What can be done to create a winning culture?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by rollie619

I want a GM/President that can be the face of the franchise while we don't have one. A guy like Burke. Something to make me proud to be a Flames fan again.

No one person is the face of a successful franchise. Derek Jeeter is not the face of the New York Yankees. The New York Yankees are the logo and the pins stripes. That is a team with a winning tradition and there is honor putting that uniform on. Same with the Montreal Canadiens and the CHC. A true winning franchise does not need a person to be the face of the organization. The organization stands on its own. Only poor management on a colossal level can do harm to the franchise (see Edmonton Oilers). As long as the team is managed consistently and strives for success the face of the franchise will continue to be positive. The Flames still have that and can build on that with the a solid draft and continued improvement without drafting 1st overall for three straight years. Reputation is earned by doing the right things, even when the decisions may be tough. Moving Iginla was something that will buy this team respect and further the true face of the franchise; the prestige of wearing one of the best logos in all of sports and living in one of the best cities in North America.

[moon]

There is nothing so overrated in sports as "he hates to lose."

Tim Tebow hates to lose so much he looks like he is about to get run out of the NFL. Put Jeter on this years Marlins and I am sure they are contending for the play-offs. Messier hated to lose so much that he failed to win the Cup more often than he won it. Did he only hate to lose some years? Funny that it seemed he hated to lose more when on Gretzky teams than the sad sack Canuck teams at the end of his career.

Sure there are some guys like Nilsson, Kovalchuk, Yashin and other Euros that don't seem to care but for 99% of the players "hating to lose" or a "winning attitude" is trumped by skill.

New Era is free to have Burish, Bickell, Englland etc. I will gladly take Stamkos, Duchene and Hall even though they are from "losing" organizations.

[Alberta_Beef]

You want to build a winning atmosphere?

Step 1: Make it clear losing is not acceptable.
Step 2: Bring in "character players" with a "high compete level" as well as players from winning programs.
Step 3: Don't hand anyone anything. I don't care if the prospect is projected to be a 1st liner, make them earn it like teams like Detroit do. Going into this year their top prospects (Smith & Nyqvist) were drafted in 2007 & 2008.

[bubbsy]

1. Being a team in lottery pick contention should be a mark of failure of the entire organization (gm, coach, roster). Not something to strive for.

2. Progress should be the goal, repeated failure needs to be punished, not rewarded.

3. In summary, do as Klowe and the oilers wouldn't.

[Mattman]

The one thing we are missing... Passion
People like Blake Comeau or Cervenka or Irving all just thought they could drift by and be good. Look where they are.
People like Mgratten, or Brodie who went into each game thinking about the game and what they had to do.
In my books the C and the A's shouldn't just be given out based on talent ( although it helps) it should be based off of who can lead the team in passion.
The line ups should be based on cooperation not forcing three guys together hoping they will produce.
In no joke to hockey if Brian MgGratten can keep his passion and hard work going he deserves an A

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Mattman

The one thing we are missing... Passion
People like Blake Comeau or Cervenka or Irving all just thought they could drift by and be good. Look where they are.
People like Mgratten, or Brodie who went into each game thinking about the game and what they had to do.
In my books the C and the A's shouldn't just be given out based on talent ( although it helps) it should be based off of who can lead the team in passion.
The line ups should be based on cooperation not forcing three guys together hoping they will produce.
In no joke to hockey if Brian MgGratten can keep his passion and hard work going he deserves an A

Blake Comeau was not a great player by any means but if you think he was drifting by and not showing passion and working his ass of every night, then I have no idea what the hell you were watching but it sure wasn't the Flames.

[McG]

there is some very intriguing analysis on this thread; some excellent thought provoking posts.

i thought i was going to read "win a couple of games at the end of a season when losses are better organizationally", which was cited repeatedly during the flames wins at the end of the season.

a culture of excellence means there is a continual reinvention of the best practices and processes from around the world in terms of physical and mental strength and development, and more sports than just hockey. all too often the flames (and other teams in the league) default and isolate themselves from the broader world of sports and proven management tools.

to me, the flames culture needs to be examined closely. i don't find it acceptable at all to consider some of the mistakes that have happened to the team that seem to be "unlucky" at the time, but on broader analysis and with the fullness of time seem foolhardy in the extreme. some examples of this are the R O'R saga, the continual drafting of the same type of player, the inability to develop those players anyways, and a complete inability to win when required which leads to .500 hockey. no drafting, no development, no playoffs.

others said it better than i have in their posts, but this is the time for the flames to embark on a journey that takes a look at their entire organization, top to bottom, and leverages the best that the world has to offer. while barcelona's "more than a club" is probably not realistic, i don't see why aspects of that success couldn't be repeated. multibillion dollar sports conglomerates need to keep up, and as a part of the nhl machine the flames need to manage the development cycle and be ready when it is "our turn".

without a top to bottom analysis and moving away from "old time hockey" styles, we are destined to never get the success that is deserved.

[JiriHrdina]

One of the key things about the original turnaround was bringing in proven winners with a lot of character - like Yelle and Warrener.

That needs to be a priority again. I think Hudler was a start - but they need more guys that are coming from winning organizations.

Stephen Yelle in particular has never really been replaced on this team.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

One of the key things about the original turnaround was bringing in proven winners with a lot of character - like Yelle and Warrener.

That needs to be a priority again. I think Hudler was a start - but they need more guys that are coming from winning organizations.

Stephen Yelle in particular has never really been replaced on this team.

I know he hasn't been with a winning organization, but I think Eric Nystrom should be a target. I will admit I didn't want him back if he made more than a million when he left so when he signed for 1.4 I said good riddance, but quite frankly we have never been able to replace him. Other than him being a winger I think he is the closest to Yelle we have had since Sandbox retired.

[ricardodw]

The borderline filler guys --- Jamie Mclennan comes to mind --- need to have Team building as a significant part of their role.

Nystrom (from all reports) seemed to be a team social organizer who went out of his way to make the dressing room a better place to be.

[Matty81]

I wish it was as simple as "making losing unacceptable" or making it unacceptable to end up with a lottery pick - I think those sound like something a talking head would say that is pretty much total tripe. If your coaching strategy is poor or you don't have good enough players, you lose in the NHL. If it was about mentality exclusively the teams that would be winning would be the ones who were sending their teams to psychologists and not the ones with Crosby, Chara, Toews, Kane and Quick.

Also bringing in character players with winning attitudes is another one of those old gems they trot out that really mean nothing. It is better to get players from winning teams because they usually have the best players. Yelle was up for the selke and was one of the best checking centres in the league and Warrener was a very good mid depth defenseman in his prime.

Players attitudes, ie being a good pro, training hard and being accountable plays a role for sure, but coaching and ability are at least 75% of the equation in the NHL. Guys like Patrick Kane aren't contending for cups every year because of some magic beans mental outlook, they are well suited to the role they need to execute on their team.

Again I think this sentiment that we are better than the Oilers somehow because we make losing unacceptable where they don't is just making yourselves feel better. They are a team with many many holes. When they start winning it won't be because they learned how to win or some other cliched saying, it will be because they add some size up front, two or three decent defencemen and develop or trade for a legitimate NHL starting goalie.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Winning "culture" is bull#### in my opinion. Chicago and Pittsburgh were brutal teams that were getting their butts kicked every year. They didn't have some magic mentality shift, they added some of the best players in the game to their roster.

But those teams had large turnovers and didn't accept losing. They didn't win with a bunch of guys that spent years on losing clubs. They brought in winners along the way. Chicago brought in Hossa who went to two straight Cup finals and Madden who won it all before. Penguins brought in a lot of guys with Cup finals experience. Guys like Kunitz, Fedotenko, Guerin, Adams, and Sykora have won before. Guys like Satan and Gonchar have been to the Fianls. Both teams weren't shy in firing their headcoaches. Chicago fired Denis Savard 4 games into the season because Tallon believed he had a playoff team and the team didn't have the energy needed. The Pens fired Therrien despite the team making it to the Cup Finals the previous season.

Originally Posted by boggledepot

I will have to agree with the previous post. The assumptions some make about about Jay Feaster are incredibly ignorant.

Yes you can say that it's ignorant to assume that Feaster has become a hockey guy capable of evaluating talent.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by FAN

But those teams had large turnovers and didn't accept losing. They didn't win with a bunch of guys that spent years on losing clubs. They brought in winners along the way. Chicago brought in Hossa who went to two straight Cup finals and Madden who won it all before. Penguins brought in a lot of guys with Cup finals experience. Guys like Kunitz, Fedotenko, Guerin, Adams, and Sykora have won before. Guys like Satan and Gonchar have been to the Fianls. Both teams weren't shy in firing their headcoaches. Chicago fired Denis Savard 4 games into the season because Tallon believed he had a playoff team and the team didn't have the energy needed. The Pens fired Therrien despite the team making it to the Cup Finals the previous season.

I hear you, most teams change their roster up every year, I just don't think teams improve because they change their culture, they improve by their young players developing or by adding better players who could come from the last place team or the defending cup champs if they are faster, smarter, or more talented. The mental attitude of your team matters, but ability and coaching trump good attitudes in the NHL most nights.

Tampa Bay, the year they beat us in the finals had almost the exact same team that won 27 games two years earlier. They missed the playoffs for the 6th year in a row that year. They added Stillman, Sydor, Fedotenko and Lukewich over the next 2 years and won the cup with 23 or 24 guys and a coach who were already in an organization with a losing culture if you believe there is such a thing. Sydor is the only guy they brought in who played any significant role in a Stanley Cup finals.

I just have a hard time believing that even though a team can win the cup with the same group of people, in the same place with the same coach that missed the playoffs for 6 years running a couple seasons later that winning has much at all to do with the culture.

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by moon

There is nothing so overrated in sports as "he hates to lose."

Tim Tebow hates to lose so much he looks like he is about to get run out of the NFL. Put Jeter on this years Marlins and I am sure they are contending for the play-offs. Messier hated to lose so much that he failed to win the Cup more often than he won it. Did he only hate to lose some years? Funny that it seemed he hated to lose more when on Gretzky teams than the sad sack Canuck teams at the end of his career.

Sure there are some guys like Nilsson, Kovalchuk, Yashin and other Euros that don't seem to care but for 99% of the players "hating to lose" or a "winning attitude" is trumped by skill.

New Era is free to have Burish, Bickell, Englland etc. I will gladly take Stamkos, Duchene and Hall even though they are from "losing" organizations.

Are you related to Don Cherry?

[FlameZilla]

I like the point about Yelle & Warrener. A good team still has role-players & a supporting cast (3rd-line centre, 5-6th defenceman in this case) but the players they have in these roles are better at what they do than the other teams' players in that role.

If we continue to use failed #1 & #2 offensive centres (Stajan etc) as our shut-down 3rd-line centres then we're as good as #%€¥ed. Butler as a shut-down pairing D-man? God no. Sure, Chris Butler is not good enough to be a top 4 guy (yet) but is he a good enough bottom-pairing D to be on a winning team? That's not his skill set.

The difference on our team is that the guys in these roles are there because they are only good enough to be 3rd-choice/5th-choice players. On a champion team the guys playing in those roles are the best at doing that in the league (think Brandon Sutter or Douglas Murray). Not to mention their high-end talent trumps other teams' top talent.

Going forward I think there is a lot of potential. Max Reinhart projects as a very good 3rd line centre. Roman Horak will be a very dependable depth player. I like the look of Cundari as a rugged but small bottom-pairing guy, Andrew Ference-style. A couple of these role-players in the pipeline too, in Bill Arnold & Kenny Agostino. If we can acquire the top-end talent to fill out the roster we'll be laughing (eventually), especially if we have a coach that doesn't insist on putting square pegs in round holes.

[toquester]

No sense of urgency. They let things slide and figure they are good enough to get back into things. Create that and you will see drastic improvement.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Tampa Bay, the year they beat us in the finals had almost the exact same team that won 27 games two years earlier. They missed the playoffs for the 6th year in a row that year. They added Stillman, Sydor, Fedotenko and Lukewich over the next 2 years and won the cup with 23 or 24 guys and a coach who were already in an organization with a losing culture if you believe there is such a thing. Sydor is the only guy they brought in who played any significant role in a Stanley Cup finals.

I just have a hard time believing that even though a team can win the cup with the same group of people, in the same place with the same coach that missed the playoffs for 6 years running a couple seasons later that winning has much at all to do with the culture.

That's not what happened though. If you look at the 2001-2002 season as the turnaround, Tortorella was the new head coach, Lecavalier was stripped of the captaincy, St. Louis was the goal scoring leader prior to his injury, Tim Taylor was acquired, and Richards was only in sophomore season. The season the Lightning made the playoffs, Andreychuk was named captain. There was a definite culture change. And those guys didn't spend years losing as a Lightning. Very few players on the Lightning Cup winning team were on the team when Lecavalier was a rookie. Fortunately for the Lightning Lecavalier rediscovered what it takes to be a winner again. Some guys do that and some guys don't.

[moon]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

Are you related to Don Cherry?

Not that I am aware of.

He would have to be a very distant relative if that were the case.

[Isbrant]

To me, in order to develop a winning culture, you need the team to trust each other. To develop the trust, you need a coach to develop a system so the players know what they are to do. The team needs to have players that are able to fill the roles defined by the coach. The players need to buy into the system and play the roles. If the players are not good enough in the roles, the other players will not trust that role will be filled and either not try as hard (why should I bust my ass when the other player will let us down) or stop playing their own role to cover for the mistakes of others (stop covering my guy because my team mate will mess up on his coverage). This can happen if the team is not skilled enough or the wrong system is implemented for the players that are on the team. The team needs to have the confidence it can compete with any team on any night.

Once the trust is established, I think the players start to look out for eachother more too as they have an identity to belong to. Sticking up for the goalie, making the extra effort, putting the good of the team ahead of personal goals are all things that are a result of a team identity.

If a team has enough skill, they can win without a winning culture. I think Pittsburgh is a great example of a skilled team without a winning culture. When they are on, they look unbeatable but there are a lot of games where the players are not making that extra effort. I think Boston has a very good winning culture. Looking at the 2 rosters, on paper Pittsburg looks like the better team but I don't think they will win the series.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Also bringing in character players with winning attitudes is another one of those old gems they trot out that really mean nothing. It is better to get players from winning teams because they usually have the best players. Yelle was up for the selke and was one of the best checking centres in the league and Warrener was a very good mid depth defenseman in his prime.

Exactly. Targeting players solely from winning organizations is a recipe for disaster - it severely limits your pool of prospective players you want to add and that's never a good thing. This is especially concerning when you start talking about drafting and developing "winners" - you can easily end up with guys riding coattails on successful teams. I guess it means we can't draft Monahan then - that bum played amazing, but his team lost 50+ games so he's damaged goods and has a losing attitude. Too bad though since he would've been a winner the year before when his team was in the conference finals.

There are guys who are okay with losing - they just get weeded out well before the NHL. Pro sports is ultra-competitive and full of ultra-competitive people. Unless the guy is head and shoulders more talented than the rest of his peers I find it hard to believe that they find their way in best league in the world if they just don't care that much. And you can count the number of guys that so talented they just don't have to care on two hands.

The big problem is that people mistake different personalities for a lack of passion. Look at the Selke race - Toews, Datsyuk, and Bergeron. Toews is clearly the hothead of the group, but it's pretty evident from the other two quieter guys play that they want to win just as badly. They just don't need to throw fits to prove it.