[POLL] Calgary Flames coaching change mega-thread—with poll

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He's a Babcock disciple.

So is GG. You would get the exact same coach, why shuffle chairs around on the deck?

[Reign of Fire]

So GG is still the HC? ...

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

So is GG. You would get the exact same coach, why shuffle chairs around on the deck?

GG employs similar style whereas Bill Peters actually coached alongside Babcock.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Toonage

GG employs similar style whereas Bill Peters actually coached alongside Babcock.

That's what I meant.

[The Boy Wonder]

I wouldn’t necessarily say Babcock employs any specific style.

He is an all star coach because he can adapt his style to fit the personnel he has available.

Ie: if he had a d corps of fast puck moving offensively minded d men like Calgary, he likely would activate the d more often.

GG doesn’t seem to have this ability.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

I wouldn’t necessarily say Babcock employs any specific style.

He is an all star coach because he can adapt his style to fit the personnel he has available.

Ie: if he had a d corps of fast puck moving offensively minded d men like Calgary, he likely would activate the d more often.

GG doesn’t seem to have this ability.

Babcock generally played his D in the Olympics like GG does. GG's refusal to "activate" his D is way overstated. Gio and Hamilton went up ice a lot. Brodie did too - he just got burned a lot. Kulak wasn't shy about moving up ice either.

Good article about Babcock systems both in Detroit and Toronto. It makes the point that Horachek preached the same stuff but didn't have the pedigree or credibility to make it stick with the players that Babcock does. I wonder if that's the case here.

https://www.mapleleafshotstove.com/2...cocks-systems/

[Toonage]

While not my first choice I would be fine with Peters coaching the Flames.

On a somewhat related note, anyone listening to the Fan right now? Lou is answering a caller who suggested GG had been outcoached a number of nights and you can just hear Peter getting out of his chair.

Comes back to asking for more accountability on the players (fair) but he and the rest of this panel seem to miss the forest for the trees constantly on this subject. Almost like there is a barrier there that they can't or won't get over. I don't want to suggest they're going to bat for a friend, but hackles are immediately raised when the subject comes up and their defense is primarily of the "why should we" variety rather than the "this is why he should stay" variety

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Babcock generally played his D in the Olympics like GG does. GG's refusal to "activate" his D is way overstated. Gio and Hamilton went up ice a lot. Brodie did too - he just got burned a lot. Kulak wasn't shy about moving up ice either.

Good article about Babcock systems both in Detroit and Toronto. It makes the point that Horachek preached the same stuff but didn't have the pedigree or credibility to make it stick with the players that Babcock does. I wonder if that's the case here.

https://www.mapleleafshotstove.com/2...cocks-systems/

Good article! That actually does demonstrate how babcock adjusts his system depending on personnel.

I don’t want to go too tangential but we’ve talked many times about teams like Boston, Tampa, Vegas, Winnipeg, Nashville all moving the puck up ice quickly after regaining possession.

This is something that the flames d corps with their speed and offensive instincts would likely be good at but the eye test from the ~75 flames games I watched this season tells me that GG would rather move the puck d to d instead of instantly up ice in most situations.

That was more what I was meaning in activating the D but I guess both points stand.

I think there was a bit too much Brent sutter going on trying to fit square pegs into round holes of the GG system.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Toonage

While not my first choice I would be fine with Peters coaching the Flames.

On a somewhat related note, anyone listening to the Fan right now? Lou is answering a caller who suggested GG had been outcoached a number of nights and you can just hear Peter getting out of his chair.

Lou is the best. Just a heart on his sleeve most loyal guy ever

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

Lou is the best. Just a heart on his sleeve most loyal guy ever

Absolutely, and its admirable but it may also be to a fault.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

Good article! That actually does demonstrate how babcock adjusts his system depending on personnel.

I don’t want to go too tangential but we’ve talked many times about teams like Boston, Tampa, Vegas, Winnipeg, Nashville all moving the puck up ice quickly after regaining possession.

This is something that the flames d corps with their speed and offensive instincts would likely be good at but the eye test from the ~75 flames games I watched this season tells me that GG would rather move the puck d to d instead of instantly up ice in most situations.

That was more what I was meaning in activating the D but I guess both points stand.

I think there was a bit too much Brent sutter going on trying to fit square pegs into round holes of the GG system.

What he actually says is that he wanted the same system in Detroit but his stars "cheated" and got away with it through talent. Then when they weren't as talented a team, he got them to actually play his system. he always wants that system.

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

I feel like a lot of us, me included, will be eating crow whenever the next coach comes to the Flames. He'll be different, sure, but not perfect. Nobody pleases 100% of CP. Not even our young superstars!

If you look at Buffalo, Bylsma got fired because his team wouldn’t listen to him and execute the system he kept trying to implement. In comes Phil Housley and they don’t listen to him either. In fact they are 16 points worse than when Bylsma left. In player interviews yesterday, Eichel says things like “we have got to start listening to our coaches.” ROR was brought in to help fix things and instead he’s giving up. New coach or not, you can’t fix rich players with bad attitudes.

I’m hoping this isn’t the case in Calgary. I think GG and his coaches have to go but I worry that plan B could have a similar outcome next year.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by SportsJunky

If you look at Buffalo, Bylsma got fired because his team wouldn’t listen to him and execute the system he kept trying to implement. In comes Phil Housley and they don’t listen to him either. In fact they are 16 points worse than when Bylsma left. In player interviews yesterday, Eichel says things like “we have got to start listening to our coaches.” ROR was brought in to help fix things and instead he’s giving up. New coach or not, you can’t fix rich players with bad attitudes.

I’m hoping this isn’t the case in Calgary. I think GG and his coaches have to go but I worry that plan B could have a similar outcome next year.

Indeed. I think this example stresses the importance of going with someone that brings a proven track record when trying to move your young team up the ladder.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Absolutely, and its admirable but it may also be to a fault.

Yup. It's almost sickening to hear old Loubo apologising and making excuses for GG all year.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Absolutely, and its admirable but it may also be to a fault.

The problem, as I see it, with Loubardias' position is that he is saying the team needs to grow, needs to add a piece essentially isn't there yet. This is all fine.

However the GM and the coach had set expectations as a contender or a 100 point team.

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/13...eam-in-2017-18

The team evaluated where they believe they are, traded futures and went all in. Not only that but after a full season under Gulutzan the team came out flat and Gulutzan said they had to relearn things in the system - they were making the same mistakes.

Who is accountable for that?

[Toonage]

Lou suggested we see where the team is in 2 more years (suggesting that's the time before making a coaching change). Given we have just seen 2 years of near identical performance and can balance that against his prior stop in Dallas over an equal time I just can't see another 2 being the time needed to pull this all together. Quite the opposite, I think 2 more years can irreparably hurt this team.

Now he is suggesting that Smith's injury hurt the team most. It hurt, but he also went down 3/4 into the season where they could have had a bigger cushion to fall back on.

Just to note, I'm not trying to pick on Lou (although I see that I am) but his opinion is shared by a lot of media and its frustrating to me.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Lou suggested we see where the team is in 2 more years (suggesting that's the time before making a coaching change). Given we have just seen 2 years of near identical performance and can balance that against his prior stop in Dallas over an equal time I just can't see another 2 being the time needed to pull this all together. Quite the opposite, I think 2 more years can irreparably hurt this team.

Now he is suggesting that Smith's injury hurt the team most. It hurt, but he also went down 3/4 into the season where they could have had a bigger cushion to fall back on.

Just to note, I'm not trying to pick on Lou (although I see that I am) but his opinion is shared by a lot of media and its frustrating to me.

I think we can confirm that Lou does not frequent CP. he would fall into the 0.1% of the population who would give the coach 1 more year let alone 2

[Erick Estrada]

Come on people. Dallas Eakins could coach the Flames to 31st overall and have them on their knees barking like dogs at practice and Lubo would still defend him. You aren't exactly getting an unbiased opinion from some of the employees paid to cover the Flames.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Lou suggested we see where the team is in 2 more years (suggesting that's the time before making a coaching change). Given we have just seen 2 years of near identical performance and can balance that against his prior stop in Dallas over an equal time I just can't see another 2 being the time needed to pull this all together. Quite the opposite, I think 2 more years can irreparably hurt this team.

Now he is suggesting that Smith's injury hurt the team most. It hurt, but he also went down 3/4 into the season where they could have had a bigger cushion to fall back on.

Just to note, I'm not trying to pick on Lou (although I see that I am) but his opinion is shared by a lot of media and its frustrating to me.

This is what bugs me with these excuses about the late collapse. They collapsed because they knew they had to play near perfect to make the dance. Had no cushion at all, in fact, were a bit behind the pack so the first bad loss was pretty much the writing on the wall.

Some of us were worried in November, but were quickly shut down as knee jerk reactionists. Kept hearing how you don't make a change when you are 3 over .500, or when you are near or in a playoff spot etc. Well....that worked out well, didn't it?

[dammage79]

Lou admitted he may be too close to the people he covers to give an unbiased opinion. Only guy in his full hour he actually was openly critical of was Dougie.

Hamilton is not the favorite flame of the media.