[Rumour] G.Gulutzan front-runner for Flames HC - UPD: Hasn't been officially offered contract

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

On the surface it seems like a pretty blah hire. Not sure why you're so puckered up about someone feeling like it's awful? It would be just as ludicrous to claim this is an amazing hire.

In a lot of ways it feels like the Flames settled to me as opposed to getting the best guy for the job. It was an incredibly long and drawn out search. Many fans probably were expecting a sexier hire to come out of all of it - hence the OP claiming it was 'awful'.

One thing for sure, Treliving is now officially on the books with the previous reign of terror all but completely wiped away.

This is the biggest point for me, and why I'm not yet upset about the Gluegun hire (has it even been confirmed yet?)

Treliving is on the clock to find a capable #1 goalie. I'm guessing there will also be a buffer period to "undo Hartley's bad habits" if the team has another slow start.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

On the surface it seems like a pretty blah hire. Not sure why you're so puckered up about someone feeling like it's awful? It would be just as ludicrous to claim this is an amazing hire.

I plainly stated it was because he has no good reason to believe it's awful this early on, and flipping out about it is pointless.

If he had a good reason to be so adamant about it I legitimately wanted to know, but as I suspected he didn't, so his little tantrum was completely baseless.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

I said it above and I'll say it again:

Looking at it realistically and objectively what are the elements that would differentiate this from being (your words) a "Blah" hire vs. a "sexy" hire - not including a big name we're all familiar with (as there aren't any of those available)?

Aside from a massive name with an extensive head coaching history, things like:

- Philosophy
- Systems
- Temperament
- Personality

are all completely unknown elements to all of us.

How then, can this be judged with any degree of fairness as an astute or poor hire?

The answer is that it can't... and that comments like "this is a blah hire" are completely superficial and devoid of any true insight.

You can't look at it in terms of being analytical. The court of public opinion is almost always based on panache. The only rational reason anyone would be upset with this hire, which I'm not, is because it took an incredibly long time to complete and ended up where it could have if completed on day one. People inherently begin to expect big things when processes such as this take much longer than the norm. Hence a blah hire.

I don't think any fan can honestly say they are overjoyed with the hire. The guy obviously checks off lot of the boxes the franchise was looking for but we've all been through a ton of these hires as Flames fans that don't work out. I approach the move with cautious optimism because this regime has proved it is willing to go against the grain when it has to and it has worked relatively well thus far.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

You can't look at it in terms of being analytical. The court of public opinion is almost always based on panache. The only rational reason anyone would be upset with this hire, which I'm not, is because it took an incredibly long time to complete and ended up where it could have if completed on day one. People inherently begin to expect big things when processes such as this take much longer than the norm. Hence a blah hire.

I don't think any fan can honestly say they are overjoyed with the hire. The guy obviously checks off lot of the boxes the franchise was looking for but we've all been through a ton of these hires as Flames fans that don't work out. I approach the move with cautious optimism because this regime has proved it is willing to go against the grain when it has to and it has worked relatively well thus far.

Did it?

Was Treliving supposed to be looking for a coach during the season while he still had one employed (who they could have realistically kept, despite the bad season) and have interviewed multiple candidates before letting him go?

I'm not sure what people were expecting. A little over a month to decide who you want steering the direction of your team, and whose tenure will reflect your own? It seems like a reasonable amount of time to me.

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Sure. But he then says he wanted Kirk Muller as the new head coach. How is Muller's resume better then Gulutzens?

Without my opinion just NHL only facts.

Gulutzan

NHL Player
Did not play in the NHL no stats

NHL HC
DAL 2011-12 No playoffs
DAL 2012-13 No playoffs

VAN Asst
2013-14 No playoffs
2014-15 Playoffs 1st round Calgary
2015-16 No playoffs picking 5th in draft PP 27th. If you didn't like the Flames PP it was 22nd.

Not based on opinion based on the stats.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?report...tg&aggregate=0


As a player Muller 19 years. The average player 5-6 years.
http://www.quanthockey.com/Distribut...erLengthGP.php

Muller NHL stats
1359GP 357 G 959 PTS 1223 PIM
Best season 94 pts
Playoffs 127GP 33G 69 PTS
Was not just a player was a Captain.
Won a SC
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...y.php?pid=3839

Became known as a defensive specialist later in his career when he no longer had his offensive abilities.

6 time Allstar
Retired at age 37 in 2003. Hired as Asst Coach with Montreal in 2006.
http://www.hhof.com/LegendsOfHockey/...p?player=11153

NHL Asst coach
Montreal
2006-07 no playoffs
2007-08 Playoffs 1st round Boston
2008-09 Playoffs 1st round Boston
2009-10 Playoffs Eastern final to PHI
2010-11 Playoffs 1st round to Boston. Boston wins Cup.

Carolina
HC
2011-12 No playoffs
2012-13 No playoffs
2013-14 No playoffs

St. Louis
Asst Coach
2014-15 Playoffs round 1 to MIN, MIN loses to CHI. Hawks win the Cup.
2015-16 Playoffs beat their nemesis defending SC champ CHI . Loses in Western Final to SJ.
St Louis offer extension to Muller for 1 year he turns it down
Montreal hires him as Asst to rebuild their PP, less than a week later after he turns down STL offer.
Why did they hire him
St. Louis PP 2015-16 6th best

Again not based on opinion these are Mullers stats.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?report...tg&aggregate=0



Is it fair to say sports like many careers is often measured fairly or not by what have you done lately? If so...

Gulutzan 2015-16 No playoffs picking 5th in draft PP 27th.
Muller Asst coach 2015-16 Western Final and beating the previous SC champion who had their playoff number. PP 6th
Rumour replacement Reirden Asst coach 2015-16 2nd round lose to PENS who go on to win the SC. PP 5th.
Based on stats who succeeded last year.
Hartley succeeded last year coaching the Flames to the playoffs and this year he didn't result gone.

Rumour replacement Gulutzan Asst coach 2015-16 No playoffs picking 5th in draft PP 27th.

We hear daily GM's talk about the goal for their organizations their staff and players is to make the playoffs. Media pundits, former players talk about the goal for coaching staffs is to make the playoffs.
So there it is black and white in 2015-16 which of these 3 contributed to successfully reaching that goal? Which one was part of having impressive PP stats and which one wasn't?

Did i enter the conversation in a rant instead of stats yup. That's on me that is my mistake and i took a fair amount of heat for it.
I can own that, I posted out of anger instead of information.

The stats between Gulutzan and Muller are as above.

[Dan403]

Still don't want Muller.

[shotinthebacklund]

as my avid Canuck friends tells me ,Gulutzan did not run the PP. They had split special teams and it was Gulutzan ran the PK which has been notably good.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Did it?

Was Treliving supposed to be looking for a coach during the season while he still had one employed (who they could have realistically kept, despite the bad season) and have interviewed multiple candidates before letting him go?

I'm not sure what people were expecting. A little over a month to decide who you want steering the direction of your team, and whose tenure will reflect your own? It seems like a reasonable amount of time to me.

I don't have any numbers on coaching search longevity but I can't remember an NHL head coaching hire taking this long for quite a while. I'd certainly wager that they move much quicker than this did more often than naught.

[Coach]

Mark Crawford probably has the best record of anyone available outside of Carlyle. Still don't want either of them.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Nm

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

as my avid Canuck friends tells me ,Gulutzan did not run the PP. They had split special teams and it was Gulutzan ran the PK which has been notably good.

VAN PK 17th
STL PK 3rd
WSH PK 2nd

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?report...tg&aggregate=0

[Ashasx]

one season on a terrible team. Literally worse than any Flames team ever.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

I don't have any numbers on coaching search longevity but I can't remember an NHL head coaching hire taking this long for quite a while. I'd certainly wager that they move much quicker than this did more often than naught.

Wasn't the most previous coaching change for the Flames themselves a longer wait? April 12- May 31st between firing Sutter and hiring Hartley. May 22 to June 23 between Keenan and Sutter (and that was pretty much a slam dunk from day 1).

How long would you take to hire a person who would steer the culture of your business, hopefully for as long as possible? As long as it takes to find the person you deem to be the best?

Not to mention the other stuff Treliving has/had been doing during that time.

A lot of times, coaches get fired to specifically be replaced by a newly available coach. When that's not the case, my guess is ~month is pretty common.

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

LOL at bringing up a coach's stats as a player. Super relevant. Almost as relevant as the the team's record while he was an assistant coach.

I brought up all his NHL stats because it is a reflection of what he accomplished as an NHL career thus far as a player and a HC and and Asst.
It also shows that he is rounded. Many players try to move into coaching and it doesn't work, many players want to continue their NHL career into coaching and they don't get hired. It is relevant.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Wasn't the most previous coaching change for the Flames themselves a longer wait? April 12- May 31st between firing Sutter and hiring Hartley. May 22 to June 23 between Keenan and Sutter (and that was pretty much a slam dunk from day 1).

How long would you take to hire a person who would steer the culture of your business, hopefully for as long as possible? As long as it takes to find the person you deem to be the best?

Not to mention the other stuff Treliving has/had been doing during that time.

A lot of times, coaches get fired to specifically be replaced by a newly available coach. When that's not the case, my guess is ~month is pretty common.

I would have guessed 3-4 weeks was the average duration in recent history. Wasn't Hartley fired May 1st? If so, we are edging on almost 7 weeks with no announcement.

It also doesn't help that this search been beaten like a rented mule around here the entire time making it seem longer than it has actually been.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

I would have guessed 3-4 weeks was the average duration in recent history. Wasn't Hartley fired May 1st? If so, we are edging on almost 7 weeks with no announcement.

It also doesn't help that this search been beaten like a rented mule around here the entire time making it seem longer than it has actually been.

I think it's the fact that many assumed Hartley would be fired long before he actually was, and so the search seems longer because it was being discussed before the season even ended.

I really don't think Treliving ruled out keeping Hartley until at least a couple weeks after the season ended. He is methodical in his process, and I think that would apply to his evaluation of his (potentially) outgoing staff as well.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Aside from a massive name with an extensive head coaching history, things like:

- Philosophy
- Systems
- Temperament
- Personality

are all completely unknown elements to all of us.

How then, can this be judged with any degree of fairness as an astute or poor hire?

One element we do know is which organizations and which coaches they apprenticed with. Personally, I like Rierden over Gulutzan on that front.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

I brought up all his NHL stats because it is a reflection of what he accomplished as an NHL career thus far as a player and a HC and and Asst.
It also shows that he is rounded. Many players try to move into coaching and it doesn't work, many players want to continue their NHL career into coaching and they don't get hired. It is relevant.

Just a reminder that Kevin Lowe played 18 seasons as an NHL player.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

I brought up all his NHL stats because it is a reflection of what he accomplished as an NHL career thus far as a player and a HC and and Asst.
It also shows that he is rounded. Many players try to move into coaching and it doesn't work, many players want to continue their NHL career into coaching and they don't get hired. It is relevant.

What's the criteria factor for a player, in becoming a successful coach. You've stated there's relevance, you just haven't correlated it.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Mark Crawford probably has the best record of anyone available outside of Carlyle. Still don't want either of them.

Crawford could never pronounce names correctly - he was worse than Cherry, even with players on his own team! Decent results though, but he's a little ridiculous