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

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You are damn right it is. I am absolutely certain that Brad Treliving is better at this than any one of us nameless/faceless internet critics.

Most of the time he is better but he's not infallible. Many of us though the Gulutzan hiring was a mistake in the first place and we were right. He wasted prime years of young core players and some of Gio's best remaining seasons on a coach that many of us felt would fail at his time of hiring. He's 0-1 so I wouldn't call him an expert at coaching evaluation.

[automaton 3]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Hmm to me that screams that those teams are good at generating those passes/plays across the "royal road" that get the goalie moving and don't allow him to set.

Good article on it here.

https://www.omha.net/news_article/sh...never-heard-of

This is on the PP - but really it's this pass.

Thank you. The shooter is on his off-wing to boot.

I still can't wrap my mind around the awfulness of the Flame's PP. The coaching staff all deserved to go based on this alone.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Most of the time he is better but he's not infallible. Many of us though the Gulutzan hiring was a mistake in the first place and we were right.

I never said Treliving was infallible. I do believe that he understands more clearly what the problems are than any of us fans, and I also believe he is better positioned and more capable to resolve them than we are.

As for being "right" about Gulutzan, I will say that you correctly guessed the outcome, but I still think that all of us are scrambling when it comes to identifying the actual problems.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You are damn right it is. I am absolutely certain that Brad Treliving is better at this than any one of us nameless/faceless internet critics. And for the record, it is NEVER a bad idea to set a higher level of confidence in the opinion of experts.

Well, I hate to bring up the whole Holocaust thing, but...

So, what is the conventional wisdom among hockey executives about who will be the next best coaching hire, and how do you know it? Do they think exactly the same way as fans do about this?


Of course you don't. The reason for that is that you do not have all the available information, and most likely you are also not nearly as well versed on the various criteria for getting the most out of this group of players. I am certain that Treliving has a better handle on these things than you do.

I'm not really here to change anyone's mind, so if you want to believe whoever Treliving hires is unequivocally the right choice, more power to you. I'm just saying I think this Bill Peters thing has "fool me once" written all over it and all the evidence I have available supports it.

[Erick Estrada]

Every team has problems even the best but if your head coach is a problem you don't have a chance. It's hard to identify the other problems of the workers when the guy tasked with giving out the orders to them isn't good at his job. I'm fine with the team moving out a player like Brodie to get some forward help but I would be weary of making wholesale changes based on the past two seasons under a coaching staff that was making a lot of head scratching decisions.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

Well, I hate to bring up the whole Holocaust thing, but...



I'm not really here to change anyone's mind, so if you want to believe whoever Treliving hires is unequivocally the right choice, more power to you. I'm just saying I think this Bill Peters thing has "fool me once" written all over it and all the evidence I have available supports it.

Certainly not "unequivocally", and I don't think that was said. But Treliving is a better choice than me to select the next coach. I'd be confident saying he's a better choice than you as well.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is not my intention at all. I am only suggesting that we don't really have a good idea as to who the GM and his advisors consider to be the top candidates for the Flames head coaching job. In this vacuum of information it seems pretty presumptuous to think that Treliving's shortlist should look anything like ours.

His last "out of the box" hire (likely his first and only one) blew up spectacularly in his face. So I'm willing to bet that his shortlist looks very similar to CP's since there are only a handful of "experienced" names out there and some of them already being mentioned as potential replacements for Gulutzan, their coaching styles and impressions already getting dissected.

Why do you consider that a 'presumptuous' thing to assume? Is it presumptuous, hasty, or arrogant to form judgements based solely on not being 100% privy on their coaching review process?

[868904]

Originally Posted by Scary Eloranta

Anyone who thinks Darryl should be our coach again should read this:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/drew-doughty-los-angeles-kings-challenging-offseason/

Big, heavy hockey is dead (not that the Flames could ever play like that anyway).

I don't want Darryl for his technical expertise or systems, I want him because he knows how to motivate players and he has a real feel for the game allowing him to adjust. He's also a great leader; leaders don't have to be liked, they just have to know how to handle situations.

However, if we did hire Sutter, I want there to be a John Stevens' equivalent as an assistant.

I think Treliving needs to put as much emphasis on the assistant coach as the head coach. I don't know how it works with the assistant coach hires, whether the GM has any say or leaves it entirely up to the head coach, but Treliving should have fired GG or pulled the contract away the minute he told him Gerrard and Cameron were his assistants.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Scary Eloranta

Anyone who thinks Darryl should be our coach again should read this:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/drew-doughty-los-angeles-kings-challenging-offseason/

Big, heavy hockey is dead (not that the Flames could ever play like that anyway).

Darryl coached the King's that way because that was the strength of that team. You should also read where Sutter said the game had changed and speed and skill is the way to win now. Sutter is pretty smart, he is not a one dimensional coach.

[cannon7]

Don't think Sutter wants to come back, so went with AV.

Would love Sheldon Keefe on the coaching staff, though. Dave Lowry should probably a poll option, too.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

When GG was hired a lot of people were clamoring for "no retreads" when Boudreau's name came up and despite GG having one previous gig, he wasn't really seen that way.

Not around here.

The vast majority of CP wanted an experienced head coach, and assumed Boudreau was coming in right after Hartley was fired.

GG getting the job was a shocking WTF moment from day 1. Seems most of us don't want that type of coaching choice again.

[Incogneto]

This thread reminds me of when the Flames made the Mike Smith trade. That one ended up ok.

If its Peters hired, lets give it some time before we jump off a bridge.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

GG getting the job was a shocking WTF moment from day 1. Seems most of us don't want that type of coaching choice again.

Cameron was also a WTF moment from Day 1, considering how badly he ran the Ottawa PP and was allegedly hired(?!) to run our PP.

I think from the moment he was first spotted at Winsport wearing a Flames jacket that summer, the "oh no please don't be him" dread kicked in immediately and then was confirmed very shortly afterwards.

[moncton golden flames]

Other....

I'm hoping Joel Quenneville gets let go in Chicago.

[Locke]

nm

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

Other....

I'm hoping Joel Quenneville gets let go in Chicago.

Confirmed he is staying in Chicago

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Steve Bozek

IIRC, one of the terms of Calgary being allowed to sign Treliving was that he not take a role in the Flames’ 2014 draft.

I'm looking for a source right now but I know for a fact Treliving had no restrictions during the 2014 draft.

Edit: here

Under the terms of Treliving’s hiring, there are no restrictions on his involvement in the Flames’ drafting, so he’ll dive right into draft preparation and take the reins of the club’s drafting list.

https://thehockeywriters.com/new-fla...right-to-work/

[dissentowner]

So how does this Peters thing work? I am assuming any team interested would have to get permission to talk to him from Carolina because even though he has an opt out clause he is still as of right now under contract.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I'm looking for a source right now but I know for a fact Treliving had no restrictions during the 2014 draft.

Yes, I remember Burke saying that. Burke asked the Coyotes for permission to talk to Treliving and they gave him a specific window of time to work with.

I believe the deadline was set at April 30, and Treliving was hired on the 28th. Because he was hired before the Coyotes got into the nitty-gritty of their draft preparations, there were no restrictions on his involvement in the draft.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

So how does this Peters thing work? I am assuming any team interested would have to get permission to talk to him from Carolina because even though he has an opt out clause he is still as of right now under contract.

Exactly. He had an out clause and enacted it. During this period he can negotiate with any team so long as they request permission.