View Single Post
Old 12-12-2016, 12:19 AM   #541
Calgary4LIfe
Franchise Player
 
Calgary4LIfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner View Post
One of the biggest differences I noticed between GG and Hartley is that when one of our D guys jumps up into the offensive zone, there is always a forward who drifts back to cover his spot in case it goes the other way. With Hartley when the D man would carry in deep into the O zone everyone went to the net on the attack which led to a lot of huge advantages for the opposition once the puck went back the other way.
When a forward didn't go cover for a defencemen in Hartley's system, it was called a screw-up.

Hartley's system always had a guy filling-in for a pinching defencemen. It was part of that system. I know how people are loving Gulutzan (and rightfully so!), but Hartley wasn't a trash coach either, and his system wasn't about 'riverboat gambling'. There was a lot of defensive components in his system, and having guys rotate and not allow odd-man rushes was an important attribute. Hartley would be screaming at a guy who didn't cover for the pinching defencemen, especially if it resulted in a turnover and ESPECIALLY if that turnover resulted in an odd-man rush. You must not remember him screaming at Backlund on the bench one game.

My main beef with Hartley's system is the lack of pressure on the opposing team in the defensive zone. Too passive and relied on shot-blocking. I much preferred the aggressive defensive system that the Wild used (and I think I made reference to it last season). Gulutzan seems to be using a variation of that system, and it is really working well. His offensive system was fine - the Flames scored on the rush, and they did the stretch pass, they dumped and chased, and they also did smaller passes when they needed to. I don't see that much of a difference in the offensive side between Hartley and Gulutzan, though Gulutzan emphasizes the short passes more, but he still uses all the other methods to gain the zone as well. All coaches do. Well, all coaches not named Brent Sutter.

Hartley's system was particularly awful when the Flames couldn't find a decent goalie for that stretch last year, as having a passive D led to the other team having more time to get set for a big shot (as long as they could find a lane through the blockers). I think a team that pressures the opposing team a bit more allows for less dangerous shots - even from dangerous spots - as the shooter is just being pressured and doesn't have as much time.

I don't know.. you can go back and forth on things that each coach did well and things you wish improve (and there is always room for improvement). I will definitely say this - I haven't seen this team play this good defensively since the Darryl Years (maybe the Playfair year too).

Remember that Hartley preached physical fitness and worked the Flames hard in practice for a reason. That reason was not just to out-work opponents, but it was because he expected everyone to skate hard on defence. He demanded that forwards come back. His PK was AMAZING the one season (Sportsnet ran a story and broke it down since it was so awesome - people forget that). The results were lousy, and the team was playing jittery as hell - hard to play in front of a goalies that start the year by letting everything past them.

Gulutzan has really started to turn this team around, has really put his stamp on this team, but I really don't think people need to trample all-over Hartley while they do it. Hartley's system for the team was really good for what the team was made up of. Most of all, I am thankful that Hartley was such a good 'teacher' on the ice who regularly took the time to pull a player to the side, and spend a long time explaining and showing them exactly what they needed to improve on. He was a great coach for that time, and unsustainable or not, he made this team play as a very good team and got them into the playoffs that season. He deserves some accolades, regardless if the new coach is better or not.
Calgary4LIfe is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 31 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post: