There is an interesting article on the Athletic about Hakstol. It is primarily directed at Leafs fans to introduce him as a former great coach at UND. TJ Oshie and many other former players and staff rave about his abilities and how he always held every player “accountable” (really?). It strangely barely mentions his time with the Flyers which you would think would be more relevant to Leafs fans. He will coach the D and PK with the Leafs. Two units that steadily declined while he was here. This is good news because the Leafs are always one of the teams that I enjoy watching them lose. . They deserve nothing less than the Hak.
- Djapana

Why would an NHL team hire such an incompetent coach?

I understand what you and MJL are saying, but you are missing my point. Yes, the hits, in and of themselves were legal.
In the context of the overall play and delivery of those two hits, I argue that his intention was to hurt them, not just prevent them from scoring. As far as hurting them, Stevens was quite successful. These were not cases of not being able to stop due to the flow of the play. These were cases of wanting to knock the opposition into tomorrow. When Stevens says he wasn't trying to hurt them in interviews, he wreaks of being disingenuous. IMO, Stevens' intent to injure was almost as obvious as Dave Brown's on Sandstrom. Again, the hit was legal, the intent to injure is a match penalty.
- GeorgeBailey

there was a time when you were taught/told hit to hurt them. was part of the game. No issue at all with is hits and trying to hurt

I don't think Bondra is obscure. He was a beast for years. Ovechkin showing up has just cast quite the shadow.
- Pixote Andolini

He was always good, averaging about 35 goals per season. But he only ever surpassed 50 goals in a season twice, and was a very quiet star player. He wasn't like Brett Hull or Jeremy Roenick or ever Pierre Turgeon, he never got talked about much. He'd quietly collect his 35-40 goals. I guess it's because the Caps were never a serious contender during his time (aside from 97/98) so he never got much spotlight.

Look at the person you're responding to.
- jmatchett383

but he has 97 years exp as an almost GM , he should know better!

He was always good, averaging about 35 goals per season. But he only ever surpassed 50 goals in a season twice, and was a very quiet star player. He wasn't like Brett Hull or Jeremy Roenick or ever Pierre Turgeon, he never got talked about much. He'd quietly collect his 35-40 goals. I guess it's because the Caps were never a serious contender during his time (aside from 97/98) so he never got much spotlight.
- jmatchett383

Yeah you're right. He was never considered top all-star talent and considerably less sexy than another notable Russian winger from that era - Bure. Another under-the-radar player from that era was Stephane Richer. All he did was score goals.

peter bondra isnt obscure at all

It's fantasy. Don't pay attention. Go to the pool, beach, links, office.
- Pixote Andolini

Hoffman-

I am hoping that Frost and Farabee end up to be similar players, with less drama

peter bondra isnt obscure at all
- daryl stanley

In season mode of NHL '96 for Sega Genesis, he & Joey Juneau regularly potted 75+ per season for me. So I'm not surprised at all to see him in the 500 Goal Club

I understand what you and MJL are saying, but you are missing my point. Yes, the hits, in and of themselves were legal.
In the context of the overall play and delivery of those two hits, I argue that his intention was to hurt them, not just prevent them from scoring. As far as hurting them, Stevens was quite successful. These were not cases of not being able to stop due to the flow of the play. These were cases of wanting to knock the opposition into tomorrow. When Stevens says he wasn't trying to hurt them in interviews, he wreaks of being disingenuous. IMO, Stevens' intent to injure was almost as obvious as Dave Brown's on Sandstrom. Again, the hit was legal, the intent to injure is a match penalty.
- GeorgeBailey

They were "set plays". Lindros. and similarly Kariya, were engaged with other players through the neutral zone and Steven's blindsided them. It's inconsequential whether he used his elbow or shoulder, it was an Intentional killshot

Very true. Carter could be the greatest Flyer ever 30 years from now.
- joegreif17

Jeff Carter!

- sjk540

He wouldn't have to...

1) He would not skate with his head down.
2) He played in the era where players were taught to defensively raise their stick, giving the would be hitter the choice of veering off or skating right into the lumber.
3) Alternatively, there is good chance that Clarke would have proactively two-handed or speared Stevens.
4) If Stevens did succeed in hitting Clarke high, there would have been a beeline for Stevens by every Flyer on the ice and the rest leaping over the bench. Ask Barry Cummins how bloodying Clarke worked for him.
- bmeltzer

So...different eras?

Everyone gets hit at some point. Paul Kariya, Ron Francis. If a hitting player wants to get a player, they will. Hatcher got Roenick in two different uniforms.