Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
This is where I keep shaking my head.
Where did I give anyone a pass? You made a pretty salacious comparison for effect, which is fine but not really the best indicator of the year over year product.
But no they didn't make a step forward at all, I think we can all agree on that.
All I've ever suggested is looking into why instead of assuming it's one thing only.
|
I haven't really encountered a lot of people solely blaming this on coaching. They may feel coaching is the biggest factor in player performance and I would tend to agree. The team was on life support before Christmas and playing some pretty crappy hockey that we still see today. What people were calling for is a coaching change to try and save the season. You will not change enough players during the season to make a difference so you change the coach. The team as constructed was not responding to the coach so many called for a change.
Now that the results are in many still feel the same way. Team is still not responding to the coach and playing some crappy boring hockey. One side feels this issue mostly resides on the coaches side but still understands that player changes are needed to take the next step. The other side feels the players are more to blame and feel this current coach can get them to take the next step if the right players are moved in and out.
I have some question that come up around this. Who is responsible for sucking the life out of the never say die team in a 2/3 year span when you largely have the same players? Who's responsible for the slow and very predictable play on the ice? Players don't understand and overthink? Coach calls for control above all else? Way too many questions...
When the deep analysis is done are the games rewatched to go over the specific scoring chances? Just curious as I contend that the Flames high danger chances are really not all that high danger given the positioning of the opposition and I am not sure how that is reflected in spreadsheets.