Sutter is the problem

[SuperMatt18]

The Average tenure for a coach in the NHL is 2.4 years (this was from a study done in 2014 but doubt it's changed much).

IMO generally you get about 3 years...and if you haven't won then another coach generally replaces you.

This is year 3 for Sutter. Hartley got 4 years. Gulutzan 2 years. Peters/Ward 2.5 years.

So the Flames haven't won, and due to that are right on that average coaching tenure for the most part.

IMO this isn't unique - it's part of how the NHL works.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

It's going to take as many coaches as it takes to get the right one, just like it's going to take as many roster moves it takes until they get the right one. It's clear that the coach and the roster are not working. Anyone defending him ask themselves how they would like to go to work everyday under a man as dour as him that takes shots at teammates in the media, continually tells the media that you and your teammates don't have talent, doesn't talk openly to a lot of players in the room, just delegates, etc. I can't imagine there are a lot of sunny days for players. As we all know winning is fun so when the team is winning players have that to fall back on but when they aren't winning it has to be pretty miserable to come to work everyday.

Maybe Treliving needs to step up and have a talk with a coach. You know Sutter is doing some things right, but he did relent on his attitude towards bringing up a young player. Maybe the lack of communication is on the GM to define the type of relationship the coach needs to build with the team. We don’t know that Treliving has already talked to him or not. I think Brad needs to address those concerns with the coach.

[CalgarySames]

Sutter needs to go.

Why won't he play Huberdeau on the top line?

Huberdeau/Lindholm/Toffoli
Dube/Kadri/Mangipane
Pelletier/Backlund/Coleman
Lucic/Ruzicka/Duehr - and ruduce 4th line minutes played

Huberdau on the second line is like dropping a Corolla engine in an F1 Car. Yeah it'll kinda work, but it's not going to win you any races!

All that said, this year should have been a development year! We replaced our core, expecting to make the playoffs was ridiculous. It is hard to fault Sutter for that, those expectations were completely delusional.

Phillips should have been given a real chance to develop! Could have gone, Dube/Kadri/Phillips (Mang/Backs/Cole) and really see what he can do! I hope Phillips gets signed elsewhere and becomes a regular top/mid 6 player! He deserves his chance!

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

It appears you are the one spinning narratives here. Last year was absolutely the outlier in Darryl's coaching career in terms of getting production out of his top end talent. Outside of last year you have to go all the way back to 1999 to find the last time a player scored a point per game or more under him. That's one time in fifteen NHL seasons, but sure, we should just expect Huberdeau to do it while playing his off-wing, in a new system, with a mishmash of linemates because the top line last year had a one off season while scoring at unsustainable rates.

No real issue with your post, but this whole analyzing history of player output under Sutter than many posters trot out is inherently flawed if you don't consider league-wide scoring rates. Last season (and this season) was 10-20% higher than most of the previous 25 seasons.

People trot out Iginla's paltry 41g 73pt season in 2004 as evidence that Sutter teams can have success with their best players not producing massively. Except that was the lowest scoring year in the last ~67 seasons; Iggy won the Rocket Richard trophy that year; 16th in pts; and that season 'adjusts' to 48g 85 pts.

Last year was still remarkable, and the dropoff to this year even moreso, but I'm skeptical that there is any significant pattern through Sutter's history compared to other coaches who didn't have Crosby/Thornton/Sedin/Jagr over those years.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Hartley - Players hated him, had to go
Gulutzan - Players tuned him out, had to go
Peters - Players hated him (not that people remember him for that because he got “fired” for racism)
Ward - Players tuned him out, had to go
Sutter - Players hate him, has to go?

You do have to question how much player sentiment should matter. Every coach either gets tuned out right away or is hated by several players. And for every guy that hates the coach, there seems to be guys that love the coach.

We are due for a likeable coach that the players tune out after half a season or so. Excited for that!

Some people like change for the sake of change but won't look deeper at the real problem. From the top If we're not going to do what it takes to bring in elite players, we are going to have to ask average players to work harder. That becomes an issue for the coach, as he has to work with what he has. I doubt any of us could get all those players to play together, even in the positions they want to. It is very hard to get a team to play at a high level. It is not always about giving the players what they want it's s about getting them to make the sacrifices, to achieve those wins.

Getting rid of the coach is the easy answer, but pushing and getting an average group to play a harder is an uphill battle. How often have we made the playoffs? When you have a group of players that have hardly made the playoffs and don't know what it takes to get there, you have to wonder if giving the players the reins is the answer. Good teams that make the playoffs all the time and know that if they don't work hard or make the sacrifices they won't be in the playoffs. Our team lacks the will because the don't have the experience. I think this is why Sutter looks for guys who've won Stanley Cups. Too bad right now we don't have that younger version Lucic.

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

No real issue with your post, but this whole analyzing history of player output under Sutter than many posters trot out is inherently flawed if you don't consider league-wide scoring rates. Last season (and this season) was 10-20% higher than most of the previous 25 seasons.

People trot out Iginla's paltry 41g 73pt season in 2004 as evidence that Sutter teams can have success with their best players not producing massively. Except that was the lowest scoring year in the last ~67 seasons; Iggy won the Rocket Richard trophy that year; 16th in pts; and that season 'adjusts' to 48g 85 pts.

Last year was still remarkable, and the dropoff to this year even moreso, but I'm skeptical that there is any significant pattern through Sutter's history compared to other coaches who didn't have Crosby/Thornton/Sedin/Jagr over those years.

I understand what you are saying, but again, in 01-02 (which was the second lowest scoring year in that timeframe you mentioned) Jarome Iginla scored 52 goals and 96 points, and led the league in goals by 11, and points by 6.

You could legitimately make the argument that Jarome Iginla was the best offensive player in the word at the time Darryl was brought in.

In the year prior to Darryl taking over, and the two seasons following his departure Jarome Iginla played at a 101 point pace. The three seasons in between those years under Darryl, he averaged 71 points.

I think that speaks for itself.

[Strange Brew]

If Treliving is in fact out, you hire the best GM you can and let them decide who the coach should be. There is no other way to do it.

[Hockey_Ninja]

The people in here who are upset about constant coaching changes made me realize that the shelf life on NHL coaches is actually pretty short. The current median range of an NHL coach’s tenure is 2.4 years. Only the NBA has a lower tenure average: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ce-all-season/

Is it because it’s easier to replace coaches than trade players?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

If Treliving is in fact out, you hire the best GM you can and let them decide who the coach should be. There is no other way to do it.

In my wildest dreams, I’d want to see Calgary do what Montreal is currently doing. They’re “rebuilding” with key faces in key places. St. Louis and Lecavalier are at the heart of it.

I don’t think Sutter is leaving - I think the owners will see to that. So with that in mind my dream scenario is:

President of Hockey Operations: Darryl Sutter or Craig Conroy
General Manager: Craig Conroy or Darryl Sutter
Head Coach: Jarome Iginla
Assistant Coach: <good coach to back Jarome up>

Flames <ANNOUNCE> that the team is getting younger and building a new era (and never actually say “rebuild”).

Iginla becomes the face of the franchise again, and he helps usher in a youth movement - and the owners knowing that people will back a franchise that is led by Jarome and other Calgary “04 celebrities” actually allow the Flames to take their time and build a team around young stars without rushing.

and no, I don’t think this is going full Oilers. Iggy and Sutter are of a different quality than the rubbish they did.

The dream.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

At this rate, since we can’t rebuild the team on the ice, rebuild off it. Put Conroy in the GM chair and bring Love up to be the head coach. They’re both ready for the step up at this point, and both fresh enough that you’d hope to avoid some ego battle. Love knows and has had success with the young guys we need to call up to fill out a capped roster, and Conroy is good at selling guys on joining the Flames.

Keep the scouting department, bring in an experienced guy as an assistant or advisor to the GM, bring in new assistant coaches for the PP/PK and let’s see what happens.

Kind of reminds you of the Toronto situation no? Dubas takes over Lou and fires Babcock and hires his guy from the minors.

I think Conroy works a lot with the Wranglers if I am not mistaken?

Obviously some other stuff led to Babcock fired but its a similar type of coach and a potential budding star of a coach in the minors.

My only issue is that Conroy has been here for long he might have some blinders on when looking at players and coaches.

What the team needs is a Brian Burke to come in again and clean up whatever it is that is going that is creating a tense environment. He told the owners what they needed to hear when Jay Feaster was telling them what they wanted to hear to keep his job and sell our assets for 10 cents on the dollar.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

If Treliving is in fact out, you hire the best GM you can and let them decide who the coach should be. There is no other way to do it.

Agreed.

I can start tomorrow.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Some people like change for the sake of change but won't look deeper at the real problem. From the top If we're not going to do what it takes to bring in elite players, we are going to have to ask average players to work harder. That becomes an issue for the coach, as he has to work with what he has. I doubt any of us could get all those players to play together, even in the positions they want to. It is very hard to get a team to play at a high level. It is not always about giving the players what they want it's s about getting them to make the sacrifices, to achieve those wins.

Getting rid of the coach is the easy answer, but pushing and getting an average group to play a harder is an uphill battle. How often have we made the playoffs? When you have a group of players that have hardly made the playoffs and don't know what it takes to get there, you have to wonder if giving the players the reins is the answer. Good teams that make the playoffs all the time and know that if they don't work hard or make the sacrifices they won't be in the playoffs. Our team lacks the will because the don't have the experience. I think this is why Sutter looks for guys who've won Stanley Cups. Too bad right now we don't have that younger version Lucic.

Having played on numerous teams/sports (never hockey) since I was 6 I will say that as far as coaching is concerned, regardless of the sport, players play within a system, man to man vs. zone as an example. I can honestly say that I never really liked any of my coaches all the way to playing for Calgary Saracens in my early 20's. In every case/sport coaching brings a system in and adapts the system to personnel/strengths/weaknesses to enable the team to win or at least compete. Managements job is to look to the future to enable the team to win or at least compete. My take on Sutter is it's his way or the highway and that just don't play well with pretty much any team. Now, I don't know Edwards at all and have never worked within his system but I do know folks that know him pretty well and with Murray, it is his way or the highway so there is that.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Agreed.

I can start tomorrow.

Martin St. Louis

[chedder]

Originally Posted by Yikes

Martin St. Louis

Don't know why people keep saying this. He has two more years as Montreal's head coach making $3 million per season.

Why would he quit that to come here, most likely make less money and have to deal with meddling owners.

[saillias]

Wouldn't mind a Sutter firing right now but the right time to do it was probably after the all-star break when they came out and blew it. No point going on a late season surge now with a new coach bump.

That said I think either Mitch Love or Ryan Huska would be solid and potentially great coaches.

The GM situation is far more worrying. The wrong one has the potential to tank this franchise's for years. I'm not sure they even have a guy who can hire a good GM. There's no Burke anymore to pick a Treliving, there's no King (RIP) to hire a Burke to hire a Treliving.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

I totally get what you're saying and I have had those same concerns too. I have been around a while. I wasn't a big fan of Brent Sutter.

I think where you and I may have some differences, I think some key players are under performing which is contributing to the problem. The same problem with had when the players stopped playing for coaches the Flames have already hired. Sutter was brought in to change the culture and to turn us back into a hard working team; Something we haven't seen from Huberdeau. I think he is better than he is playing and a top guys effort can have an effect on whole team not just the coach.

I like some things Sutter has done, I have some concerns too. Let's just say we hire another coach who can't get anything out of 1 or 2 players or this group, then what? We could end up a few more years with another useless coach? Thoughts?

I disagree I think Huberdeau is working hard and doing what is being asked of him.

Overall I think work ethic during Sutters time here is the least of our concern as I think the work part is there almost every single game.

I get what you are saying about firing the coaches and if it doesn't work with a new guy we spin the wheel again. I just don't think Sutter is a long term coach on any team he is a today coach, we need a today and tomorrow coach. Its a hard find because like I said the NHL turns over coaches the most in sports for whatever reason.

I think the organization needs to really do a deep dive and create an identity of what this team is going to be. Take that vision and find a coach who shares that vision and can work with the players we have and have coming up the pipeline.

It seems like we have zeroed in on 1 candidate each time. I get it that its a hard market to get a coach and Sutter was probably the best of the bunch who would work here.

[Burning Beard]

Real question is if PW is going to get to 100 posts in this thread tonight or tomorrow? Already at 73.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by chedder

Don't know why people keep saying this. He has two more years as Montreal's head coach making $3 million per season.

Why would he quit that to come here, most likely make less money and have to deal with meddling owners.

Way less travel for starters plus the obvious opportunity jumping from coach to senior management.


For any head coach, kind of a no-brainer?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

Real question is if PW is going to get to 100 posts in this thread tonight or tomorrow? Already at 73.

Just needs around 23 more to get into the playoffs.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

Real question is if PW is going to get to 100 posts in this thread tonight or tomorrow? Already at 73.

100 farts in the wind