Is it time for a coaching change?
- Thread starter Kevinsane
- Start date
Fistfullofbeer
Moderator
I am torn on this. I have been pretty vocal about my concern(s) with Hakstol, and while I do think our roster sucks, I still feel we should be better than the 5th worst league in the team more than a third into our 3rd season.
A more experienced/better coach could help get more out of this roster, but how much more? I still don't expect them to make us a playoff team. But I think what Francis plans to do next season could also dictate whether Hakstol is on the hot seat. If he plans to go hard at trades and FA to improve our roster, then maybe he would keep Hakstol and see how he does with a better roster. However, if he plans to keep the status quo and continue waiting for the kids to step up, maybe it is time to move away from Hakstol to a coach who plays a more structured defense and not just depend on a "high energy" strategy to keep us in games.
A more experienced/better coach could help get more out of this roster, but how much more? I still don't expect them to make us a playoff team. But I think what Francis plans to do next season could also dictate whether Hakstol is on the hot seat. If he plans to go hard at trades and FA to improve our roster, then maybe he would keep Hakstol and see how he does with a better roster. However, if he plans to keep the status quo and continue waiting for the kids to step up, maybe it is time to move away from Hakstol to a coach who plays a more structured defense and not just depend on a "high energy" strategy to keep us in games.
RainyCityHockey
Registered User
I'm not sure why you would do something during the season.
If you bring in someone new they'd want a longterm deal and 1) I don't know who that would be and 2) I think that's more of an offseason move given how the season has gone so far.
So I'd let Hakstol play out the season and then make a decision.
That would give him a chance to show he could turn things around and you also have more options during the summer.
Though, if Francis does make a change I'd say let's bring in Bruce Baudreau just for the sake of it.
At least that would bring some fun(and a lot of beep sounds to cover up those F-Bombs) during interviews....
If you bring in someone new they'd want a longterm deal and 1) I don't know who that would be and 2) I think that's more of an offseason move given how the season has gone so far.
So I'd let Hakstol play out the season and then make a decision.
That would give him a chance to show he could turn things around and you also have more options during the summer.
Though, if Francis does make a change I'd say let's bring in Bruce Baudreau just for the sake of it.
At least that would bring some fun(and a lot of beep sounds to cover up those F-Bombs) during interviews....
Fuhrious
Registered User
- Feb 3, 2004
- 1,262
- 1,168
I don’t know, I guess I don’t see the point? Sell me on what it accomplishes besides an expression from fans that we're frustrated?
The Marquis
Moderator
I never expected the Kraken to make the playoffs this season. My expectation was competing for, but just missing out on the playoffs. As it sits right now we're not competing for a playoff spot any longer due to this injury riddled losing streak. That said, I'm a "if you're going to be bad, be very bad" because of the lottery rules and as such am ok leaving everything in place for us to suck and build for the future. If Hakstol is the problem, I don't see how a change is going to be enough, so just leave it in place, save the double dipping for when it's clearly the coaches fault. That's not the case here. It's injuries, a not great squad to start with, and coaching. So one could say "everything is wrong". I say that and really the "potential" is there, it's just not being realized for a multitude of reasons. I don't see the Kraken coming back after this atrocious streak. If they do start to, I hope they go all in and make the damn playoffs. The energy just isn't there.
Scomerica
Registered User
I'm at the 'who should we draft in the lottery' resignation part of the season. Maybe we should have sucked last season while Bedard was there but last year was really fun and enjoyable. Watch us go in a late run when out of contention to really eff ourselves over.
The Marquis
Moderator
Well, Chicago was never going to not get Bedard, so I'm glad the Kraken were good last year.
I'm worried about that late run. They trade a few guys away at the deadline and bring on the young guys who overperform and give us all sorts of hope, they go on a 6-7 game streak and we end up 12th-14th fromm bottom overall, instead of 3rd-6th.
Hakstol seems to not be a very effective development coach and a poor communicator. The young players on the Kraken teams often were confused with what is going on, and have stated so publicly.
The testimonials from the young players on the North Dakota team after Hakstol left, claiming that the team was more functional and a better place to play after he was gone - and then they went on to win a national championship without him, can't be ignored.
Flyers fans take on Hakstol's time in Philly with their prospects is another major concern.
Hakstol gets his guys to compete hard, so give credit where credit is due, but that seems to be the underlying focus of his coaching philosophy, and the ability to read the situation and adjust accordingly in games does not seem to be in his coaching toolbox. He also tends to lose his locker rooms after a couple of years and has nothing but the "LineBlender" to try to right the ship.
I do not think he has lost this dressing room yet, but I do worry that he is a poor choice to be running the ship when all the young prospects who are the future of this organization start to arrive.
The testimonials from the young players on the North Dakota team after Hakstol left, claiming that the team was more functional and a better place to play after he was gone - and then they went on to win a national championship without him, can't be ignored.
Flyers fans take on Hakstol's time in Philly with their prospects is another major concern.
Hakstol gets his guys to compete hard, so give credit where credit is due, but that seems to be the underlying focus of his coaching philosophy, and the ability to read the situation and adjust accordingly in games does not seem to be in his coaching toolbox. He also tends to lose his locker rooms after a couple of years and has nothing but the "LineBlender" to try to right the ship.
I do not think he has lost this dressing room yet, but I do worry that he is a poor choice to be running the ship when all the young prospects who are the future of this organization start to arrive.
Scomerica
Registered User
Player development, some goofy-ass line combos and a propensity for his team to lose a lead in the third period.
And if point #3 doesn't look alarmingly familiar...
I would agree that there isn't much point to replacing him during the season, but if the team wants to move on afterword it wouldn't hurt my feelings.
Scomerica
Registered User
I don't think there's much point either. If we aren't play off bound we might as well stink and reap the draft capital. Nothing worse than being stuck in mediocrity if we did fire the coach and things turn around but not enough to get back in contention.
His ability as a development coach is the one thing his job is riding on, to my mind. This team is unlikely to be much better under any coach.
I never understood how Hakstol got labelled as a development coach. Has to be just because he coached college for 10+ years.
When Hakstol left North Dakota, there were a few articles and interviews with the Hawks top players, and all of them said that under Brad Berry, everyone knew what they were supposed to do. Some of them even said, (paraphrasing) "when you made a mistake under Hakstol, he would just yell at you, but with Berry, he teaches you what you did wrong and helps you learn what to do in the future". They all basically said that they were more confused and the communication was not as clear when Hakstol was head coach.
He surely did not show an ability to connect with the young players in Philly, and I have never read any young player praising him for his teaching and communication, which is the foundation for development coaches.
Then we had most of the young players in Seattle publicly saying that they were often unclear what was being asked of them or what they were exactly supposed to do on the ice.
Beniers is one young player that seems to have came in and done fairly well under Hakstol, but he has had stellar coaching for a long time, playing years in the USNT program, and then playing a couple of years under Mel Pearson at Michigan. He was definitely far more prepared than most junior players are going to be entering the league (and possibly a lot of AHL players). which probably made a huge difference.
To be clear, I have no opinion on whether Hakstol is a capable development coach or not.
You make a strong case that he is not.
Renopucker
Registered User
Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me that the Kraken roster is mostly guys in their mid 20's to 30's. Kartye ( Coachella coaching) and Matty are the only two on the roster born after 2000. Point being, these are mostly vets and I just don't know how "developmental coaching" fits into this squads' profile. This group, minus some important players, led the league last year 5v5 with a sub .900 tandem in goal. Goaltending is still sub .900 now, and not scoring, particularly on the PP. I certainly don't know how to explain their situation, but I'm not convinced its the coaching.
Kat Predator
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2019
- 3,826
- 3,835
The development issue is not front and center this season due to all the reasons you listed.
Problem is that most of the younger guys, (Appleton, Geekie, Bastion), all were publicly critical of the coaching staff here in terms of a lack of communication and said they were confused most of the time on what was expected of them, which does not seem like a great recipe for the next few years as all of the young ELC talent arrives and the coaching staff is going to be relied on to mold them into solid NHL players that will hopefully develop into great players and the team's future.
Renopucker
Registered User
If that’s the case, I’m absolutely certain Francis and Leiweke have Haks on a very short leash. Minor league coaching has to match up with what’s going on at the parent club. The Lightning are a good example of the fit. Tom saw that first hand in Tampa.
RainyCityHockey
Registered User
Yes.
It was three year extension for his contract which would've run out next summer otherwise.
Kevinsane
Kraken up.
I agree with those that say a change mid-season may not accomplish much other than a short bump in play followed by finishing out of the playoffs with a worse draft spot.
It was reasonable to expect this year would see a regression after that amazing shooting percentage last year, but too often the team just doesn’t seem to have the fire. San Jose have learned how to never ever give up. It would be nice to see that kind of fight from this roster, injuries or not.
It was reasonable to expect this year would see a regression after that amazing shooting percentage last year, but too often the team just doesn’t seem to have the fire. San Jose have learned how to never ever give up. It would be nice to see that kind of fight from this roster, injuries or not.
Fuhrious
Registered User
- Feb 3, 2004
- 1,262
- 1,168
This, to me, is why the extension was such a headscratcher. If us duffers on HFBoards could see the shooting % anomaly and anticipate a regression, why did GMRF give him effectively 4 more years? It’s NEVER a good look for a team when its fans are throwing around “dump so-and-so” chatter on a player or coach whose extension hasn’t even kicked in yet…
RainyCityHockey
Registered User
Well, Francis got himself into a bit of a problem.
Hakstol had only one year left and was a Jack Adams finalist that got the team to game seven of the western conference semifinals.
I don't think he wanted to go in this season with Hakstol being on the final year of his contract and potentially a lame duck coach.
Though, that might end up being pretty expensive for the franchise.
BTW: The guys on Emerald City Hockey talked about firing him and one interesting thing was about coaches who just got extended.
According to them the last time a team fired a coach, after just extending him, was in 2012.
That's also one of the reason why I doubt Francis will do anything during the season cause it would look bad on him as well.
Fistfullofbeer
Moderator
Yeah. I would be a little surprised if he were fired mid-season. But I am genuinely curious how long his leash is. We are on a 8 game losing streak. What happens if that stretches to 15. Or what if we only win 2 in the next 15 games? At some point in time, Francis has to answer to the owners who may not be very happy with the state of the Kraken. Francis may not want to fire Hakstol but his hand may be forced.
I will start by stating that I am also not a big fan of firing a coach in midseason and would rather wait until the offseason. However, the main issue with Hak is, as mentioned above, is the development aspect (or lack thereof). Prime example is Matty B, after winning the Calder last season, he looks absolutely lost out on the ice this year....is that on Hak? Is it the League catching up? Sophomore slump? All of the above?
If most of the issue is on Hak, does Francis really want Matty exposed to having his development stalled when he is supposed to be our franchise player, not to mention all the other prospects that we have coming up?
As well, Locked on Kraken made a good point last week in that Hak has basically done everything possible to get the team going (mixing up the lines at the start of the season, going on a tirade during practice, etc.) and the Kraken are still struggling. Although I think that the players are still giving max effort, has Hak's message and game plan been tuned out and the players are playing hard but without any strategy?
If most of the issue is on Hak, does Francis really want Matty exposed to having his development stalled when he is supposed to be our franchise player, not to mention all the other prospects that we have coming up?
As well, Locked on Kraken made a good point last week in that Hak has basically done everything possible to get the team going (mixing up the lines at the start of the season, going on a tirade during practice, etc.) and the Kraken are still struggling. Although I think that the players are still giving max effort, has Hak's message and game plan been tuned out and the players are playing hard but without any strategy?
Sometimes players quit on a coach, though it is usually later in the coach's tenure. During the latter stages of the losing streak, I began to wonder if that wasn't beginning to happen to the Kraken. In general, though, that while firing a coach in mid-season may give a team a short boost, it is a risky thing to do in the long run with the chance as great that the move will destabilize a shaky team rather than right the ship. I'm not a big fan of Hakstol, but he had a hell of a year last year. I think he should be given a chance to succeed right now. I think he has earned that. If the poor play continues, well, that will have to be considered. But I don't think we should pull the trigger on a move we might regret. That would have the whiff of panic about it.
Last edited:
