The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[Mr.Coffee]

Enoch, your view of the coach is literally the exact same as mine. Well put, I think you're spot on.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You make some good points. I, for one, do not think Hartley was a better coach - exciting, passionate, but I hated the defensive structure.

Are there positives with Gulutzan's coaching? Of course. And yes, when the team is executing the 5-man system well, they can be dominant. But I would counter that they aren't dominant with it often enough. That is either due to a lack of talent, or the system is flawed in some way (too complicated, or too inflexible, or whatever). I think the talent is there, so...

As for lacking competitive depth, I would argue that no one in the bottom 6 is exceeding expectations, and everyone in the bottom 6 is under-achieving, and regressing. That is either a horrifically unfortunate coincidence, or there is a fundamental problem that is causing it.

Same argument can be made about the defense. Either there is way less talent than everyone (including experts outside of the fanbase) thought, or the D is under-achieving.

I am a big believer in Occam's razor. I think if the whole team is under-performing, it is more likely that there is a problem that is causing it, than it is the case that all of the players are suddenly not as good as they used to be or are expected to be.

What about the defensive structure did you dislike exactly?

I think that given the makeup of the team - including forwards - I thought that system actually fit the Flames until the final year when the wheels fell off (and I do think that it may have been just as much of a symptom from a team losing confidence in their goaltending as much as any other reason - in fact, when Ramo was called back up, I do remember that the team started coming back to form, broke the franchise record for most consecutive wins at home, and maintained a fairly low GA until Ramo got injured).

The passive shot blocking was 'phase 2' of that defensive structure, and given that Giordano and Brodie were the only really mobile defencmen at the time (Russell was average, Wideman was slow, Smid was slow, Engelland was slow, and Diaz didn't have much of an IQ), I thought it was a decent fit. Get in the lanes, block like crazy, and avoid 2nd and third chances. Once the goalies started getting beat clean on the first shots from lower scoring chances, it all went to hell.

Before that, you had goalies finishing in the middle of the pack in SV%, a team that finished in the middle of the pack in GA, and a team that finished in the top 10 offensively.

I do believe that Hartley would not have utilized that exact system if he had the talent on the back end today - maybe I am wrong, maybe not. However, the Flames had unquestionably better talent under Gulutzan, but haven't been much better defensively, but are much worse offensively. Given that Hartley had a 'rebuilding' team, vs Gulutzan's 'starting to compete' team, it does make me wonder if Gulutzan is indeed an upgrade or not.

Hartley's last season was a terrible one, but I do think that the revolving door of goalies was just as much to blame, and that the larger body of work he had done was perhaps more important. Ramo and Hiller were both garbage to start the year, but when Ramo was recalled I believe that team went on a nice run holding down the GA really nicely, and setting a new franchise record for most consecutive home wins. Then Ramo got injured, and the GA exploded with the revolving door of goalies again.

There are facets of that Hartley system that I would love to see Gulutzan use - even defensively - and some facets that I am glad that Gulutzan has modified. I just really dislike that it has neutered the offence somewhat.

I wish I could find that Sportsnet article where they broke down Hartley's defensive structure. I did a quick look, but no luck. I specifically remember that article praising his system.

At any rate, I think Bob was the better coach simply because it felt like that system was tailored for the makeup of the Flames, and they executed that system well for a while. To me, that is what a good coach does - develop a specific system that fits a team, and then get the team to actually execute it consistently. I haven't seen consistency out of Gulutzan, and the system has made me worry a bit too much of being able to generate enough offence off of it.

However, I do think that given Gulutzan's NHL experience, and the length of time he has been with the team, it could happen under his watch as well. I really don't feel he is anywhere close to as bad of a coach as Brent was (poorly constructed system that didn't fit the team, and inability to ever get the team to play it consistently).

I do agree with most everything you have been saying about the Flames now, just being curious as to why you felt that Hartley's defensive structure was poor (a common sentiment on these boards, even though it seemed to me that it went pretty well until the goalies started letting in those first shots from low danger areas). The only thing I disagree with you on thus far is that I don't think the time is necessarily right to replace Gulutzan.

Howerver, I just don't see his defensive system all that impressive yet with any consistency, especially given the increased talent on the blue line, and especially coupling it with the hit on offence it seems to be taking. If that doesn't change soon - by December by my own insignificant and arbitrary little timeline in my head - then I do think Treliving needs to step-in and make a change.

[indes]

I agree with alot of the above. One of the big things I've noticed this year is the lack of pinching from the D. The hesitation is blatantly obvious where a lot of the D want to pinch but stop and start going back.

I'm not sure why GG doesn't want us to be aggressive on pinches but I think it's a huge failing point for our possession style.

I keep going back to how our team wants to go 'offense vs defense' all game and I think it kills our transition game.

Anyways coaching is killing this team. Possession is great, a team assembled to capitalize on the transition is even better imo

[Domoic]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Totally. If you remove all the good things, the only things GG has done are bad.

That winning streak was all GG. Totally.

[jlh2640]

Is he though

[nemanja2306]

Originally Posted by jlh2640

Is he though

Of course not.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Erick Estrada]

Yeah my feeling is that he appears to me to be a top shelf assistant coach that lacks the authoritarian approach that guys like Babcock, Quenneville, D. Sutter, Tortorella, etc have in spades. As Enoch Root stated there is no identity as they look like a team just going on the ice to do their job rather than a team on a mission to accomplish a goal. Gulutzan isn't unique to that as many solid assistants simply lack the quality to be able to persuade a group of well paid men to buy-in to the team concept he's trying to build. Jim Playfair comes to mind as a coach the players loved as an assistant but simply couldn't buy into him as the authoritative figure in the dressing room. Being intelligent and knowing your X's & O's makes for a great assistant but the head coach position requires more leadership intangibles and just being a really good guy like Gulutzan isn't enough.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by indes

I agree with alot of the above. One of the big things I've noticed this year is the lack of pinching from the D. The hesitation is blatantly obvious where a lot of the D want to pinch but stop and start going back.

I'm not sure why GG doesn't want us to be aggressive on pinches but I think it's a huge failing point for our possession style.

I suspect this is more due to the early seasons defensive woes and the attempt to get the shots against down. I don't think the general tactics have changed from last season in that regard.

It's pretty normal and will likely pass.

[blender]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I wonder if they could do a hockey trade 1 for 1 GG for Coach V.

Don't think the Rags make that trade. Wait, haven't they just won 6 in a row? There was talk Vigneault was one loss away from being sacked a couple weeks ago, but I really wonder if there was any substance to it.

I agree with the opinion that unless the wheels fall completely off there will be no coaching change. It's not a good way to run a hockey team.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by blender

Don't think the Rags make that trade. Wait, haven't they just won 6 in a row? There was talk Vigneault was one loss away from being sacked a couple weeks ago, but I really wonder if there was any substance to it.

I agree with the opinion that unless the wheels fall completely off there will be no coaching change. It's not a good way to run a hockey team.

This exactly. Which is why the hire was so important in the first place.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by blender

I agree with the opinion that unless the wheels fall completely off there will be no coaching change. It's not a good way to run a hockey team.

Yeah, I mean, the Pens and Kings did it and where did it ever get them?

[Backlunds_socks]

What is GG paid?

[kukkudo]

Originally Posted by blender

Don't think the Rags make that trade. Wait, haven't they just won 6 in a row? There was talk Vigneault was one loss away from being sacked a couple weeks ago, but I really wonder if there was any substance to it.

I agree with the opinion that unless the wheels fall completely off there will be no coaching change. It's not a good way to run a hockey team.

Does that mean a record under .500 at the end of November or December? If the flames are sitting barely in a playoff spot come Christmas. As a GM you have to do something.

I honestly think if the Flames had all there picks for the upcoming draft the expectations wouldn't be that high.

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Not sure Sutter is the answer, L.A. is doing much better since he is gone. That doesn't mean that he wouldn't be great again with a fresh start on a new team. Don't know if he just "lost the room" or if the game is passing him by.

I guess we'll see when John Stevens wins 2 cups behind the bench in LA. Not every coach is Scotty Bowman, most get fired a few times throughout their careers.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Domoic

That winning streak was all GG. Totally.

Obviously it wasn't completely GG. But you can't remove the winning streak and then blame the losses on the coach. The fact is, after the first 15 games last season (which is typically how long it takes for a team to adjust to a new coach, this has been backed up with lots of examples) the Flames were something like 42-25, which if memory serves was the 4th best record in the league over that stretch. Simply because a lot of our wins came consecutively is meaningless, wins are wins and the fact is after GG and the team got used to each other we were a top team in the league and most people on this board were loving Gulutzan.

It is totally unfair to say "outside of the winning streak, the Flames weren't very good"... of course they weren't you're removing 10 wins from their record. Every team would look significantly worse if you took 10 wins away.

[---Hatrick---]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Obviously it wasn't completely GG. But you can't remove the winning streak and then blame the losses on the coach. The fact is, after the first 15 games last season (which is typically how long it takes for a team to adjust to a new coach, this has been backed up with lots of examples) the Flames were something like 42-25, which if memory serves was the 4th best record in the league over that stretch. Simply because a lot of our wins came consecutively is meaningless, wins are wins and the fact is after GG and the team got used to each other we were a top team in the league and most people on this board were loving Gulutzan.

It is totally unfair to say "outside of the winning streak, the Flames weren't very good"... of course they weren't you're removing 10 wins from their record. Every team would look significantly worse if you took 10 wins away.

If you take away the 7 losses the Flames have so far, they look pretty good

[Bingo]

Everyone has coaches they like and dislike. Some by personality, some by style, tactics etc.

I was pretty much done with Hartley so I'm not going to suggest a person can't dislike Gulutzan.

But I see a pretty strong coach in a highly competitive (parity) league that is pulling the right levers to make this team a very good one once they all get on the same page.

The Flames special teams have been rough, to which I'd separate the powerplay to some extent because the shooting percentage there has been as inexplicabley bad as the five on five marks. And I don't see shooting percentage as a coachable thing. Guys that score need to score. If you're not getting chance or looks then it's a combination but failing to beat a goaltender is on the player.

Either way here is the Flames differentials this season. To me this is a team that has found it and are moving their way to some good results. I see patience, as things are coming.



They've been very good for the last eight games and have three or four stinkers in 15 games total this season. They could easily be 9-5-1 or something at this point with some puck luck.

[kukkudo]

Either way I think GG has to get them into the playoffs and win a round to be employed next year.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Everyone has coaches they like and dislike. Some by personality, some by style, tactics etc.

I was pretty much done with Hartley so I'm not going to suggest a person can't dislike Gulutzan.

But I see a pretty strong coach in a highly competitive (parity) league that is pulling the right levers to make this team a very good one once they all get on the same page.

The Flames special teams have been rough, to which I'd separate the powerplay to some extent because the shooting percentage there has been as inexplicabley bad as the five on five marks. And I don't see shooting percentage as a coachable thing. Guys that score need to score. If you're not getting chance or looks then it's a combination but failing to beat a goaltender is on the player.

Either way here is the Flames differentials this season. To me this is a team that has found it and are moving their way to some good results. I see patience, as things are coming.



They've been very good for the last eight games and have three or four stinkers in 15 games total this season. They could easily be 9-5-1 or something at this point with some puck luck.

So the Flames lost their two best games and won their worst game? Man outliers piss me off. Haha

[samsaini]

Watched the Lightning Vs Sharks game last night and was really impressed with the way the lightning play! They're fast, up-tempo, and always pressuring the opponent to force a turnover.

After watching the game, I'm more in agreement to fire GG. We play slow, give opposition too much space to make plays, little to no pressure on the puck carrier, and very little offence. Also, benching prospects in favour of vets. The new NHL is fast and in your face, something Calgary has moved away from. We need more speed in our lineup and more pressure to the puck carrier, with at least 1 other player supporting.

We need a mix of Hartley's system with the speed and pressure, with GG's heavy possession system to be dominant in this league. Just don't know which coach is available that brings those elements to our team if GG was to leave.