The Flyers made the playoffs twice in Hakstol's tenure.
- MJL

Thanks, fixed my post.

Braun -12 on a team that has a +4 goal differential. Pretty hard to do. What's he on his way to -50?
- PLindbergh31

+/- is a garbage stat but Braun really offers next to nothing, especially in the O zone. Still dont understand the trade especially since we have our own Braun in Hahg

I was too young for Gene Hart but I’ve watched enough of the old games to actually miss the guy. He was fantastic.

Him and Harry k. Sorely missed. I don’t know what the eagles are going to do Merrill Reese is a nightmare right now. Just about unlistenable those 2. I guess most don’t care
- Just5

You are right Gene was fantastic he lived for that job. But his color man during the cup years was Don Earl. The former Bruins announcer was a total blatant homer. The bullies never got a fair shake in his eyes and that is where a lot of the “conspiracy theories “ got their roots. I think Gene was actually embarrassed by some of the schlock that Earl spewed nightly.

Overall I dont think Hak was either a success or a failure I think he was average.

He did some things well and some things not so well.
He coached the team to the playoffs twice (Fixed credit to MJL) and finished with an above 500 record.
He also seemed to grow a bit stale in his approach to the game.
- opeth_pa

I agree. He wasn't abysmal like some have said, but he wasn't great either. He just was a coach. Nothing exceptional on either end, he was just another coach that had strengths and weaknesses.

I also feel like Hexy could have been pulling the reins a bit, but that's just speculation, I have no proof.

+/- is a garbage stat but Braun really offers next to nothing, especially in the O zone. Still dont understand the trade especially since we have our own Braun in Hahg
- bulet13

Were you actually expecting anything out of Braun in the offensive zone? Those days are gone for him. Despite his flaws, Braun is still a much better player than Haag. I agree with you about the trade overall.

+/- is a garbage stat but Braun really offers next to nothing, especially in the O zone. Still dont understand the trade especially since we have our own Braun in Hahg
- bulet13

I think Braun has helped the PK. He also handles the puck less like a hand grenade than Hagg does.

I agree. He wasn't abysmal like some have said, but he wasn't great either. He just was a coach. Nothing exceptional on either end, he was just another coach that had strengths and weaknesses.

I also feel like Hexy could have been pulling the reins a bit, but that's just speculation, I have no proof.
- jmatchett383

ended up being a placeholder as the franchise did a rebuild. Lets be honest, the shelf life for a coach is short, he never really stood a chance to be the coach beyond what he was.

I'm going to repeat what I said multiple times when Hakstol was here. Hakstol is a good hockey coach. Not necessarily a good NHL head coach. He had a lot to learn on the job in the NHL but he was a strong development coach for this team.

Ah yes 4 wins this week and we talking about Hak again

He was fine. He did some things well (putting Coots with G, developing Sanheim, Provy and Ghost had good years under him). He did some things very very poorly (overrelience on VDV, benching players like Lindblom for Lehtera, ice time given out in certain games, refusal to use timeout). His tenure was not a failure however. But I cant say he was a good coach. Probably about average

Overall I dont think Hak was either a success or a failure I think he was average.

He did some things well and some things not so well.
He coached the team to the playoffs twice (Fixed credit to MJL) and finished with an above 500 record.
He also seemed to grow a bit stale in his approach to the game.
- opeth_pa

What determines success?

Hak had a mediocre team that Hextall spent most his tenure trying to remove bad contracts. He finished his tenure with 2 playoff appearances in 4 years.

Berube had a winning record with the team. 1 playoff appearance in 2 years.

Laviolette winning record, 3 playoff appearances in 5 years. 1 SC final appearance. At the same time, made the playoffs by 1 point.

You are right Gene was fantastic he lived for that job. But his color man during the cup years was Don Earl. The former Bruins announcer was a total blatant homer. The bullies never got a fair shake in his eyes and that is where a lot of the “conspiracy theories “ got their roots. I think Gene was actually embarrassed by some of the schlock that Earl spewed nightly.
- Djapana

I believe Don Earle's claim to fame was screaming "he hit the (franking) post!" on air

I'm going to repeat what I said multiple times when Hakstol was here. Hakstol is a good hockey coach. Not necessarily a good NHL head coach. He had a lot to learn on the job in the NHL but he was a strong development coach for this team.
- MJL

I actually think this is a great way to describe Hak...A good hockey coach but not necessarily a good NHL head coach.

Well said.

I'm going to repeat what I said multiple times when Hakstol was here. Hakstol is a good hockey coach. Not necessarily a good NHL head coach. He had a lot to learn on the job in the NHL but he was a strong development coach for this team.
- MJL

I can totally get behind this.

I actually think this is a great way to describe Hak...A good hockey coach but not necessarily a good NHL head coach.

Well said.
- opeth_pa

Hakstol was solid in terms of fundamental play, systems play (Though I think Vigneualt's systems are superior but Hakstol had to adjust the way he wanted to play based on personnel). He was learning on the job as an NHL bench coach. His greatest failure was not being able to lift the team out of it's funk in the early part of 18/19. The goaltending issues had a lot to do with it. Unfortunately the players also knew he didn't have the answers and lost confidence. To be fair, a lot of experienced NHL coaches found themselves n the same position.

It is a nice day in hockeybuzzland when we are only really arguing over whether they are 3 games over 500 or 5 games over 500.

Hakstol was solid in terms of fundamental play, systems play (Though I think Vigneualt's systems are superior but Hakstol had to adjust the way he wanted to play based on personnel). He was learning on the job as an NHL bench coach. His greatest failure was not being able to lift the team out of it's funk in the early part of 18/19. The goaltending issues had a lot to do with it. Unfortunately the players also knew he didn't have the answers and lost confidence. To be fair, a lot of experienced NHL coaches found themselves n the same position.
- MJL

I agree with the goaltending, and that falls on Hexy.

He plays with minimal desire, watching him it is clear he's the best guy out there but there is too much gliding and waiting for me at times. Also, Bill has mentioned multiple times about his speed, he does not play with pace, his speed is used with more change of pace to try and catch defenders flat footed. I'd like to see him play with more determination, go out and dominate every shift, not just for a play every few shifts.
- ClaudeFather

I wonder if some of that is him just taking time to adjust to AHL. Was this an issue for him in the OHL?.... I didn’t watch any games of him in Juniors

Ah yes 4 wins this week and we talking about Hak again

He was fine. He did some things well (putting Coots with G, developing Sanheim, Provy and Ghost had good years under him). He did some things very very poorly (overrelience on VDV, benching players like Lindblom for Lehtera, ice time given out in certain games, refusal to use timeout). His tenure was not a failure however. But I cant say he was a good coach. Probably about average
- bulet13

I think that is a very fair assessment of Hak. Two things I would cite would be the deterioration of the PP and PK on his watch. The bottom line is W/L and the Flyers remained stagnant in that regard under his tenure. You can cite the lineup, but a good coach can get the most out of what is there. Trotz is the supreme example of that and AV is certainly very good at it. To call Hak a “ Good Coach” is setting the bar pretty low IMO.

I think that is a very fair assessment of Hak. Two things I would cite would be the deterioration of the PP and PK on his watch. The bottom line is W/L and the Flyers remained stagnant in that regard under his tenure. You can cite the lineup, but a good coach can get the most out of what is there. Trotz is the supreme example of that and AV is certainly very good at it. To call Hak a “ Good Coach” is setting the bar pretty low IMO.
- Djapana

Hakstol did exactly that in the 17/18 season. He did it with one line, a 19 year old as his top defensman and riding Fillpula to play against top lines. He guided the team to 3rd in a tough Metro division and a playoff spot with an overall weak roster.

I agree with the goaltending, and that falls on Hexy.
- jmatchett383

Somewhat ironic coming from a former goalie too.

Hakstol did exactly that in the 17/18 season. He did it with one line, a 19 year old as his top defensman and riding Fillpula to play against top lines. He guided the team to 3rd in a tough Metro division and a playoff spot with an overall weak roster.
- MJL

If that was his high water mark in 4 years, I guess we just won’t agree what “Good” means.

It is a nice day in hockeybuzzland when we are only really arguing over whether they are 3 games over 500 or 5 games over 500.


- hockeylover

And Hakstol

Hakstol is doing terrific work for the Flyers this season, unifying team and fan base. Go Hakstol!

For me personally, I’m done rehashing the failures of last season. I really don’t see a lot of comparison between this and that. I do wonder if anyone else has noticed all the records and stats that keep popping up with comparisons to Flyers circa 2011?

If that was his high water mark in 4 years, I guess we just won’t agree what “Good” means.
- Djapana

Are you telling me that the roster and the players a coach has to work with should not be considered? That every coach should be judged on the same level of what good is? What is good in your book? I used your standard in your previous post and in my opinion Hakstol reached that level in 17/18.