Confirmed with Link: Flyers Sign Philippe Myers, D to ELC (9/21/15)

[Magua]

It's absolutely hysterical that so many people who rail against Hakstol on a practically daily basis, asserting with vigor that he held the Flyers back, refuse to answer a simple question of where they thought the Flyers' roster ranked in the league last year and if it was better than 12th, which is where they finished.

They were within 4 points of 14th WORST. It's not the accomplishment you make it out to be. They needed to win their final game to even make the playoffs over the powerhouse Florida Panthers before shitting the bed in the playoffs yet again. They had the 2nd worst goal differential of any playoff team, ahead of only Jersey. There's a lot of mediocrity and fake parity in this league.

They needed career years out of basically every important player on the team, which probably aren't replicable, in order to achieve that glorious 12th place finish, following in the footsteps of the masterful Guy Boucher and his Senators the year before. When I'm not kidding around I can at least modulate my Hakstol criticism and not blame him for everything, but to most every other observer, there was meat on the bone with late game management and general personnel usage (at every strength) where they could've finished even higher, piggybacking off those monster seasons. Hell, they finished 13th best (before 19th "best") in Hakstol's first year as head coach with less talent and without those career years. That argument works a whole lot better then than now. They've straddled mediocrity and fallen on each side in his tenure. He's not the worst coach evurrrr, but it's not worth extolling his virtues over either or acting like this team was maximized.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

They were within 4 points of 14th WORST. It's not the accomplishment you make it out to be. They needed to win their final game to even make the playoffs over the powerhouse Florida Panthers before ****ting the bed in the playoffs yet again. They had the 2nd worst goal differential of any playoff team, ahead of only Jersey. There's a lot of mediocrity and fake parity in this league.

They needed career years out of basically every important player on the team, which probably aren't replicable, in order to achieve that glorious 12th place finish, following in the footsteps of the masterful Guy Boucher and his Senators the year before. When I'm not kidding around I can at least modulate my Hakstol criticism and not blame him for everything, but to most every other observer, there was meat on the bone with late game management and general personnel usage (at every strength) where they could've finished even higher, piggybacking off those monster seasons. Hell, they finished 13th best (before 19th "best") in Hakstol's first year as head coach with less talent and without those career years. That argument works a whole lot better then than now. They've straddled mediocrity and fallen on each side in his tenure. He's not the worst coach evurrrr, but it's not worth extolling his virtues over either or acting like this team was maximized.

They finished 12th. In a league loaded with parity. With an .891 Mrazek playing in 17 games. With a below-average Lyon playing in 11 games. With Elliott being mediocre when he played.

With Patrick being unable to play for the first half of the season. With a defense corps that is generally accepted is subpar. With Filppula, the guy the GM acquired to be the 2C, being subpar. With Simmonds being injured the entire season and lousy at ES. With Weal failing. And the move that led to two career seasons was MADE BY THE COACH.

The humor is that I'm not arguing that Hakstol is a genius or a special coach. It's that others consistently argue he's an utter moron and one of the worst coaches in the league. Yet they won't acknowledge that they finished 12th in the league with a roster that almost certainly ranked worse than 12th.

 

[Magua]

Just stumbled upon this. His super aggressive game is so fun to watch. May not make the smart play all the time, but the positives far outweigh the negatives with Myers. When do you think he’ll make his NHL debut Magua? I’m thinking January/February.

I think he could be ready out of camp if he plays up to snuff. Given the hints by Kjell Samuelsson and Hextall, it sounds like they think his missed time puts him at a disadvantage. I'd call it less of an advantage than a disadvantage. He's good enough to play and learn at the NHL level right now.

But I expect him to get sent down. I think, if that happens, he makes his NHL debut if and when a top 4 defenseman gets injured. I should add: "top 4" as we see it, otherwise known as someone with actual puck skill, which might not be the same as the top 4 in usage. That seems to be Hextall's strategy: let injuries dictate a call-up and less so performance. How macabre. Now, if a defenseman we don't particularly care for, say Hagg or MacDonald, gets injured (even Gudas given his shared handedness), it wouldn't floor me to see them run with Folin. He's played 51 and 65 games the last 2 seasons each, so there's probably a confidence level there to start. He plays that heavy game to which his coach will probably take a liking. Basically, if Myers doesn't make it out of camp, I reckon it'll be fate that decides. Might not be a good fate either.

 

[Striiker]

The Hakstol fandom is out of control.

 

[Striiker]

Also, if we’re randomly giving Hakstol credit for our stars playing great (which is obviously a stupid thing to do, but let’s play along), I assume we’re also giving him blame for our bad players being awful, right?

 

[TB87]

I think he could be ready out of camp if he plays up to snuff. Given the hints by Kjell Samuelsson and Hextall, it sounds like they think his missed time puts him at a disadvantage. I'd call it less of an advantage than a disadvantage. He's good enough to play and learn at the NHL level right now.

But I expect him to get sent down. I think, if that happens, he makes his NHL debut if and when a top 4 defenseman gets injured. I should add: "top 4" as we see it, otherwise known as someone with actual puck skill, which might not be the same as the top 4 in usage. That seems to be Hextall's strategy: let injuries dictate a call-up and less so performance. How macabre. Now, if a defenseman we don't particularly care for, say Hagg or MacDonald, gets injured (even Gudas given his shared handedness), it wouldn't floor me to see them run with Folin. He's played 51 and 65 games the last 2 seasons each, so there's probably a confidence level there to start. He plays that heavy game to which his coach will probably take a liking. Basically, if Myers doesn't make it out of camp, I reckon it'll be fate that decides. Might not be a good fate either.

I also think he's good enough to hold his own in the NHL to start the season. Was the waiting for injuries as an impetus to call-up players something Hextall & Lombardi did in LA? Because it's a very odd policy. The other odd element here is that you'll get called-up, only if a similar player goes down with an injury on the big club. Designated roles from the jump put player's into a box. Which is a bit asinine. I'm very prepared for Folin to be this seasson's Brandon Manning: played far too often (& in critical spots) because he plays a "heavy game."

"It doesn't matter if you can actually play hockey well, as long as you hit people, you're golden in my eyes."

Love,
- Dave Hakstol Esq. (probably)

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Also, if we’re randomly giving Hakstol credit for our stars playing great (which is obviously a stupid thing to do, but let’s play along), I assume we’re also giving him blame for our bad players being awful, right?

It's not "random" credit. It's based on the fact that he made a specific roster move -- moving Giroux to wing and playing Couturier as the first line center -- that ended up with both players having career-best seasons.

And you're so extremely anti-Hakstol you can't even give him an ounce of credit for that decision working out. No, you actually try to twist it into a criticism of him, saying it was a mistake to not start Giroux at center.

Well, Giroux had played 1C for two seasons under him. I think he had enough information to make an assessment, and made a good one, that he'd be better on Couturier's wing. And it was probably a good idea to use the preseason to let them adjust to the new arrangement.

It's fascinating psychology that you consider yourself less extreme in your Hakstol views than I am. I mean, you can't even answer a simple question of whether you think the Flyers' roster for last season was better or worse than 12th in the NHL. You'd think for how much you think Hakstol is a moron and holding them back, it would be an easy answer. But you know he didn't have a top 11 roster in the league, and admitting their finish in the league was better than where their roster ranked screws with your narrative.

 

[bobbythebrain]

It's not "random" credit. It's based on the fact that he made a specific roster move -- moving Giroux to wing and playing Couturier as the first line center -- that ended up with both players having career-best seasons.

And you're so extremely anti-Hakstol you can't even give him an ounce of credit for that decision working out. No, you actually try to twist it into a criticism of him, saying it was a mistake to not start Giroux at center.

Well, Giroux had played 1C for two seasons under him. I think he had enough information to make an assessment, and made a good one, that he'd be better on Couturier's wing. And it was probably a good idea to use the preseason to let them adjust to the new arrangement.

It's fascinating psychology that you consider yourself less extreme in your Hakstol views than I am. I mean, you can't even answer a simple question of whether you think the Flyers' roster for last season was better or worse than 12th in the NHL. You'd think for how much you think Hakstol is a moron and holding them back, it would be an easy answer. But you know he didn't have a top 11 roster in the league, and admitting their finish in the league was better than where their roster ranked screws with your narrative.

I agree. I am not full anti Hak although some moves boggle the mind like TK

But G, Couts, Provy, Ghost(this year all around), Voracek,

Some career years. It's hard to say that all this happened cuz Hak is a moron and got lucky. However, his mistakes are pretty evident also..Manning, McDonald, Flip

Imo it's a pretty healthy good and bad of good coaching and mistakes

I give it another year to see if he truly slants to one side or the other

 

[Doodootheclown]

Worth posting again, if it hasn't been already. I know its the AHL, but that clapper though

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I agree. I am not full anti Hak although some moves boggle the mind like TK

But G, Couts, Provy, Ghost(this year all around), Voracek,

Some career years. It's hard to say that all this happened cuz Hak is a moron and got lucky. However, his mistakes are pretty evident also..Manning, McDonald, Flip

Imo it's a pretty healthy good and bad of good coaching and mistakes

I give it another year to see if he truly slants to one side or the other

I've consistently said that I disagree with some of Hakstol's personnel decisions.

I've consistently said I don't think he's a great coach. But I do think he's probably above average.

I've consistently said I wouldn't care if they fired him, but I don't think his record over his 3 seasons was worse than the roster he had at his disposal.

There is an extreme, popular viewpoint that Hakstol held the team back and made them finish worse than they should have. And it's telling that no one who supports the "Hak is horrible" viewpoint will answer the question as to whether his roster was 11th in the league or better. It's telling they refuse to acknowledge they were tied for 21st in the league in preseason Cup odds. It's telling that some people can't even give Hakstol an ounce of credit for moving Giroux to wing and Couturier to 1C, which ended up with two career seasons. And they think I'm the extreme one???

I've already said I disagree with moving TK to the third line in the playoffs, but I understand why they tried it. They're thin. Flip, well, Hextall traded for him to be the 2C. He stunk, but Patrick couldn't play for half the year, so what are you gonna do? That was the 2C your GM gave you. Manning wasn't a negative. He gave them very good value for his contract, and earned himself an over $2M/per deal on the UFA market, so I wouldn't be blaming Hakstol for him. And AMac, I thought, had his best season as a Flyer. Not that I like him. But he was an AHLer, and then played adequately on a defense that I think everyone knows was undermanned. Who should they have played more? Hagg? Gudas, who was a disaster in the playoffs? Manning, who did his best but you clearly dislike?

 

[Adtar02]

Tell that to Striiker, who alleges that no one argues that the "shell" is a system change, but, rather, a personnel usage issue.

It's absolutely hysterical that so many people who rail against Hakstol on a practically daily basis, asserting with vigor that he held the Flyers back, refuse to answer a simple question of where they thought the Flyers' roster ranked in the league last year and if it was better than 12th, which is where they finished.

I wonder why.

Honestly thought talent wise the were middle of the league to start the season. Thought they had great top end but bad depth. And weak defense. I thought the stars carried them and Jake did hold back the team.

I also don’t think Hakstol is terrible but he makes some bad mistakes. And cost the team points.

 

[bobbythebrain]

I've consistently said that I disagree with some of Hakstol's personnel decisions.

I've consistently said I don't think he's a great coach. But I do think he's probably above average.

I've consistently said I wouldn't care if they fired him, but I don't think his record over his 3 seasons was worse than the roster he had at his disposal.

There is an extreme, popular viewpoint that Hakstol held the team back and made them finish worse than they should have. And it's telling that no one who supports the "Hak is horrible" viewpoint will answer the question as to whether his roster was 11th in the league or better. It's telling they refuse to acknowledge they were tied for 21st in the league in preseason Cup odds. It's telling that some people can't even give Hakstol an ounce of credit for moving Giroux to wing and Couturier to 1C, which ended up with two career seasons. And they think I'm the extreme one???

I've already said I disagree with moving TK to the third line in the playoffs, but I understand why they tried it. They're thin. Flip, well, Hextall traded for him to be the 2C. He stunk, but Patrick couldn't play for half the year, so what are you gonna do? That was the 2C your GM gave you. Manning wasn't a negative. He gave them very good value for his contract, and earned himself an over $2M/per deal on the UFA market, so I wouldn't be blaming Hakstol for him. And AMac, I thought, had his best season as a Flyer. Not that I like him. But he was an AHLer, and then played adequately on a defense that I think everyone knows was undermanned. Who should they have played more? Hagg? Gudas, who was a disaster in the playoffs? Manning, who did his best but you clearly dislike?

I agree w/ most of this post honestly. Well laid out

Coaches usually defer to those who they can trust(it's not a Hak trait, it's a general NHL coach trait also)..but also have an obligation to develop others which imo gets lost in debate. Is Hak stupid or a year ahead behind the curve? I'm positive he also has a mandate from the GM and general direction of the teams concept to create competition/development/ right of passage/ unfair/blashamy it seems

You hear over and over coaches on any team say they play who they trust..then it becomes a fine line who they did or who they didn't, regardless of those who they are molding at the sake of extra time, experience or developing, hunger, readiness

IMO Hak is not the best coach, but I do feel he is still operating under Hex's orders as far as development

 

[deadhead]

I think Hextall waits for injuries to promote players because he doesn't like to rush players in the first place (I think he's right that few players have been ruined by AHL time but many by being promoted too soon).

The advantage of an injury call up is there is less pressure on the young player, the thought is he's only expected to hold the fort, not carry the team, so it provides a cushion while a prospect adjusts to the NHL, especially given the vitriol that characterizes much of the Philly media. It's up to the player to then run with his opportunity, people whine about Sanheim, but look at Lindblom, it took him two games to become the 2LW.

Ironically, Sanheim playing well will probably send Myers down, if Sanheim/Gudas play like a solid 2nd pairing, the third pair will get 15-17 minutes a night, including PK duties - in that case Ron may prefer Myers playing 20+ a night in LHV in all roles as a faster path to developing a top 4 defenseman.

I don't think if Myers goes down, if he stays healthy and keeps improving, that he'll stay down much past January 1. If he approaches his potential, it'll soon be obvious he's a man among boys in the AHL.

 

[Striiker]

Good morning everyone. Time to embarrass Ghosts Beer again.

And we'll start off by pointing out that, yet again, he's a liar. But that proof will come last, since he lied in that last paragraph and I want to go in order.

It's not "random" credit. It's based on the fact that he made a specific roster move -- moving Giroux to wing and playing Couturier as the first line center -- that ended up with both players having career-best seasons.

For what percentage of the season was Hakstol on the ice? How many of the goals came off his stick? How many passes?

Oh, none? Then I guess it'd be pretty stupid to give him credit for their quality of play.

The two of them played incredible individually and deserve all the credit for their play. Trying to sneak some to Hakstol just proves how weak the arguments in his favor are.

And you're so extremely anti-Hakstol you can't even give him an ounce of credit for that decision working out.

Difference is, I admit I'm anti-Hakstol, but you can't admit that you're pro-Hakstol, even though you're so clearly biased in his favor and regularly make dishonest/illogical arguments to defend him.

You lie and say you're in the middle, the grey area, but that's obviously not true. Especially when you say he's "above average". You're the most biased of anyone on here, other than your hero deadhead. At least the rest of us are right about him, meanwhile you have to resort to making up imaginary things to praise him for.

No, you actually try to twist it into a criticism of him, saying it was a mistake to not start Giroux at center.

Well, Giroux had played 1C for two seasons under him. I think he had enough information to make an assessment, and made a good one, that he'd be better on Couturier's wing. And it was probably a good idea to use the preseason to let them adjust to the new arrangement.

Yeah, because it's obvious he should have.

For the same logic as why it would be stupid to move Couturier to wing right now. There's no reason to believe he can't still play center, so obviously he should be at center.

There was no reason to believe that Giroux couldn't still play center, so he should have been at center until he gave us a reason to believe he couldn't do it anymore.

Those previous two years you keep mentioning? Well you're being dishonest by intentionally ignoring that the first year he was injured and the second he was still recovering from that injury (which is notorious for needing a long recovery time to get back to normal) and he also wasn't able to train in the offseason, so this past year would have been the only one of the three where he was healthy.

It was obviously premature to move him to wing without even trying him at C first. That's just common sense, whether you admit it or not. The team would have been better off with improved center depth and we obviously didn't have a real 2C once both our 1Cs were on the same line, so there was no reason to rush and make the wrong move here.

It's fascinating psychology that you consider yourself less extreme in your Hakstol views than I am. I mean, you can't even answer a simple question of whether you think the Flyers' roster for last season was better or worse than 12th in the NHL. You'd think for how much you think Hakstol is a moron and holding them back, it would be an easy answer. But you know he didn't have a top 11 roster in the league, and admitting their finish in the league was better than where their roster ranked screws with your narrative.

OK, now here's the biggest bold face lie.

You asked this stupid question - which doesn't help your point at all, as has been explained by multiple people, including myself multiple times and just recently Magua too - and accuse me of dodging it ( do I have to post you dodging the simple question already?)

Fact is, the roster played well enough to have more points than they ended up having. Hakstol stole points away from the team by both 1) overusing the hell out of terrible players, 2) under-using good players, 3) the Hak shell, and 4) shit like that Nashville game. So yes, obviously the team deserved a higher finish than 12th, thanks to the insane play of our top players being enough to make up for the trash guys, plus more.


Regardless, I did answer it, as can be seen here...

They finished 12th in the league.

Do you think they are better than 12th overall in the league talent-wise?

Yes, the Flyers are better than 12th overall, talent-wise.

... and you know that, since you even replied, so clearly you're trying to lie again.


This is really embarrassing for you...

 

[Rebels57]

Myers was a heck of a find by Hextall. Gonna be a good NHL hockey player.

 

[TB87]

Good insight here Dead! This thought never crossed my mind. There’s a method to the madness! Anyways, I’m very excited to see Myers in the NHL His game seems tailor made for the new NHL: adept skater, good stick, clean exits/entries, and aggressive in all three zones. Should be a fun player to watch in the not-too-distant future.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

If you think you're coming off well here, Striiker, I don't know what to tell you. You're coming off extremely unhinged.

You weasel worded your answer as "Yes, the Flyers are better than 12th overall, talent-wise." The question wasn't asked in relation to the present-tense. It was asked in relation to the roster they had available last season. With Patrick being a non-NHL quality center for half the season. With Mrazek having to play 17 games and posting an .891. With the AHL goalie Lyon having to play 11 games. With Neuvirth repeatedly hurt. With the 2C that the GM acquired being a terrible Filppula. With Simmonds being hurt all season and being lousy at ES. With the bottom 5 defensemen on the roster consisting of AMAC, Manning, Hagg, Gudas, and Sanheim.

If you really think the roster they had available throughout the season was better than top 12, I think you're letting your anti-Hakstol bias cloud your judgment. I think the Vegas odds of having them tied for 21st is a much more accurate and objective representation.

 

[Striiker]

Look at him squirm and try to ignore being caught lying.

(And for the record they “are” and “were” better than 12th, thanks to their stars. No “weasel wording” at all)

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Holy cow, man. Thanks for the clarification (and I completely disagree with your opinion that the roster Hakstol had available throughout last season was 11th or better out of 31).

But the way your M.O. has become parading around on here in hysterics accusing, "LIAR!" is childish and embarrassing.

 

[Striiker]

Holy cow, man. Thanks for the clarification (and I completely disagree with your opinion that the roster Hakstol had available throughout last season was 11th or better out of 31).

But the way your M.O. has become parading around on here in hysterics accusing, "LIAR!" is childish and embarrassing.

I see you’re upset at being exposed.

That’s natural.

But if you stop the dishonesty/lying I won’t be able to expose you, so it’s really up to you. And it’s not like I have to make it up, seeing as I post indisputable proof of it.

As for the roster, they had bad depth but the insane play of their the stars boosted them into that top range. They alone got this team to the playoffs, in spite of the depth and coach issues. If it wasn’t for those two negative things, they certainly finish higher than 12th. So yes, Hakstol obviously held them back from placing higher.

 

[Striiker]

Myers was a heck of a find by Hextall. Gonna be a good NHL hockey player.

Yes, Myers is good at hockey.

The question is: will his aggression be enough for Hakstol to look past his mistakes or will his offensive talent mean he’s automatically in the doghouse?

 

[Rebels57]

Yes, Myers is good at hockey.

The question is: will his aggression be enough for Hakstol to look past his mistakes or will his offensive talent mean he’s automatically in the doghouse?

It makes me nauseous just thinking about how angry Hakstol's treatment of Sanheim and Myers this upcoming season is going to make me.

 

[kudymen]

It makes me nauseous just thinking about how angry Hakstol's treatment of Sanheim and Myers this upcoming season is going to make me.

He (Hak) will have no choice

 

[Striiker]

It makes me nauseous just thinking about how angry Hakstol's treatment of Sanheim and Myers this upcoming season is going to make me.

I don't know what's worse... his stupid treatment of the good players or his stupid treatment of the bad players.

They're so clearly inverted from what they should be.

 

[deadhead]

Sanheim and Myers will determine their usage, the way Ghost forced his way in with elite offensive skills and Provorov with an off the charts hockey IQ.

Sanheim has had an offseason to prepare, we'll see in camp if he was mature enough to learn from his rookie season and show up bigger, stronger, smarter and meaner - because his flaws are fixable, but they require commitment to playing hard at both ends of the ice and maintaining his focus.

Myers is just a matter of experience, he has the size and mean streak Sanheim lacks, just has to make the adjustment from juniors to AHL to NHL, where you have to play more under control b/c the margin for error is much smaller (your mistakes skate faster in the other direction).