brelic Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 17 hours ago, King Knut said: I honestly think that will depend on what they do about the coaching situation. It's my position that Hakstol has directly cost this team At least 8 points. Maybe as much as 12. They're not a competitor now, but I honestly believe the talent on this team should make it a playoff team and that experience would make them competitive within 2-3 seasons. But the coach and the GM are not currently putting the talent they have assembled in positions to develop at the best case scenario, so if nothing changes, you may be right. Do you really believe that? You think coaching has cost them 6 wins? They would be 2nd in the conference. I'm not sure this team is actually that good, regardless of the coach. The blown challenge in Nashville, fine. That's on Hakstol. But the mistakes by Voracek, Sanheim, Hagg, etc... that's on the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, brelic said: So, I wonder how much of it was benching those three, versus rewarding the other 13-14 guys who had much better games? There's no question in my mind that the Laughton line deserved much more ice time than the Patrick line on that given night. Same with the other two lines, right? Plus, Patrick's line was -2, and just did not look good. Nothing wrong with rewarding the guys who play well. Of course, if this keeps up long term, it's a problem for a bunch of reasons, one of which is it doesn't help NP's development to be playing 8 minutes a night. I think the game against Calgary was the exception to the rule - he's averaging 12:17 for the season, which is about where he was before the injury. So, really, it's an overblown story imo. I really look at it as development of the players you are identifying... If this goes long term it is definitely a problem. They are not making the playoffs, and I understand the need to win, but they are missing when getting benched. Weis and Lehtera are not worthy of getting more time IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, murraycraven said: what you mean sitting TK, Sanheim and Patrick in the 3rd is a bad thing? LOL I mean... it worked. They held the lead. But what does it say about the ability of our coach (who's supposed to be the expert in developing young talent) if his best option to hold a lead is to remove what are otherwise agreed upon as talented young players from the equation completely? Unless they suddenly turn things around and go on a big run here between now and New Year's, I'm really starting to warm up to the idea of line combinations designed to enhance development rather than win games. Giroux Patrick Simmonds Weal Couturier Konecny Filppula Vecchione Voracek Raffl Laughton Leier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 11 minutes ago, brelic said: Do you really believe that? You think coaching has cost them 6 wins? They would be 2nd in the conference. I'm not sure this team is actually that good, regardless of the coach. The blown challenge in Nashville, fine. That's on Hakstol. But the mistakes by Voracek, Sanheim, Hagg, etc... that's on the players. 2 points they should never have lost to Nashville and I think 4-6 points they should never have lost in OT games that had no business going to OT. 4-6 more points lost in games they just showed up for utterly unprepared. 8-12 points. At first I could put the blame on individual players... especially young ones. But when you see the same situations arising game over game over game for three seasons in a row... I don't blame individual players any more. Is it more likely that Hakstol is trying to coach them and 18 of 20 players are just really really stupid weak links or is it more likely that just 1 coach is the weak link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 23 minutes ago, King Knut said: 2 points they should never have lost to Nashville and I think 4-6 points they should never have lost in OT games that had no business going to OT. 4-6 more points lost in games they just showed up for utterly unprepared. 8-12 points. At first I could put the blame on individual players... especially young ones. But when you see the same situations arising game over game over game for three seasons in a row... I don't blame individual players any more. Is it more likely that Hakstol is trying to coach them and 18 of 20 players are just really really stupid weak links or is it more likely that just 1 coach is the weak link? It's a combination, I'd say. As for the lost points, I think that's what separates good and great teams from mediocre and poor teams. It's coaching *and* the players. I agree that Hakstol definitely has room for improvement - just like Patrick, Sanheim, Konecny, etc. Hextall has put that story to rest - and Hakstol will be here at least until the end of the season... so he and the players have time to redeem themselves. We'll see, I guess. Nothing we can do about it lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 22 minutes ago, brelic said: It's a combination, I'd say. As for the lost points, I think that's what separates good and great teams from mediocre and poor teams. It's coaching *and* the players. I agree that Hakstol definitely has room for improvement - just like Patrick, Sanheim, Konecny, etc. Hextall has put that story to rest - and Hakstol will be here at least until the end of the season... so he and the players have time to redeem themselves. We'll see, I guess. Nothing we can do about it lol. I've said it before, but I'm kinda cool with Hakstol's systems in general. I suppose I wouldn't be horrifically opposed to keeping him if they took measures to curb the stuff he keeps screwing up. Maybe having a sit down with Hak and saying look, do you want to get fired or do you want to let Knoblach tell you when to call a timeout and yell some encouraging stuff at the players once in a while? Other than that, this team could probably save themselves a dozen points by the end of year by taking measures to upgrade their PK at last to the league average... which probably means goodbye to Lappy. I know hextall doesn't seem to want to shift horses mid stream, but the PK in particular really is THAT bad that something should be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 5 hours ago, brelic said: Plus, Patrick's line was -2, and just did not look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 5 hours ago, brelic said: You think coaching has cost them 6 wins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyClarkeFan16 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 5 hours ago, brelic said: Do you really believe that? You think coaching has cost them 6 wins? They would be 2nd in the conference. I'm not sure this team is actually that good, regardless of the coach. The blown challenge in Nashville, fine. That's on Hakstol. But the mistakes by Voracek, Sanheim, Hagg, etc... that's on the players. I believe coaching has cost them. I look at the 10 game winless streak and all the OT losses and the collapses in the third period. Hakstol is an absolute dumpster fire with regards to coaching decisions and to do things like shorten the bench, not call time out when teams were building momentum and not play guys who helped build leads are just some of the things that helped contribute to the losses. Are the players at fault? Yep, but coaching certainly played a huge part in the winless streak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Jake saves his beard AFTER they break the streak?? Isn't that the jinx??? Thanks for the jinx Jake!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 6 hours ago, brelic said: So, I wonder how much of it was benching those three, versus rewarding the other 13-14 guys who had much better games? There's no question in my mind that the Laughton line deserved much more ice time than the Patrick line on that given night. Same with the other two lines, right? I'm sorry, but if Laughton's line "deserves more time" you're in real trouble as an NHL team. And if your coach can't get more out of the #2 pick in the draft that allegedly "played so well he had to be on the team" I really don't know what to tell you... But hey, in 2-3 years they "might" be good so we got that going for us, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 3 minutes ago, radoran said: I'm sorry, but if Laughton's line "deserves more time" you're in real trouble as an NHL team. And if your coach can't get more out of the #2 pick in the draft that allegedly "played so well he had to be on the team" I really don't know what to tell you... But hey, in 2-3 years they "might" be good so we got that going for us, eh? Boom Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 5 minutes ago, radoran said: And if your coach can't get more out of the #2 pick in the draft that allegedly "played so well he had to be on the team" I really don't know what to tell you... He should of been sent back. I still stand by this. But Ron will do what is best for the kid. Bullshit! He should be in Brandon playing top minutes getting his confidence back not 8-9 minutes a night on a not so good right now finding it's way team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 3 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: He should of been sent back. I still stand by this. But Ron will do what is best for the kid. Bullshit! He should be in Brandon playing top minutes getting his confidence back not 8-9 minutes a night on a not so good right now finding it's way team. As soon as they got the #2 pick they pencilled in "#2" on the roster. It's why they dealt Schenn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 8 minutes ago, radoran said: As soon as they got the #2 pick they pencilled in "#2" on the roster. It's why they dealt Schenn. could not agree more... and it goes back to what I said earlier to Brel -- I am sorry but these kids getting limited minutes and being benched in the 3rd is doing SQUAT for their development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 7, 2017 Author Share Posted December 7, 2017 23 minutes ago, radoran said: I'm sorry, but if Laughton's line "deserves more time" you're in real trouble as an NHL team. And if your coach can't get more out of the #2 pick in the draft that allegedly "played so well he had to be on the team" I really don't know what to tell you... But hey, in 2-3 years they "might" be good so we got that going for us, eh? As much as I criticize Hak, This makes no sense. Laughton is also a first round pick. If after (after, what is it 4 years?) your first round pick is finally ready to chew up NHL minutes and produce a positive two way game, why would we criticize it? At the same time if after 18 games, your 19 year old rookie who missed half of last year in juniors, had off season surgery and missed a few weeks with a concussion isn't up to par, we're surprised? We're confusing cynicism, fantasy and realism all up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 7, 2017 Author Share Posted December 7, 2017 14 minutes ago, radoran said: As soon as they got the #2 pick they pencilled in "#2" on the roster. It's why they dealt Schenn. I think they dealt Schenn because St. Louis called and offered them 2 first rounders and because in five years, the kid never carved out a place for himself in the Flyers lineup. Had Homer not fired Lavvy, I think that's all different. As it is, I can't blame them and neither should anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 7, 2017 Author Share Posted December 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, murraycraven said: could not agree more... and it goes back to what I said earlier to Brel -- I am sorry but these kids getting limited minutes and being benched in the 3rd is doing SQUAT for their development. Making them play with Weise and Lehtera ain't helping much either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted December 7, 2017 Author Share Posted December 7, 2017 20 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said: He should of been sent back. I still stand by this. But Ron will do what is best for the kid. Bullshit! He should be in Brandon playing top minutes getting his confidence back not 8-9 minutes a night on a not so good right now finding it's way team. I disagree with this completely. Patrick wasn't going on I develop any further in juniors. He played through misdiagnosed injuries and missed half the season, was playing through a hernia and still dominated. He he needs AHL time at center. But he's not allowed to get it. It's a tough position. Juniors thisbyear would just delay him even more. Relax. Let him learn. Hope Hakstol starts to play him with some better more experienced players. He and Konecney need experience... so we stick them with Weise and are surprised they play like 19 year olds? Really. The situation isnt that bad. The way Hakstol is handling it is not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, King Knut said: Making them play with Weise and Lehtera ain't helping much either. YUP... That wouldn't have helped Gretzky! Lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 44 minutes ago, King Knut said: Making them play with Weise and Lehtera ain't helping much either. It's the new training regime you need to catch up. Gone are the days of running or flipping a tire over and over again. In with new. Skating with one sometimes two boat anchors!!! #whoneedssteroids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 45 minutes ago, King Knut said: Patrick wasn't going on I develop any further in juniors. What? How can you even say that? Because no 19 year olds ever mature further with more time in juniors play big minutes? I call horseshit! Yeah those 8 minutes a night are working wonders for him. He is coming off of surgery nothing is really to be gained much by playing with this issues abound team. And his ELC would of slid for another year. Could of had Patrick as a 22 old on the last year of his deal. Too late now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 52 minutes ago, King Knut said: As much as I criticize Hak, This makes no sense. Laughton is also a first round pick. If after (after, what is it 4 years?) your first round pick is finally ready to chew up NHL minutes and produce a positive two way game, why would we criticize it? At the same time if after 18 games, your 19 year old rookie who missed half of last year in juniors, had off season surgery and missed a few weeks with a concussion isn't up to par, we're surprised? We're confusing cynicism, fantasy and realism all up here. No, I'm looking at arguably the worst first round forward pick of the Flyers in the past 30 years. Laughton is "on pace" for 24 whopping points. That's not a "two way" game. That's a defensive forward who chips in a point every fourth game or so. Whoopee. Let's have him out with Lehtera and Raffl for extended periods(?) I suppose that's a step up from PEB and VDV, but it's not a big step... And your description of Patrick is exactly why he deserved to go back and have a full season in Juniors. I'm not saying he's a "bust" at this point - that's ridiculous - just that he's "learning" in the NHL as a second line center at 19, who missed half of last year in Juniors and had off season surgery. And then got concussed. That's just not great for your "development" (see: Laughton, Scott). Honestly, I didn't see anything in his game that said he "had" to make the team. It's just that when they traded Schenn, they boxed themselves into a corner. YMMV, which is fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 54 minutes ago, King Knut said: I think they dealt Schenn because St. Louis called and offered them 2 first rounders and because in five years, the kid never carved out a place for himself in the Flyers lineup. Had Homer not fired Lavvy, I think that's all different. As it is, I can't blame them and neither should anyone. What I'm saying is when they traded Schenn, Patrick was a lock for the team. Period. The decision was made regardless of his "development". (And I'm pretty confident that they were "shopping" Schenn as soon as the ping pong ball left them at #2). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 51 minutes ago, King Knut said: I disagree with this completely. Patrick wasn't going on I develop any further in juniors. He played through misdiagnosed injuries and missed half the season, was playing through a hernia and still dominated. He he needs AHL time at center. But he's not allowed to get it. It's a tough position. Juniors thisbyear would just delay him even more. So, you're saying he's not good enough to be playing as a #2 center in the NHL at 19? We agree! I don't at all agree he had "nothing left to learn" in Juniors. Playing a full Junior season is a Good Thing to learn, especially when making the jump to playing 82 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.