Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
I am still trying to really figure out Gulutzan's system, but I would argue that the points for Hartley's system isn't quite right (not that you are totally wrong either).
On defence, Hartley did NOT want high quality shot attempts being made. His defence was more passive - they would always allow entry (except on the PK - there they would close the gap and try and intercept the pass across right at the blue line). Once the other team set up in the zone, the puck carrier was challenged and the challenge was to poke the puck away, or if a shot attempt was made, then to block it. The defencemen and forwards would position themselves with sticks in the lanes (Hartley was very adamant about this point) and maintain proper positioning so the Flames would NOT give up high-quality shots from danger areas. Everything was still kept to the perimeter. It was a LOT of getting in the lanes and blocking shots.
The big difference between the two systems defensively (that I can see anyways) is that Gulutzan is getting the defence to pressure the puck carrier more. Hartley would challenge them, but this defence actively hunts them down in the zone more. Hartley would rely on the sticks and bodies in passing lanes to block shots and then quickly turn that into a transition (sometimes a stretch pass, sometimes a clean break by a forward or defencemen and everyone has to skate hard in support, with a trailer every time).
Gulutzan instead seems to 'chase' the opposing players more in the zone, forcing them to make quicker decisions. They still utilize shot blocking - they just aren't as reliant on it. I find that the defence still collapses hard around the net - and this is where they really utilize the shot block. You are seeing a lot of players just lay down and attempt to stop passes across and shots when the opposing team has the puck in a high danger area. It is a bit different than Hartley. I didn't see that very often.
You are definitely right with the shorter touch-passes, and Gulutzan still utilizes the stretch pass and the deflected dump and chase - you have to in order to keep the other team guessing. Brent Sutter forced everything down the walls and into the corners for a cycle, and teams quickly learned to cover the walls, for instance, neutralizing the offence quickly. Hartley still used the cycle, but not as often as Gulutzan. When you look at the makeup of the team year to year, you will notice that this year's Flames are bigger - Ferland is a regular now, Brouwer, Chiasson (for his warts, he has size), Tkachuk (who is excellent on the cycle), Hathaway when he was up, and of course the existing young players getting larger and stronger naturally. This all helps competing against other teams along the boards.
The misconception I find is that Hartley employed a 'run and gun' system where defence was only a secondary consideration. While true that the defence was activated on offence and would often join rushes (or even lead rushes more regularly), the system would force a forward to come back and cover. Again, looking at the team during most of his tenure, that was a pretty good system that fit the team, as offensive forwards were sparse, but the Flames had some talented puck-moving offensive defencemen. Brodie started excelling at BOTH ends of the ice under Hartley, not Sutter, for instance. Backlund as well (though he was well on his way in Brent's last year, without question).
Offensively, Gulutzan is favoring a more traditional 'forward' attack where the center and two wingers are driving the offence. Hartley preferred more pressure from the defence. I would say that the system (as I see it) that Gulutzan employs is fitting the Flames, but I also see the system that Hartley used as fitting the Flames for how they were constituted as well at the time.
What I do think is that BOTH systems broke down readily when the team suffered from shaky goaltending. The majority of last year under Hartley by Hiller and Ramo (though the Flames started to look good and seemed to be getting back on track when Ramo was recalled, but then took a sudden nosedive when Ramo got injured). A rattled team will make a tonne more unforced errors as they try to compensate. We saw the exact same thing happen early on when Elliott was letting in too many ugly goals - a tonne of breakdowns happened, though I do think it is arguable how much of that was breakdowns, and how much of that was 'learning the system' (so players had to think too much instead of react). I don't look at it as "Working Hartley's tendencies out".
What exactly is Gulutzan's system right now? I don't exactly know - and I really hate to criticize what I do see (or don't see) as it seems to be working, but I do see on this squad some good 200 foot forwards and some really good offensive and mobile defencemen. I would like to see them add a bit of pressure in the offensive zone by the D at times - maybe not as much as Hartley employed (and there are better forwards throughout the lineup that can carry the offence) but I think it would help produce more high quality chances. Then again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Hamilton is about to break his career high for points.
Giordano has taken a substantial hit on his point production.
Brodie has taken a hit.
Engelland has already exactly equaled his point production from last season (exact goals and assists, though in slightly less games played (3) as he was hurt last season).
I didn't factor other defencemen on the team for obvious reasons. Brodie can be somewhat excused for switching sides and his off-ice worries. Giordano is the real question mark. Gulutzan's system has reduced Giordano's point production, but it seems to be paying off well for Hamilton (or we are seeing Hamilton just progress). The system definitely seems less dependent on the defencemen this year, so it is curious to see only one player (who is playing exceptionally well, btw) take a hit on points (if you excuse Brodie's reasons). I would have thought the Flames would have seen an across the board reduction in points by defencemen.
Just my observations anyways - which aren't at all that insightful.
I am just getting much more confident that they system that I am seeing seems to be a fit when you look at the roster - though one could certainly argue that with the size and skill found on the team, that a number of systems could work.
I liked Hartley's counter-attack system as the team was still rather undersized, shallow but relatively quick with a talented backend.
I hated Sutter's 'everything along the boards, nothing up the middle' system as the team was old and small, and would often get manhandled along the boards.
What I disagree with in many posters saying was that Hartley's system was not defensively responsible. Hartley pushed this team hard to be fit so that they could skate hard on the attack, but also skate back hard to cover on defence and try to get into position quickly to fill the lanes. However, no system looks good when a goalie is having trouble stopping pucks that they should be stopping.
There seems to be a larger repertoire of options under Gulutzan than Hartley, that's for sure, but I also think this team has a larger repertoire of ability now with their makeup.
I know I will be really interested in following Hartley's next coaching gig to see how his team is composed, and what system he utilizes.
I will go so far as to say that Darryl Sutter, Hartley and (so far) Gulutzan have all employed systems that seem to fit the makeup of the team, and they all experienced some form of success. Brent Sutter did not and that team flopped. Keenan... just let them do their thing - but that was a talented and deep squad - so I guess it is arbitrary what success was. I think they flopped with their lack of playoff success. Hopefully this team reaches new heights under Gulutzan's system that seems well tailored for the Flames.
|