Originally Posted by New Era
Yes, the game has continued to change and evolve. It is a younger players game that relies more on speed and transition. You can't get by on playing the lumbering smash mouth game synonymous with Sutter hockey. You need speed and you need to move the puck quickly. Dump and chase with a reliance on crash and bang is no recipe for success in the NHL these days.
Tell me, what is "Sutter Hockey"? Either you didn't believe me or you didn't read what Darryl specifically said about the Flames and how they played under Gulutzan - namely that they have to be a fast transitioning team.
So, who on this team is Kopitar, Carter, Brown, Clifford, Lewis, Penner, King, Fraser, Nolan, Regehr, Muzzin, or Greene? Smallest guy on the team was Richards who is average size on this team.
Pretty easy to turn a team around when you have that talent level on it too.
Point taken on the size front - but also, just maybe, perhaps... Sutter can actually change a system to suit the personnel on the team?
Also, if it was so easy to turn a team around, why were they flailing and looking like their rebuild was about to go to version 2.0? He was a 'hail mary' hire as a last-ditch effort by Lombardi. It worked.
What makes me think otherwise? Take a look at this roster. Take a look at the rosters that Sutter has put together. Sutter likes size and physicality. This team is small and can't play dump and chase to save their lives. They would fail under Sutter because he would try and get them to play that game, and then when they didn't he'd sit the small guys for Robinson, Ritichie, and Leivo. Good lord, Sutter is the antithesis of a coach for this team.
1) They are playing dump and chase hockey now
2) What makes you think that he will make this team play dump and chase? I take him on his word that teams need to play a fast transition style.
That relied on dump and chase hockey and grinding out the opposition.
There are other coaches available. I'd take Gallant over Sutter every day of the week and twice on game days. Gallant has shown he can adapt to the talent he has while Sutter makes the team in his own image. The game has passed Sutter by.
The Flames transition poorly because they are schooled to continually move the puck against the flow. Fix this minor issue and this team improves 1000%. Anyone with half a brain can see this.
I don't mind Gallant, and he has shown a rather short track record of exceeding expectations and having his teams work hard too. He has nowhere near the reputation of Darryl or his accomplishments, however. I will be fine if the Flames hire him, but I know I would be worrying about why exactly this great coach who seems to get teams turned around gets fired rather quickly.
Might as well bring Conroy out of retirement and see if Iggy wants to put the band back together too. The game has passed Sutter by. To play his brand of hockey would require a massive retool and we don't have the assets to go through that mess. Not sure if you haven't noticed, but the Flames have drafted small skilled players, not the ice boxes on skates Sutter likes. Bringing Sutter in would be a disaster and move the entire organization backward.
You keep saying this... repeatedly "The game has passed him by". It wasn't so long ago that he won 2 cups. He is very much a 'modern era' coach by an measure given that he has won 2 cups in the modern era. You may not like him, but he has more than proven the notion that the game passing him by was completely erroneous, and all the analysts and community at large that piled on all have egg on their face.
Again, I am sure that Darryl is much more than a one-trick pony, and is actually smart enough to figure out that a small team can't play smash-mouth hockey. Have you heard him talking about coaching methodologies?
I loved Darryl as a coach here in Calgary. I thought he would do well in LA, but even I didn't expect him to win 2 cups out of the deal. I thought of him as a heck of a coach, but SOMEWHAT like you, needs that 'big strong team' to coach that compliments 'his style'. Listening to him analyze different teams in the NHL and dissecting what they were good at was a bit of a revelation to me.
Mabye he would flop here if hired. I don't know - nobody does - but point is that this team is not successful, and it is much easier changing a coach than the core, especially mid-season. I would feel better getting a coach with experience - especially with a track record of fixing exactly what seems to ail this Calgary roster at the moment - before deciding to move out important core pieces. I don't feel comfortable doing that when this team has had inexperienced coach after coach. Bring in one good coach - anyone with a track record - for the remainder of the season and just see if this team shows both an uptick in their wins, and an uptick in the actual game play.
And for heaven's sake, make it more fun to watch!
|