Dave Hakstol

[Ghosts Beer]

NO HIS ARGUEMENT IS IT IS MORE LIKELY TO INJURE OUR GOALIES NOT ELITE STARTERS. OUR GROUP CANT HANDLE AND NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO IN THEIR FING CAREERS

You’re clearly a medical expert, so how much more likely are we talking? 1%? 10%? 25%? 50%? More?

How many extra games off during 23 in a row would have prevented the injury, which you & others apparently feel only happened due to overuse?

And isn’t Hextall in charge of supplying the goalies? Is it Hakstol’s fault he’s trying to win with Elliott & Neuvirth, & that Neuvirth is as unreliable a backup as you could have, which left the Flyers without an NHL backup option for a while, causing Elliott to play more?

 

[deadhead]

So the problem is the goalies? Which means the problem is Hextall?

Goalies are funny, at times you can ride Neuvirth, because he'll break down in any case so you might as well ride him while he's hot.
Elliott never gets that hot, but Neuvirth was never healthy last year and Lyon was so bad they traded for Mrazek.
While Ghost Beer is riding this theme that fatigue has no impact a bit too hard, the rest of you are riding the coach too hard.
A lot of HCs will ride a goalie and hope for the best, when the alternative is basically is putting up the white flag.
Sometimes you cross your fingers and hope for the best (especially when the worst isn't that much worse).

Most of the decisions everyone whines about (and what a fine group of whining beetches you are) are due to lack of depth and subsequent bad choices, young players who are too inexperienced, aging veterans on their last legs if that, a few overworked quality players.
And every coach has favorites, Lavi loved Matt Carle, now try and defend that!!

In two years this will all be a thing of the past as this team will have mucho depth.
At which time, Hakstol will play Game of Thrones: "you win or you die."

Meanwhile, as Will once said: "Much ado about nothing."

 

[Beef Invictus]

So the problem is the goalies? Which means the problem is Hextall?

Goalies are funny, at times you can ride Neuvirth, because he'll break down in any case so you might as well ride him while he's hot.
Elliott never gets that hot, but Neuvirth was never healthy last year and Lyon was so bad they traded for Mrazek.
While Ghost Beer is riding this theme that fatigue has no impact a bit too hard, the rest of you are riding the coach too hard.
A lot of HCs will ride a goalie and hope for the best, when the alternative is basically is putting up the white flag.
Sometimes you cross your fingers and hope for the best (especially when the worst isn't that much worse).

Most of the decisions everyone whines about (and what a fine group of whining beetches you are) are due to lack of depth and subsequent bad choices, young players who are too inexperienced, aging veterans on their last legs if that, a few overworked quality players.
And every coach has favorites, Lavi loved Matt Carle, now try and defend that!!

In two years this will all be a thing of the past as this team will have mucho depth.
At which time, Hakstol will play Game of Thrones: "you win or you die."

Meanwhile, as Will once said: "Much ado about nothing."

The goalies aren't so much the problem as Hakstol's terrible management of them is. We've made that clear. Read.

 

[Striiker]

You are talking about 30 goals and 60 points in 2 of those three years, and about a period where until last season he had steadily increased in usefulness all-around. Are you sure you're reading the stats columns right? Are you sure you're even on the right player?

You’re talking about the wrong guy. Those numbers are from Wayne Simmonds, not Ben Simmons.

Simmons isn’t a good LW/RW and he never scored 30 goals or 60 points.

Bet you feel real dumb.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Ghosts Beer,

Say you’re put on a wild physical regiment for the next three weeks, every single day. Do you think that at any point your body will start to break down and result in it being more likely that your injured in some way than if you had breaks during that period?

Asking for a friend.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

It's really telling that my argument has remained the same the entire time, and you've been all over the place

My argument hasn’t changed one iota: There’s no evidence that Elliott’s injury was the result of overuse. It’s pure speculation. You aren’t a medical expert. You haven’t seen his files. You haven’t talked to him. Goalies get hurt all the time regardless of workload. There’s zero evidence that a few more games off would have prevented the injury. You’re completely speculating & treating it as fact.

As for saying the Flyers’ particular goalies are incapable of handling the workload they were given, but others are... I’m curious how you determine this.

Because Elliott has always played in a rotation? Why does that mean he’s physically incapable of playing as a true #1? Maybe he just never got the opportunity. Again, you’re speculating & treating it as fact. Neuvirth, well, yes, he has quite a history of being fragile no matter what. But he can get hurt any time he puts a skate to the ice. He can pass out for no apparent reason. He was paid to be the backup; the starter got hurt; the games were crucial; the coach played him. There’s no evidence that playing three or four games in 8 days would’ve prevented him from getting hurt as opposed to playing 5. The coach needed him to do his job & he wasn’t capable, but it’s Neuvirth. You can play him only once a year & he still seems likely to get hurt. Might as well get what you can out of him until the inevitable happens.

 

[deadhead]

No, the goalies ARE the problem, Neuvirth was dinged all last year, even when he returned he wasn't 100%.
So ride Elliott, or use Neuvirth before he's ready and put him back on DL, or play Lyon who clearly wasn't ready when he came up.
As usual, all the decisions were crappy. Lose now or lose later.

When we have Hart and Sandstrom, it'll be easy to manage goalies (assuming Sandstrom can stay healthy).
Heck, if Lyon is the goalie we saw in the AHL playoffs, just keep three knowing Neuvirth will be on the DL by December.

That's why I don't get the gnashing of teeth around here, I never thought Lavi was the genius people think he is, when he had top talent he won, when that talent eroded and got injured he missed the playoffs, just like most coaches. Gallant got smart when he was handed a deep experienced team (almost every player between 25-30, a coach's wet dream) and a hot goalie. As Hatcher has pointed out, they're running a similar scheme to Gallant with similar results but without MAF. Give us MAF and we probably beat the Penguins.

Now if the Flyers had ended up with 88 points last year, then you'd have reason for complaint, they were a mediocre team, not a bad team, talentwise, so a bad season would be a reason for Hextall to reconsider whether he wanted a coaching change. But they performed up to their talent, they never folded when both goalies went down and Mrazek turned out to be a pumpkin, they took a far more talented team to six games in the playoffs despite atrocious goaltending from (drumroll) Elliott and Neuvirth.

We'll know if Hakstol can coach in two years when he has top ten talent.
It'll be a young team, but that's why he was hired in the first place, to coach up young players into winners.
This year's team is in transition, enough talent to compete, but too many holes to be a top ten team (though that could change by April).

Generally, the litmus test for a coach is getting a talented team to perform up to its talent, mediocre teams can fall in love with a hot season and everyone is kumbaya (they often crash the next year when talent will out), but on talented teams egos often erupt and chaos rules - and that's when a coach has to become a lion tamer.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Yep, I’m gonna have an anyuerysm.

 

[Beef Invictus]

My argument hasn’t changed one iota: There’s no evidence that Elliott’s injury was the result of overuse. It’s pure speculation. You aren’t a medical expert. You haven’t seen his files. You haven’t talked to him. Goalies get hurt all the time regardless of workload. There’s zero evidence that a few more games off would have prevented the injury. You’re completely speculating & treating it as fact.

As for saying the Flyers’ particular goalies are incapable of handling the workload they were given, but others are... I’m curious how you determine this.

Because Elliott has always played in a rotation? Why does that mean he’s physically incapable of playing as a true #1? Maybe he just never got the opportunity. Again, you’re speculating & treating it as fact. Neuvirth, well, yes, he has quite a history of being fragile no matter what. But he can get hurt any time he puts a skate to the ice. He can pass out for no apparent reason. He was paid to be the backup; the starter got hurt; the games were crucial; the coach played him. There’s no evidence that playing three or four games in 8 days would’ve prevented him from getting hurt as opposed to playing 5. The coach needed him to do his job & he wasn’t capable, but it’s Neuvirth. You can play him only once a year & he still seems likely to get hurt. Might as well get what you can out of him until the inevitable happens.

It's common sense that a goalie who isn't used to playing 65 games should not, at age 32, suddenly be expected to maintain a 65 game pace. It is common sense that such a thing is begging for an injury. It's widely known and a principle that applies in all physical sports.

It is widely known that Neuvirth is fragile. It is known that wearing him down will increase his already high chance for injury. It is so well known that we predicted, correctly, that he would be hurt. It was an easy prediction.

These are simple truths you have not been able to refute. Because those are truths, it is necessarily true that Hakstol mismanaged both his goalies and maximized their chances of wearing down.

 

[Beef Invictus]

No, the goalies ARE the problem, Neuvirth was dinged all last year, even when he returned he wasn't 100%.
So ride Elliott, or use Neuvirth before he's ready and put him back on DL, or play Lyon who clearly wasn't ready when he came up.
As usual, all the decisions were crappy. Lose now or lose later.

When we have Hart and Sandstrom, it'll be easy to manage goalies (assuming Sandstrom can stay healthy).
Heck, if Lyon is the goalie we saw in the AHL playoffs, just keep three knowing Neuvirth will be on the DL by December.

That's why I don't get the gnashing of teeth around here, I never thought Lavi was the genius people think he is, when he had top talent he won, when that talent eroded and got injured he missed the playoffs, just like most coaches. Gallant got smart when he was handed a deep experienced team (almost every player between 25-30, a coach's wet dream) and a hot goalie. As Hatcher has pointed out, they're running a similar scheme to Gallant with similar results but without MAF. Give us MAF and we probably beat the Penguins.

Now if the Flyers had ended up with 88 points last year, then you'd have reason for complaint, they were a mediocre team, not a bad team, talentwise, so a bad season would be a reason for Hextall to reconsider whether he wanted a coaching change. But they performed up to their talent, they never folded when both goalies went down and Mrazek turned out to be a pumpkin, they took a far more talented team to six games in the playoffs despite atrocious goaltending from (drumroll) Elliott and Neuvirth.

We'll know if Hakstol can coach in two years when he has top ten talent.
It'll be a young team, but that's why he was hired in the first place, to coach up young players into winners.
This year's team is in transition, enough talent to compete, but too many holes to be a top ten team (though that could change by April).

Generally, the litmus test for a coach is getting a talented team to perform up to its talent, mediocre teams can fall in love with a hot season and everyone is kumbaya (they often crash the next year when talent will out), but on talented teams egos often erupt and chaos rules - and that's when a coach has to become a lion tamer.

"We can't judge Hakstol until he has a roster that is flawless" is the worst possible defense of Hakstol. If he requires such a great roster then he isn't a good coach.

 

[Adam Warlock]

My brain honestly hurts.

I could use a few posts of just Hakstol gifs to help clear my head after reading the last few pages.

 

[deadhead]

"We can't judge Hakstol until he has a roster that is flawless" is the worst possible defense of Hakstol. If he requires such a great roster then he isn't a good coach.

I've judged him, he's done about as much as you expect with what he's had the last three years.
I don't nitpick, I look at results, his results are as good as I expected.
Doesn't make him a great coach (but how often does a coach take mediocre talent to the CF?), but doesn't make him a bad coach.
No knowledgeable hockey observer would have expected more from last year's team - and I've yet to see anyone nationally refer to this team as an underachieving team.

So I'm right, y'all are wrong, case closed.
And anyone who thinks the Flyers were as talented as the Caps or Penguins shouldn't pretend to expertise.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Deadhead, I’ve never argued that “fatigue has no impact,” let alone ridden a theme of it. Just pointing out that goalies get hurt regardless of workload, & there’s no evidence that workload caused Elliott’s injury. It’s nothing but pure speculation & shouldn’t be accepted as fact. Hell, if hatcher’s right, Elliott himself said it was a freak occurrence. (I don’t recall hearing/reading him say it, but a quote from him would be the best info we have, & that’s with the caveat you don’t always get the truth.)

Is it possible fatigue caused the injury? Like I said many posts ago, I guess. Is it just as possible it had nothing to do with overuse? Absolutely.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I've judged him, he's done about as much as you expect with what he's had the last three years.
I don't nitpick, I look at results, his results are as good as I expected.
Doesn't make him a great coach (but how often does a coach take mediocre talent to the CF?), but doesn't make him a bad coach.
No knowledgeable hockey observer would have expected more from last year's team - and I've yet to see anyone nationally refer to this team as an underachieving team.

So I'm right, y'all are wrong, case closed.
And anyone who thinks the Flyers were as talented as the Caps or Penguins shouldn't pretend to expertise.

Nothing you gibbered forth here refutes my post. The simple fact is that if he needs a roster too good to fail because we can judge him, then that indicates maybe he isn't actually very good. Good coaches can elevate their roster, rather than being dragged along behind it.


You're too terrified of my questions to answer them. Perhaps someone who lives in abject horror of simple yes/no questions because said questions ruin their assertions shouldn't be so confident.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Deadhead, I’ve never argued that “fatigue has no impact,” let alone ridden a theme of it. Just pointing out that goalies get hurt regardless of workload, & there’s no evidence that workload caused Elliott’s injury. It’s nothing but pure speculation & shouldn’t be accepted as fact. Hell, if hatcher’s right, Elliott himself said it was a freak occurrence. (I don’t recall hearing/reading him say it, but a quote from him would be the best info we have, & that’s with the caveat you don’t always get the truth.)

Is it possible fatigue caused the injury? Like I said many posts ago, I guess. Is it just as possible it had nothing to do with overuse? Absolutely.

I see you've stopped even trying to defend his usage of Neuvirth.

 

[Doodootheclown]

You’re clearly a medical expert, so how much more likely are we talking? 1%? 10%? 25%? 50%? More?

How many extra games off during 23 in a row would have prevented the injury, which you & others apparently feel only happened due to overuse?

And isn’t Hextall in charge of supplying the goalies? Is it Hakstol’s fault he’s trying to win with Elliott & Neuvirth, & that Neuvirth is as unreliable a backup as you could have, which left the Flyers without an NHL backup option for a while, causing Elliott to play more?

 

[Striiker]

Making the playoffs last year has nothing to do with Hakstol.

Luckily for his employment status, this talented team, led by an elite franchise player, made up for his best efforts to tank the season.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

It's common sense that a goalie who isn't used to playing 65 games should not, at age 32, suddenly be expected to maintain a 65 game pace. It is common sense that such a thing is begging for an injury. It's widely known and a principle that applies in all physical sports.

It is widely known that Neuvirth is fragile. It is known that wearing him down will increase his already high chance for injury. It is so well known that we predicted, correctly, that he would be hurt. It was an easy prediction.

These are simple truths you have not been able to refute. Because those are truths, it is necessarily true that Hakstol mismanaged both his goalies and maximized their chances of wearing down.

They aren’t “simple truths.” They’re conjecture.

 

[Beef Invictus]

They aren’t “simple truths.” They’re conjecture.

It isn't a simple truth that Neuvirth is prone to injury? It isn't a known fact across sports that fatigue takes a toll on form in ways that lead to injury?

It isn't a simple truth that working someone harder than they are used to working going back 8 years has the same effect?


How are they not? I mean, hell, you've argued yourself that Neuvirth is injury prone. Now that's not a simple truth?

 

[Magua]

I could use a few posts of just Hakstol gifs to help clear my head after reading the last few pages.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

It isn't a simple truth that Neuvirth is prone to injury? It isn't a known fact across sports that fatigue takes a toll on form in ways that lead to injury?

It isn't a simple truth that working someone harder than they are used to working going back 8 years has the same effect?


How are they not? I mean, hell, you've argued yourself that Neuvirth is injury prone. Now that's not a simple truth?

It’s sure not a simple truth that Hakstol caused Elliott’s & Neuvirth’s injuries, which you seem intent on. I guess you consider yourself a hell of a medical expert. But you know nothing about Elliott’s injury & how it happened. You know nothing that playing Neuvirth one or two less games in 8 days would have prevented his injury, when he seemingly has a high risk of injury anytime. The coach is trying to win crucial games in a playoff race when his #1 is hurt & the backup he has is fragile as ice. It’s a poor state of affairs.

You’re mixing conjecture for fact.

 

[Beef Invictus]

It’s sure not a simple truth that Hakstol caused Elliott’s & Neuvirth’s injuries, which you seem intent on. I guess you consider yourself a hell of a medical expert. But you know nothing about Elliott’s injury & how it happened. You know nothing that playing Neuvirth one or two less games in 8 days would have prevented his injury, when he seemingly has a high risk of injury anytime. The coach is trying to win crucial games in a playoff race when his #1 is hurt & the backup he has is fragile as ice. It’s a poor state of affairs.

You’re mixing conjecture for fact.

It is not a fact that Neuvirth is injury prone? It is not a fact that fatigue takes a toll on form?

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Heil Hakstol!

 

[hatcher]

Ghosts Beer,

Say you’re put on a wild physical regiment for the next three weeks, every single day. Do you think that at any point your body will start to break down and result in it being more likely that your injured in some way than if you had breaks during that period?

Asking for a friend.

If you are trained properly in cardio and putting on the beef you should last forever unless in is a fluke injury. Elliot was ready to go and it was a fluke he got hurt. Flyers arent trained well as they never play a solid 60 do cardio and being smallish and cant take the riggers of 82 gms.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

It is not a fact that Neuvirth is injury prone? It is not a fact that fatigue takes a toll on form?

Yeah, Neuvirth is injury prone. You seemed to be insinuating that his playing time caused his injuries. There’s no way to know that. He gets hurt regardless of playing time.

Fatigue taking a toll on form? Sure, probably can. The insinuation that it’s a fact Elliott’s PT caused his injury? Complete conjecture.