The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[calgarygeologist]

If I was part of the management team I would be pushing for an offseason #1 RW addition and a coaching overhaul, Gulutzan and Cameron. I think that for the most part the team is set up for success with the current crop of players. If they tank next season with a new coaching staff I would start to consider a fire sale of assets at the 2019 trade deadline.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by browntrout

Andersson, Kylington, Mangiapane,Parsons, Dube, Fox, Phillips, Valimaki, and then maybes in Ruzicka, Fischer and Joly is a pretty good haul......until one of these prospects you mentioned start to make an impact in the NHL, they are just that, prospects outside of the NHL. Not having a first or second this year followed by no 2nd or 3rds next year given the teams performance is an utter disappointment that is on the GM's hands.

What exactly are you saying?

Every GM has to assess their prospect cupboard for likelihood to make it, and in what role.

The Flames have had some pretty terrible prospect lists in the past and if that was the case today you wouldn't want to deal picks as it would put the team in a terrible position.

The relative quality of this group makes it more palpable to make those moves.

That's the reality. They're not players until they make it is just a bumper sticker.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by colbym72

For what its worth, Friedman said on 960 this morning that he would be surprised if there is any coaching or management changes, and thinks it will be a big roster shakeup if they miss the playoffs

Yikes, my worst fear for this team.

[Toonage]

The crazy thing is, and maybe I'm wrong, that no matter what side of the fence you are on. Pro or Anti Gulutzan. Win or lose these past 2 years have seen some of the dullest most unentertaining hockey imaginable. Even with player's personal successes, the curse ending in Anaheim, Jagr on board etc, etc.

Can we agree on that?

[tripin_billie]

Originally Posted by Toonage

The crazy thing is, and maybe I'm wrong, that no matter what side of the fence you are on. Pro or Anti Gulutzan. Win or lose these past 2 years have seen some of the dullest most unentertaining hockey imaginable. Even with player's personal successes, the curse ending in Anaheim, Jagr on board etc, etc.

Can we agree on that?

I live in the eastern time zone so a lot of the games are pretty late for me. I used to stay up and watch, enjoying games even when the Flames were down. Now? I think might have caught 10 games or so from start to finish this year. I simply can't justify staying up, dealing with waking up exhausted for work, for such miserably boring hockey. The last two seasons have killed my enjoyment of hockey so much simply because the style the Flames play is unwatchable.

Also, let's face it, if the Fames get behind by even a goal, I might as well go to bed or do something other than watch, they're not going to come back...

[Jiri Hrdina]

I would add Foo to the prospect list. After a slow start he's put together a pretty good first year of pro. Still in the mix long-term as a guy who maybe something at the NHL level.
After the hype of the signing seems like he has been kinda forgotten about.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Toonage

The crazy thing is, and maybe I'm wrong, that no matter what side of the fence you are on. Pro or Anti Gulutzan. Win or lose these past 2 years have seen some of the dullest most unentertaining hockey imaginable. Even with player's personal successes, the curse ending in Anaheim, Jagr on board etc, etc.

Can we agree on that?

Not for me. I found the teams from the 7 years out to be brutally boring. Iginla was the only offensive threat consistently and his offense was not that exciting. Guys like Vale Bure were more entertaining but also frustrating.
Johnny is a rare player who is exciting. Monny is also a fun player to watch when he's on his game and Tkachuk is really a blast to have on this club.

Those teams from the 7 year drought were just awful to watch every night.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Not for me. I found the teams from the 7 years out to be brutally boring. Iginla was the only offensive threat consistently and his offense was not that exciting. Guys like Vale Bure were more entertaining but also frustrating.
Johnny is a rare player who is exciting. Monny is also a fun player to watch when he's on his game and Tkachuk is really a blast to have on this club.

Those teams from the 7 year drought were just awful to watch every night.

To be fair, I said some of the dullest, etc

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Toonage

To be fair, I said some of the dullest, etc

I also found those teams to be really lazy. Which was incredibly frustrating. I don't think this team is lazy. Just not good in some areas.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I also found those teams to be really lazy. Which was incredibly frustrating. I don't think this team is lazy. Just not good in some areas.

The whole NHL during that time was a slow plodding league which made the teams of the late 90s worse I suppose. I agree that this team isn't lazy, and I don't want to rehash old comments or go in circles, but they aren't drawing up a style of play that lends itself to edge of your seat excitement when they have the horses to do just that.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by colbym72

For what its worth, Friedman said on 960 this morning that he would be surprised if there is any coaching or management changes, and thinks it will be a big roster shakeup if they miss the playoffs

I can get the point of it. Burke/Treliving have a long-term vision/Philosophy in place and Gulutzan is a type of coach that fits in with it. If a team can't perform within a set vision, roster needs to be reshaped. Doing it the other way around, I.e. creating a vision around players in place will send the wrong message, that it is the players, rather than the management, that imposes a vision and a direction.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I’ve already gone over this too many times. This sometimes, maybe, what if crap is all just a 50/50 shot in the dark. Maybe we do make the playoffs, or maybe we fall into the abyss like the Avs didnwhen Roy left or maybe this roster just isn’t good enough no matter what coach is in the system.

Fact is, 2 coaches have failed with this roster and I’ll bet a 3rd will fail just as hard. This roster is not elite. We have some elite pieces, but pieces of a puzzle doesn’t make the picture complete. We don’t need new voices, we need a new philosophy. Less muckers and grinders who love the penalty box and more speed and skill to make teams pay when they’re in the box.

I dont think anyone has made the claim that this roster is elite.

But if you believe what you're saying is true then it doesnt matter if we fire Gulutzan or not. So why not give it a whirl? Just for the sake of variety if nothing else.

We could have a Magic 8-Ball behind the bench to make critical decisions. We could glue a Gulutzan-esque wig on it if that would make you more comfortable.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Making key personnel and management decisions to "give it a whirl" seems like a poor way to make those key decisions.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Making key personnel and management decisions to "give it a whirl" seems like a poor way to make those key decisions.

But he just said it doesnt matter! Hardly a 'key decision' if it doesnt matter.

Cant be both ways.

Its either a key decision or it doesnt matter. It cant be a key decision that doesnt matter.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I would add Foo to the prospect list. After a slow start he's put together a pretty good first year of pro. Still in the mix long-term as a guy who maybe something at the NHL level.
After the hype of the signing seems like he has been kinda forgotten about.

Foo was an example of Treliving recognizing the problems at forward and doing his best to address it. He's made several moves and IMO it's not his fault that they haven't gone as expected.

He thought Bennett would be a centre. The fact that he isn't looking to pan out that way changes things a lot.

He brought in Brouwer, who had decent second line type numbers on a very consistent basis. The one error with this IMO is not that Brouwer has underperformed, but rather in thinking that Brouwer's style would mesh with the possession game.

He signed Foo and Jagr when it looked like more scoring was needed and the draft picks weren't panning out. We know what happened there.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont think anyone has made the claim that this roster is elite.

But if you believe what you're saying is true then it doesnt matter if we fire Gulutzan or not. So why not give it a whirl? Just for the sake of variety if nothing else.

We could have a Magic 8-Ball behind the bench to make critical decisions. We could glue a Gulutzan-esque wig on it if that would make you more comfortable.

Yes I agree. Regardless of whether another coach gets much more out of these guys, the fact is they are boring to watch. I can maybe put up with boring garbage hockey if they are winning but they aren’t really much better than when Hartley was here and the entertainment value is at least half. I would kill for a different system just to be entertined let alone getting different results.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Foo was an example of Treliving recognizing the problems at forward and doing his best to address it. He's made several moves and IMO it's not his fault that they haven't gone as expected.

He thought Bennett would be a centre. The fact that he isn't looking to pan out that way changes things a lot.

He brought in Brouwer, who had decent second line type numbers on a very consistent basis. The one error with this IMO is not that Brouwer has underperformed, but rather in thinking that Brouwer's style would mesh with the possession game.

He signed Foo and Jagr when it looked like more scoring was needed and the draft picks weren't panning out. We know what happened there.

I am beginning to doubt whatever internal player metric system the Flames are using. They have targeted very specific type players and let others go, and I can only assume it is based on their metric system.

There seems to be a growing list of players brought in like Lazar or Brouwer that are not effective in this system, while letting heart players like Bouma and Comeau go. I know salary plays a role in those decisions but I feel that letting those guys go has had a dramatic effect on the effectiveness of the bottom two lines.

The coaching and the system have been excellent for the top 6 and the top 3 D. They all are having near career high years and succeeding in the system. The bottom 6 have not held up and not provided the heart or intensity either.

Hamonic was an expensive pick-up and I assume their metrics along with scouting placed him in a very elite status, but so far I am have been underwhelmed. Yes he has improved, but I was expecting a defensive guy like Regher and ended up with a Sarich. Good, but not a first and 2 seconds good.

If they plan on revamping the roster, I hope they look at changing their evaluation criteria because I don't think it is working.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Yikes, my worst fear for this team.

Right there with you, moving a Dmen is a big move but I’m not a fan of a big roster shake up especially without seeing what another coach could get out of this group.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I am beginning to doubt whatever internal player metric system the Flames are using. They have targeted very specific type players and let others go, and I can only assume it is based on their metric system.

There seems to be a growing list of players brought in like Lazar or Brouwer that are not effective in this system, while letting heart players like Bouma and Comeau go. I know salary plays a role in those decisions but I feel that letting those guys go has had a dramatic effect on the effectiveness of the bottom two lines.

The coaching and the system have been excellent for the top 6 and the top 3 D. They all are having near career high years and succeeding in the system. The bottom 6 have not held up and not provided the heart or intensity either.

Hamonic was an expensive pick-up and I assume their metrics along with scouting placed him in a very elite status, but so far I am have been underwhelmed. Yes he has improved, but I was expecting a defensive guy like Regher and ended up with a Sarich. Good, but not a first and 2 seconds good.

If they plan on revamping the roster, I hope they look at changing their evaluation criteria because I don't think it is working.

Agree with most of your points of your points except Bouma and Comeau, they weren’t that good haha. I think Byron would be a better example

[belsarius]

Agree with most of your points of your points except Bouma and Comeau, they weren’t that good haha. I think Byron would be a better example

I don't think they were that skilled either, but they brought an intensity to their game that is lacking. They were hard to play against, especially Bouma, much more than what we are getting this year. Totally agree with Byron as a skilled bottom 6 guy, but when you talk about Sutter type teams being successful it is due to getting hard nosed hockey out of the bottom 6. Hathaway for his first 10 games showed it, but otherwise the bottom of the Flames lineup has not seemed all that difficult to play against.

If those guys aren't going to score then they should at least be making the opposition's life miserable. I just haven't seen that this year. Even in the bottom pairing, and I like Kulak and Stone, but no one brings the fear of standing in front of the net than a guy like Engelland did.