While the players never really spoke ill of Berube (aside from Hartnell).. They all seem to really like playing for Hakstoll and are very vocal about it.
- jak521

There seemed to be a bit of a disconnect for benchings with Berube. VL certainly didn't like him. With Hak, the guys who were scratched never seemed angry or confused. That's a minor thing though.

Berube just wasn't a very good coach IMO. The scratching of MDZ, their best defenseman, for 9 games was absurd. The usage of Couturier WHILE forcing him to play with Umberger and still asking for scoring was pretty unfair. His handling of Mason - both from a usage and personal standpoint - was also a bit unnerving. Mason was legitimately one of the 5 best goalies in the league, yet Berube never wanted to compliment him. We still don't know the whole story about Jeff Reese either.

Everyone likes to point out that Akeson hasn't done anything since he left, but were Rinaldo, VL and Umberger really better options? Would Berube have given Ghost the same level of freedom Hak has? I highly doubt it.

I'm sure Berube is a nice guy and and a fine coach, but he was underwhelming with the Flyers.

Never was a fan of his stagnant, conservative system either.

Frank Seravalli ‏@frank_seravalli now4 seconds ago

Difficult to handicap Caggiula sweepstakes, but sense is it's down to VAN or EDM. Believe PHI, CHI, PIT, NYR and OTT are all out. We'll see.
- PLindbergh31

Edmonton...speaking of tire fires... But I guess the chance to play with McD is appealing.

Edmonton...speaking of tire fires... But I guess the chance to play with McD is appealing.
- wolfhounds

There are probably opportunities to crack the NHL roster this Fall on both Canadian teams mentioned.

yeah...i can...i am saying that Vinny and Umberger are outliers to the conversation and really the NHL in general.

I dont think a rookie to the NHL should be considered older and set in his ways just because hes 33. he still needs to adjust and develop to the NHL and had he had the chance to, or if he does next season...the result would be the same as MDZ (meaning scratching him helped him realize what he needed to fix)
- YuenglingJagr

Yes. Agreed.

Rookie to the NHL and the rink size, new to the English language, new to North America, new to all of his teammates, no friends/family in the area. Dude wasn't given much of a chance to establish himself. Manning, however, was given all the leash he could have ever asked for, and it's pretty clear all he's going to be is a 6/7 who counts taking the body as his best asset.

I can't wait until we get to AMac.
- wolfhounds

Manning got more playing time because he was a better player than Medvedev. I think some of those factors were an issue, but overall, other than a handful of games, Medvedev just wasn't that good.

Never was a fan of his stagnant, conservative system either.
- PhillySportsGuy

^ This, more than anything.

Manning got more playing time because he was a better player than Medvedev. I think some of those factors were an issue, but overall, other than a handful of games, Medvedev just wasn't that good.
- MJL

Part of the argument being put forth for the reason Medvedev didn't play that well was his newness to everything. And the fact that as the season wore on, when he got reinserted he knew one little gaffe and he was likely getting yanked.

Manning being better is definitely debatable.

There are probably opportunities to crack the NHL roster this Fall on both Canadian teams mentioned.
- johndewar

Some teams might guarantee he starts the season with the big club, and cracking the lineup would have to be the goal.

Manning being better is definitely debatable.
- wolfhounds

Med struggled in his own zone a bit. He was godly in the neutral zone. Probably could have done better in the o-zone.

Manning was kinda meh in all three zones, but did have a nice PO's.

Part of the argument being put forth for the reason Medvedev didn't play that well was his newness to everything. And the fact that as the season wore on, when he got reinserted he knew one little gaffe and he was likely getting yanked.

Manning being better is definitely debatable.
- wolfhounds

Medvedev is definitely the better of the two in pretty much every individual aspect (skating, passing, puck skills, shot, etc..) His biggest problem was he was new to the game and was prone to mental mistakes every other game or so... However, he missed most of November, and then didnt play from March on.. So he never even really got a prolonged chance to prove himself the second half of the season.

Manning

Part of the argument being put forth for the reason Medvedev didn't play that well was his newness to everything. And the fact that as the season wore on, when he got reinserted he knew one little gaffe and he was likely getting yanked.

Manning being better is definitely debatable.
- wolfhounds

There are some differences between the play in different leagues, but a lot of the issues Medvedev had, didn't have much to do with being new in my opinion. I think it comes down to trust and consistency. A coach will live with a few mistakes if a player is bringing a consistent game. In those terms, Manning was better. Medvedev was wildly inconsistent, and had issues in coverage and in physical battles. I agree with the lineup decisions Hakstol made, concerning the defense. I was excited in the pre season, and early on with Medvedev due to his skill level, but as the season wore on, it became apparent that he just wasn't a very good defender.

Med struggled in his own zone a bit. He was godly in the neutral zone. Probably could have done better in the o-zone.

Manning was kinda meh in all three zones, but did have a nice PO's.
- Tomahawk

Med wasn't going to take the body or muscle people off, but he had decent stickwork while defending. His positioning needed some help (from my amateur perspective), but how much of that was adjusting to the smaller rink size? Early in the season he would try that wrap-around behind the net expecting it to go out of the zone that would inevitably lead to a bad (unnecessary) turnover.

Maybe he won't be good in North America, maybe he can't learn the new game or compete in the NHL, or maybe he just wasn't given enough of a chance to get up to speed with everything. We'll see what happens with him in the off-season.

Med wasn't going to take the body or muscle people off, but he had decent stickwork while defending. His positioning needed some help (from my amateur perspective), but how much of that was adjusting to the smaller rink size? Early in the season he would try that wrap-around behind the net expecting it to go out of the zone that would inevitably lead to a bad (unnecessary) turnover.

Maybe he won't be good in North America, maybe he can't learn the new game or compete in the NHL, or maybe he just wasn't given enough of a chance to get up to speed with everything. We'll see what happens with him in the off-season.
- wolfhounds

The angles are a bit different between the ice surfaces for sure. I think Hak preferred a more hardy presence in the d-zone, given the other personnel. I think that's one of the few things I'd nitpick Hak on -- Med should have played more. MDZ/Med were really great together, weren't they?

There are some differences between the play in different leagues, but a lot of the issues Medvedev had, didn't have much to do with being new in my opinion. I think it comes down to trust and consistency. A coach will live with a few mistakes if a player is bringing a consistent game. In those terms, Manning was better. Medvedev was wildly inconsistent, and had issues in coverage and in physical battles. I agree with the lineup decisions Hakstol made, concerning the defense. I was excited in the pre season, and early on with Medvedev due to his skill level, but as the season wore on, it became apparent that he just wasn't a very good defender.
- MJL

For me, it's hard to downplay the fact that he was new to everything...not just the coach and the team, but the league, the rink size, the language, the community, country, etc. Granted, a lot of responsibility lies with the player, but it's my opinion Med had a very short leash.


Winning physical battles is not the forte of this Flyers D.

Medvedev is definitely the better of the two in pretty much every individual aspect (skating, passing, puck skills, shot, etc..) His biggest problem was he was new to the game and was prone to mental mistakes every other game or so... However, he missed most of November, and then didnt play from March on.. So he never even really got a prolonged chance to prove himself the second half of the season.

Manning
- jak521

Agreed. I was excited to see what he could do. But now it's time to be excited to see what the kids do next season.

The angles are a bit different between the ice surfaces for sure. I think Hak preferred a more hardy presence in the d-zone, given the other personnel. I think that's one of the few things I'd nitpick Hak on -- Med should have played more. MDZ/Med were really great together, weren't they?
- Tomahawk

It'll be interesting to see what Hak does with all the projected top-flight rookies he's going to inherit during his tenure as coach.

I disagree with a few of the things you wrote Bill, but especially the Couturier assessment under Chief. Most of his supporters didn't find his usage the biggest issue, even if it was a touch extreme (Hakstol has given him a sliver more o starts and match ups against weaker competition, so there is that too). It was the fact he played an entire season with an obviously injured and ineffective Matt Read and an obviously injured and ineffective RJ Umberger, all while taking the hardest minutes in perhaps the league, and that Chief had the audacity to complain about his scoring.

Coururier showed he can take the same minutes this year and score. But quality of teammate is always more important than competition: he was treated as a top 6 center and was given top 6 linemates, and he produced better than we could've imagined without sacrificing a lick of defense. That was Chief's issue: he gave him used gym socks and expected him to make lemonade.

Sorry, but I gotta disagree with Bill on this one. Berube did himself no favors. Hak is the better coach and Berube deserved to be fired IMO.
- PhillySportsGuy

yeah

I disagree with a few of the things you wrote Bill, but especially the Couturier assessment under Chief. Most of his supporters didn't find his usage the issue, even if it was a touch extreme (Hakstol has given him a sliver more o starts and match ups against weaker competition, so there is that too). It was the fact he played an entire season with an obviously injured and ineffective Matt Read and an obviously injured and ineffective RJ Umberger, all while taking the hardest minutes in perhaps the league, and that Chief had the audacity to complain about his scoring.

Coururier showed he can take the same minutes this year and score. But quality of teammate is always more important than competition: he was treated as a top 6 center and was given top 6 linemates, and he produced better than we could've imagined. That was Chief's issue: he gave him used gym socks and expected him to make lemonade.
- Mononoke

ty

There seemed to be a bit of a disconnect for benchings with Berube. VL certainly didn't like him. With Hak, the guys who were scratched never seemed angry or confused. That's a minor thing though.

Berube just wasn't a very good coach IMO. The scratching of MDZ, their best defenseman, for 9 games was absurd. The usage of Couturier WHILE forcing him to play with Umberger and still asking for scoring was pretty unfair. His handling of Mason - both from a usage and personal standpoint - was also a bit unnerving. Mason was legitimately one of the 5 best goalies in the league, yet Berube never wanted to compliment him. We still don't know the whole story about Jeff Reese either.

Everyone likes to point out that Akeson hasn't done anything since he left, but were Rinaldo, VL and Umberger really better options? Would Berube have given Ghost the same level of freedom Hak has? I highly doubt it.

I'm sure Berube is a nice guy and and a fine coach, but he was underwhelming with the Flyers.

Never was a fan of his stagnant, conservative system either.
- PhillySportsGuy

Agree on it all

Bill
I wish you could have touched on what role Berube had getting Hartnell traded.
From the one infamous locker room scene we have watched on video, there was some obvious dislike between them. The trade was IMO Hexy's worst move so far as GM. Did Berube force a trade to happen? Not going to give him responsibility for the return on the deal, just want to know if in your opinion how much of Hartnell's leaving had to do with Berube.

I disagree with a few of the things you wrote Bill, but especially the Couturier assessment under Chief. Most of his supporters didn't find his usage the biggest issue, even if it was a touch extreme (Hakstol has given him a sliver more o starts and match ups against weaker competition, so there is that too). It was the fact he played an entire season with an obviously injured and ineffective Matt Read and an obviously injured and ineffective RJ Umberger, all while taking the hardest minutes in perhaps the league, and that Chief had the audacity to complain about his scoring.

Coururier showed he can take the same minutes this year and score. But quality of teammate is always more important than competition: he was treated as a top 6 center and was given top 6 linemates, and he produced better than we could've imagined. That was Chief's issue: he gave him used gym socks and expected him to make lemonade.
- Mononoke

Berube didn't complain about his scoring, Berube simply stated that a player can still put up points, while being placed in the matchups, Couturier was placed in. Context is everything. I think the ineffectiveness of his linemates is a factor, but a coach only has so many choices. With the roster that Berube was given, it didn't matter how it put the lineup together there was going to be issues. If you want to bake a good cake, you need the right ingredients. Berube was handicapped in a lot of ways.

I know is was a topic of the blog, but Berube was fired over a season ago. I'd much rather talk about the current team.

Bill
I wish you could have touched on what role Berube had getting Hartnell traded.
From the one infamous locker room scene we have watched on video, there was some obvious dislike between them. The trade was IMO Hexy's worst move so far as GM. Did Berube force a trade to happen? Not going to give him responsibility for the return on the deal, just want to know if in your opinion how much of Hartnell's leaving had to do with Berube.
- Marc D

we've watched a locker room scene? Link pls

The angles are a bit different between the ice surfaces for sure. I think Hak preferred a more hardy presence in the d-zone, given the other personnel. I think that's one of the few things I'd nitpick Hak on -- Med should have played more. MDZ/Med were really great together, weren't they?
- Tomahawk

Manning definitely improved at the end. He was playing with Gudas too which will have that effect, but I think he did improve. He is good at NZ d. That's his best attribute. But he may have been "hardy," but he was sloppy in his own zone too. My issue wasn't even that Manning was playing by the end (earlier yes, but there were worse d men than him to scratch hem hem), but that his ceiling was #6. Medvedev could've been the best d man on the ice any given night. That is game breaking ability that was pissed away. He had a very bad period around Christmas, but his "struggles" we're entirely overblown. He was held to a different standard for his mistakes; and all his positives were never recognized duly. They threw the baby out with the vodka.

we've watched a locker room scene? Link pls
- Giroux_Is_God

Can't there was graphic nudity and adult themes