I understand their reasoning and like most of what I’ve heard. It’ll all mean nothing though if they can’t show it in practice.

I live in the Phoenix area and got to see Tocchet’s teams up close when he coached the Coyotes. He really didn’t have much talent but they played really hard. I’m disappointed they lost Brad Shaw but I’m willing to give him a chance.

In theory, this does seem to hit all the check boxes:
– player development
– emphasis on structure
– discipline & accountability
– able to engage with the players (which is a very hard line to walk when also trying to maintain accountability)

The only thing i dont necessarily see as a plus is being in harmony with Jones/Danny’s vision – at some point, there is a risk of things becoming an echo chamber and you want people to bring dissenting voices and opinions. Every effective C-level suite i have consulted for has a certain degree of conflict and disagreement, and that makes for a better management team – of course, too much conflict is not good either, so let’s see how this plays out.

Overall, the more i read about the hire, the more cautiously optimistic i get. Now, let’s see what prospects Danny can pull out of his hat.

Excellent summation and analysis, Charlie.

I liked Torts, and I think that the big difference with Tocchet is that where Torts and Tocchet are both emotional guys, Tocchet learned as a player that he had to control his emotions. Torts, at times couldn’t restrain himself, nor back down from questionable moves, like benching his captain, or benching players when the Flyers played in their home towns.

Torts did a lot of the tough coaching and I believe Tocchet is a logical next step in the Flyers return to a top NHL team.

I’ve been pretty down on this hire, but if he wins, I’ll be happy to be wrong.

I’m fine with the hire.

Briere, Jonesy, and {current coach} are aligned for now. It’s gonna be a mess when those dynamic conversations do become heated arguments between those first two.