A SC ring and a Jack Adams disagree with you. Not to mention taking a Flames team that was predicted to be in the McDavid sweepstakes into the 2nd rnd of the playoffs.
Since the cup win, he has coached 10 seasons in the NHL, making the playoffs 3 times. Losing in rounds 1, 2 and 3.
Was he the best coach in the NHL last year? I don't think so. His team over-achieved last year and is now playing up to its level.
He hasn't been able to make PP and PK adjustments ALL year. People can blame it on assistants as much they want to but at the end of the day why isn't he stepping in and helping the assistant make the change? It's not like the PP and PK were amazing last year, ranked 16th and 20th, respectively.
His time in Calgary from 12-13 to current, the PP ranks 25th, the PK ranks 26th. Even if you remove this years dismal 30th ranked numbers, the team is 21st and 22nd in terms of PP and PK in his coaching span in Calgary.
He is not an elite coach.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Da_Chief For This Useful Post:
Who exactly projected that? The only people foolish enough to project an upward trend like that are people who were fooled by our clearly unsustainable style of play last season and who aren't patient enough to handle a 5 year rebuild. At minimum, that's how long this thing will take. We are halfway through. Are fans patient enough to wait that long? Evidently, not everyone. Anything quicker then that is pure gravy.
Rebuilding suck. Losing is expected. The GM and head coach ALWAYS take the heat when the team is losing. But rebuilds are all about short term pain for long term gain. There should absolutely zero expectation of being division contenders for the foreseeable future, let alone annual playoff contenders.
We're in this for the long haul folks. I'm of the opinion that Hartley's job is safe, until upper management feels we are ready to take the next step and another coach who is available is deemed to be a better fit.
It was the general consensus. After trading for Hamilton and signing Frolik, the general view of the Pacific was:
Anaheim
LA
Calgary
San Jose
Most pundits had Calgary 3rd, 2nd or 4th.
This season has been as big a flop as last season was a surprise.
It was the general consensus. After trading for Hamilton and signing Frolik, the general view of the Pacific was:
Anaheim
LA
Calgary
San Jose
Most pundits had Calgary 3rd, 2nd or 4th.
This season has been as big a flop as last season was a surprise.
That's not true. There was one expert who picked the Flames to make the playoffs this year. There were a lot more than 1 who picked the Flames to miss this year. They've under performed expectations - but not every close to how much of a surprise last year was.
That's not true. There was one expert who picked the Flames to make the playoffs this year. There were a lot more than 1 who picked the Flames to miss this year. They've under performed expectations - but not every close to how much of a surprise last year was.
General consensus was Ducks 1st, Kings 2nd, Flames 3rd to 4th depending on how Sharks did.
Firing Hartley isn't the solution if you can't find a better replacement as I don't think this team will be any better with a guy like Mike Yeo as head coach. That said players are always evaluated as are coaches and there's a lot to criticize this season. I'm not campaigning for Hartley to get fired but as always I'm hoping the team can be improved and if management thinks coaching can be better then so be it.
If the Flames had decent goal tending all year they would be right in the race where people expected them to be. Hard to blame Hartley for that, Brodie injury, Gio forgetting how to play hockey for a month, Wideman/Hudler forgetting how to play hockey for 5 months ect.
It seems the quality of your posts have a lot in common with the end of your post.
C'mon. Say whatever you want about me and my posts.
But at least consider the Jack Adams objectively—It's basically a weird perception-based pat on the back that answers the question: Who best polished the turd this year? Who wins it is not necessarily tied to any quantifiable result based-number or fact.
How many times has Mike Babcock won it? He's a pretty good coach, no?
Look who has. John Torterella, Paul MacLean, Patrick Roy... All pretty average coaches, no? One's that any reasonable hockey fan would have some serious reservations about having behind the bench, right?
Granted, many great coaches have won it. But does it really deserve to act as any sort of indicator of coach performance? Look at wins/losses, win percentage, games coach, etc. etc. Stanley cup wins? Sure. Most definitely. But the Jack Adams just isn't as compelling as proof.
Last edited by MoreDrank; 02-16-2016 at 02:40 PM.
Reason: spelling
Well, to be fair he only did that once. I think my point was more along the lines of there not really being anyone waiting in the wings to take Hartley's job.
The team has self destructed this year mostly because of goaltending and GM decisions (start with 3 goalies, too much dead weight signed like Raymond, etc.).
I think my point was more along the lines of there not really being anyone waiting in the wings to take 