[PGT] The Flames didn't win

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

I think the Flames only Stanley Cup appearance since the one they won was largely Daryl Sutter's coaching and that we haven't had a coach who has got the team playing to that level again since he stepped down as head coach.

I don't understand why GG should get the benefit of the doubt. What has he achieved? And if you think GG's doing a fine job and we generate so many good scoring chances and just need some pure goal scorers, then you should be calling for Treliving's head.

Why do we always have to call for someone's head?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by kevman

Why do we always have to call for someone's head?

Precisely.
I think there is awareness that goal scoring and RW is a problem area. Several different approaches were tried this year to address and it didn't work.
Do you fire the GM because of that alone? I sure don't. Not if he has a plan to address it going forward.

Or we could fire him because that's what the Flames do.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Precisely.
I think there is awareness that goal scoring and RW is a problem area. Several different approaches were tried this year to address and it didn't work.
Do you fire the GM because of that alone? I sure don't. Not if he has a plan to address it going forward.

Or we could fire him because that's what the Flames do.

I don't think too many fans are campaigning for the GM to get fired. He just got a new contract so even if this season ended up a tire fire like the Oilers I couldn't see him getting a pink slip. He's proven to be a good not great GM that we hope is learning from past mistakes. That said he has to take some of the credit for the failure this season. Jagr didn't work out and Lack was a disaster. Haminic has been okay but not a difference maker you expect from a 1st round pick and two 2nd's. His best move was acquiring the 35 year old goaltender. He clearly needs to have a much better offseason this year or this time next season there will be a lineup of fans campaigning for the GM to be fired.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Precisely.
I think there is awareness that goal scoring and RW is a problem area. Several different approaches were tried this year to address and it didn't work.
Do you fire the GM because of that alone? I sure don't. Not if he has a plan to address it going forward.

Or we could fire him because that's what the Flames do.

I'm not advocating that Treliving should be fired. Yet. Although he's made his fair share of mistakes. I don't like that we've used up so many picks and so much salary on the defence when the team needs more scoring.

But if you believe the Flames' coaching, system and style of play is all fine and we just lack some players who can finish, that is clearly all on the GM.

I think we need a new coach and I think we need some changes in the roster. Quite willing to give Treliving a chance to make that happen.

[stone hands]

It's a Canadian market, which means you either turn it over in one season or you spend decades floundering in mediocrity because of the turnstyle-esq rotation of management required when you're constantly canning people for constructing mediocre teams that need to be constructed every 3-4 years before fan patience wears out

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Red

But these players with bombs are playing in positions to succeed. Our shooters, Stone, Gio, Hamilton sat on the bench and watched Brodie shoot muffins on the first PP for most of the season.
Johhny is a much better player on his off wing on the PP, he played that in the past. But GG doesnt let him move. Why not try it? Its not like current set up works.
If you want the one timers you need to let players be in the right spot to shoot. Having Brouwer on the PP on the right side because he shoots right is the most ridiculous thing we have seen from GG. He has a stone hands player in the least effective spot to score. All he does is hug the post all PP. It is mind boggling that we keep trying that.

My personal favorite is Gio getting the puck and then walking the line to the middle to get a shot off. So dumb, so predictable, so ineffective. Coach GG can't come up with an answer why they are not scoring, that's so reassuring. I can point of a few things that we could at least try, but then again, we are fine with GG drawing a blank stare when asked what's wrong with this team. Some coach.

Here's what I don't understand, half of our roster is doing really well and the other half isn't. So how is that on coaching exactly? Why can't the problem be that certain players just aren't performing? I mean, Jankowski has hit the rookie wall, but he and Sam Bennett had phenomenal months of December and helped carry the team while the 1st line struggled a bit.

All this coaching stuff doesn't make sense to me. Playing them in positions to succeed? Half the roster is beyond succeeding. Every line has seen some form of success this season, there's just been extreme inconsistencies from certain guys.

These guys also practice the PP constantly and they see what works and what doesn't. We've seen them change it up from time to time and when there's been prolonged success, they've stuck to that (i.e. 1-3-1 with Versteeg, Dougie now on the top PP unit). They're not opposed to success.

Lastly, just face it, this team doesn't have players who own quality one timers. That's not a skill you just pick up from the streets. It's a high end skill and certain players either have it or don't. I've never seen a player on this team one time a puck with any regularity or proficiency, Pre and Post Gulutzan. Blaming the coach on this team's lack of one timers is once again, another cop out.

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

Tbh i'm not actually sure when was the last time a forward unloaded a one timer for a goal....?

Two games ago, Monahan against Buffalo, cross ice pass and a one timer. That is exactly why I would have more players playing their off wing on the power play.

It doesn’t need to be Laine or Ovechkin there, but the ability to immediately fire the shot before the goaltender can get over and set, and before the defenders can get a stick into the lane, is often a true high danger scoring chance.

As opposed to having all players playing the ‘conventional’ side, where the player has to accept the pass then turn their hips before the shot can be taken.

Both shots can be considered high danger scoring chances do to the location on the ice, but one generates goals, the other generates a statistical chance.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Precisely.
I think there is awareness that goal scoring and RW is a problem area. Several different approaches were tried this year to address and it didn't work.
Do you fire the GM because of that alone? I sure don't. Not if he has a plan to address it going forward.

Or we could fire him because that's what the Flames do.

I don't know where to find this stat but I'd love to know the average tenure for a coach and GM in the league. Does every team flip these positions as often as the Flames do?

Bob Murray has been the GM of the Ducks for 10 seasons. (GM of the year 6 years post hire)
Dean Lombardi was GM of the Kings for 11 seasons. (Stanley cup 6 & 8 years post hire)
Doug Wilson has been the GM of the Sharks for 15 seasons. (Presidents trophy 6 years & Stanley Cup appearance 13 years post hire)

But the Flames are having an off year less than 4 years into Treliving's tenure so they should fire him?

Those are our Pacific division competitors. They're given time to build teams. The Flames? Not so much.

Randy Caryle coached the Ducks for 7 years before Bruce Boudreau coached them for 5 years.
Darryl Sutter coached the Kings for 6 years.
Todd Mclennan coached the Sharks for 7 years, Ron Wilson for 5 years before that.

Gulutzan's in year 2. Probably time to move on...

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

That's low even for Loubardias to make that comment. Acting like coaches in Edmonton or Montreal weren't thrown to the wolves recently??

Why do you think this team has never turned into a juggernaut based on coaching? The Flames almost always go cheap and hire someone nobody else wants. With the exception of the Brent Sutter debacle where they actually lured a coach away, this team always picks a coach up off the scrap heap and they get what they pay for imo.

That's not low at all, that was his personal opinion based on decades of experience. Look at this place, there's a fire Gulutzan thread that's 3700 posts deep with over 200,000 views? This franchise is a coaching graveyard. How many coaches did Iggy have only to see consistent non-playoff seasons and 1st round exits?

We've had 10 coaches at the helm since the turn of the millennium. That's 10 coaches in 18 years, for an average of 1 year and 8 months per coach and 16 missed playoffs/1st round exits. The proof is in the pudding, new coaches haven't lead to any real success.

Experienced and expensive coaches don't guarantee anything either. Just look at the $3 million dollar man up north in Todd McLellan. Guy is on the hot seat and likely won't make it through to the next season. Claude Julien, Stanley Cup winner in 2011, how's he doing in Montreal right now? I'm sure he's having a lot of fun right now.

[Igottago]

I don't see how the past history of Flames coaches is relevant to anything. Coaches are hired to be fired, we all know that, that's the business of sport.

The only relevant question for the Flames right now: Does Gulutzan give this team what it needs to get to the next level? If yes, they keep him. If no, they look for someone they believe will be better.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Here's what I don't understand, half of our roster is doing really well and the other half isn't. So how is that on coaching exactly? Why can't the problem be that certain players just aren't performing? I mean, Jankowski has hit the rookie wall, but he and Sam Bennett had phenomenal months of December and helped carry the team while the 1st line struggled a bit.

All this coaching stuff doesn't make sense to me. Playing them in positions to succeed? Half the roster is beyond succeeding. Every line has seen some form of success this season, there's just been extreme inconsistencies from certain guys.

These guys also practice the PP constantly and they see what works and what doesn't. We've seen them change it up from time to time and when there's been prolonged success, they've stuck to that (i.e. 1-3-1 with Versteeg, Dougie now on the top PP unit). They're not opposed to success.

Lastly, just face it, this team doesn't have players who own quality one timers. That's not a skill you just pick up from the streets. It's a high end skill and certain players either have it or don't. I've never seen a player on this team one time a puck with any regularity or proficiency, Pre and Post Gulutzan. Blaming the coach on this team's lack of one timers is once again, another cop out.

Hamilton's goals are not a compliment to GGs system. He had him watch the top PP from the bench for most of the season. Same for Gio.
Some individuals will always put points up. Any NHL team will score about 200 goals a year. It's just how it is. And it's not like these guys are overachieving either. They have always scored so they are expected to score now too.

The coaches job is to use these players and their hot hand to shift momentum, to get that late tying or winning goal etc. Really, to help the team win hockey games.
We aren't winning.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by yourbestfriend

I've been thinking about this for quite a while now. Looking up and down the roster, I think the only player who can legitimately one time the puck with any kind of quality is Giordano. Ferland and Monahan I've seen do it from time to time, but not with any regularity. Tbh i'm not actually sure when was the last time a forward unloaded a one timer for a goal....?
I'm not saying getting a player who can one time the puck will solve any of our problems, but I think that somewhat speaks to the disconnect between the GM and coaches philosophy of what it takes to score goals versus the rest of the league.

What it tells me is that this organization values other things than pure skill. Character, leadership, edge, competitiveness, truculence. All good and great, but all that character and edge doesn't will the puck into the back of the net.

I'm really not sure what to think of this organization. If it was a contest about character, I think we'd win the Stanley Cup of character and we've certainly given up a lot of assets and dough to find these guys (Hamonic, Lazar, Brouwer, Stone and etc). But I just don't think we have the same level of skill that other teams have that I watch.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Precisely.
I think there is awareness that goal scoring and RW is a problem area. Several different approaches were tried this year to address and it didn't work.
Do you fire the GM because of that alone? I sure don't. Not if he has a plan to address it going forward.

Or we could fire him because that's what the Flames do.

That is the question, isn't it? What is the long term plan? And how was the club been tracking against the "plan" so far?

Hard to evaluate when you don't know what the plan is really.

DId they really try several different approaches to RW and goal scoring this year? They signed Jagr at end of camp. What else? I guess they held training camp and invited players throughout the organization to show they could help fix the problem.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by kevman

I don't know where to find this stat but I'd love to know the average tenure for a coach and GM in the league. Does every team flip these positions as often as the Flames do?

Bob Murray has been the GM of the Ducks for 10 seasons. (GM of the year 6 years post hire)
Dean Lombardi was GM of the Kings for 11 seasons. (Stanley cup 6 & 8 years post hire)
Doug Wilson has been the GM of the Sharks for 15 seasons. (Presidents trophy 6 years & Stanley Cup appearance 13 years post hire)

But the Flames are having an off year less than 4 years into Treliving's tenure so they should fire him?

Those are our Pacific division competitors. They're given time to build teams. The Flames? Not so much.

Randy Caryle coached the Ducks for 7 years before Bruce Boudreau coached them for 5 years.
Darryl Sutter coached the Kings for 6 years.
Todd Mclennan coached the Sharks for 7 years, Ron Wilson for 5 years before that.

Gulutzan's in year 2. Probably time to move on...

What signs do you see that Gulutzan has created something worth building on? That he is capable of coaching a serious contender?

The Ducks, the Kings and the Sharks had perennial playoff teams that were seen as contenders. The Kings won the Cup after a late season coaching change to Sutter.

How does the history of these other teams support an argument for retaining a coach who misses the playoffs two out of three seasons despite the GM going all in with his off-season moves?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by kevman

I don't know where to find this stat but I'd love to know the average tenure for a coach and GM in the league. Does every team flip these positions as often as the Flames do?

Bob Murray has been the GM of the Ducks for 10 seasons. (GM of the year 6 years post hire)
Dean Lombardi was GM of the Kings for 11 seasons. (Stanley cup 6 & 8 years post hire)
Doug Wilson has been the GM of the Sharks for 15 seasons. (Presidents trophy 6 years & Stanley Cup appearance 13 years post hire)

But the Flames are having an off year less than 4 years into Treliving's tenure so they should fire him?

Those are our Pacific division competitors. They're given time to build teams. The Flames? Not so much.

Randy Caryle coached the Ducks for 7 years before Bruce Boudreau coached them for 5 years.
Darryl Sutter coached the Kings for 6 years.
Todd Mclennan coached the Sharks for 7 years, Ron Wilson for 5 years before that.

Gulutzan's in year 2. Probably time to move on...

You highlighted GM's and coaches that got results in their initial seasons. Are you of the opinion that the Flames should have kept Hartley? How about the Oilers should they have kept Eakins? All hirings are done with the best intentions but sometime you have to realize when it's simply not working. As a poster above noted coaches are hired to be fired. It's the reality that of all the positions it's the most results based. There is too much money at stake to wait multiple seasons for a head coach to get a team moving in the right direction. If it doesn't happen in the first two seasons chances are it's not going to happen. If Treliving gives Gulutzan another season and it ends much like this season he's pretty well guaranteeing his pink slip whereas he's going to get at least another two seasons grace with a new head coach. That's just the way it works.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Red

Hamilton's goals are not a compliment to GGs system. He had him watch the top PP from the bench for most of the season. Same for Gio.
Some individuals will always put points up. Any NHL team will score about 200 goals a year. It's just how it is. And it's not like these guys are overachieving either. They have always scored so they are expected to score now too.

The coaches job is to use these players and their hot hand to shift momentum, to get that late tying or winning goal etc. Really, to help the team win hockey games.
We aren't winning.

Not a compliment? Hamilton has had his 2 best seasons under Gulutzan. The PP is what it is, they were a top 10 PP last season with the same players, same structure. So I can see why that stuck with it.

I get that GG is not too likable in these parts. But the honest truth is, he doesn't get any credit at all from all the haters. He's done some good things for a lot of players on this team, but the haters will gripe on him about everything and anything and generally, if it's positive, it's on the players and if it's negative, then it's all on the coach. Very simple minded. I would take someone's word a little more if they actually looked at everything more objectively then the whole pitchfork, scapegoat thing that I'm seeing.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

That is the question, isn't it? What is the long term plan? And how was the club been tracking against the "plan" so far?

Hard to evaluate when you don't know what the plan is really.

DId they really try several different approaches to RW and goal scoring this year? They signed Jagr at end of camp. What else? I guess they held training camp and invited players throughout the organization to show they could help fix the problem.

Indeed and we will never know what that plan is. I assume he has a plan based on everything we know about the man. But our lack of knowledge of what the plan is makes it tough to evaluate.

I think the plans to address RW included signing Brouwer (barf), signing Foo (not ready), signing Jagr and probably some unknown trade opportunities that we don't have visibility on.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

No offense but bull.
People are motivated short-term by traditional carrot/stick methodologies but in the long-term they are motivated by deeper items

Autonomy
Purpose
Mastery

And a lot of that comes from within and then a manager taps into it understanding what motivates specific individuals. We can debate how effective GG is at that, but I would say we have little to no insight on that.

These guys should be going out there with drive largely for self-motivation reasons. They have all sorts of reasons why they should "go out there with drive and confidence". If they can find those within themselves we have the wrong guys.

But to go back to my point, if I don't show up ready to work, I get fired. My manager isn't going to put a lot of time to try and motivate me. He's going to fire me.

I don't see the lack of preparedness as a lack of motivation. They're professional athletes - they're motivated.

Hockey is a team game. And it has to be played with emotion and with confidence.

When the players are all thinking about where they are supposed to be, they can't play. And they will look lazy and disinterested.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Laine is probably the best sniper in the game today. Better than Ovechkin at this point in their respective careers. Laine would be a perennial 50 goal scorer on this team.

Please explain how Laine is a better sniper than Ovechkin.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Please explain how Laine is a better sniper than Ovechkin.

Especially at "this point in their respective careers"
Didn't ovi average 55 goals a year his 1st 3 years?