Denver Post Article on Scott Parker (and his thoughts on Bob Hartley)

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Last season the Flames spent to the cap.... they had Iginla, Bouwmeester, Kipper. .... signed expensive UFA's Hudler and Wideman. Their defense was so good that the Hartley put Corey Sarich in the stands as a healthy scratch.... and they finished with the very worst record in Flames history.


The fact that Hartley was back for a second year based on his 2012-13 coaching results was a major surprise. Feaster took a lot of the blame for Cervenka but Hartley/Feaster have to be on a short leash.

But you think Bouwmeester is absolute garbage so they would have been worse off last year right? You also fail to mention that it was a lockout shortened season, the Flames were an old team and many players did not play overseas and there was no training camp. Hudler dealt with family issues out the gate and Kipper was injured. It is clear today that Iggy has taken a step back and is no longer the elite player he was. The team decides to rebuild because they were not good enough.

[Yakbutter]

I don't have a problem with anything Harley allegedly said. Insinuating to a player that try will be demoted if they don't do their job is hardly bullying. I think that people need to consider that players respond differently to different styles of coaching. Some people need a kick in the ass to get them going and some people need to be guided.

Saying "I smell chocolate" is hardly bullying.

Hartley is not trying to actively ruin young players. Players like Brodie and colborne are getting massive amounts of ice time. And it seems like Moahan is coming along just fine too.

[Flames89]

Concerning words from Parker, but not the most credible source and who knows what an asshat he was being to deserve some Hartley anger.

Hartley also has likely changed during this time. He has been focusing on the positives much more since his return.

More surprising is when all of CP became anti-Hartley? This is essentially his first real year. The Flames are playing an entertaining brand of hockey that has me tuning in despite the likely outcome, and we are gaining league wide respect for our work ethic - a work ethic that is being demonstrated and not just talked about (as in previous seasons).

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Flames89

More surprising is when all of CP became anti-Hartley? This is essentially his first real year. The Flames are playing an entertaining brand of hockey that has me tuning in despite the likely outcome, and we are gaining league wide respect for our work ethic - a work ethic that is being demonstrated and not just talked about (as in previous seasons).

Because Hartley seems to be focused on winning instead of player development, which most people do not agree with. They are also noticing some glaring inconsistencies in his approach to coaching / icetime.

Most of our young players seem to have taken a step back this year or are not making much progress. Which is really all that matters for this team going forward.

[868904]

Originally Posted by mikeecho

What I get from this article is that Hartley was open and brutally honest with a guy who was a borderline NHLer and more than likely should have been a minor leaguer. Use your skill sets and suck up the injuries or you have no place on this roster as someone else will take your job.

That's the reality for 1/2 of the guys in the league. At least he heard it straight from the coach. Many coaches in the league don't even talk to the players and leave that to the assistants.

If Parker wanted to have the message sugar coated, then he'd likely have spent his career in the minors. I suspect it's more bitterness from a tough guy like Parker who resented being bossed around by a guy half his size who never played in the NHL.

For those wanting the Flames to fire Hartley because of this article... I suspect you'd be mortified if you knew how Darryl treated his players. If you go by Warreners accounts, Darryl had the same kind of dialogue, except he would call out and embarrass his players infront of the entire team... And the people of Calgary pretty much have him the key to the city for being a great coach.

Bang on, threat of job loss is an everyday thing in most people's lives. In the real world, If you aren't doing your job, you get fired and your contract is not guaranteed, unlike how good the players have it.

Demotion and ice time are the only tools with which coaches have to motivate players. I think the bigger question from this article is what Hartley is saying when he stands behind Sven on the bench after he turns the puck over?

"I hear sirens" or "I smell weed"?

[Buff]

This is one guy saying that he has zero respect for Hartley. I'll bet you can find 15-20 of Hartley's former players who would also say they have zero respect for Hartley. I'll bet you can find a couple dozen of Scott Bowman's former players who don't have respect for Bowman. Not everybody is going to have the same warm fuzzy feelings towards their coaches, and not everybody is going to have the same disdain for their coaches either.

I have seen a couple of things that make me wonder if Hartley will be around after the season, but I don't think I've seen anything to suggest that the Flames need to be in a hurry to get rid of Hartley. Seeing these comments from a fringe NHLer shouldn't change anything. If a current player was saying these things, then maybe the issue is a bit more urgent. If That current player is one of your core, then management better be getting to the bottom of things pretty quickly.

We're hearing these comments from a former player who only had a job because he was the policeman. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that his attitude wasn't all that great either. We're only hearing his side of the story and we aren't likely to hear a response from Hartley and I would be that you'd be hard pressed to find other players (non-fringe) that would corroborate the story.

[ricardodw]

Best players on 2002-03 Thrashers that Hartley took over as coach.

Best players: 21 year old Heatley, 21 year old Stephan, 19 year old Kovalchuk, 25 year old Savard and 30 year old Kozlov .... 9 players under 26 .... best young team in hockey.

3 full seasons latter 2006-07 latter 2 Hartley's playoff team (4 game first round sweep by Rangers)

Best players 27 year old Hossa, 34 year old Kozlov, 23 year old Kovalchuk, 40 year old Mellanby, 35 year old Holik, 28 year old Sim.


Only 3 guys under 26 Kovalchuck, Slater and 22 year old goalie Lethonen.

That was the peak of this old team and they have been out of the playoff's for the next 6 years.


Might not be Hartley's fault but he did not develop the young talent that he stepped into with Atlanta.


He sure did not develop Stepan who was a #1 pick overall and was as 2 year nhl pro 21 when Hartley got him.

[Flames89]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Because Hartley seems to be focused on winning instead of player development, which most people do not agree with. They are also noticing some glaring inconsistencies in his approach to coaching / icetime.

Most of our young players seem to have taken a step back this year or are not making much progress. Which is really all that matters for this team going forward.

I am not sure I agree with that perception.
Hartley has the team he has been given and the mandate to run it. While some debate the treatment of Baertschi, I have not seen the kid demonstrate the consistent effort required. As for young players taking a step back? Other kids are getting a bunch of chances. Playing big guys helps balance our size, and I actually think McGrattan is a better hockey player than given credit for.
We need to focus on being a winning team, despite the odds, else we will turn into the Oilers.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

If this was from Joe Sakic I would listen to it. But it's Scott Parker, the biggest plug to ever play in the NHL. You people are naive if you believe this.

What does a player's skill level have to do with their believability?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Yakbutter

I don't have a problem with anything Harley allegedly said. Insinuating to a player that try will be demoted if they don't do their job is hardly bullying. I think that people need to consider that players respond differently to different styles of coaching. Some people need a kick in the ass to get them going and some people need to be guided.

Saying "I smell chocolate" is hardly bullying.

Hartley is not trying to actively ruin young players. Players like Brodie and colborne are getting massive amounts of ice time. And it seems like Moahan is coming along just fine too.

Yelling "I smell chocolate" on the bench in the middle of a game for all teammates to hear is not good coaching. You don't have to call it bullying, but it's not right.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Flames89

I am not sure I agree with that perception.
Hartley has the team he has been given and the mandate to run it. While some debate the treatment of Baertschi, I have not seen the kid demonstrate the consistent effort required. As for young players taking a step back? Other kids are getting a bunch of chances. Playing big guys helps balance our size, and I actually think McGrattan is a better hockey player than given credit for.
We need to focus on being a winning team, despite the odds, else we will turn into the Oilers.

Agreed, the only people who think he's focused on winning are folks who think being in a rebuild means play every player you have under 25 at the NHL level for as many minutes a possible..........some how that means you are playing for the future.

Like you said, you can debate the treatment thus far of Sven, but you can't confuse it with a focused on winning strategy. To me, Hartley is doing the opposite of win now:

- Sitting Sven for his long term development mulitple times, despite it being clear that Sven is easily a Top 9 forward on this team. This means the Flames are better with Sven in the line up, and therefore have a better chance of winning if they don't sit him.

- Continuing to play Berra despite mulitple questionable games and an equally capable / similar level back up on the bench. Giving Berra that extended stretch of games was clearly not a "win now" move. It was done to evaluate Berra and give him a chance to show case. Berra was weak numerous times in that stretch, a win now coach tries Ramo much sooner than Saturday.

None of this smells like a coach who doesn't understand the teams situation or mandate. The Flames aren't flush with young talent yet, and Hartley is trying his best to create a competitive atmospher on a team that still has a long way to go in teh asset aquiring process for a rebuild.

[automaton 3]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Because Hartley seems to be focused on winning instead of player development, which most people do not agree with. They are also noticing some glaring inconsistencies in his approach to coaching / icetime.

Most of our young players seem to have taken a step back this year or are not making much progress. Which is really all that matters for this team going forward.

I don't agree with this assessment. Brodie and Monahan are getting loads of ice time and are getting better and better. Colborne is improving every game as well.

Backlund and Sven are averaging 14:44 and 14:26 in icetime respectively, which is pretty decent. Backlund I think has played well, but Sven has to be better to earn increased ice time.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Itse

Obviously there's no way of knowing what would have become of the guys that are pushed into fighter roles. It's not like a coach is going to tell that to an already esbalished player.

Ok, but Scott Parker???The only way he makes it to the NHL is to buy a ticket if he wasn't fighting. Unfortunatly that goes for most if not all of the big boys.

I really hate the goon role....hard friggin way to make a living but the reality is they hit a point in their development where they needed to start fighting or get cut. Lots of skilled junior guys need to realize they won't be a sniper in the NHL so they have to change to become a checker etc.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by habernac

A young Scotty Bowman was coaching the Blues. Their farm team at the time was in Kansas City. He was having issues with some of his players spending a lot of time in the pub and not concentrating enough on hockey. He walked into the pub post game and past his players and went over to the jukebox. He put in his quarter and selected a song. "Kansas City Here I Come" started playing. He didn't have much issue with his players not taking the game seriously after that.

And I bet if he'd told Barclay Plager that he was a ##### for not playing injured, Bowman would have been fed his lunch.

Again, there is a difference here between enforcement through intimidation, it's quite another to intimidate a player to fight and play injured at the risk of their professional livelihood.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

What the heck is Stempniak doing playing (poorly) with his broken foot?

I assumed that Hartley was the President of the Stempniak fan club. Maybe Hartley is using him to show the young guys that they be ready to play hurt. If an 8 year veteran millionaire can be made to play hurt why shouldn't Monahan suck it up and play hurt. I wonder how many games Monahan played to proof he was tough and who finally decided enough was enough.

Last year Blair Jones was a precious resource that the Flames really lacked. Hartley flexed his authority to show he controlled the room.

David Jones started off stronger and has faded. His only punishment is not playing the PP (behind Stempniak) but he is making his $4M for the next 3 years and Hartley will be long gone from coaching in the NHL by then.

Glencross obviously understands that he is untouchable on the Flames and was not busting a gut for Hartley. How can Hartley punish Glencross? --- Ben Street is your Centre.

They can't MAKE them play hurt, you know that right? These guys have friggin guaranteed contracts, they play hurt for the same reason they go back on the ice after getting their teeth knocked out, they are warriors and love the game and they are hockey players and they are made that way.

Isn't that one of the reasons we love our game?

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

If this was from Joe Sakic I would listen to it. But it's Scott Parker, the biggest plug to ever play in the NHL. You people are naive if you believe this.

That's silly.

I think people can be good coaches without having played high level hockey themselves.

Conversely, players can properly assess their coaches and how their coaches treat them, even if they're poorly skilled players on the ice.

And we can certainly discuss this article without weighing the on-ice skills of the people mentioned. If not, a reporter could just quote Gretzky in every article he writes and publish it as the lord's truth.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

Ok, but Scott Parker???The only way he makes it to the NHL is to buy a ticket if he wasn't fighting. Unfortunatly that goes for most if not all of the big boys.

I really hate the goon role....hard friggin way to make a living but the reality is they hit a point in their development where they needed to start fighting or get cut. Lots of skilled junior guys need to realize they won't be a sniper in the NHL so they have to change to become a checker etc.

Totally agree, but the part that drives me crazy when these stories (or ones like it) surface is your statement above gets coupled with the comments as though they "had to do it to earn a living". Like as though they had no other options. The choice to be an NHL tough guy is a completely voluntary one. It's one people make..... not to survive like some always say, but a choice they make so they can continue to live out a dream and make rediculous amounts of money.

Choosing to stay in the NHL is never a life or death choice, or a I have to provide for my family choice. It's a I want to play a game to earn my money and be rediculously wealthy choice. Lots of other things any NHL tough guy can do to "earn a living", tones of manual labour out their if they don't have the other skill sets to leverage (not saying they don't).

Most of us don't get to live out our childhood dreams of being a Pro Athlete, or an rock star or whatever else floats your boat. At some point along the way, most of us had to accept we were off to plan B, and we are likely doing that for a living now. That was an option for any NHL tough guy as well, but they choose to continue to chase the dream and big money any way they could..............and good for them. But they were also free to leave at any point also, and I don't like it when they or others make it seem like they had no choice.

BTW, I wasn't saying you said any of the BFD, your post just sparked the above thought.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Poe969

I wonder how people are going to react if Monahan comes back and isn't playing great then Hartley either keeps him in the pressbox for a few games or puts him on the fourth line with McGrattan.

I am 1000% fine with that. Why in the hell wouldn't you be?

"Hey kid, you're playing like crap and floating around.....let's encourage that behavior by keeping your 19 year old ass on the first line and # 1 power play."

[wingmaker]

So Hartley gets no credit for the success of the players on Colorado because they were so good they didn't need coaching but is criticized for not developing young players in Atlanta who were high draft picks with similar pedigree and similar expectations?

I really don't think a coach is responsible for "developing" a player by the time they get to the NHL level. At that point, it is up to the player. All a coach can do is give them a bigger or smaller opportunity to take advantage of. Junior coaches develop, NHL coaches are for the most part managers of individuals with some ability to motivate, employ certain playing systems that govern the framework that a team plays under, and hold a team accountable. If Hartley was not giving any opportunity for Sven than all of this criticism would be warranted. But he has provided lots of opportunities. At some point, either players step up or they don't.

[wingmaker]

As for the article, it sounds like sour grapes. In what world is being a professional athlete an easy job? Players are expected to play hurt, they always have the threat of being demoted or traded hanging over their head...that is the deal. How is this anything new? Should Hartley have used nicer language when he told his players that if they didn't perform they would be demoted? Maybe it's just me but that seems like part of the deal. Doubly so for hockey players who are paid handsomely to fight and to be bruisers—it's not like they can make themselves useful by doing other things well.

Having said that, I do realize that you don't have to be an ahole when you are coaching a team. it's nice to think that all coaches are respectful to their players. But I don't think this is a big shocker and it certainly doesn't make Hartley a good or bad coach on its own.