[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'd also ask yourself why those that want Gulutzan gone so bad have this obsessive need to make everyone agree with them?

Probably for the same reason the Gulutzan apologists obsessively want everyone to agree with them and see Gulutzan as a good coach. Strange how both sides want the other to see their side of the story?

My opinion is you fire a coach if his system doesn't work, and you can fire a coach if his utilization doesn't work. I personally wouldn't fire a coach with a good system and solid utilization with a team that brainfarts their way to losses.

What determines whether a coach's system is working? Is it not ultimately results? It is not ultimately whether the team is achieving the production you expected them to? Is it not how well the players fit in that system and whether they are being used to their fullest potential? I guess that is where player utilization comes in, but does that not ultimately show in the results generated by the team?

This is not a team that is utilizing its players properly. Coming into the season it was predicted the Flames defense was going to be one of the picks from the NHL litter. Coupled with a solid starter this was supposed to be a rock solid playoff team. How close to reaching any of those expectations is this team? Do we think for a second that our player personnel is being used to its fullest? Are we leveraging the strength of the talent on the team or are they being cast into a system that works against their natural instincts and abilities? I think results indicate pretty strongly that we are not see the results expected from the talent on this team.

They are outplaying teams and they've done so for almost three months. To me that's the aim of the season, get a team with a structure that is sustainable and let the results come. So he gets a check mark for me in the most important area.

Are they? Are they really outplaying teams, or does the fancy stats tell you that they are? What I see is a team that spends a lot of time in the offensive zone and generates a lot of low quality shots and chooses stupid time to take shots. They pass up way too many quality scoring opportunities in favor of making an extra pass resulting in just more cycle or time in the zone battling for possession. Sure, they puck is in the one end of the ice more, but does that really mean they are outplaying the other team? Is it not possible the other team is taking exactly what the Flames system gives them and they are just playing us better on the defensive side of the puck? The Oilers under Eakins followed a similar flawed strategy and it achieved poor results as well. Could it be that other teams recognize what the Flames are going to do, and they allow them to take all these low percentage shots knowing they won't turn into much?

Utilization is another thing. I've had issues with Gulutzan on utilization and have been pretty up front about it. He's hand cuffed on some of them (Brouwer), and maybe he's giving too much responsibility to Cameron for the powerplay (not using Hamilton, players on their true sides), but the big one for me was the use of the fourth line to start periods, or after goals, and he's cleaned that up quite a bit.

Gulutzan's utilization is terrible. You've highlighted a couple of them. He doesn't let any of his defensemen play the game the way they can. They are handcuffed by the system. His reliance on Brouwer and Stajan, two guys that would not have jobs elsewhere in the NHL, is disturbing. His refusal to change things up is just maddening. Same four lines pretty much night-after-night, hoping for something different to result. His refusal to step in and take a more active role in the PP is almost criminal. Its like he has no answers to anything other than to try and grind out a win.

So if I'm the GM I see element one is going well, element two is coming along, but the players are finding a way to lose despite being put in a situation to win.

I don't fire a coach for that.

Element one is no going well. The fancy stats say one thing, but the outcomes tell a completely different story. If your system is to play perfect hockey, you're going to lose. In Gulutzan's system the team may spend most of the game in the offensive zone, generating a lot of nothing, but with the Gulutzan Gap happening in the defensive zone there are too many instances of quality opportunities for the opposition. I don't see a system that is designed for success. Element two continues to be problem. A guy makes a brain fart, you don't leave him out there to immediately make another. You don't go and leave a guy out killing a penalty for a full two minutes, especially after losing two straight draws. Utilization is still a massive failure.

I do sit down with Gulutzan and Giordano and ask about leadership and how to get the team some fortitude.

I would be more concerned about sitting down with Gulutzan and asking him about his decisions of when and how to use personnel. But if you want to sit down with both parties I would hope that you allowed the player to be frank and call out the garbage systems in play. No matter how good this team is 5-on-5, their special teams more often than not lose them games. I don't think that is on the players and their fortitude. That's on the coaches and the systems they put into play.