Making the playoffs should not be the goal, they need to get something other than the 8 seed if they get in. Tampa Bay is a juggernaut. Don't want to see them go out losing a bunch of 5-0 and 6-1 games.
Well Carolina, the 7th seed has 5 points on the Flyers with a game in hand. I agree, Tampa would be a horrible matchup, but if the Flyers (who are 19-7 over the last month with two of the losses being OT losses) continue to play at the same level they've been at recently, I don't care what your record is, I wouldn't be thrilled about playing them in the playoffs. NHL history is littered with President Trophy winners getting ousted early in the playoffs.
What's funny is, didn't the team do this two different times under Haskstol too? Epic struggles, epic winning streak? Or was it just the one?
They finished strong each year under Hakstol.
This year it's basically going from awful goalie play to top ten goalies, since January 10 the goalies have a .924 Sv% with the team giving up about the same rate of scoring and high danger scoring chances.
The other factor this year was Couts lost a month to the MCL and JVR didn't hit his stride until December, and Sanheim and Lindblom moved into bigger roles in January. Last year TK moved up to the first line in January. This will be the norm the next couple years - young players tend to be inconsistent, and when they struggle, the team often struggles. As they get more talent, and new players break in with lesser roles, this will be less of a problem.
Still don't see 'em getting there and don't really care if they do but great win tonight. Still wanna trade JVR?
At this point, as much as I like Quenneville as a coach, I know he leans towards vets, and the Flyers are loaded with young players, many of whom played under Gordon with the Phantoms. I think the way the Flyers have played, it is worth keeping Gordon as the coach even if it means missing out on Quenneville. I'd like to see this team next year with a full year with Gordon and the core of players currently on the team, with a big free agent signing and Frost coming up, plus full years of Hart and Myers and a big step forward from Patrick. I'm really excited about the future of this team.
Just say no to Gordon, the team has played worse under him than Hakstol, the difference has been the goalies, not the coaching. They're being dominated in Corsi, scoring chances and high danger scoring chances practically every game - in other words, the other team controls games and our goalies stop them - that's not a long-term winning formula.
My preference is Keefe, a great AHL HC who will coach somewhere in the NHL next year.
Before you say how can you go with an AHL coach - Sullivan took the Pens to two Cups.
Of course you can go with an AHL coach. Sullivan's Cup-winning predecessor (Bylsma) was also an AHL coach. Helps to have the Penguins players too doesn't it? But the Flyers have also had great success with their NHL retreads - Nielsen, Hitch, Laviolette - for as long as they lasted.
Anyway, don't think you can expect this front office - even Fletcher - to hire an AHL or junior guy this time. They can justify keeping who they have - also a good AHL coach (before he failed on Long Island) - or they can make the splash. (Also I wonder if Keefe will just get promoted to Toronto assistant so they can keep him).
To say they have been truly worse under Gordon seems like a stretch. If anything it shows the problems are much deeper than coach or system.
Under the 40 games so far with Gordon, the Flyers have amassed 47 points, which projects to around 95 points for an 82 game season, which would put them squarely in the playoffs. This also included a 7 game losing streak as Hart was getting acclimated to the NHL game, so you could project another 5 points with more goalie stability and now you have a 100 point season. That also discounts any improvement to the team, which there should be with the younger players being a year better, plus the addition of Frost and a free-agent. Of course not everything could go right, but I think the Flyers are poised to be a top 5 team next year with Gordon at the helm.
I should also add that the assistant coaches with Gordon have really brought improvement to the defense and in no small way as Provorov, Sandheim in particular have made great strides of improvement under this staff's tutelage.
If you look at the team metrics under Hakstol and Gordon, they're worse under Gordon except for shooting % on the PP and save % at both 5x5 and the PK. The PP sh% is probably an anomaly, just like the historically poor PP sh% before he took over - like BABIP it tends to regress to the mean over time.
Hart came up and Elliott came back under Gordon, while before then, the Flyers easily had the worst goaltenders in the league.
Flyers under Gordon are more turnover prone, struggle to get the puck out of the D-zone and tend to make too many stretch passes instead of moving the puck up the ice.
With Hart as the starter (amazing game against the Pens), a veteran backup, goalie should be set (and a bunch of good young goalies that are 2-3 years away in Sandstrom, Ersson, Ustimenko and Fedotov).
Fletcher has a lot of assets to play with this offseason, from cap room to pick #12-15 to some young players he can deal.
Rick Wilson's work with the defense has been a huge step forward from what was going on under Murphy. He'd be a keeper as an assistant coach but at his age, sixty-eight, he might rather enjoy his retirement, which he broke up, to help his friend, Fletcher.
All those negatives you are citing, yet they are 23-14-4 under Gordon. That's more than just luck and goalie stability. The defense is better and the scoring is up. They are turning the puck over more because they can take more chances offensively because the defense and goaltending have improved.
The defense isn't better, they've been dominated most games of the winning streak in terms of both Corsi and scoring changes. The goalies are better by a wide margin at both 5x5 and the PK, in terms of Sv% for both scoring chances and high danger scoring chances - which wouldn't reflect better defense, better defense would be reflected in fewer scoring chances allowed, which hasn't occurred.
I am sympathetic to both arguments. Results don't lie but peripherals and luck matter too. They were also 26-12 last season in 2018 (after starting 16-14). You can't discount the shake-up but I don't know that Gordon necessarily made them any better than Hakstol, and therefore can't say he's a clear choice over other outside candidates either. At the same time, he is and will be coaching al large group of guys he's had in the AHL, and he's a former goalie breaking in a young goalie.
The thing is there aren't really any casual hockey fans, they, and most of the local media wouldn't know Joel Quenneville from Conn Smythe. Otherwise, there would be pressure - post Process, post-Bryce - to make a splash. But winning is the only splash that really matters.
Boring for a message board but basically I don't have an opinion. They wanna hire Quenneville, he's obviously good. They wanna keep Gordon, he's done a good job. They wanna interview multiple candidates and pick someone else, also good. As always I'm in favor of interviewing multiple candidates regardless.
Honestly, fans that think the team has been playing better over the win streak (other than goalie play) aren't watching the same game I am. They still make lots of bad passes, lose their men in the zone, and just don't create enough dangerous scoring opportunities. They seem to be better than an average NHL team at converting good chances, and their goalie play has really been good lately. But that's it, and all the advanced stats show the same thing I'm seeing.
For me it doesn't make a difference. If the team is actually better under Gordon, great, keep him if they want. If it's the same as it was under Hakstol, well, I doubt a third coach is going to be the difference either. Only more development (and some new players) will, and if things go right in that regard, whoever is coaching next fall will be the beneficiary of that improvement, as much as as a reason. It's really about deciding who is the right fit for the short and medium-term needs of both the roster and the W-L expectations. Not sure we know exactly what those are for the latter yet (though we have a pretty good idea how Scott and Holmgren feel).
Trading JVR
I am guessing this is directed at me. Yes, I would, the fact he is playing well, and he is, just makes it an easier decision. It is not that he doesn't have value, it is that by the time this team might actually compete he will be in decline. He was not playing that well earlier this year, but he has certainly found his way now. Good.
I would like to see them get value for him, because sadly we are going to be a few years from competing. The young players coming up are going to need time, we have much of the defensive youth, but the offense is getting old fast.
Yes, I would hope to get something for him now.