Two big articles about the Flyers in the Inqy today. Hockey must be getting close. They’re doing a three part interview with the coach. Apparently coach and his family have decided it’s time to let down his guard and let Philly get to know him. After the first article all I know is that he bought a boat. There’s a better article about Dave Scott. It’s a little off putting that he has no background in hockey or pro sports at all, but he has made an effort in this article to convince me that he’s a killer businessman determined to win. Hopefully he’s determined to win the cup and not just financially.
- Dkos

I read the Dave Scott piece. It was interesting, for sure.

Basically, he's Comcast's guy. He's a soldier for the Roberts family. In some ways, he's Peter Luukko, but with more juice. Luukko was more of a hockey guy, though, but role wise, that's how I see Scott.

I'm not too worried about Scott, per se. He's older (65) and won't be that guy forever. Plus, he did work with Mr. Snider in some capacity.

From a corporate perspective, I'm more worried about what guy comes after Scott.

I don't think it's unfair to question the coaching staff with decisions they make. While they clearly know more than us it's unfair to say we are not allowed to question their decisions and have a different opinion. While the coach can't exactly control what players do on the ice, he can put the team in the best position to succeed and it's totally okay to disagree with the coach.


- bulet13

I find this argument absurd to a point. Stating that it's not unfair to criticize a coaching staff doesn't validate any criticism. I find the overwhelming amount of criticism of Hakstol on this board to be unfounded and from uninformed sources.

To the point of system, I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to realize that high danger scoring chances lead to more goals and unscreened point shots don't lead to those. Now whether that is how hakstol truly wants to play or if he's just implementing that system because of the defenders we used to have will be shown this year where we could potentially see a full year of Sanheim and some of Myers, both of whom are adept in the O zone
- bulet13

So based on that rocket scientist comment, how valid is posting an opinion that Hakstol's offensive system and philosophy is built around shots from the point?