Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

Calgary4LIfe · 01-24-2026, 04:19 PM

I always look at the Oilers circa Hall, Eberle, etc., as the poster child for how NOT to do things.

The Calgary Flames' rebuild under the Hartley years and into the Gulutzan era was more successful than the Oilers' was, even though they were "building something special up there". Notice how nobody in the media uses that expression any longer?

Say what you will about Hartley, but he held players accountable. Say what you will about Gulutzan, but he held the players accountable too. I think the rebuild was screwed due to switching to 'win now' mode too soon, but I do think that generally - with a few exceptions - the Flames brought up their prospects the right way.

I will never forget one night under Hartley where the Flames went down 3-0 or 4-0, and fought back to win the game. That same night, the Oilers went down 3-0, and lost by more. I remember RNH being interviewed, and he said: "We can't go down by 3 goals. Nobody can comeback in this league when down by 3 goals." LoL

The Oilers at that time cycled through coaches, and were always terrible defensively and not committed to both ends of the rink (and they still aren't!). That's the culture that they were developed in. Thank goodness that the Flames have leaders like Backlund and Coleman here, and a coaching staff that will hold players accountable.

I am a firm believer that it is 100% fine to purposefully tank and be able to rise out of it as a top team, but you just can't allow poor play. You tank by making your team bad on paper, but you make sure your coach holds everyone accountable still.

I want to see Gridin being held accountable if he is having a bad game. The Oilers didn't screw it up because they put Hall on the top line. I think that's putting a player in a situation to succeed - Gridin was playing with Kadri, not with Kirkland, right? The difference between the Oilers and Flames is that Huska will hold a young player accountable for poor play (just like Hartley did, and most coaches that came afterwards), while the Oilers just kept giving them all the ice they wanted.

Being benched/scratched/demoted is part of development. Put a prospect in a position to succeed. If the prospect is not succeeding, show a bit of patience. If the prospect isn't succeeding, then bench, scratch or demote, depending on how long it has been. Then rinse and repeat. Provide feedback. Keep putting that prospect in positions to succeed at the NHL or AHL level. Work and communicate with the prospect and support the prospect. That's how development should occur, and I think that's what Calgary's philosophy has been for some time now with everyone except maybe Ward.

Huska has a very good track record when it comes to player development now. Just listen to Andersson or Backlund who both have praised him in the past. Or look how many prospects have cut their teeth under Huska now and are establishing themselves as NHL players - Wolf, Klapka, Zary, Pospisil, Kuznetsov, Honzek (he was looking great until he was injured), one could argue Cooley now, Brzustewicz is really trending in that direction I would say (though I expect him to be a casualty and be sent down when Parekh returns).

Huska may or may not be the coach for tomorrow, but for today, I don't find any reasons to complain. He holds players accountable and has a track record for development. Plus, this team isn't getting killed on the scoreboard every night, and that's what I honestly had expected to start happening like bottom feeders generally do. I don't see a bad performance after a bad performance night in and night out. I see lulls to be sure, and that's impossible to stop simply because losing sucks. It just seems to me that Huska has his fingers on the pulse of this team, and that includes the development of young players.

01-24-2026, 04:19 PM	#100
Calgary4LIfe Franchise Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Exp:	I always look at the Oilers circa Hall, Eberle, etc., as the poster child for how NOT to do things. The Calgary Flames' rebuild under the Hartley years and into the Gulutzan era was more successful than the Oilers' was, even though they were "building something special up there". Notice how nobody in the media uses that expression any longer? Say what you will about Hartley, but he held players accountable. Say what you will about Gulutzan, but he held the players accountable too. I think the rebuild was screwed due to switching to 'win now' mode too soon, but I do think that generally - with a few exceptions - the Flames brought up their prospects the right way. I will never forget one night under Hartley where the Flames went down 3-0 or 4-0, and fought back to win the game. That same night, the Oilers went down 3-0, and lost by more. I remember RNH being interviewed, and he said: "We can't go down by 3 goals. Nobody can comeback in this league when down by 3 goals." LoL The Oilers at that time cycled through coaches, and were always terrible defensively and not committed to both ends of the rink (and they still aren't!). That's the culture that they were developed in. Thank goodness that the Flames have leaders like Backlund and Coleman here, and a coaching staff that will hold players accountable. I am a firm believer that it is 100% fine to purposefully tank and be able to rise out of it as a top team, but you just can't allow poor play. You tank by making your team bad on paper, but you make sure your coach holds everyone accountable still. I want to see Gridin being held accountable if he is having a bad game. The Oilers didn't screw it up because they put Hall on the top line. I think that's putting a player in a situation to succeed - Gridin was playing with Kadri, not with Kirkland, right? The difference between the Oilers and Flames is that Huska will hold a young player accountable for poor play (just like Hartley did, and most coaches that came afterwards), while the Oilers just kept giving them all the ice they wanted. Being benched/scratched/demoted is part of development. Put a prospect in a position to succeed. If the prospect is not succeeding, show a bit of patience. If the prospect isn't succeeding, then bench, scratch or demote, depending on how long it has been. Then rinse and repeat. Provide feedback. Keep putting that prospect in positions to succeed at the NHL or AHL level. Work and communicate with the prospect and support the prospect. That's how development should occur, and I think that's what Calgary's philosophy has been for some time now with everyone except maybe Ward. Huska has a very good track record when it comes to player development now. Just listen to Andersson or Backlund who both have praised him in the past. Or look how many prospects have cut their teeth under Huska now and are establishing themselves as NHL players - Wolf, Klapka, Zary, Pospisil, Kuznetsov, Honzek (he was looking great until he was injured), one could argue Cooley now, Brzustewicz is really trending in that direction I would say (though I expect him to be a casualty and be sent down when Parekh returns). Huska may or may not be the coach for tomorrow, but for today, I don't find any reasons to complain. He holds players accountable and has a track record for development. Plus, this team isn't getting killed on the scoreboard every night, and that's what I honestly had expected to start happening like bottom feeders generally do. I don't see a bad performance after a bad performance night in and night out. I see lulls to be sure, and that's impossible to stop simply because losing sucks. It just seems to me that Huska has his fingers on the pulse of this team, and that includes the development of young players.