The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[Kovaz]

I'd also add, in terms of evaluating Gulutzan as a coach, who cares if it's Monahan or Tanner Glass getting the chances? Gulutzan can't make his team better shooters. All he can do is teach them a system to play, get them prepared for the game, and make adjustments on the bench - all of which should be reflected in the number of shots and scoring chances. If we're out-chancing other teams 2 to 1 and getting out-scored, I don't blame that on the coach.

Any team can look good when they're shooting 20%, or getting .975% goaltending. These aren't necessarily due to luck, but they're still not often sustainable over a full season. Hot shooters will cool off. Goalies will have a string of bad games. But regardless of who's hot and who's cold at any given point, a well-coached team will generally have the puck more often than not, and generally get more chances for than against. And that's something you can deliberately, reliably control.

Carolina is an extremely well-coached team. Their problem for the last few years has been shooting talent. To be successful, they should change nothing about how they play, but they need to add some better scorers. Edmonton's numbers are somewhat boosted by generous shot counters in Rogers Place. And in the top 10 you find teams like Tampa Bay, St. Louis and Columbus, excellent teams who deserve to be where they are in the standings.

It's never going to be a 1-to-1 correlation between possession stats and standings, because at the end of the day each team is going to get 6 or 7 chances, and it comes down to whose shooters execute better, and whose goalie makes more saves. You can't always finish all of your chances. You can't always rely on your goalie to make highlight-reel saves while allowing no softies. What you can do, is commit to an effective system, and stick to it night in and night out. That leads to, maybe, 10% more chances for, and 10% fewer chances against, on average, every night. Over the course of a season, maybe a few games that would've been a 2-1 loss become a 2-2 game we win in OT. Or maybe we go up 3-0 instead of 2-0 before a third period collapse, and hang on for a 3-2 win instead of going to a shootout. Or, a brutal first period leads to a 1-0 deficit instead of 2-0, and we manage to come back. On each of those individual nights, we'll point to a Mike Smith save, or a Gaudreau pass, or a dominant 3M shift as the reason we won. But what isn't nearly as visible is that Smith only needed to make one save, instead of two. Or that Gaudreau got a third try with the puck, instead of only two. Or that 3M got to start in the offensive zone, instead of their own zone.

Our underlying numbers are pointing in the right direction, now it's up to the players to see how far they can take this team.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well first of all I'm not doing anything with the stats but looking them up. They are what they are. Everyone sees a game differently, but the stats happen to back up what I'm seeing these days. But I'm not altering or editing in any way to prove a point.

Monahan is Monahan, I don't disagree. But the Flames have half a roster shooting at a level that is unsustainable bad. The league averages 8% five on five, and 9.5% in all situations through the last 5 seasons. If you're way under that with an NHL roster it's likely to change.

There will be always be outliers for sure, and I don't disagree with that, but just as I didn't think Mike Smith would stay at .960 for a save percentage all season, I was pretty sure the Flames wouldn't stay at 5% in shooting percentage either.

What happened this week? Smith leaking a bit, and the Flames scoring, both trending back towards the mean.

The Flames rode Smith to a 4-2-0 record that they didn't deserve.
Then they went 2-4-0 when they were actually playing much better.

Happens.

Right now they are trending positive in most fashions based on the numbers. But up to you if you a) don't agree or b) see it differently.

That's a great explanation and I take your point on things moving towards the mean and creating scoring chances being a positive measure. And I'm not accusing you of cherry-picking stats, just saying that you can't look at the one thing (scoring chances) and ignore the others (low shooting percentage and low goal-scoring output) and just chalk it up to luck.

You're right. Things will even out to some degree over the course of a season but some teams will have better shooting percentages and save percentages than others that make the ultimate difference in a given game, in the standings, in a series. I agree with you given what you've pointed out that the Flames will likely start getting better results if they keep up with current trends but I'm not confident that the Flames have enough skill to match the best teams with their current roster.

But this is a thread about Gulutzan and I have to concede you've made a good case that he's doing a better job than I felt he was doing given that they're doing a good job creating quality scoring chances. I think where he's still weak, and this may harder to quantify, is whether he has the team dialled in when it really matters, and putting out the right players at the right times.

[Freeway]

Glen described their defensive game as "leaky" today, in terms of giving up too many scoring chances.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Freeway

Glen described their defensive game as "leaky" today, in terms of giving up too many scoring chances.

Hamonic coming back should help this out.

[Max Cow Disease]

Such civil discussion. What a wondrous thread. I almost forgot I was on the internet for a minute!

[GioforPM]

Is GG a good coach yet? I'd say his team did pretty well last night, outside of a couple individual mental lapses, which ended up in the net.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Is GG a good coach yet? I'd say his team did pretty well last night, outside of a couple individual mental lapses, which ended up in the net.

I've been very critical of GG, but seeing Hamonic struggle a bit and dropping him down to let him get back up to game speed is the exact type on in game adjustment I have been waiting for GG to make. Its not a huge change, but it made a big difference and hopefully shows some growing flexibility in GG's style of coaching.

[indes]

I like how he's letting Johnny fly the zone for the stretch pass too, adjustments are being made which is a good thing.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

I'd also add, in terms of evaluating Gulutzan as a coach, who cares if it's Monahan or Tanner Glass getting the chances? Gulutzan can't make his team better shooters. All he can do is teach them a system to play, get them prepared for the game, and make adjustments on the bench - all of which should be reflected in the number of shots and scoring chances. If we're out-chancing other teams 2 to 1 and getting out-scored, I don't blame that on the coach.

Any team can look good when they're shooting 20%, or getting .975% goaltending. These aren't necessarily due to luck, but they're still not often sustainable over a full season. Hot shooters will cool off. Goalies will have a string of bad games. But regardless of who's hot and who's cold at any given point, a well-coached team will generally have the puck more often than not, and generally get more chances for than against. And that's something you can deliberately, reliably control.

Carolina is an extremely well-coached team. Their problem for the last few years has been shooting talent. To be successful, they should change nothing about how they play, but they need to add some better scorers. Edmonton's numbers are somewhat boosted by generous shot counters in Rogers Place. And in the top 10 you find teams like Tampa Bay, St. Louis and Columbus, excellent teams who deserve to be where they are in the standings.

It's never going to be a 1-to-1 correlation between possession stats and standings, because at the end of the day each team is going to get 6 or 7 chances, and it comes down to whose shooters execute better, and whose goalie makes more saves. You can't always finish all of your chances. You can't always rely on your goalie to make highlight-reel saves while allowing no softies. What you can do, is commit to an effective system, and stick to it night in and night out. That leads to, maybe, 10% more chances for, and 10% fewer chances against, on average, every night. Over the course of a season, maybe a few games that would've been a 2-1 loss become a 2-2 game we win in OT. Or maybe we go up 3-0 instead of 2-0 before a third period collapse, and hang on for a 3-2 win instead of going to a shootout. Or, a brutal first period leads to a 1-0 deficit instead of 2-0, and we manage to come back. On each of those individual nights, we'll point to a Mike Smith save, or a Gaudreau pass, or a dominant 3M shift as the reason we won. But what isn't nearly as visible is that Smith only needed to make one save, instead of two. Or that Gaudreau got a third try with the puck, instead of only two. Or that 3M got to start in the offensive zone, instead of their own zone.

Our underlying numbers are pointing in the right direction, now it's up to the players to see how far they can take this team.

Fantastic description on the role stats play in trying to evaluate the coach/system/team.
There is nothing particularly 'advanced' about anything. If you consistently outchance the opposition, you are more likely to be successful.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

I might not agree bingo always but he man does put together information in a logical format.

Appreciate it maing

Bingo has a great hockey mind.

I hope that somehow, somewhere, he coaches my future kids in minor hockey.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Is GG a good coach yet? I'd say his team did pretty well last night, outside of a couple individual mental lapses, which ended up in the net.

He's getting there.

Plugs on the roster are slowly being taken away as usable options (Glass, Stajan, Bartkowski) and it's helping. Bennett to the wing was another necessary move he eventually figured out.

Heading out on the road is going to be a good test. He doesn't get last change so it's easier to get stuck with a bad matchup.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

He's getting there.

Plugs on the roster are slowly being taken away as usable options (Glass, Stajan, Bartkowski) and it's helping. Bennett to the wing was another necessary move he eventually figured out.

Heading out on the road is going to be a good test. He doesn't get last change so it's easier to get stuck with a bad matchup.

IIRC their record this year is slightly better on the road, and JG has scored better on the road, which is a change. If the third line starts scoring like last night, matchups aren't as much of an issue.

[joejoe3]

This thread in summary.

Flames win = Glen Gulutzan is a good head coach
Flames loss = Glen Gulutzan needs to go

/thread

[---Hatrick---]

Originally Posted by joejoe3

This thread in summary.

Flames win = Glen Gulutzan is a good head coach
Flames loss = Glen Gulutzan needs to go

/thread

So true.
The mood around here after a nice W is a breathe of fresh air

[taco.vidal]

I didnt like a lot of GlueGun’s moves and non-moves during the game and definitely didnt like his comments after the game.
As long as the team is in a playoff spot or in contention, then the GlueGun isnt going anywhere. Therefore its likely that the best we can hope for is an offseason move after this season.

[stone hands]

Strange, for me the best I can hope for is that the team continues to play playoff-bound hockey and wins a lot of games

[jlh2640]

Originally Posted by dabrit

Fire the Gully bring back Jimmy Playfair

Bring his main guy Dave Tippett with him.

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by jlh2640

Bring his main guy Dave Tippett with him.

Boring Hockey...great fit to clean up our highly underachieving team defense.

I knew this thread would be bumped. I don't think it's fair after one bad game in a run of good games (look at the pens getting blown our by Columbus last year), but I do think there will be an adjustment made in the coaching staff at some point soon if the special teams continue to be a disaster.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by jlh2640

Bring his main guy Dave Tippett with him.

I suppose it would help me with my insomnia problem.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by taco.vidal

I didnt like a lot of GlueGun’s moves and non-moves during the game and definitely didnt like his comments after the game.
As long as the team is in a playoff spot or in contention, then the GlueGun isnt going anywhere. Therefore its likely that the best we can hope for is an offseason move after this season.

What about the comments didn't you like? Do you not generally hope for team success, even if it means you may have to change your opinion?