the criticism over feckless playoff performances, unlike certain players. He's been here through all the sh*tty years too; all the bipolar play. I'm not daft enough to use that as a criticism of those intangibles/leadership qualities; I'm only saying that they didn't get us anywhere either; they didn't make up lost ground. Because you always need more, on an individual or team basis. Will they make up lost ground this season? In the following few seasons? He's never been a big playoff performer, where 5v5 play and speedy of play get emphasized. So, with track record and play style, I'm just a tad skeptical he's even as essential as made out in some dream scenario we can win a playoff round.

I agree with this entire post. It's in the same vein as what I was getting at with my 3rd paragraph.

He can play in the NHL, and he's been a proven PP point producer, even during a down year last year, where he had double digit PP goals. But as you said, the problem with resigning lies in the fact that we have players to replace BOTH his ES and PP scoring numbers. His loss wouldn't be missed. I would prefer to trade or walk away from him (actually trading him @ the 2016 draft would have been ideal), but signing him to a 3 year deal wouldn't be the end of the world at face value imo. Not my preferred move, but I can live with it.

It's probably moot tho, he's going to get a long term deal with making at least $6m per season.

 

[Striiker]

If he signs any deal here it’d be pretty awful, even if only because 1) it would show poor judgement on Hextalls part, and 2) it would just be another year where young players don’t have a spot to possibly earn.

He’s not like MacDonald where he’s regularly going to lose you games on his own, but there’s really no upside in keeping him around and it could become an increasingly large problem every year that passes.

Imagine if we lose a player like Allison or Laczynski because they know we don’t have a potential spot for them (they’re not replacing TK or Jake) and they decide to go elsewhere.

 

[TCTC]

I wouldn't mind re-signing Simmonds at this point. It wouldn't be the smartest move but at least it would break the cycle of trading veterans for draft picks. I'm sick of this never-ending rebuild.

 

[Striiker]

Re-signing does more to extend the rebuild than end it.

 

[deadhead]

If Allison/Laczynski (who's also a center) don't think they can beat out Simmonds in a year or two, I don't want to sign them.

Resigning Simmonds to a reasonable short-term deal wouldn't block them, he could always move to 4th line/PP2 duties.
But he'd be crazy to sign that kind of deal when he could cash in if he gets 20+ goals this season.
Someone will overpay for his reputation (in today's NHL, his willingness to fight has limited value, and he's really not a fierce forechecker, no more than say Laughton or Weise).

 

[Stizzle]

Imagine if we lose a player like Allison or Laczynski because they know we don’t have a potential spot for them (they’re not replacing TK or Jake) and they decide to go elsewhere.

Cooper Marody played 12:12 last night for Edmonton.

These college prospects see how the Flyers railroad many young players. Sadly, a trade request is a very real concern with those two even when the Flyers don't re-sign Simmonds.

 

[Striiker]

Cooper Marody played 12:12 last night for Edmonton.

These college prospects see how the Flyers railroad many young players. Sadly, a trade request is a very real concern with those two even when the Flyers don't re-sign Simmonds.

I doubt it comes to that. People are always worried about this kind of thing and it rarely happens.

 

[deadhead]

Flyers don't treat their young players differently than other teams, ir's been shown again and again - urban myth.

What they will probably do is try to negotiate a cameo appearance this year to burn a year off their ELC, common in college players with negotiating leverage. Most college players know that on a good team they're likely to spend a half season or even a full season in the AHL, only a few go directly to the NHL, especially on competitive teams.

Since they're juniors, they'd have to risk injury in another year in college (and put their RFA contract a year further away) or take the money now and accelerate their development.

 

[Foggy14]

So now the Flyers are years away. The narrative changes yet again.....

Yeah, I've been willing to be patient with Hexy, but he's starting to get into Moses territory with this rebuild.

 

[Curufinwe]

Cooper Marody played 12:12 last night for Edmonton.

These college prospects see how the Flyers railroad many young players. Sadly, a trade request is a very real concern with those two even when the Flyers don't re-sign Simmonds.

I'm sure the fact he's not as good of a center prospect as Vorobyev, Rubtsov or Frost had nothing to do with him not signing here.

Kase had no problem signing here when he could have played another year in the SHL and then become a free agent. He must have been to dumb to notice all the railroading.

 

[tucson83]

this team needs a fresh start, they need a new coach and for god sakes, make a move for starting goalie. i swear if he does those things, this team will be in cup contention. for him not to do anything is totally mind blogging. talent is here, time is now.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Flyers don't treat their young players differently than other teams, ir's been shown again and again - urban myth.

What they will probably do is try to negotiate a cameo appearance this year to burn a year off their ELC, common in college players with negotiating leverage. Most college players know that on a good team they're likely to spend a half season or even a full season in the AHL, only a few go directly to the NHL, especially on competitive teams.

Since they're juniors, they'd have to risk injury in another year in college (and put their RFA contract a year further away) or take the money now and accelerate their development.

How many other teams have players who flagrantly outplay guys only to be sent down for no reason? How many teams call up promising talent to play them for 5 minutes? How many teams run their own goalies into the ground to avoid playing G prospects?

Please by all means, show us this is the norm around the league. You have to if you want to prove your assertion.

Pro-tip: stripping away context while listing player age is egregious cherry picking that fails to prove your assertion and undermines your credibility.

 

[Curufinwe]

How many other teams have players who flagrantly outplay guys only to be sent down for no reason? How many teams call up promising talent to play them for 5 minutes? How many teams run their own goalies into the ground to avoid playing G prospects?

Please by all means, show us this is the norm around the league. You have to if you want to prove your assertion.

Pro-tip: stripping away context while listing player age is egregious cherry picking that fails to prove your assertion and undermines your credibility.

I'd be fine with all of that, if they just had a normal PK.

 

[Jray42]

lotskaH eriF

 

[Beef Invictus]

I'd be fine with all of that, if they just had a normal PK.

Or a competent coach.

 

[Curufinwe]

I think they go hand in hand.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I think they go hand in hand.

That's true.

 

[Tripod]

"a coaching change is an easy one to make"-Hockey Central at Noon

(they were talking about Oilers, fwiw)

 

[Jray42]

Or a competent coach.

I'd settle for a slightly below average coach at this point tbh

 

[Striiker]

I’d be willing to coach if (when) they ask me.

Probably have to move some appointments around, but it could work.

First move would be firing Lappy, then Hagg would be locked in a cage in the broadcast booth, then I’d ban Weal from the building, and after that I’d do the humane thing and take Neuvirth out back of the farm and put him down.