Quote:
Originally Posted by bax
15 games in and the same people are coming out of the wood work clamoring for the coach to be fired. I love how passionate the fans are here, but sometimes the discussion leads to some really hyperbolic statements.
There are no positives to having GG coach this team? As in there was positives when Hartley was the coach? Didn’t some of you ever get tired of repeatedly watching the Flames attempt an obvious stretch pass that the entire league clearly knew how to stop?
When the teams is executing the the system they move as a 5 Man Unit and look unstoppable a lot of the time. Gulutzan has brought in a system that although isn’t perfect, does represent a fast paced, possession brand of hockey that clearly works in the modern NHL.
He isn’t without his faults, but I seriously question some of the posters here who think cleaning house mid season (without our first or second) would be a good idea. You don’t have to approve of every move the coach makes, but at least be objective and see that there is a lot of good he has done here as well.
I’m not sure what some of you expect. It’s like you think the Flames have the best roster in the league and think we should win 70 games per season.
Realistically our roster lacks competitive depth as we have too many slow and overpaid players in the bottom six. I like our defense, but without Hamonic in the line up it becomes quite soft and prone to inconsistency in the defensive zone.
Also our third line really needs to start producing. Fortunately I think they have looked good the last couple of games and are close
|
You make some good points. I, for one, do not think Hartley was a better coach - exciting, passionate, but I hated the defensive structure.
Are there positives with Gulutzan's coaching? Of course. And yes, when the team is executing the 5-man system well, they can be dominant. But I would counter that they aren't dominant with it often enough. That is either due to a lack of talent, or the system is flawed in some way (too complicated, or too inflexible, or whatever). I think the talent is there, so...
As for lacking competitive depth, I would argue that no one in the bottom 6 is exceeding expectations, and everyone in the bottom 6 is under-achieving, and regressing. That is either a horrifically unfortunate coincidence, or there is a fundamental problem that is causing it.
Same argument can be made about the defense. Either there is way less talent than everyone (including experts outside of the fanbase) thought, or the D is under-achieving.
I am a big believer in Occam's razor. I think if the whole team is under-performing, it is more likely that there is a problem that is causing it, than it is the case that all of the players are suddenly not as good as they used to be or are expected to be.