Burke coming up on FAN960

[jschick88]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Is there a link to this interview?

http://www.sportsnet.ca/960/boomer-m...-burke-studio/

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Bingo

But are you seeing that?

A system that is taking away from Gaudreau's ability to be Gaudreau? Or are you seeing him doing the same things he's always done but with mistakes, bad reads, and bobbling the puck uncharacteristically?

I certainly don't see the team playing the left wing lock with Gaudreau the defensive conscious of the first line.

I'm seeing players like Monahan and Gaudreau struggling to find eachother. Errant passes, unable to enter the zone in sync, out of position for cycling along the boards. The reason they are turnover machines is they just aren't finding each other out there. They look confused and have no ability to keep the puck like they used to in the past.

I'm seeing a guy like Giordano, who has always been an offensive defenseman, struggle to make the right offensive choices like he always used to. Hang on to the puck when it was right, fake shots when its right, shoot when its right.

Is that just player performance or something else? Again, to me it would be quite a coincidence that all of our best players are struggling so much at the same time.

I personally think it goes way deeper than guys just fighting the puck. You know when a player is just going through a rough patch and when there is something a little deeper that is throwing things off. There's just too many sub par performances by good players for me to believe they are all just struggling at once.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Every team has basically the same plays. Execution matters.

Not giving the coaches a pass (I hate the passive PK for example), but the special teams would look a lot better if the players were performing.

I thought the passive PK was one of the things that Burke/Treliving wanted to get rid of with the new coach.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by heep223

Powerplay is 90% coaching. The new coaches were specifically supposed to fix it.

It may be that there is typically a 20 game period until the new systems set in, but you can't argue that these coaches are doing a good job. They're not. So why put it all on the players?

They're all a bunch of bums right now, players and coaches alike.

People keep saying that, but it's bull ####. No it's not. PP is these 4 things:

1. Skill on the ice - which I agree we have enough of.
2. Effort on the ice - despite what many around here think, I actually think our boys are trying almost every night.
3. System / Coaching whatever you want to call it - tbd
4. Execution on the ice and of the system being coached - doesn't matter how good the "coaching is" if the players aren't making it happen.

So how can it be 90% coaching with so many factors. Agreed, you can't succeed without a good system, but you also can't succeed if the players aren't good enough (not the case for us), if the effort isn't there, or the execution of the plan is not happening.

Right now, I'm putting my money on execution vs. coaching. Time will tell, and I'm not willing to say the coaches have it nailed, but since the STL. game at the dome, any problems we are seeing in all aspects of the game look way more like execution issues, versus the team executing a poor system well.

90% on coaching gives our star players, Gaudreau, Monahan, Gio, Brodie and Hamilton way to much of a pass. It's not like these guys are only garbage on the PP, they've been garbage in all aspects of the game, and our lesser players actually haven't been. Doesn't sound like coaching to me.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Timbo

Give it another 14 games then we can see if it is emotional overreacting or foreshadowing.

It isn't foreshadowing. Foreshadowing is something a writer does to hint at what is going to happen later. It works because the writer already knows what is going to happen. CP is not writing the Flames' future, much as some posters seem to believe they are.

[heep223]

I said it in my last post but I think it's worth repeating. Basically they all suck and we should lynch them all equally.

It's not black and white. It's a combination of new systems, poor player execution and poor coaching (motivation and communication). All three are issues right now.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by 868904

On the topic of systems and execution, I don't know what it is about this team cause this goes back many years, but i'm always amazed at how they are unable to execute a proper "dump and chase".

It is the simplest zone entry available, but it never works for the Flames in recent years because of poor execution.

Puck carrier dumps the puck into a corner, forwards who are not the puck carrier attack with speed into said corner, retrieve the puck or battle for puck.

Yet, recent Flames teams will always screw up in one of if not all of the following ways:

- No speed by forechecking "chaser";
- dumped into the wrong corner;
- "dumper" holds on too long, forcing "chaser" to slow down at the blueline, resulting in no speed on the forecheck;
- wrong forechecker (ie., Johnny Gaudreau should not be the "chaser" when Monahan and Chiasson are his linemates, makes no sense);
- weak dump.

It's almost like under Hartley and now Gulutzan, they never practice a "dump and chase". You see other teams do it very well against a very mobile Flames defence and you wonder, why can't the Flames do the same thing?

If you eliminate one potential zone entry, you make it much easier for the opposition to defend you.

Actually some of the Flames have been able to utilize the dump and chase effectively. Ferland/Bouma/Stajan have been so effective all year almost exclusively on the dump and chase. One dumps and the other two guys are like rabid dogs going into the corners, forcing turnovers and keeping pressure.

Backlund/Ferland/Tkachuk are also very effective at the dump and chase, Tkachuk may not win every battle but it seems every game he is getting better. The difference with these guys is they also have the skill to adjust and make a puck carried entry or sharp passing.

The top two lines are unable to complete a proper dump and chase, carry in or smart pass. All of the problems you are listing are problems the top players are having. The best guys are not executing and that's a problem.

Sure the coaches have a lot to work on, but I have a hard time calling them out on entries when 6 players are actually great at them.. Burke is dead to rights, the support players are our best players and that won't win games when other team's top players are performing.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I'm seeing a guy like Giordano, who has always been an offensive defenseman, struggle to make the right offensive choices like he always used to. Hang on to the puck when it was right, fake shots when its right, shoot when its right.

I do think the new system is more demanding. The stretch pass was look for the right colour jersey and hammer it at him, he deflects it in and you're work is done.

Now you have to see the ice better and work as more of a unit.

I think that's the way to go, but some players are certainly not having an easy time of learning it.

However that doesn't say the coach is to blame because I think this franchise needed better x's and o's and more system. It's been harder to adjust to actual structure than I expected.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It isn't foreshadowing. Foreshadowing is something a writer does to hint at what is going to happen later. It works because the writer already knows what is going to happen. CP is not writing the Flames' future, much as some posters seem to believe they are.

All this overreacting is more like a hyperbole.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Right, so they way I would have framed a question is exactly at that level. Don't ask about a specific player or coaching decision, but just ask about the blueline overall.
Something like
"Traditionally, the blueline has been a strength for this club, but top to bottom, it seems like they are struggling right now. What are you seeing right now when it comes to the play of the D. Do you believe the addition of a tugboat like Grossman will help or hinder the righting of this ship's course.".

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by heep223

I said it in my last post but I think it's worth repeating. Basically they all suck and we should lynch them all equally.

It's not black and white. It's a combination of new systems, poor player execution and poor coaching (motivation and communication). All three are issues right now.

Exactly, when a team is losing consistently everyone shares the blame. Anything less is just making excuses. Making excuses, and singling players and coaches makes the rest of the organisation feel like they are not responsible for any of the failures.

We have seen teams follow up on witch hunts, the only tangible result was continued failure. There is no easy way to build a winner. There are no easy solutions.

[Timbo]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It isn't foreshadowing. Foreshadowing is something a writer does to hint at what is going to happen later. It works because the writer already knows what is going to happen. CP is not writing the Flames' future, much as some posters seem to believe they are.

Semantics , you know what I was getting at. Maybe I should have used harbinger.

Or maybe even yet, foreshadowing is fine as it's defined.

verb (used with object)
1.
to show or indicate beforehand; prefigure:
Political upheavals foreshadowed war.

Next time I will get my lawyer to insure my posts on CP don't get the minutae police after me

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I do think the new system is more demanding. The stretch pass was look for the right colour jersey and hammer it at him, he deflects it in and you're work is done.

Now you have to see the ice better and work as more of a unit.

I think that's the way to go, but some players are certainly not having an easy time of learning it.

However that doesn't say the coach is to blame because I think this franchise needed better x's and o's and more system. It's been harder to adjust to actual structure than I expected.

The biggest difference that I can see is that Hartley had the team running stretch passes north-south and the players moving east-west. Gulutzan's system has us stretch passing east-west and skating north-south. The issue is that lateral passes stop the entire offence in its tracks as everyone has to wait for the pass receiver to start moving forward again. Our entire system has become point to point to point. And every point requires a hesitation - partly due to lack of execution - that allows the defence to drown our offence.

And since the LW seems to be the intended point man leading the rush into the zone in this system, it means forcing guys like Gaudreau into running a gauntlet rather than sneaking into space. Gaudreau needs to be better, but the system, by design, is stifling his ability to be creative. This is a classic case of a coach failing to consider the strengths and abilities of his players.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The biggest difference that I can see is that Hartley had the team running stretch passes north-south and the players moving east-west. Gulutzan's system has us stretch passing east-west and skating north-south. The issue is that lateral passes stop the entire offence in its tracks as everyone has to wait for the pass receiver to start moving forward again. Our entire system has become point to point to point. And every point requires a hesitation - partly due to lack of execution - that allows the defence to drown our offence.

Yes, the players have to be much faster in executing. Right now it's taking them anywhere from immediate to two seconds to initiate the breakout play (I've seen goddamned Wideman take five seconds. What a doof), but mostly much longer than immediate.

And since the LW seems to be the intended point man leading the rush into the zone in this system, it means forcing guys like Gaudreau into running a gauntlet rather than sneaking into space. Gaudreau needs to be better, but the system, by design, is stifling his ability to be creative. This is a classic case of a coach failing to consider the strengths and abilities of his players.

Pairing players sucks. This is why the game of hockey has three forwards and two d-men. When goddamned stone hands Chaisson is the other winger, the other team can easily afford to double team Gaudreu.

[Anduril]

Having listened to most of the interview with Burke, he does point out all the same things that the fans are generally upset with: Poor special teams, top players not performing (and puck management).
Speaking of the top players, it's interesting he mentions a common thing he's seen is how players getting a big pay raise try to force themselves to do more as a result of that. Gaudreau certainly looks like a player that's trying to find his old game in the middle of doing too much.

[MarkGio]

He specifically mentioned that he's not happy with the special teams, so that's on coaching. And there was some slack given to the top player regarding effort, but he never said a good thing about coaching. He never said players were well-prepared, playing the right system, getting the right minutes, or anything else that would otherwise give the coach a thumbs up.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Rick M.

I thought the passive PK was one of the things that Burke/Treliving wanted to get rid of with the new coach.

They did say that, yes. But here it is still.

But just like the PP, confidence and execution matter.

Deciding whether or not to attack a player in the corner, or maintain position is a choice and isn't always black and white.

When players are new to a system or uncertain in their roles, they tend to hesitate and defer to their positioning. And any hesitation will result in more passivity. And it spirals.

It is so frustrating watching every PK attack our PP - and do so successfully. Then our PK stands there and lets the opposing PP set up and pass it around.

Beyond frustrating.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I'm seeing players like Monahan and Gaudreau struggling to find eachother. Errant passes, unable to enter the zone in sync, out of position for cycling along the boards. The reason they are turnover machines is they just aren't finding each other out there. They look confused and have no ability to keep the puck like they used to in the past.

I'm seeing a guy like Giordano, who has always been an offensive defenseman, struggle to make the right offensive choices like he always used to. Hang on to the puck when it was right, fake shots when its right, shoot when its right.

Is that just player performance or something else? Again, to me it would be quite a coincidence that all of our best players are struggling so much at the same time.

I personally think it goes way deeper than guys just fighting the puck. You know when a player is just going through a rough patch and when there is something a little deeper that is throwing things off. There's just too many sub par performances by good players for me to believe they are all just struggling at once.

That's what i'm seeing. I think for all of the players, they are still adjusting to actually playing a system and most of them still haven't gotten to the point where the system is natural to them. They are overthinking and it is causing indecision and poor execution.

For Gaudreau and Monahan, there is also the added pressure of needing to perform. This is a job now to them, whereas before, you could say "it was just hawkey".

I do agree with those who point at a bit of system hinderance to Gaudreau though. Hartley's ridiculous stretch pass system of breakout was beneficial to Gaudreau because it really stretched the zone and gave Johnny more room. When you breakout as more of a 5 man unit, the opposition will sit back a bit more and there is less room and we are seeing Johnny trying to deke through a lot more defenders in a tighter area than before. Johnny and the coaching staff are going to have to figure out a way create more room for him out there. If that means using a hybrid of Hartley (Johnny's line) and Gulutzan's (every other line) system, then that's what they have to look at.

Either that or get into more coincidental scrums to create more 4 on 4 opportunities.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Of course points are as important right now as they are later.

And everyone is disappointed - it's not like anyone is saying "what are you complainers talking about? - everything is great!"

The fundamental issue of this debate is: what is to be done? And panicking at the 14 game mark is absolutely not the answer. It's simply too soon to be certain what exactly needs fixing.

Has the coaching been perfect? Of course not. Have the players played well? Hell no. Have the special teams sucked? Definitely. But can you tell me with certainty that the reason they've sucked is coaching?

Being disappointed is one thing. Panicking is another. It's simply too soon to know, and making changes for the sake of making changes just results in chaos and more uncertainty.

You calling people that disagree with you chicken little haters is, however, quite helpful.

Everybody likes a witty category title for self-identification.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

He specifically mentioned that he's not happy with the special teams, so that's on coaching. And there was some slack given to the top player regarding effort, but he never said a good thing about coaching. He never said players were well-prepared, playing the right system, getting the right minutes, or anything else that would otherwise give the coach a thumbs up.

You make a few leaps there.

"He specifically mentioned that he's not happy with the special teams, so that's on coaching" - players don't play on special teams? why boil it down to coaching only? why say he's boiling it down to coaching? He didn't say that at all.

the rest is based on what he didn't say to prove that he thinks the opposite?

I don't follow that logic at all.