Q isn't as magic pill. It could work. It could fail. Everyone acts like it'll fix everything. Why didn't Hakstol, a new voice.from outside, fix this core? Yes Hakstol needs to go, but don't be so sure it's going to fix this cluster (frank).
- dragonoffrost

This core has failed under 2 coaches, neither of whom had any experience as a head coach prior to taking the Flyers job. I think an experienced coach like Quenneville, who has won 3 Stanley Cups as a head coach, could make a tremendous difference.

This has happened before in recent Flyers history. After the mess that was Cashman/Neilson/Ramsay/Barber, the Flyers brought in Ken Hitchcock and made it clear to the players that it was now 100% on them. The same would hold true if the Flyers brought in Quenneville.

Also, for those who claim that this core has failed under 3 coaches, that is a fallacy. Coots, Simmonds and Voracek were kids under Lavi and not part of the core. The core of that team, once Pronger got hurt and the trades of 2011 were made, was Timonen, Briere, Hartnell and the new young captain, Giroux. To say that the current core failed under Laviolette is simply wrong.

Core is the leadership of this team. Your list of best players is the start of it
- dragonoffrost

Trading for A,B,C will be futile. When the coach uses subpar personnel for the majority of the game, it may not matter who plays the rest of the game.

This core has failed under 2 coaches, neither of whom had any experience as a head coach prior to taking the Flyers job. I think an experienced coach like Quenneville, who has won 3 Stanley Cups as a head coach, could make a tremendous difference.

This has happened before in recent Flyers history. After the mess that was Cashman/Neilson/Ramsay/Barber, the Flyers brought in Ken Hitchcock and made it clear to the players that it was now 100% on them. The same would hold true if the Flyers brought in Quenneville.

Also, for those who claim that this core has failed under 3 coaches, that is a fallacy. Coots, Simmonds and Voracek were kids under Lavi and not part of the core. The core of that team, once Pronger got hurt and the trades of 2011 were made, was Timonen, Briere, Hartnell and the new young captain, Giroux. To say that the current core failed under Laviolette is simply wrong.
- BiggE

Look at Edmonton and what a competent coach does for a team.

Look at Edmonton and what a competent coach does for a team.
- jmdodgeser4

Has nothing to do with coaches, the players just didn't want to execute last year.

Coaching has zero to do with how a team performs, they're just figureheads. It's solely about whether the players execute or not.

Look at Edmonton and what a competent coach does for a team.
- jmdodgeser4

competent....and different. Hakstol is a good coach, but it's pretty apparent that his message is not getting through. I think they need an experienced guy to come in and get this thing going in the right direction....regardless of the name on the jersey if your not rowing in the same direction you won't be here.

This core has failed under 2 coaches, neither of whom had any experience as a head coach prior to taking the Flyers job. I think an experienced coach like Quenneville, who has won 3 Stanley Cups as a head coach, could make a tremendous difference.

This has happened before in recent Flyers history. After the mess that was Cashman/Neilson/Ramsay/Barber, the Flyers brought in Ken Hitchcock and made it clear to the players that it was now 100% on them. The same would hold true if the Flyers brought in Quenneville.

Also, for those who claim that this core has failed under 3 coaches, that is a fallacy. Coots, Simmonds and Voracek were kids under Lavi and not part of the core. The core of that team, once Pronger got hurt and the trades of 2011 were made, was Timonen, Briere, Hartnell and the new young captain, Giroux. To say that the current core failed under Laviolette is simply wrong.
- BiggE

it goes both ways look at Dallas and the Rangers they went to new young ideas and it's worked.

Look at Edmonton and what a competent coach does for a team.
- jmdodgeser4

Exactly. You can’t compare that with what is going on in Chicago or St Louis. The Blues know that Berube is a stopgap and that’s going to do nothing to improve the team and in Chicago you just replaced one of the finest coaches in NHL history with young, rookie head coach. I’m sure the veterans in that room aren’t exactly thrilled with change. Meanwhile a wily, veteran head coach like Hitch takes over an underperforming team and immediately they start playing better. It ain’t rocket science!

Also, with all this "Voracek for Tarasenko" talk, I just don't see it. If St. Louis is moving on from an elite goal scorer in his prime, I doubt they're looking to acquire an older elite playmaker. I'm pretty sure that St. Louis would be looking for a tear down/mini rebuild and would want top-end young pieces. Honestly, Tarasenko is one of the very few players I would consider moving Frost for in a deal.

Now, Voracek for Stone I could see, as Ottawa probably won't be able to resign him.

competent....and different. Hakstol is a good coach, but it's pretty apparent that his message is not getting through. I think they need an experienced guy to come in and get this thing going in the right direction....regardless of the name on the jersey if your not rowing in the same direction you won't be here.
- landros 2

It well may be, but he is coaching out of fear. Every third period with a lead looks exactly the same. It's like he has a stone tablet somewhere: "One shall not lose".

it goes both ways look at Dallas and the Rangers they went to new young ideas and it's worked.
- dragonoffrost

Dallas had a pretty solid team to work with and even so, they aren’t a lock to make the playoffs just yet. Also, what have the Rags really done so far under their new coach? I’ll reserve judgement on them until the end of the coach’s first full season.

Honestly, are you really trying to argue that Quenneville wouldn’t be an upgrade over Hakstol?

Exactly. You can’t compare that with what is going on in Chicago or St Louis. The Blues know that Berube is a stopgap and that’s going to do nothing to improve the team and in Chicago you just replaced one of the finest coaches in NHL history with young, rookie head coach. I’m sure the veterans in that room aren’t exactly thrilled with change. Meanwhile a wily, veteran head coach like Hitch takes over an underperforming team and immediately they start playing better. It ain’t rocket science!
- BiggE

Dallas had a pretty solid team to work with and even so, they aren’t a lock to make the playoffs just yet. Also, what have the Rags really done so far under their new coach? I’ll reserve judgement on them until the end of the coach’s first full season.

Honestly, are you really trying to argue that Quenneville wouldn’t be an upgrade over Hakstol?
- BiggE

No I'm just saying it's not a lock to be the fix

I want both changed coach and roster.

Even if we were able to close out the game, the same issues exist. Our talent level doesn't match the usage in certain situations. We don't have that dominate shut down dman (Parayako??) so AMac (veteran) gets minutes in key situations. Nor has any forward stepped up on d/PK. G and Coots must be used on PK and it hurts end-of-game situations.

Stolie will be fine. Patrick will be fine. I'd really like to see Lindblom moved up with Patrick and for Sanheim to start getting more minutes (and placed in key situations).

We need moves to shake up the roster. Everything that we have been saying on this board. Dman, sniper, and PK/3C type guy. If there is a "cheap" move for goalie help, take a look. I'd be fine with Stolie and Elliott also.

Sam Morin cant get here fast enough.........

(among other things)
- MBFlyerfan

We'll see if it helps. I think it's more about awareness more than anything. Players are flat footed around the net.

No I'm just saying it's not a lock to be the fix
- dragonoffrost

Now you sound like MJL. Of course it’s not a LOCK to be the fix. Nothing is a lock. But history shows that bringing in a coach with the resume of Joel Quenneville is usually a good choice.

Even if we were able to close out the game, the same issues exist. Our talent level doesn't match the usage in certain situations. We don't have that dominate shut down dman (Parayako??) so AMac (veteran) gets minutes in key situations. Nor has any forward stepped up on d/PK. G and Coots must be used on PK and it hurts end-of-game situations.

Stolie will be fine. Patrick will be fine. I'd really like to see Lindblom moved up with Patrick and for Sanheim to start getting more minutes (and placed in key situations).

We need moves to shake up the roster. Everything that we have been saying on this board. Dman, sniper, and PK/3C type guy. If there is a "cheap" move for goalie help, take a look. I'd be fine with Stolie and Elliott also.
- cdearth23

They actually played worse than the score last night. If we had Neuvirth/Pickard in there, or even a less-than-100% Elliott, they would have lost probably 8-5 in regulation. Stolarz was outstanding, especially in the 3rd, the team just let him down.

Again.

Trading for A,B,C will be futile. When the coach uses subpar personnel for the majority of the game, it may not matter who plays the rest of the game.
- missingmike

This is simply not accurate. Look at the average ice time per game and see who is playing the most.

Nolan Patrick 10:27 of ice, where are you Super Schenn Bro????? I know there were penalties but we always take penalties. Only a few more than usual.

Now you sound like MJL. Of course it’s not a LOCK to be the fix. Nothing is a lock. But history shows that bringing in a coach with the resume of Joel Quenneville is usually a good choice.
- BiggE

I'll just add the caveat that it's a good choice if the current situation is becoming more and more futile by the game which, to me, is the current situation for the Flyers.

Divvy out ice time like it's game 7 in the playoffs, barely play 22 year old kids, and dump 26 minutes on a forward just back from injury.... and you still manage to blow a two goal lead and lose 6-5.

Even if we were able to close out the game, the same issues exist. Our talent level doesn't match the usage in certain situations. We don't have that dominate shut down dman (Parayako??) so AMac (veteran) gets minutes in key situations. Nor has any forward stepped up on d/PK. G and Coots must be used on PK and it hurts end-of-game situations.

Stolie will be fine. Patrick will be fine. I'd really like to see Lindblom moved up with Patrick and for Sanheim to start getting more minutes (and placed in key situations).

We need moves to shake up the roster. Everything that we have been saying on this board. Dman, sniper, and PK/3C type guy. If there is a "cheap" move for goalie help, take a look. I'd be fine with Stolie and Elliott also.
- cdearth23

The players are certainly culpable. But, the usage issue is not on players. The root-cause are not players, but where, when, and how much they play.

Exactly. You can’t compare that with what is going on in Chicago or St Louis. The Blues know that Berube is a stopgap and that’s going to do nothing to improve the team and in Chicago you just replaced one of the finest coaches in NHL history with young, rookie head coach. I’m sure the veterans in that room aren’t exactly thrilled with change. Meanwhile a wily, veteran head coach like Hitch takes over an underperforming team and immediately they start playing better. It ain’t rocket science!
- BiggE

There is a long history of coaching changes. They work sometimes and sometimes they don't. Hitchcock has also been fired how many times?

This core has failed under 2 coaches, neither of whom had any experience as a head coach prior to taking the Flyers job. I think an experienced coach like Quenneville, who has won 3 Stanley Cups as a head coach, could make a tremendous difference.

This has happened before in recent Flyers history. After the mess that was Cashman/Neilson/Ramsay/Barber, the Flyers brought in Ken Hitchcock and made it clear to the players that it was now 100% on them. The same would hold true if the Flyers brought in Quenneville.

Also, for those who claim that this core has failed under 3 coaches, that is a fallacy. Coots, Simmonds and Voracek were kids under Lavi and not part of the core. The core of that team, once Pronger got hurt and the trades of 2011 were made, was Timonen, Briere, Hartnell and the new young captain, Giroux. To say that the current core failed under Laviolette is simply wrong.
- BiggE

credibility... preach it.... that can change the mojo and belief of a team... with a coach with no resume G is as much the leader as the coach during challenging times,that is ok if they can take it to the next level, this group cant. the credibility of a championship coach could help, there would be 1 chief. we have the chief on the O; G. We have zero chief on D, since Pronger. no chief at coaching, we have 1 out of 3. we are a 1 out of 3 team.


that said in any team, any business, you feel the most pain before breaking through.

trade for muzzin and #9 on LA, ROLL WITH IT TILL NEXT SEASON

SORRY FOR THE TYPING, THIS TOUCH PAD SUCKS

Now you sound like MJL. Of course it’s not a LOCK to be the fix. Nothing is a lock. But history shows that bringing in a coach with the resume of Joel Quenneville is usually a good choice.
- BiggE

I'm just done with this team being the same for the last what 7 seasons? That long of this inconsistency needs more than a coaching change to a proven coach.

The players are certainly culpable. But, the usage issue is not on players. The root-cause are not players, but where, when, and how much they play.
- missingmike

To me, part of that falls on the GM not adequately addressing needs this offseason, which creates holes, which forces the coach to deploy players a certain way. To me, it's been a complete fail from the GM through the players and everyone in between.