What are your thoughts on Glen Gulutzan's system?

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by automaton 3

Flames are taking way more penalties so far this year as well.

2015 9:11/game (12th) and 297 penalties (5th)

2016 11:26/game (25th) and 125 penalties (30th, but Flames do have the most GP).

PK has looked a bit better lately, but is still sitting at 29th (76.8%). Home PK is 66.7%

Not going to win very many games with that formula, let alone PP and 5v5.

Flames are averaging 5 penalties a game. On pace for 410

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[spoiler]

You know what tells me which teams have talent and which don't? The Standings.

I know right? Like Pittsburgh and San Jose for the first half of last year.

(at New Years, the Flames were ahead of both of the Cup finalists in the standings)

[bubbsy]

i really have no idea at this point. Thankfully, the PK looks much stronger. My biggest annoyance was the inability to know when to pressure the puck carrier on the PK. Early on, they were just floating around in their PK box and hoping passes would hit their sticks. instead the opposition PP would simply whip the puck around until a great scoring chance was inevitably available.

as far as their 5 on 5 play, there are games where they just look so terrible. Like last night's game, the philly game, the only passes they seemed to be able to get open for and actually complete were in their own zone d to d..... Like the concept of puck possession, speed, etc, were completely non-existent. How much is due to the flames vs the opposition's style of play, i don't know. I just know when the flames look bad, it's like a non-stop powerplay as far as puck possession goes...

[Robbob]

Looking at last year the Ducks lead the league with 396 penalties.

I think the big one is that we have 113 minors called so far through 25 games. 14 ahead of the next team (STL) who has played 23 games. Sharks have only taken 59 minors in 22 games. Crazy.

I guess the real story is times shorthanded, Calgary sitting at 95 which is 6 more then STL. SJ is sitting at 53.

[Wiggum_PI]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You know what tells me which teams have talent and which don't? The Standings.

Not sure why you wasted your time posting a picture of the second article, I already know it's 2 years old.

The first article, this one, right here https://www.nhl.com/flames/news/scou...blues/c-793533 was published on December 19, 2015 which was again last season.

[CliffFletcher]

The Flames are in the middle of a rebuild. Talent-wise, they're still closer to Toronto than to Tampa. The reason some fans are baffled that they aren't higher in the standings is because they overestimate the talent on the team.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

In your own words: Base level analysis. Kiddie pool levels of shallow.

Every team in the NHL has talent and there is far more parity than ever before. The current standings are just a snapshot of how teams are doing and where they are at right now. There a lot of factors that go into that snapshot, not just 'talent'.

But you already know that, and likely just want to continue being condescending with every response to other posters.

lol, is this really your argument, that the Flames are talented because the NHL is a hard league to get to and all the players who play in it are talented? And I thought the previous analysis was shallow.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I wish Flash Walken would go away

So many horrible posters here I don't know why we bother sometimes.

Yeah, who wants to talk about hockey when there is all-star analysis like this to fawn over?

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I know right? Like Pittsburgh and San Jose for the first half of last year.

(at New Years, the Flames were ahead of both of the Cup finalists in the standings)

Larf.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The Flames are in the middle of a rebuild. Talent-wise, they're still closer to Toronto than to Tampa. The reason some fans are baffled that they aren't higher in the standings is because they overestimate the talent on the team.

What do the Flames need to be considered talented and why are they giving out massive multi year contracts to these overestimated players?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Igottago

What do the Flames need to be considered talented and why are they giving out massive multi year contracts to these overestimated players?

They need more skilled players (a couple wingers and another d-man), and they need the young skilled players they have already to get better. It's not rocket science. Draft and develop. But it takes time. And patience.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Ignoring the fact that Hartley didn't perpetually get 22nd place finishes in his time - and ignoring the fact that the Flames were a rebuilding team during his tenure here - that was not the point I was making. Was not even stating that Hartley's system was better than Gulutzan's system.

The poster I quoted stated that there were lots of blowout games during Hartley's tenure. That simply was false.

Great job at a drive-by though. First class. Your drive-by contains absolutely nothing with regards to the conversation, or what my point was.

Also, you fail. If you think Hartley's system leads to perpetual 22nd place finishes, then I don't know what to tell you. Flames did make the playoffs one year. That nullifies your argument. Also, this was a rebuilding squad, so quite unfair to assume that the team would be continually finishing in the bottom of the standings year after year.

Further to that...

The Stars - led by the scrub of a coach Lindy Ruff - finished 2nd in the league last year. Before you decide to move the goalposts and say it was just 'Hartley coaching', you wrote "The Hartley system was a great fit for perpetual 22nd place finishes." Ruff uses the exact same system for the Stars, who finished 2nd overall last year. So no, 'the Hartley system' is not relegated to perpetual 22nd place finishes.

It is funny - I am giving Gulutzan an open mind, and I have been on record that I prefer a system that has a more active defence pressuring the other team in the defensive zone. I find it funny how many posters are throwing garbage at Hartley and making it seem like things were so much worse than they were.

No, the Flames were not 'blown-out often'.
No, Hartley's system (the same system that a few teams use, actually) does not guarantee 22nd (or worse) place finishes.

Just because the team decided to move on doesn't make him a terrible coach. Just because he won the Jack Adams doesn't mean the team made a mistake by moving on from him. The truth is likely somewhere in the middle. There is no need to just spew nonsense - especially when it comes in the form of 'matter of fact' drive-bys that don't even relate to a post that is quoted.

Not a drive by, simply concise to your verbose.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Not a drive by, simply concise to your verbose.

Brevity is the soul of wit

[calgaryblood]

Nm

[GreenLantern2814]

His system seems to better at cutting down the goals against. We seem to not be horrifically outshot every night.

Gulutzan seems to me a woefully uninspiring leader. As evidenced by the team's 2-9-1 record when trailing after 2 periods. I don't care how good he is at the X's and O's. He sure doesn't seem to be very good at bringing the best out of his players - Gaudreau, Monahan, Brodie, and Bennett have all looked like shells of themselves under his stewardship.

The only player who seems to be having a career year is Chad Johnson. It's not all on the coach, but the coach doesn't really seem to help much.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Nm

a losing team brings out the worst of us

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

His system seems to better at cutting down the goals against. We seem to not be horrifically outshot every night.

Gulutzan seems to me a woefully uninspiring leader. As evidenced by the team's 2-9-1 record when trailing after 2 periods. I don't care how good he is at the X's and O's. He sure doesn't seem to be very good at bringing the best out of his players - Gaudreau, Monahan, Brodie, and Bennett have all looked like shells of themselves under his stewardship.

The only player who seems to be having a career year is Chad Johnson. It's not all on the coach, but the coach doesn't really seem to help much.

Frolik and Backlund are doing very well. Tkachuk as well. I'd say most bottom six players are actually having pretty darn good years. Stajan looks rejuvenated, Ferland is playing great. I'm pretty happy with F. Hamilton and Hathaway. Mind you, getting Bollig out of there helped a lot too.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Frolik and Backlund are doing very well. Tkachuk as well. I'd say most bottom six players are actually having pretty darn good years. Stajan looks rejuvenated, Ferland is playing great. I'm pretty happy with F. Hamilton and Hathaway. Mind you, getting Bollig out of there helped a lot too.

Frolik and Backlund are such good fundamental hockey players, it would take a special kind of awful coach to ruin them - their last two coaches have been Bob Hartley and Glen Gulutzan, can you imagine what Joel Quenville does with Michael Frolik?

Oh right, he wins a Stanley Cup.

Stajan has six points in 25 games, which barely puts him on pace to exceed his last two scorching 17-point seasons. Huzzah, Glen Gulutzan has breathed a spark of life into the fading ember of Matt Stajan's career. A feather in your cap, sir. May it warm your heart as you sit by the fire one cold winter's night, a hot mug of booze filled cider in your hand, thinking of the good you did for Matt Stajan, while trying to force from your memory that you broke Sean Monahan and couldn't figure out how to use Johnny Gaudreau.

Oh and play Brodie on the right side. FFS.

[killer_carlson]

I think the biggest difference in our offence is that GG does not give the defencemen unfettered authorization to join the rush and try to score at any opportunity the defenceman thinks is appropriate. We don't see them jumping into the rush near as much.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I think the biggest difference in our offence is that GG does not give the defencemen unfettered authorization to join the rush and try to score at any opportunity the defenceman thinks is appropriate. We don't see them jumping into the rush near as much.

Which is a shame because a few of them have the tools to do it. A lot of the offense was generated from the back the last couple of seasons because that is the way this team is built.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Frolik and Backlund are such good fundamental hockey players, it would take a special kind of awful coach to ruin them - their last two coaches have been Bob Hartley and Glen Gulutzan, can you imagine what Joel Quenville does with Michael Frolik?

Oh right, he wins a Stanley Cup.

Stajan has six points in 25 games, which barely puts him on pace to exceed his last two scorching 17-point seasons. Huzzah, Glen Gulutzan has breathed a spark of life into the fading ember of Matt Stajan's career. A feather in your cap, sir. May it warm your heart as you sit by the fire one cold winter's night, a hot mug of booze filled cider in your hand, thinking of the good you did for Matt Stajan, while trying to force from your memory that you broke Sean Monahan and couldn't figure out how to use Johnny Gaudreau.

Oh and play Brodie on the right side. FFS.

Frolik is having a better year than under Hartley, which was the comparison (not with Q). Stajan's play isn't about points, but you knew that. Sean Monahan's issues have nothing to do with coaching and a lot to do with a big contract, expectations, a back injury and the fact he is still young. Play Brodie on who's right side? Break up Gio and Hamilton? Put Wideman on his backhand? Make it even harder for Engelland to exit?

Anyway, you said GG isn't good at bringing out the best in players, I list a few guys who seem to be doing just fine and you dismiss them with (a) "Frolik and Backlund have done fine anyway" (b) "I hate Matt Stajan" (c) "there were other guys listed but I'll just ignore them". So every example you gave of a player struggling is GG's fault, and every player who's doing well is down to something else? Gotcha.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Which is a shame because a few of them have the tools to do it. A lot of the offense was generated from the back the last couple of seasons because that is the way this team is built.

If Gulutzan's philosophy is to keep the reins on the D then he's a puzzling hire given that the Flames' organization is stocked top to bottom with PMD and the current GM keeps drafting them.