Throw out all the expectations about playoffs and overall placement at the end of the season.
Let's look at the division. I argue it is the weakest division in hockey. One expansion team, the worst rebuilding team by a mile, another team that is half rebuilding, half competing by signing vets, a 'has been' team that many were predicting should start to rebuild, the expected top team completely decimated by injuries... yet the Flames are 5th in the division and closer to 2nd last than 2nd best.
Does anyone want to argue the following statements:
1) Gallant has been an EXCELLENT coach for Vegas this season.
2) John Stevens has the Kings playing very good hockey.
3) DeBoer has been fantastic with the Sharks - a team that many pundits expected to enter a rebuild. This season, they are the best defensive team in the league.
4) Carlyle has done a masterful job of keeping that Anaheim ship together after it got absolutely decimated by injuries. The AHL Ducks have been doing really well all things considering.
5) The Canucks have been out-performing expectations this year.
What can we say about the Flames?
Gulutzan has Calgary playing an absolutely beastly CORSI game.
I can't say they have been better than I thought. I would like to say they have been worse overall than I expected. They have had the luxury of a very healthy roster (Jagr's groin notwithstanding).
I just don't see why after 1.5 seasons, there is a really great reason to keep Gulutzan around. if this was a really tough division, I can see the argument. If the Flames were in the Central? Heck, if they were last or near last, at least we could point and say: "This is an incredibly difficult division. Anyone can come in last!"
There is no excuse for being in 5th. For having Vancouver ahead of the Flames for so long. For having any team ahead of them right now actually ahead of the Flames. This is a weak division, and weaker teams are seemingly getting the benefit from stronger coaching.
Unless you subscribe to the notion that this iteration of the Flames is yet another 'tough to coach' group. I thought Darryl labeled the Flames that years ago as more of an excuse than anything, as he consistently failed to deliver a proper coach for the squad since stepping down. However, even if true back then, what are the chances that it is true once again?
I don't know... I look at coaching as a very likely missing piece of the puzzle. I don't see a team that is over-achieving in the slightest (other than CORSI). I don't see a team that is improving - no consistent upward trajectory that causes me to think that they are on the right path. I think the last two seasons, the Pacific division has been an easier division to confound the issue.
It may not be Gulutzan that is the problem, but he also doesn't seem to really be making much of a difference. Less talented teams in the division have been much better. Less healthy teams in the division have been doing better. Teams that people have written-off are consistently better. Teams that are MUCH worse are nipping at Calgary's heels (and have been ahead of the Flames often).
This healthy Flames team that is 'all-in' and is playing in the weakest division in the NHL, and who has had a pretty damn good schedule up until this point (back to backs, and so on) finds itself as the 5th best team. Not out of it by any stretch, but worse than expected. MUCH worse than expected given a look at the rest of the Pacific.
I don't have confidence in the coaching staff. I don't see this team trending up. I don't see anything in this team other than CORSI stats why this coach should be retained. Treliving fired a coach who did more with much less on the roster. It seems like Gulutzan has been a step down from Hartley, instead of a step up.
Hartley got this group to over-achieve, even for only part of his tenure. Can anyone say that about Gulutzan?
I want that coach that was promised to be an upgrade over Hartley. That coach that would be able to lead Calgary 'further'.
|