[belsarius]

I'd have to do some more in depth research to be sure but my eye test tells me a big part is player utilization.

Under Hartley I remember him running his horses in the third. Fourth line would see more bench time and the team's top players saw an increase in ice-time over the previous periods. I think a lot of that was based on the Flames tended to be trailing a lot and he would want them to push hard to get back in it. It is a dangerous game and with a goalie that can bail you out you can get those goals back, but with a weak goalie that extra push can put it in the back of your net.

I think it is a GG issue. His line management doesn't seem to take this into account and he is very structured. Playing the 3rd and fourth line as much in the third (sometimes more since he relys a lot on Stajan/Brouwer in dieing minutes) really restricts offensive output. Instead of pushing your top players to the 20 min played mark to make that comeback, they stay at 17-18 mins regardless of score.

When other teams pushback with their best players getting extra ice-time is will expose the weaker lines. I also think you are right that they seem to give up more EN goals and not score as many with the net empty as they did under Hartley. Again, I would blame player utilization.

I am a GG supporter, and understand that over 82 games this will probably keep his top players fresh, but I think the system is costing points early, but may be saving them late.

And again I would want to actually break down the numbers, Johnny's total ice-time under Hartley vs GG, his ice-time per period on average under both, and fourth line utilization under both because I am only commenting on memory and eye test.