patrick looked great

totally agree about sanheim- that's when hak lost me, putting him in the pressbox in that pens series
- -davies-

I’m just glad to see Sanheim progressing.
Last year there were several things that seemed off with what they were doing with him.

A month in the press box when he should have been playing somewhere, LHV if not in Philly?

But it’s the end results that count.

He has basically the same players the previous coach did, who was fired after just two years.

He also has a starting goalie who is playing terribly, but he's been able to overcome that.

https://www.eliteprospect...m/player/10173/mike-smith
- Feanor

That's not true at all -- they brought in multiple new players, some of whom are playing better than others.

Elias Lindholm is simply playing better in Calgary than he ever did in Carolina. How does that work? Bill Peters figured out "which buttons to push" in Calgary...three months after the SAME PLAYER didn't perform nearly as well in Carolina?

Or is Elias Lindholm playing with Johnny Gaudreau and Sean Monahan?

What were the lines.

Seen JVR g and tk
- wcorvette

Ask Lehtera.

Well JVR got 5 years at 7 million per and he doesn't bring the intangibles to the table that Simmonds does. Couple that with a rising cap and I can all but guarantee that if Simmer is willing to take a 4 year deal, there will be GM willing to pony up at least 7.5 per or if he wants 5 years, he'll get the same as JVR from someone. It's just the nature of the business.
- BiggE

I meant to say I “wouldn’t” go further than what I posted. My mistake.

I think from a purely offensive standpoint JvR is better. With this said, I think the only way guys like Couturier, JvR or Simmonds are to be successful is if they see time with a player like Giroux every night. Not to say they can’t be good alone. G just helps.

Someone mentioned “moving their feet” earlier. For the most part, it was really noticeable from all 5 skaters in the D-zone last night. It’s probably one of those really obvious fixes, but before there was no chance for them to defend well or get to loose pucks when they were standing still.

That's not true at all -- they brought in multiple new players, some of whom are playing better than others.

Elias Lindholm is simply playing better in Calgary than he ever did in Carolina. How does that work? Bill Peters figured out "which buttons to push" in Calgary...three months after the SAME PLAYER didn't perform nearly as well in Carolina?
- AllInForFlyers

Peters was also Lindholm's coach in Carolina.

They swapped Hamilton for LIndholm and Hanifin, and their major free agent signing was James Neal, who was 7 points in 34 games. The bulk of the roster hasn't changed. Keep trying to dismiss the impact Peters has had there, but Calgary fans will tell you you don't know what you're talking about.

Players have to buy into the system in order for them to lead. I'm not sure how much the veterans bought into what Hak was selling. How often over the last 4 seasons did we see them only start to compete once they fell behind and were able to just go all out offensively? Ken Hitchcock always said that it was imperative that the key veterans on the team buy into what you are trying to do, if not, you don't stand a chance. He had that in Dallas with Hatcher and Carbonneau and in Philly with Primeau and Roenick. I don't think Hak ever made those connections. Of course if a team is struggling a lot is on the players. That's obvious. But it is part of the coaches job to figure out a way to reach these guys and get them to play to their potential. In that respect, Hak failed.

Lets be real here, if it was all on the players, than any competent hockey coach should be able to succeed in the NHL and their would be no reason to pay huge salaries to guys like Babcock and Quenneville. The coach matters.
- BiggE

I agree, buy in is huge and I don't think Hakstol had that bridge between the coaches and the players. Top coaches like Babcock and Quenneville are just really good at finding that edge, that in game nuance that give his team an edge. When a coach has more tools at his disposal, he has more of an opportunity to find that edge. What we also see is top coaches like Babcock and Quenneville seem ordinary, even fired. Which normally corresponds to the ability of the players at his disposal. To fully illustrate, a top team will be better with Quenneville as a coach than they would with Hakstol. He just is better and has more experience.

Someone mentioned “moving their feet” earlier. For the most part, it was really noticeable from all 5 skaters in the D-zone last night. It’s probably one of those really obvious fixes, but before there was no chance for them to defend well or get to loose pucks when they were standing still.
- NC Flyers Fan

PK seemed extremely aggressive as well.

Someone mentioned “moving their feet” earlier. For the most part, it was really noticeable from all 5 skaters in the D-zone last night. It’s probably one of those really obvious fixes, but before there was no chance for them to defend well or get to loose pucks when they were standing still.
- NC Flyers Fan

Motion would be what I would say if asked to describe the difference in the flyers play last night in one word.

Playing tight leads to frustration which can lead to a player not keeping his feet moving. It has nothing to do with effort. Case in point. During my first season in Bantam, I played for an excellent coach who was a pleasure to play for. He understood that mistakes were going to happen and he didn't overreact when you screwed up. Also, if he had something to say to you that was a criticism, he took you aside and didn't do it in front of your teammates. Every guy on the team played their butts off for this guy and we had a blast doing so.

The next season, still in Bantam, our coach was a guy who had actually played pro in the old Eastern League. He was the worst coach I ever played for. He constantly belittled guys in front of the whole team and his answer to everything was "shut the (frank) up and work harder". His strategy was basically go after the puck, get it, and score. We rarely, if ever, practiced any kind of set breakouts or any manner of special teams. You knew if you made a mistake, you were going to get reamed out in front of the entire team and probably benched for a shift or 2.

So, what happened? Guys were hesitant. They would slow up, not from lack of effort, but from fear of making mistakes and not wanting to do the wrong thing. We spent too much time thinking about the coach and what not to do instead of just reacting and playing the game, and that is always a recipe for failure.

Now, pro sports is light years beyond a bunch of 14 year old kids playing bantam, but some basic tenets hold true at all levels. When you are frustrated and/or afraid to screw up, your natural inclination is to be hesitant on the ice. It will seem to the casual viewer to be a lack of effort, but what it really is, is a lack of confidence combined with a fear of failure. Hakstol certainly is a good hockey coach, you don't get to where he is if you aren't. But just because he's a good hockey coach and for that matter a good person, doesn't mean that he's going to be successful coaching in the NHL. Like it or not, the league has changed quite a bit over the last couple of decades and coaches need not only to be good coaches, but also, at least to some degree, sports psychologists too.

You need to which players need a pat on the back and which respond better to a kick in the ass. You need to know which guys have thick skin and can take a chewing out and which are sensitive and would respond better to a quiet chat. You need to make sure that the key veterans are on the same page as you and that the kids are comfortable and being put in a position to thrive. Scott Gordon may not be the next Quenneville or Hitchcock, but he's been coaching NHL and AHL players for a decade and he knows how to communicate with them. I'm not sure that Hakstol was skilled enough in this department to succeed in today's NHL.
- BiggE

Nice post. You really managed to capture the spirit of the thing.

I didn’t think Gordon was at practice.
- NC Flyers Fan

He was.

Someone mentioned “moving their feet” earlier. For the most part, it was really noticeable from all 5 skaters in the D-zone last night. It’s probably one of those really obvious fixes, but before there was no chance for them to defend well or get to loose pucks when they were standing still.
- NC Flyers Fan

It helps when you take off a 2 ton weight. Letting Hak go did that

PK seemed extremely aggressive as well.
- ClaudeFather

The PK has been playing more aggressively for significant period of time. I credit Giroux for bringing that to the PK.

Peters was also Lindholm's coach in Carolina.
- Feanor

Exactly. Was Peters a poop coach in Carolina because he didn't get Lindholm to produce and never made the playoffs? But now he's a good coach because Lindholm is producing and Calgary is leading their division?

He's the same guy. He's just got different players

I agree, buy in is huge and I don't think Hakstol had that bridge between the coaches and the players. Top coaches like Babcock and Quenneville are just really good at finding that edge, that in game nuance that give his team an edge. When a coach has more tools at his disposal, he has more of an opportunity to find that edge. What we also see is top coaches like Babcock and Quenneville seem ordinary, even fired. Which normally corresponds to the ability of the players at his disposal. To fully illustrate, a top team will be better with Quenneville as a coach than they would with Hakstol. He just is better and has more experience.
- MJL

Regardless of Hak I've never really understood the Babcock praise. He had GREAT teams in Detroit and won one cup. Once he saw that the team was headed south he left, went to another really good team, still has done nothing. Why is he any different than Dan Bylsma?

Defenseman always had the green light to move up on the play under Hakstol. Just look at the goals that Sanheim has scored when Hakstol was behind the bench.

The PK has been playing more aggressively for significant period of time. I credit Giroux for bringing that to the PK.
- MJL

And who gets credit for telling the Dmen to get in the play last night, those guys were up ice all night. Hakstoll?

The PK has been playing more aggressively for significant period of time. I credit Giroux for bringing that to the PK.
- MJL

No they haven’t. Last night the puck side forward pressured the puck carrier on the half wall. That hasn’t been done by the Flyers in years.

Defenseman always had the green light to move up on the play under Hakstol. Just look at the goals that Sanheim has scored when Hakstol was behind the bench.
- MJL

Lmao yea he told them never to get up ice?? Come on, that's not what we are saying, there was a CLEAR difference last night in the Dmen pushing the play.

I’m just glad to see Sanheim progressing.
Last year there were several things that seemed off with what they were doing with him.

A month in the press box when he should have been playing somewhere, LHV if not in Philly?

But it’s the end results that count.
- Marc D

Carter Hart aside, Sanheim's usage was encouraging.

It was a win! That's a good thing, right?

*reads other posts*

Right, you guys??

*goes back to making Jori Lehtera cocaine jokes*

Exactly. Was Peters a poop coach in Carolina because he didn't get Lindholm to produce and never made the playoffs? But now he's a good coach because Lindholm is producing and Calgary is leading their division?

He's the same guy. He's just got different players
- AllInForFlyers

Peters was never a poop coach, he had rosters with nowhere near the talent and payroll that Hakstol was given to work with. That's why Peters wasn't fired, he resigned, and he was immediately hired by a better organization.

Don't hold your breath waiting for Hak to get a new NHL head coaching gig.

Last night the flyers essentially used a triangle + 1 instead of passive box on the pk

IMO 2 years ago Hak enforced a change in the Flyers. IMO he took out all grit from the players game because they were taking too many penalties. This is what lead to Simmonds effectiveness dropping in addition to Gudas, and anyone else that played with "passion". I also believed he put restraints on the defense to keep them from joining the rush, or being "creative". Changing those 2 things could be enough to change this team.

And who gets credit for telling the Dmen to get in the play last night, those guys were up ice all night. Hakstoll?
- ClaudeFather

The Dmen who moved up in the play.

How many dart holes in it does the picture you have?
- MJL

Considering how bad his aim is, probably none.