Wow.. lots of fighting going on in this thread. Kind of surprised by it.
As far as the "Treliving or Gulutzan" making roster decisions (i.e. Jankowski being sent down), it USUALLY is a combination of BOTH. It really depends on their relationship.
We haven't heard much from Gulutzan, but I remember Hartley speaking about this well during his tenure. He would let Treliving (and Feaster, and Burke) know what he was missing on the roster. He would also regularly chat with the AHL coach, see who is hot, etc. He would also ask Ward/Huska who was hot, who is deserving to fit into a specific role he needed on the Flames.
I am betting that is a fairly similar relationship that is happening now. With Jankowski, it wasn't as simple as making the coaching decision. There are waivers to consider for existing players, opportunities to shore up depth at the start of the season, etc. Getting Jagr was a good move organizationally (and culturally). Sometimes you simply can't field the best possible team because you need to account for injuries down the road, and keeping a guy that is waiver eligible or even signing additional depth isn't the wrong move. You don't win the cup without depth in this league, and I would prefer a GM (and a coach that agrees) that sometimes you have to set yourself back marginally in order to assure you have it in place.
As for this thread being an 'embarrassment' - no, it isn't. I am surprised that Textcritic would blast the entire board in this way. There was plenty to criticize Gulutzan about. The slow starts. The atrocious defensive play of this highly skilled defence group. The inability to score. The team was not firing on all cylinders, and was not doing so for a very long time. I still think the Flames managed to stay where they are thanks to a number of really lousy teams this year in the Pacific.
Gulutzan now seems to have his team more prepared (how many games did they not look prepared to start the year?)
Gulutzan has this team playing (mostly) strong team defence (and Smith covering up when needed, but DEFINITELY not as much)
Gulutzan is not over-playing the 4th line as much
Gulutzan is making stronger in-game decisions and adjustments (seemingly, anyway).
Nobody should still be on the 'fire Gulutzan' bandwagon any longer. I think he is doing a solid job right now, and if he continues to do so (even better - continues to improve) then I think he is deserving of at least finishing out his contract and then thinking about an extension even.
The playoffs is a different animal altogether. This is where the 'savvy coach' often makes the young and inexperienced coach look foolish. Bylsma and Sullivan being exceptions here (on an extremely talented team). Terry Crisp also being a notable exception here as well. Hopefully Gulutzan also proves to be an exception as well.
I think people were right to be critical of Gulutzan (well, ignoring some of the 'over the top' posters who were essentially spamming the board). This thread holds a lot of that spam, but it also contains a LOT of thorough, insightful posts about Gulutzan. Actually, thorough and insightful posts that were both good and bad.
The overwhelming majority wanted to see change. I would be curious to know why a large segment didn't want to see change. From my own perspective, I not only didn't like to see what was going on with the team for too many games this season, but I also thought that this team was a much better team than their position in the standings.
I wonder if SOME of the people that voted no did so because they felt that this team wasn't that good. I know a lot of posters kept insisting that this team is just not that good, and that their position in the standings is reflective of that, and that no coach - Gulutzan or otherwise - was going to make this team better.
Valid thread today as it was last month. Brought out a lot of good discussion, the unfortunate amount of vitriol and spam as well, but a good thread that was very much relevant to the Flames and their predicament at the time. Also, I didn't buy the 'Flames are winning the CORSI battle' that some trotted out here. The Oilers often won the CORSI battle even under Eakins (especially later on in his tenure). That means nothing to me (or rather, next to nothing). I didn't see a team that battled enough, that created enough and went to the dirty areas enough. Now I do.
It is always going to be an argument about whether it is the coach that is to blame or the players. In the end, I think it is always about both, but it ends up falling on the shoulders of the coach - right or wrong. The coach has the option to bench players, change up the lines, assign responsibilities, etc.. Yes, the players might fail in the execution. The coach might fail in setting expectations. There is always a bit of a battle there. That is why often good coaches that are very experienced and who have won a tonne of awards get canned.
A relatively inexperienced coach leading a team that appeared to be disjointed? Yeah, I don't see why this thread was such an outlandish thing to have. Some of the posters that were continually spamming and taking personal pot-shots at the coach (and other posters!), sure, that was the embarrassment. But this thread was a very relevant one considering what we were seeing with the Flames.
As of right now, Gulutzan has this team playing well. I look forward to seeing the rest of the season, and definitely look forward to seeing the playoffs. I don't have any real expectations regarding him at this point - keeping my mind open either way, as I don't dislike him nor do I think he is exceptional either. The playoffs is where I think we will really get to see whether he has improved as a head coach or not. This is what I have said before as well - when a team hires an inexperienced head coach, it is much like having a young team. You have to be patient with some growing pains. In-game adjustments have been better. Personnel decisions have been better. Hopefully he continues to improve, and with it the Flames as well.
|