Bill Meltzer: Quick Hits: Flyers Sign Allison, TIFH

Keep the good news coming!

Fletch getting all the kids signed!

I think outside of Frost, Allison is the prospect most people are excited about in the immediate future.

I LOVE the type of player he projects to be, so here’s to hoping he gets there!

Stay safe and wash your hands!

Happy to have him signed. I was worried he might go the distance and not sign

I think outside of Frost, Allison is the prospect most people are excited about in the immediate future.

lots to choose from

for me it's York, he's exactly what this team needs coming up in the system once Niskanen moves on or slows down

lots to choose from

for me it's York, he's exactly what this team needs coming up in the system once Niskanen moves on or slows down
- Coburns_Nose

Not disagreeing, a serious question. Do you think York had a good season?

lots to choose from

for me it's York, he's exactly what this team needs coming up in the system once Niskanen moves on or slows down
- Coburns_Nose

I like York too, but I don’t consider him “immediate future”. Kid is gonna take a couple more years to be in consideration.

Allison/Frost/Lasynscy(sp)/Ratcliffe are potentials for next season.

Some day we’re gonna look back and thank Hextall and the scouting department for their drafting between 2014 and 2018

Some day we’re gonna look back and thank Hextall and the scouting department for their drafting between 2014 and 2018
- Dave21Brown

I don't need to look back. I already know it. I also know that Hakstol deserves credit for player development.

I don't need to look back. I already know it. I also know that Hakstol deserves credit for player development.
- MJL

Some kids took a step forward under him but the team kinda muddled around never really getting better, two separate things though. I’m certainly happy to have AV on-board.

I like York and all, but I think there’s too much talent just sitting there waiting to come up before him.

Do we count Frost? Because he’s champing at the bit.

If not, Ratcliffe seems to have the fast track, or maybe even dark horse Zamula. Zamula shows a lot of skill, and defensive positions might open up more quickly.

Some kids took a step forward under him but the team kinda muddled around never really getting better, two separate things though. I’m certainly happy to have AV on-board.
- Dave21Brown

It was up and down under Hakstol. The goaltending issue broke it all down in the final year to the point where the team got into a funk and would not play for him. Good or bad in those years the Flyers are better off now.

Ratcliffe and Allison seem to be similar kind of players, though one plays left wing and the other right (for now). They have big size, and are goal scorers.

Thing is though, very big bodies are usually playing against players much smaller at the junior and college levels. Once they hit the pros, the size difference equalizes rapidly.

Ratcliffe seems like he had a rough transition to the pros this year, though he was coming on towards the later parts. But based on what I read, he will likely need another season at least in Lehigh.

In short, I would keep my powder dry on these two for now.

It was up and down under Hakstol. The goaltending issue broke it all down in the final year to the point where the team got into a funk and would not play for him. Good or bad in those years the Flyers are better off now.
- MJL

I thought Hasktol's greatest strength was developing young players. Which payers did he develop, really?

Konecny - quantum jump after Hakstol leaves.
Ghost - regresses under Hakstol.
Couturier - improves tremendously.
Sanheim - defensive play improves a lot this year, after Hakstol leaves
Laughton - having best year after Hakstol leaves
Lindblom - takes off after Hakstol leaves
Nolan Patrick - underachieves relative to expectations in Hakstol years
Vorobyev - stagnates at low level
Provorov - starts to trend downwards after great start during Hasktol years
Aube-Kubel - takes off after Hakstol leaves

This list suggests that other than Coots, there is really no one I can think of amongst the young players who Hakstol improved. I think credit goes to Hextall for drafting and Scott Gordon and his crew for developing, but not much to Hakstol for polishing.

I thought Hasktol's greatest strength was developing young players. Which payers did he develop, really?

Konecny - quantum jump after Hakstol leaves.
Ghost - regresses under Hakstol.
Couturier - improves tremendously.
Sanheim - defensive play improves a lot this year, after Hakstol leaves
Laughton - having best year after Hakstol leaves
Lindblom - takes off after Hakstol leaves
Nolan Patrick - underachieves relative to expectations in Hakstol years
Vorobyev - stagnates at low level
Provorov - starts to trend downwards after great start during Hasktol years
Aube-Kubel - takes off after Hakstol leaves

This list suggests that other than Coots, there is really no one I can think of amongst the young players who Hakstol improved. I think credit goes to Hextall for drafting and Scott Gordon and his crew for developing, but not much to Hakstol for polishing.
- PT21

The very premise of your post is very shortsighted. As if a player breaks out under a different coach then that invalidates all the development time spent under the previous coach.

For example, all of the hard years in developing both Sanheim and Konecny, took place under Hakstol. Hakstol coached and developed Konecny and broke him of the really bad habits he had in puck management and decision making. The offensive talent was always there. Hakstol had a great deal to do with Konecny becoming a more complete player to the point where he can be trusted in all situations. That has also made him a better offensive player. Same with Sanheim. Hakstol and his staff put in a lot of development time making Sanheim into a more polished defenseman and shored up his game in his own end.

The very premise of your post is very shortsighted. As if a player breaks out under a different coach then that invalidates all the development time spent under the previous coach.

For example, all of the hard years in developing both Sanheim and Konecny, took place under Hakstol. Hakstol coached and developed Konecny and broke him of the really bad habits he had in puck management and decision making. The offensive talent was always there. Hakstol had a great deal to do with Konecny becoming a more complete player to the point where he can be trusted in all situations. That has also made him a better offensive player. Same with Sanheim. Hakstol and his staff put in a lot of development time making Sanheim into a more polished defenseman and shored up his game in his own end.
- MJL

The problem with your thesis is that it can be never disproven. It is a tautology. Lets say a player plays n years under a coach, coach leaves, and then player improves in the n+1th year under new coach. You could say the n years of training led to the n+1th year of success.

How come all those years of training never resulted in improvement before the coach left?

The very premise of your post is very shortsighted. As if a player breaks out under a different coach then that invalidates all the development time spent under the previous coach.

For example, all of the hard years in developing both Sanheim and Konecny, took place under Hakstol. Hakstol coached and developed Konecny and broke him of the really bad habits he had in puck management and decision making. The offensive talent was always there. Hakstol had a great deal to do with Konecny becoming a more complete player to the point where he can be trusted in all situations. That has also made him a better offensive player. Same with Sanheim. Hakstol and his staff put in a lot of development time making Sanheim into a more polished defenseman and shored up his game in his own end.
- MJL

Also, re: Sanheim. I see a significant difference in his style during this season alone. He is a spectacularly effortless skater. Sometimes in the early part of the season, when he was swirling around int he offensive zone, I would think to myself - damn, that was worthy of Brian Leetch. But some of his pinches were ill-advised and he gave up some plays to be made.

I noticed he is rarely out of position during our 2020 run, even from the turn of the new year. He is a much more guarded. savvy player. This was a clear in-season adjustment Vigneault and his staff made with him. I recall nothing so visually perceivable during Hakstol's grooming of him last 2 seasons.

The problem with your thesis is that it can be never disproven. It is a tautology. Lets say a player plays n years under a coach, coach leaves, and then player improves in the n+1th year under new coach. You could say the n years of training led to the n+1th year of success.

How come all those years of training never resulted in improvement before the coach left?
- PT21

This also makes no sense. Watching the player play, you can see the progression. See how after certain coaching tools were applied using ice time and demotions in line as well as other aspects such as practice and video sessions, how the player improved over time. We watched it happen before our eyes while Hakstol was the coach. Clearly that development time is a factor in Konecny being the player he is today. If you think that there was no improvement under Hakstol then you weren't paying attention.

Also, re: Sanheim. I see a significant difference in his style during this season alone. He is a spectacularly effortless skater. Sometimes in the early part of the season, when he was swirling around int he offensive zone, I would think to myself - damn, that was worthy of Brian Leetch. But some of his pinches were ill-advised and he gave up some plays to be made.

I noticed he is rarely out of position during our 2020 run, even from the turn of the new year. He is a much more guarded. savvy player. This was a clear in-season adjustment Vigneault and his staff made with him. I recall nothing so visually perceivable during Hakstol's grooming of him last 2 seasons.
- PT21

I disagree with the statement that he is rarely out of position.

Again, I'm wondering where this is coming from and if you just started watching hockey this year. Sanheim as a rookie was a frequent scratch and even spent time in the AHL. He developed that season into being a full time NHL defenseman last season to this season. How can you say there was no perceivable development shown by Sanhiem under Hakstol. That's mind boggling to me.

Also, re: Sanheim. I see a significant difference in his style during this season alone. He is a spectacularly effortless skater. Sometimes in the early part of the season, when he was swirling around int he offensive zone, I would think to myself - damn, that was worthy of Brian Leetch. But some of his pinches were ill-advised and he gave up some plays to be made.

I noticed he is rarely out of position during our 2020 run, even from the turn of the new year. He is a much more guarded. savvy player. This was a clear in-season adjustment Vigneault and his staff made with him. I recall nothing so visually perceivable during Hakstol's grooming of him last 2 seasons.
- PT21

The bottom line with Hakstol and Hextall. If they were that good at their jobs they would have another HC or GM job by now. There have been numerous openings. I have never heard them even being interviewed. Have you?

Not disagreeing, a serious question. Do you think York had a good season?
- coffee junkie

i really don't know, I saw all of 0 of his games

I also don't know what to expect of a 18/19 year old freshman defenseman in college hockey, in terms of offensive production. He was at about half a point per game, and went about +1 for every 3 games

At his age/size, I'm sure this wasn't a bad year stats wise, but it's hard for me to comment beyond that

The bottom line with Hakstol and Hextall. If they were that good at their jobs they would have another HC or GM job by now. There have been numerous openings. I have never heard them even being interviewed. Have you?
- Djapana

Hakstol has a coaching job. Hextall will undoubtedly get another GM job.

Not to get in between your other argument, but didn’t Hextall almost get the Wild job and was heavily considered for Seattle? Or was that just rumor?

I disagree with the statement that he is rarely out of position.

Again, I'm wondering where this is coming from and if you just started watching hockey this year. Sanheim as a rookie was a frequent scratch and even spent time in the AHL. He developed that season into being a full time NHL defenseman last season to this season. How can you say there was no perceivable development shown by Sanhiem under Hakstol. That's mind boggling to me.
- MJL

There is a difference between perceivable development under Hakstol and due to Hakstol. Some development is going to happen anyway simply as the player matures. This is a natural upwards progression.

To say that a coach contributed to development would have to imply that there was *an acceleration* in that progression. I saw a perceptible qualitative change in Sanheim's play in the last 2 months that I have not seen before. He is playing differently, staying back a lot more. He is far from perfect, but I will say his pairing with Myers has been a pleasant surprise to me as a bona-fide 2nd pairing on a contending team.

EDIT: Also, I am not sure that a player being sent down to the AHL really counts as part of Hakstol's credit. Once sent down, a different crew guides Sanheim's development, and the sending down bit was probably not just Hakstol's decision but also Hexy's.

There is a difference between perceivable development under Hakstol and due to Hakstol. Some development is going to happen anyway simply as the player matures. This is a natural upwards progression.

To say that a coach contributed to development would have to imply that there was *an acceleration* in that progression. I saw a perceptible qualitative change in Sanheim's play in the last 2 months that I have not seen before. He is playing differently, staying back a lot more. He is far from perfect, but I will say his pairing with Myers has been a pleasant surprise to me as a bona-fide 2nd pairing on a contending team.

EDIT: Also, I am not sure that a player being sent down to the AHL really counts as part of Hakstol's credit. Once sent down, a different crew guides Sanheim's development, and the sending down bit was probably not just Hakstol's decision but also Hexy's.
- PT21

You go off base in this manner. Player development is never linear. It is always a series of ups and downs. So your point that it would imply that there was *an acceleration* is a really, really bad one. To think that the early development time under the previous coach had little to do with the players overall development is ridiculously shortsighted. All you had to watch them play to see that it happened. Hakstol had the tough years with most of the players. Vigneault, who is undoubtedly a better NHL coach is reaping some of the benefits of that.

You don't think that the NHL coach who a player is playing under has any input or guidance in the decision making process of sending a young player down to the AHL? You don't think the NHL coaching staff gives any direction or insight to the AHL staff on what areas of his game a young player needs to focus on to get better and get back to the NHL?