The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

I thanked your post for being a a great example of that mob mentality - while actually denying it.

I've posted the real stats , Wins/Losses and playoff success, or lack thereof. Everything else is conjecture - as hockey games are not science experiments that take place in a vacuum.

This is where you keep getting into trouble.

If you want to look at simple wins and losses and make a coaching decision, that's fine. You don't have to look any further, but because you pass on any depth to the analysis certainly doesn't mean others have to join you.

I wouldn't call wins and losses "real" though. I'd call them superficial.

It's akin to someone getting heads three straight times and then announcing to the world that he has coin tossing beat!

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by Bingo

This is where you keep getting into trouble.

If you want to look at simple wins and losses and make a coaching decision, that's fine. You don't have to look any further, but because you pass on any depth to the analysis certainly doesn't mean others have to join you.

I wouldn't call wins and losses "real" though. I'd call them superficial.

It's akin to someone getting heads three straight times and then announcing to the world that he has coin tossing beat!

A coin toss is random iwth a probability of either of 50% or .5; that is very much unlike hockey games.

Win Losses are the result of the game, the final results chooses the playoff seeds, and number of playoff wins decides if the team moves forward - WIN/LOSS is the most direct indicator.

A team does not win the stanley cup based on best advanced stats - not saying they don't have a place because they do.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

I thanked your post for being a a great example of that mob mentality - while actually denying it.

I've posted the real stats , Wins/Losses and playoff success, or lack thereof. Everything else is conjecture - as hockey games are not science experiments that take place in a vacuum.

This is just simply wrong.

There has been an abundance of information provided in this thread which effectively shows various aspects of good performance and improvement which is demonstrably accurate and applicable. Your constant whining about the coaches in the face of this evidence that you utterly incapable to acknowledge strongly suggests that your opinion stems NOT from reason but is rather the product of an axe to grind.

The fact of the matter is that every team in the NHL will win games they have no business winning (i.e. the Flames win in LA), and will lose games that they should have won (i.e. the Flames loss to Minnesota). The underlying numbers are crucial to showing what teams are doing well and where they need to improve, and they also provide reams of data for understanding individual game results beyond the sum of goals scored. Simple wins/losses in tiny segments of a full season are not good indicators of what the coach or players are doing well or poorly, because there is so much noise and randomness in the space of a 60 minute game—You are right: hockey games do not take place in a vacuum. But you are completely wrong in your application of that analogy, because if they did, then we could simply look at the score after each night without seeing what transpired on the ice and KNOW everything about what happened.

But of course, because you cannot tolerate the possibility that Glen Gulutzan might be a quality NHL coach, you will continue to relish in team losses and smugly deflect counter opinions with your fingers planted firmly your ears. (..."Your [sic.] right mate, I’ll get the jack Adams ready.)

[shotinthebacklund]

The ignore list is not suffecient for some individuals it would seem

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Last year when the Flames were running with different goalies and defence core? How will that tell you much about how they will perform this season?

I think its fair to look at last year when assessing GG. Our goaltending got way better this year, as did our defense. So I would suggest GG should get better results. Thus far (yes its only 12 games) the results don't appear any better.

That is my concern, I don't see any progression with the team. 12 games is early, but what is the internet if not a place for knee jerk reactions?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

I think its fair to look at last year when assessing GG. Our goaltending got way better this year, as did our defense. So I would suggest GG should get better results. Thus far (yes its only 12 games) the results don't appear any better.

No one ever suggested that it was "unfair" to draw comparisons to last year, only that all comparisons need to weigh various factors individually.

That is my concern, I don't see any progression with the team. 12 games is early, but what is the internet if not a place for knee jerk reactions?

People keep providing tangible evidence of improvement that is continually ignored...

Originally Posted by Bingo

...First 6 Games
4-2-0
GF/GA - 17-17
CF% 5on5 - 49.6%
CF% All Situations - 47.8%
HDCF% 5on5 - 45.7%
HDCF% All Situations - 47.7%
Shooting Percentage 5on5 - 6.6%
Shooting Percentage All Situations - 9.0%

Last 6 Games
2-4-0
GF/GA - 10-16
CF% 5on5 - 53.5%
CF% All Situations - 53.1%
HDCF% 5on5 - 58.3%
HDCF% All Situations - 57.4%
Shooting Percentage 5on5 - 5.9%
Shooting Percentage All Situations - 5.3%

I see a team playing better but squeezing their sticks. Don't think that's much of a reach either.

Originally Posted by Robbob

...108 to 92. That is the High scoring chances against through 12 comparing last year to this year.

*EDIT* I will add to this a win by the Flames at the Honda Center—a place they have not won a game in more than a decade, and a win at the Saddledome over the Washington Capitals. This last one has not received the attention it deserves: The Capitals came into Calgary with a three-year winning streak in Calgary, in which they have outscored the Flames 12–4, and lost only once at the Saddledome since 2008. Sunday's win was a big deal.
Whether you see it or not probably indicates something of your own biases and blindspots.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

A coin toss is random iwth a probability of either of 50% or .5; that is very much unlike hockey games.

Win Losses are the result of the game, the final results chooses the playoff seeds, and number of playoff wins decides if the team moves forward - WIN/LOSS is the most direct indicator.

A team does not win the stanley cup based on best advanced stats - not saying they don't have a place because they do.

So when Mike Babcock left Detroit and started coaching the Leafs did he become a worse coach? The wins/losses certainly reflect that so far.

[pepper24]

I don't see how Gulutzen is responsible for the 3rd line being terrible. No points and costing the team games.

Bennett needs to move to 4th line or press box. Center or wing he's struggled. Lazar is 4th line or press box as well. The issue then is who do we move onto 3rd line. Versteeg yes. Brouwer not sure if any better. Stajan, Hamilton, Glass are 4th line players. Jagr returning could help the 3rd line. Jankowski has been just ok and not making a strong case to stay up with zero points.

You can break up our top 2 lines to spread out but a struggling Bennett isn't going to help that unless he can help himself. He's the problem.

None of this is on Gulutzan.

[EldrickOnIce]

Every year this has to be rolled out, again.
So again.
The great Peter Maher always said, you find out what everyone is made of in the 2nd quarter of the season - after the first 20 games or so. That is the measuring stick.
Are the Caps really a 0.500 team?
Will Vegas win the Pacific?
I expect we already know those answers. Other answers are not as clear, including the Flames.
So call it authority fallacy if you will, but I would heed his sage advice, and wait a bit yet to see what is actually what. 15-25 games from now would be a better time to evaluate any of this. I think that is all most people are saying.

[Teroy]

There is only one way to survive on this forum; post your opinion and leave it at that. If you do otherwise you'll just be continually chewed up by those who think their opinion is right and yours is wrong.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by belsarius

The Flames Win/Loss record for the tail end of last season, the playoffs and to start this season match the Chicago Blackhawks. So I guess they are bottom feeders that need to fire their coach into the sun too? Take out 10 wins from the Blackhawks last year and they don't look so good! What a disaster of a team. Blow it up!

Or such a small sample size isn't a great indicator of the ability of a team.

Unless it's the Oilers. Even at just 10 games, their current record fills my dark, bitter soul with inexplicable joy.

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is just simply wrong.

There has been an abundance of information provided in this thread which effectively shows various aspects of good performance and improvement which is demonstrably accurate and applicable. Your constant whining about the coaches in the face of this evidence that you utterly incapable to acknowledge strongly suggests that your opinion stems NOT from reason but is rather the product of an axe to grind.

The fact of the matter is that every team in the NHL will win games they have no business winning (i.e. the Flames win in LA), and will lose games that they should have won (i.e. the Flames loss to Minnesota). The underlying numbers are crucial to showing what teams are doing well and where they need to improve, and they also provide reams of data for understanding individual game results beyond the sum of goals scored. Simple wins/losses in tiny segments of a full season are not good indicators of what the coach or players are doing well or poorly, because there is so much noise and randomness in the space of a 60 minute game—You are right: hockey games do not take place in a vacuum. But you are completely wrong in your application of that analogy, because if they did, then we could simply look at the score after each night without seeing what transpired on the ice and KNOW everything about what happened.

But of course, because you cannot tolerate the possibility that Glen Gulutzan might be a quality NHL coach, you will continue to relish in team losses and smugly deflect counter opinions with your fingers planted firmly your ears. (..."Your [sic.] right mate, I’ll get the jack Adams ready.)

Dude, the your entire post is would've, could've been. All conjecture.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

No one ever suggested that it was "unfair" to draw comparisons to last year, only that all comparisons need to weigh various factors individually.


People keep providing tangible evidence of improvement that is continually ignored...



*EDIT* I will add to this a win by the Flames at the Honda Center—a place they have not won a game in more than a decade, and a win at the Saddledome over the Washington Capitals. This last one has not received the attention it deserves: The Capitals came into Calgary with a three-year winning streak in Calgary, in which they have outscored the Flames 12–4, and lost only once at the Saddledome since 2008. Sunday's win was a big deal.
Whether you see it or not probably indicates something of your own biases and blindspots.

The most tangible evidence is how the season went, wins/losses, how deep into the playoffs the team made it.

Advanced stats are a tool to look for how to improve a team, where a team is excelling and where another maybe lacking - advanced stats don't win games.

The horse is dead, lets both stop beating the #### out of it?

I can't accept GG is a good coach and you can't accept he's a bad coach.

Originally Posted by VilleN

So when Mike Babcock left Detroit and started coaching the Leafs did he become a worse coach? The wins/losses certainly reflect that so far.

Babcock changed teams entirely; the Flames roster improved. You are comparing apples to oranges my friend.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Babcock changed teams entirely; the Flames roster improved. You are comparing apples to oranges my friend.

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

I've posted the real stats , Wins/Losses and playoff success, or lack thereof. Everything else is conjecture...

Dodge, duck, dip, dive and.............. dodge!

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Babcock changed teams entirely; the Flames roster improved. You are comparing apples to oranges my friend.

No, I'm not. You've said that you presented data in the form of wins/losses to support your argument for why GG should be fired - I am providing an obvious example of why that is flawed.

Do you agree that the Flames improved from 2015/2016 to 2016/2017 under GG?
The Flames went from being a lottery team under Hartley to a playoff team under GG. That was the goal at the beginning of that season. Mission accomplished, the coach successfully achieved what was expected. How is it fair then, after 12 games and being a .500 team (hardly a catastrophic start) to call for GG to be fired? Should he not be allowed to see this season through AT LEAST until the mid point of the season? Not to mention, as Textcritic pointed out, the underlying numbers show improvement this season.

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by VilleN

No, I'm not. You've said that you presented data in the form of wins/losses to support your argument for why GG should be fired - I am providing an obvious example of why that is flawed.

Do you agree that the Flames improved from 2015/2016 to 2016/2017 under GG?
The Flames went from being a lottery team under Hartley to a playoff team under GG. That was the goal at the beginning of that season. Mission accomplished, the coach successfully achieved what was expected. How is it fair then, after 12 games and being a .500 team (hardly a catastrophic start) to call for GG to be fired? Should he not be allowed to see this season through AT LEAST until the mid point of the season? Not to mention, as Textcritic pointed out, the underlying numbers show improvement this season.

Not gonna go over this again, but take a look at the the numbers after the 10-game win streak. Including the SWEEP.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

The ignore list is not suffecient for some individuals it would seem

STOP....QUOTING...HIM!!! Please

thx

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Not gonna go over this again, but take a look at the the numbers after the 10-game win streak. Including the SWEEP.

Not gonna go over this again. The season before GG: Lottery team. GG's first season: Playoff team. 12 games into second season as a .500 team:Fired?

The order that the wins/losses happen doesn't matter at all. We made the playoffs, that was the goal at the beginning of the season. Could the playoffs have gone better, of course - and that is the goal this year now that we are a playoff team.

Would you please indicate why you think my reasoning is wrong? It's really leaving me wanting more out of this debate.

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Not gonna go over this again. The season before GG: Lottery team. GG's first season: Playoff team. 12 games into second season as a .500 team:Fired?

The order that the wins/losses happen doesn't matter at all. We made the playoffs, that was the goal at the beginning of the season. Could the playoffs have gone better, of course - and that is the goal this year now that we are a playoff team.

Would you please indicate why you think my reasoning is wrong? It's really leaving me wanting more out of this debate.

The two teams were vastly different, Monohan and Johnny each matured a year.

Big changes up front colborne, hudler, jooris out - Brouwer, Versteeg, Tkchuck in.

He also had, better Goal tending then Ramo and Eliot - Hiller was better.\

That right there is significant.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Not gonna go over this again, but take a look at the the numbers after the 10-game win streak. Including the SWEEP.

I hope you realize that Brian Elliott was tending goal at that time.

Hope you also realize that the Flames totally walked away from Brian Elliott and signed a whole new goaltender.

The horribad play of Brian Elliott is the main reason why the numbers are the way they are.

Especially the "SWEEP".

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Not gonna go over this again, but take a look at the the numbers after the 10-game win streak. Including the SWEEP.

So GG has improved the team's W/L record compared to that time span. Great!!!