Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
But when guys who have been through a couple coaches and especially a guy like Backlund who has given it all to this franchise raises an issue big enough that they're willing to move on if it's not solved? You listen, plain and simple.
|
100% agreed. No argument there. This is exactly how I understood it. Backlund wants to win. There was an issue that got in the way of winning. If the problem wasn't solved, Backlund felt the team couldn't win and thus Backlund would leave to go somewhere where he could win.
But the problem was some of the players AND Sutter. The problem wasn't just Sutter. Elliot Friedman has implied this at least three times in different podcasts - multiple players on the Flames felt the problem was both Sutter and the players who hated Sutter.
So Sutter is gone, but the players remain. Is the problem solved? Maybe. Maybe not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
I also think it's a complete rewrite to suggest that Huberdeau didn't want to adjust his game. He did, completely, and his individual stats suffered immensely for it because it's not the type of game he's successful at. He still did it. Saying he couldn't or didn't want to play the system is a lie, he could and he did, and it didn't work. Kadri... hard to say, he was a mess.
|
I don't think its a stretch to say that Huby
couldn't adjust his game while still being a point-per-game player. Sutter and Huby didn't mesh. It wasn't going to happen. The coach couldn't adjust. The player couldn't adjust. He's your franchise forward eating up 10%-13% of the cap for eight years and you need him to be effective to have team success. He's untradable. Add Kadri to that and it's 20% of the cap between two players.
In that situation, the players are going to stay and the coach is going to go. And you have to bring in a new coach who can hopefully get more out of your assets. Even if Sutter was super supportive, super positive, pooped rainbows, etc, he'd be gone if his system didn't mesh with the franchise players and neither were able to adapt. You need coaches and players to mesh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
This developing conspiracy theory about Sutter being used as a scapegoat or this all secretly coming from the minds of two new players is just bizarre to me. There's no reason not to believe Maloney is being honest and plenty of smoke that suggests this was more than two players. If it was just two players, nobody would go through the effort of making up rumours about it being multiple players, coaches, training staff, etc. Let's not forget to use our heads a little bit here.
|
It's not a conspiracy theory and I don't want it come across that way. Sutter contributed to a negative environment. Multiple players had issues with Sutter. Corroborated by multiple people in the organization. Let's say that's all true and Maloney is being honest in his understanding and characterization of that.
All the above can be true and still have had an immaterial net impact on team success. Even if Sutter was super negative and uncompromising, the fault of missing the playoffs might still be mostly attributable to poor team construction and poor performance of specific roster players. It's not either/or. And Maloney is going to be biased against seeing that possibility because they were directly responsible for team construction (along with Tre) and they believe in that team construction.