Jump to content

Here's what happens when you hire a coach that lets you play to your strength


RonJeremy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Cole Caufield was playing on the fourth line got sent down and was not being utilized properly by the coach, they hired a new coach and look at the result. I truly believe if we get the right coach guys like Konecny, Sanheim and Frost will all show vast improvement.  

 

After registering just one goal and seven assists in 30 games under Ducharme, Caufield has since lit up the scoresheet with the new hiring of St. Louis. The small winger has seven goals and seven assists in his 11 games thus far with St. Louis at the helm. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

Cole Caufield was playing on the fourth line got sent down and was not being utilized properly by the coach, they hired a new coach and look at the result. I truly believe if we get the right coach guys like Konecny, Sanheim and Frost will all show vast improvement.  

 

After registering just one goal and seven assists in 30 games under Ducharme, Caufield has since lit up the scoresheet with the new hiring of St. Louis. The small winger has seven goals and seven assists in his 11 games thus far with St. Louis at the helm. 

 

Amazing turnaround isn't it.

 

I know Radoran won't agree, but I think this is all on Marty St. Louis!  :InnocentSmiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, flyercanuck said:


Amazing turnaround isn't it.

 

I know Radoran won't agree, but I think this is all on Marty St. Louis!  :InnocentSmiley:

 

Wait, so St. Louis believes in giving chances to smaller players who have been badly served by other coaches?

 

And it worked?

 

You don't say...

 

Too often coaches want to force players to play their game rather than seeing what the player's game can do. It's a definite balancing act but can reap great rewards.

  • Like 1
  • Good Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same with Vancouver and Boudreau, their goals against is down by half a goal since he took over and their goals for are up by half a goal. They may run out of runway and come up just short of the playoffs but I am not betting against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's true and not true. In Montreal's case they went to the cup final playing a gritty (no pun intended :)) close checking style based on a foundation of exceptional goaltending and having a rock solid D man logging big minutes. Old grinders and character players throughout the roster. They lost a lot of those players permanently or temporarily and had little left to work with. Coach stuck to the same style, team sucked this year. New coach opened it up and has them playing loose in a nothing to lose way and it's paying dividends for some players. Won't hold up until they add more talent.

 

Now for Philly, yes, certain player might excel in a different system and others might not fit but you're not going to be able to play to everyone's strength as they are not all similar. 

 

Team has to decide what it is and what it wants to be. Conflicts between old style thinking vs. new and defensive vs offensive plans lead to a mess of a little of this and a little of that and not enough of anything to win.  So:

 

step 1: decide what the identity is to be and stick with it. 

step 2: find a coach with that philosophy and stick with him.

step 3: trade/clear out the players who don't fit that style and draft/sign/trade for players who do fit that style.

That's how a proper rebuild works, but in the case of Philly what are we? I have no idea. Nothing really. Absolutely no identity at all. 

  • Like 3
  • Good Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem in Philadelphia, besides coaching and the GM, are that the senior advisors are consistently in Dave Scott's ear telling him how a team should be built. Why else does anyone think Ass-to-Mouth Shitstaintolainen was re-signed? Because Dave Scott was told that "GRRR.....defenseman big.....hit people into boards......GRRR" nonsense. Holmgren, Clarke and Lombardi have caused more problems with this franchise because of their steadfast refusal to think speed, skill and instead, think brawn, power. The sad thing is, the Flyers can EASILY have brawn and power to go with speed and skill, but they're so fixated on the size and physicality that speed and skill always takes a backseat to that. It's always going to be about size in Philadelphia and that will always be the number one trait unless those guys go. It certainly doesn't help that Schmuck looks up to Clarke and Holmgren as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

The problem in Philadelphia, besides coaching and the GM, are that the senior advisors are consistently in Dave Scott's ear telling him how a team should be built. Why else does anyone think Ass-to-Mouth Shitstaintolainen was re-signed? Because Dave Scott was told that "GRRR.....defenseman big.....hit people into boards......GRRR" nonsense. Holmgren, Clarke and Lombardi have caused more problems with this franchise because of their steadfast refusal to think speed, skill and instead, think brawn, power. The sad thing is, the Flyers can EASILY have brawn and power to go with speed and skill, but they're so fixated on the size and physicality that speed and skill always takes a backseat to that. It's always going to be about size in Philadelphia and that will always be the number one trait unless those guys go. It certainly doesn't help that Schmuck looks up to Clarke and Holmgren as well.

 

tell me what teams in nhl in the last 10 years that have won cups have players that have 5'11 and lower size players? florida, tampa, colorado, st. louis  right now ,those teams are getting bigger because goalies are getting bigger which makes so much harder for smaller forwards and d to get pucks by them. that's why we are getting worse, hextall took small forwards and this team has gotten worse because bigger teams are becoming a mismatch for us. smaller teams are a thing of the past, every good team has gotten bigger, that's what the nhl has become. small players just dont work in this era of the nhl.

 

i mean come on, did you watch the florida game on how much their size is such a mismatch for us? our small forwards are getting easily checked and knocked off the puck, that's why we are getting beat so easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, tucson83 said:

 

tell me what teams in nhl in the last 10 years that have won cups have players that have 5'11 and lower size players? florida, tampa, colorado, st. louis  right now ,those teams are getting bigger because goalies are getting bigger which makes so much harder for smaller forwards and d to get pucks by them. that's why we are getting worse, hextall took small forwards and this team has gotten worse because bigger teams are becoming a mismatch for us. smaller teams are a thing of the past, every good team has gotten bigger, that's what the nhl has become. small players just dont work in this era of the nhl.

 

i mean come on, did you watch the florida game on how much their size is such a mismatch for us? our small forwards are getting easily checked and knocked off the puck, that's why we are getting beat so easy.

 

 I think it's one thing to have big players, another to have big players with skill, and yet another to have smart big players with skill who play big. 

 

 Meanwhile we have James "Marshmallow" Van Riemsdyk, Kevin "Lazyass" Haysee and Rasmus "Duh" Ristolainen.

 

 I don't mind having smaller guys who play big, like Konecny and Provorov used to. I don't even know what to say about what the Flyers have done to these guys. 

 

 But I don't have any confidence whatsoever of this management being able to assemble anything that would resemble a championship team. Our GMs signature moves are overpaying lousy players so we can keep them longterm away from all the imaginary GMs who want them. Meanwhile the reality is, Fletcher & co. are the only ones who wanted them.

Edited by flyercanuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

Our GMs signature moves are overpaying lousy players so we can keep them longterm away from all the imaginary GMs who want them.

 

When the only goal is to make the playoffs next year because anything can happen they wind up making long term commitments to whoever the "best player available" is.

 

There is no long term strategy. It is only momentary tactics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SCFlyguy said:

Clarke/Holmgren/Fletcher have always GMed like a drug addict who found $20 on the street: feeding the most immediate need immediately with no thought for consequences or tomorrow.

 

And more often than not, they end up with baking soda cut with Drano.

  • Haha 1
  • Uggh... 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just thought I'd check the whole "size" when compared to the last Stanley Cup winner, the Tampa Bay Lightning. Interesting comparison. In terms of forwards, Tampa Bay forwards on average, are 72.6875 inches tall, which works out to 6 feet, .7 of an inch tall, so just under 6'1 tall. The average weight of the Tampa Bay forward is 196 pounds. In terms of Philadelphia, the average height of a player is 6 feet, .5 of an inch tall, so you're right at 6 feet, half an inch tall. The average weight of the Philadelphia forward is 193 pounds. So, when comparing to the Stanley Cup champion, the forwards are on par in terms of size. With regards to the top six forwards in Tampa Bay and the top six forwards in Philadelphia, the size is an exact wash at 72 inches tall and 191 pounds even. So size there isn't an issue. When we get to the bottom six forwards, the average in Tampa Bay is 74 inches tall, 204 pounds. Philadelphia is 73 inches tall, 191 pounds. So, the Tampa Bay bottom six guys outweigh our bottom six on average of 13 pounds. That's nothing to write home about.

 

So, we get into the defense and this is where Tampa Bay has a distinct size advantage. The average Tampa Bay defender is 75 inches tall, 216 pounds. The average Philadelphia defender is 73 inches tall, 196 pounds. If we remove the two smallest defensemen from the Flyers roster (Ellis, York), the Flyers are 74 inches tall, 201 pounds. Once again, 15 pounds is not a make or break type scenario.

 

So, once again, when you look at things from a critical stand point, there are several things that stand out. One, our skill level is nowhere near what Tampa Bay's skill level is. And to pretend that it is is simply being a homer. Tampa Bay has invested in player development and the system they run is built around what a player does well, not what a player doesn't do well. Second, their speed is miles ahead of Philadelphia, another trait that Tampa Bay believes in. You simply can't hit what you can't catch and when you add skill to that, it makes it lethal. The Flyers believe that if you have size and physicality, you can get by on that and bull rush your way to the opponent's net. The only problem now is that these smaller guys who are quicker and with better skill sets, can simply poke check the puck and they're off to the races.

 

So, I can sit here and have a pissing match with the "we need to build bigger, tougher, meaner" crowd, and while there's still a spot for it in the game, it shouldn't be what your team is built around. Yes, you need to physical guys in your lineup and in most cases, your physical guys are going to be bigger players. But your physical guys like that (especially bottom six guys) are out there for maybe 10 to 15 minutes a night. Your speed and skill guys are out there for 17 to 18 minutes a night and those are the guys who have to carry the club. Unfortunately, this organization just doesn't grasp that concept. The fact that guys like Zach MacEwan and Patrick Brown not only play, but play prominent roles with the club should be enough to let you know what the problem is. The only player of size who should be playing a prominent role is Couturier. He's the only one that should be in a top 2 role with max ice time. Not Hayes, not JVR, not the other two guys I mentioned.

 

So, that's what the Flyers are. They are, on average, roughly the same height as the defending Stanley Cup champions and there's about 10 pound difference forward wise, 15 defense. Nothing earth shattering.

  • Like 2
  • Good Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

I just thought I'd check the whole "size" when compared to the last Stanley Cup winner, the Tampa Bay Lightning. Interesting comparison. In terms of forwards, Tampa Bay forwards on average, are 72.6875 inches tall, which works out to 6 feet, .7 of an inch tall, so just under 6'1 tall. The average weight of the Tampa Bay forward is 196 pounds. In terms of Philadelphia, the average height of a player is 6 feet, .5 of an inch tall, so you're right at 6 feet, half an inch tall. The average weight of the Philadelphia forward is 193 pounds. So, when comparing to the Stanley Cup champion, the forwards are on par in terms of size. With regards to the top six forwards in Tampa Bay and the top six forwards in Philadelphia, the size is an exact wash at 72 inches tall and 191 pounds even. So size there isn't an issue. When we get to the bottom six forwards, the average in Tampa Bay is 74 inches tall, 204 pounds. Philadelphia is 73 inches tall, 191 pounds. So, the Tampa Bay bottom six guys outweigh our bottom six on average of 13 pounds. That's nothing to write home about.

 

So, we get into the defense and this is where Tampa Bay has a distinct size advantage. The average Tampa Bay defender is 75 inches tall, 216 pounds. The average Philadelphia defender is 73 inches tall, 196 pounds. If we remove the two smallest defensemen from the Flyers roster (Ellis, York), the Flyers are 74 inches tall, 201 pounds. Once again, 15 pounds is not a make or break type scenario.

 

So, once again, when you look at things from a critical stand point, there are several things that stand out. One, our skill level is nowhere near what Tampa Bay's skill level is. And to pretend that it is is simply being a homer. Tampa Bay has invested in player development and the system they run is built around what a player does well, not what a player doesn't do well. Second, their speed is miles ahead of Philadelphia, another trait that Tampa Bay believes in. You simply can't hit what you can't catch and when you add skill to that, it makes it lethal. The Flyers believe that if you have size and physicality, you can get by on that and bull rush your way to the opponent's net. The only problem now is that these smaller guys who are quicker and with better skill sets, can simply poke check the puck and they're off to the races.

 

So, I can sit here and have a pissing match with the "we need to build bigger, tougher, meaner" crowd, and while there's still a spot for it in the game, it shouldn't be what your team is built around. Yes, you need to physical guys in your lineup and in most cases, your physical guys are going to be bigger players. But your physical guys like that (especially bottom six guys) are out there for maybe 10 to 15 minutes a night. Your speed and skill guys are out there for 17 to 18 minutes a night and those are the guys who have to carry the club. Unfortunately, this organization just doesn't grasp that concept. The fact that guys like Zach MacEwan and Patrick Brown not only play, but play prominent roles with the club should be enough to let you know what the problem is. The only player of size who should be playing a prominent role is Couturier. He's the only one that should be in a top 2 role with max ice time. Not Hayes, not JVR, not the other two guys I mentioned.

 

So, that's what the Flyers are. They are, on average, roughly the same height as the defending Stanley Cup champions and there's about 10 pound difference forward wise, 15 defense. Nothing earth shattering.

 

 Now do heart and skill.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2022 at 11:43 AM, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

The problem in Philadelphia, besides coaching and the GM, are that the senior advisors are consistently in Dave Scott's ear telling him how a team should be built. Why else does anyone think Ass-to-Mouth Shitstaintolainen was re-signed? Because Dave Scott was told that "GRRR.....defenseman big.....hit people into boards......GRRR" nonsense. Holmgren, Clarke and Lombardi have caused more problems with this franchise because of their steadfast refusal to think speed, skill and instead, think brawn, power. The sad thing is, the Flyers can EASILY have brawn and power to go with speed and skill, but they're so fixated on the size and physicality that speed and skill always takes a backseat to that. It's always going to be about size in Philadelphia and that will always be the number one trait unless those guys go. It certainly doesn't help that Schmuck looks up to Clarke and Holmgren as well.

See the source image

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 Now do heart and skill.

 

Hoo boy, that could get messy.....lol

I'll say this about heart and skill -> it's tough to display both when everything throughout the organization places emphasis on culture and "Flyers" hockey rather than heart, skill, speed, ability, etc.......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If i may chip in...

 

Heart and skill....Rather have an all heart player who gives 100% than a skilled player who plays lazy.

 

Flyers hockey, this ain't the 70's anymore, Teams used to Fear The BSB's, not anymore.

 

Same as the bruins, as with the flyers, you are not going to pound teams into submission game after game,

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brewin Flames said:

Teams used to Fear The BSB's, not anymore.

 

I didn't come in watching that era really i came in the early 90's.

 

What i will say it is, despite their physicality they had some good skill too....they actually held onto the puck.

 

And you just couldn't skate so freely near the boards and come away with the puck.

 

The were are hard out most nights. They skated. Seemed to always at least be effort if the skill was sagging.

 

The simplest of rules  - you have to have the puck first to do anything, and this team can not hang onto it for a myriad of reasons - but being soft on the puck is one of the biggest, looking to just get rid of it because it seemed they don't want to fight to keep it.

 

It is time for some new blood. Hell bring a bunch of hungry kids even even just something worth watching. Last night Canes games was one of the better ones in a while.

 

They still need some scorers. Still not lethal enough. Another sold stay at home guy to pair with York would be good with me.

 

Two more games for Giroux??? We'll see.

 

:BrownBag:

 

 

 

 

Edited by OccamsRazor
#boubonup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2022 at 9:27 AM, RonJeremy said:

Cole Caufield was playing on the fourth line got sent down and was not being utilized properly by the coach, they hired a new coach and look at the result. I truly believe if we get the right coach guys like Konecny, Sanheim and Frost will all show vast improvement.  

 

I think you're 100% correct. I know the thinking around here is "it's the players." And it is. But they need something more from their coaches, especially the guys you named - plus Provorov, Farabee and all the younger guys.

 

I'm not "blaming" AV (though I thought he was exactly the wrong coach for the Flyers when they hired him) or Yeo, or any of the coaches over the past decade. But the fact is these are good players; they've all shown they can all play in the NHL. But the past few years it's been a steady decline - even the veterans are making WTF mistakes at this point.

 

Caufield is an extreme example - and thanks for bringing it up Ron. I hadn't watched the Habs all year. Last night...jeez it's so obvious - use a good player the right way - whatever is right for him - and he'll play well. Simple? Maybe not, but whatever the Flyers are doing ain't working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said:

I'm not "blaming" AV (though I thought he was exactly the wrong coach for the Flyers when they hired him) or Yeo, or any of the coaches over the past decade. But the fact is these are good players; they've all shown they can all play in the NHL. But the past few years it's been a steady decline - even the veterans are making WTF mistakes at this point.

 

Laviolette was a Cup winning coach when he got here and has been to a Final since he left.

 

Vigneault had taken two teams to Cup Finals.

 

Hell, Berube won a Cup in St. Louis.

 

Hackstol had a strong college pedigree which sometimes works, but obviously didn't. He's also been hired by another team subsequently.

 

AV was a reaction along with bringing in Therien and Yeo - three guys with legit NHL head coaching experience - because the Hackstol experiment didn't work out.

 

It seems clear from Yeo's comments over the past several weeks that the players simply aren't doing what they are being coached to do. And even he is saying that the slightest adversity deflates the team.

 

This team simply has a losing culture right now. It's endemic. And the tragedy is that the guy they brought in from a "winning" franchise - Ellis - played four games and got hurt. Atkinson, Ristolainen, Yandle, Brassard - all guys brought in to be a part of the "leadership group" from franchises that also didn't have a history of winning. Two of them were on the ice when the Habs tied it up.

 

This isn't about "getting back to Flyer hockey" because there isn't a "Flyer hockey" they know how to get back to. The "Flyer hockey" that's been created over the past ten years is a middling, bubble playoff team (at best) with precious little accountability and a reliance upon making excuses. They have flat out quit the past two seasons. QUIT.

 

It's been ten years. And the organization* still thinks they are "a piece or two away."

 

It's midbogling.

  • Like 2
  • Good Post 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AV is a closer. He's known for not particularly relying on younger players; he likes his veterans. Now maybe the Flyers FO, in their perennial delusion about being "a piece or two away," figured AV was the logical next step after Hakstol. But that was their delusion it wasn't reality.

 

AV had some success in Philly but his style, his focus didn't meet the Flyers where they were at the time. Best I could tell - and it was never really clear to me (or anyone else I asked) - AV wanted a puck-possession/uptempo game out of them. The top line could play that way but the rest of the lines struggled.

 

I agree there's no going back to "Flyers hockey" because for years there hasn't been "Flyers hockey." What is that anyway? Most would say Broad Street Bullies style. Going back to that is a non-starter for obvious reasons. Where do they go from here? Fk if I know...

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, radoran said:

They have flat out quit the past two seasons. QUIT.

 

I can understand how it looks that way but I don't think a single player "quit" on the Flyers or on AV, or Hakstol or even Yeo. You were right when you said there now exists in the organization a "culture of losing." I would add that it is mixed with the FO's idea of "winning hockey" which is - again I think you're right - about getting into the POs and then "anything can happen." Well there's the 2010 run I guess...

 

As far as players quitting on the coaches, or their teammates...I don't think so. There are precious few NHL players you can say truly quit on their team. You just don't get to the NHL by having the "quit gene" in your bloodstream. The Flyers as a team certainly rebelled against Bill Barber...many say for good reason. But I think you have to look long and hard before you find a real quitter in the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said:

AV is a closer. He's known for not particularly relying on younger players; he likes his veterans. Now maybe the Flyers FO, in their perennial delusion about being "a piece or two away," figured AV was the logical next step after Hakstol. But that was their delusion it wasn't reality.

 

Yeah, I'm not saying he was the right hire. Just that I understand the theory behind it.

 

15 minutes ago, GratefulFlyers said:

I can understand how it looks that way but I don't think a single player "quit" on the Flyers or on AV, or Hakstol or even Yeo.

 

You described them in the game thread as "weak, soft and distracted, going through the motions."

 

We can quibble about the actual definition, but from where I sit that's "quit."

 

Getting blown out by Buffalo - twice - down the stretch last season was, again from where I sit, "quit."

 

Their own coach describes them as "falling apart at the first sign of adversity." Again, we can debate the definition, but for me that's "quit."

 

When I watch a team like the Sabres - and I have - they are playing hard. They just took it to the Leaves twice. I don't think that's the same as the Flyers last year with a playoff spot still in reach as opposed to the Leaves up 14 points in the playoff hunt.

 

When we see the Canadiens rally to tie the game and win it last night. Those teams are right in the same place as the Flyers and they're playing the game hard.

 

The Flyers are weak, soft, distracted, and going through the motions. They're mailing it in, again.

 

That's "Flyer hockey" in 2022. I'm just sick of it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...