The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

Or those coaching staff's design a system that takes advantage of those team's strengths, instead of the "square peg in a round hole" style GG pushes.

God, I am sick of hearing this. The system is good and when the players go out an execute it they are dominant. Rag on his bench management, motivation ability, or what have you that are valid points but the system is not a problem.

[Otto-matic]

@Kristen_Odland
Stajan and Ferland are the first two on the ice.



@Kristen_Odland
#Flames were not supposed to practice today (was originally skedded as a travel day). Now on at 10 a.m. for a skate.

[Looch City]

Bag skate them

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

If it walks like a duck it's a duck. It's Gulutzan's doing just like the only reason Jerrard is even here is because Gulutzan wanted him & it's the Not the first time "Gully" has brought this dud alongside his vapid coaching career.
I wonder what the result of that was hmmm..
A smart leader and this rings true in any organization sports or business surrounds themself with experts in their field.
Gulutzan is neither smart or a leader.

https://globalnews.ca/news/2807476/d...oaching-staff/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Jerrard

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.nbcd...1.html%3famp=y

I think GG is smart, but I don't think his assistants are getting the job done. GG probably trusts their decisions which is why he won't make the obvious decisions\changes. If it were a guy like Darryl he would be telling the assistants how he wants it done and then he would make the on ice decisions from there. In order for GG to become a better hands on coach he should be an assistant to a guy like Darryl; But even then I don't know if that would translate passion, emotion, leadership behind the bench.

The Flames sorely needs someone who knows how to push the right buttons, make appropriate changes and who knows that winning at all costs is the difference between making the playoffs. I am speculating but I think the reason we don't see GG making those types of changes is because the assistants are pulling a lot of the on ice strings.

Edit: GG is a smart hockey coach but doesn't appear to be a master motivator.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by Otto-matic

@Kristen_Odland

Stajan and Ferland are the first two on the ice.







@Kristen_Odland

#Flames were not supposed to practice today (was originally skedded as a travel day). Now on at 10 a.m. for a skate.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't think so. If the Flames miss the playoffs this season without a pick in the first two rounds, Treliving is guaranteed to be out. He will act before that.

The team simply cannot miss the playoffs and have not shown to be headed in a positive direction under Gulutzan.

Treliving is safe for now. Beyond the fact that the team won't want to be paying for two coaches AND two GMs next year, he's done enough good work that he will be allowed to use firing the coach as a get out of jail free card. Even if he allows this season to circle the drain.

But after that, his feet will definitely be against the fire.

[bubbsy]

In case anyone was really curious.... No changes in the lineups/pairings

Derek Wills‏Verified account @Fan960Wills
Derek Wills Retweeted Derek Wills
#Flames lines and pairings:
Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland
Tkachuk-Stajan-Frolik
Bennett-Jankowski-Jagr
Brouwer-Lazar-Hathaway
F. Hamilton

Giordano-D. Hamilton
Brodie-Hamonic
Kulak-Stone
Bartkowski

Smith
Rittich

(Backlund was not at practice, hence, stajan taking the reps in his spot).

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

In case anyone was really curious.... No changes in the lineups/pairings



(Backlund was not at practice, hence, stajan taking the reps in his spot).

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by nemanja2306

Hiring coaches is a tricky business. Sometimes the guy you don't think will do good, does great on another team. IE, Mike Yeo. I remember two years ago, none of us wanted him as our coach and the Wild fans hated his guts. Yet, he's doing a great job with STL this year. So, it's really a coin flip sometimes.

I'd think Tippet would do good here, but I still prefer Sutter though.

There's no doubt as sometimes even when it looks like a great fit (Brent working under Darryl in Calgary) it doesn't always work out. I have it on good authority that the Wild players despised Yeo and recall being horrified that Treliving interviewed him for the job but then you look at how he's got the Blues playing and it makes you think about how it comes down to the right coach for that specific group of players.

[Resolute 14]

Just as Brouwer and Gulutzan said. We need only to keep doing the same things that aren't working now, haven't worked in 113 games, and likely won't work in the future. Because surely, changing absolutely nothing is the answer.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I would rather get Hartley back than bring in Lindy Ruff. Why? They are both coaches that utilize the same system.

With all the talk about 'unsustainability', I offer you last night's game. Flames dominated CORSI events, but high danger scoring chances were even (though I thought that the Flyers led the way).

At any rate, those systems employed by Hartley and Ruff rely on the goalie making the easy saves, keeping all shots to the perimeter, and collapsing in front of the net to stop the high danger chances. Going back and arguing against the 'unsustainable' arguments by the analytic community at the time still makes sense to me now. I do think, however, that the advanced metrics on this team would have risen if Hartley was kept on, as the team just got WAY better overall - both in skill and size. That last year was a team completely rattled by playing in front of a porous goaltender, and once Ramo came back into form, that team beat the franchise consecutive home win record.

Now, I am not advocating in bringing Hartley back - I bet he wouldn't return anyway. Ruff is, however, a very similar coach, but he has never won a cup as a coach. I do think he is a good coach, but I do believe that Hartley is the better coach between the two.

Either way, there is no way that Treliving hires Ruff. Hartley had this team playing over their heads and into the 2nd round of the playoffs, and it took forever for Treliving to re-sign him. I think at the time it was clear that Treliving wanted to hire 'his guy', and employ a type of system that was more in keeping with today's NHL. I can't see him going against his own philosophy and hiring Ruff. I do think that Ruff would do well here (I think that Hartley would do well on this team too).

Something I really have to complain about in a Gulutzan vs Hartley system - the D-to-D pass. Hartley stressed that he preferred the D to pass the puck forward as the first choice, skate up the ice with the puck as the 2nd choice, and make a D-to-D pass as the third option. That resulted in lightning-quick transitions that would put teams on their heels at times. It wasn't just about the stretch pass - though it happened a lot. I understand why Gulutzan employs the system he does in terms of transition, but in my opinion, it makes this team 'slow' in a way. Yes, those 5 foot passes and moving up the ice as a unit definitely has its' advantages, but so does transitioning the puck quickly. I believe the 5 foot passes is something that should be utilized when facing teams that are employing the trap.

I just look at the D on this team, and can't help but feel they are being underutilized. They are a much more talented group than one that can only make 5 foot passes, they can skate as a unit exceptionally well, but defence is not the strongest suit as a unit. Why keep the puck in the zone longer in a D-to-D pass?

This is where I partially feel that Gulutzan's system doesn't fit the Flames as well. I think this team SHOULD be an incredibly difficult team to play against in terms of neutralizing their transition game. I do think this is a team that seems to score a lot more goals off the rush, and draws a lot more penalties while attempting to do so.

I think at the time Hartley was here, you had to look at the talent on the team to figure out that this was not an elite defence, but he made Russell and Wideman amazing. Replace those two with Hamilton, Hamonic and Stone. Replace the goaltending with Smith. Look at how much bigger and better this team is along the boards. I suddenly see how much more effective that Hartley system would have been at neutralizing the opposition along the boards (Colborne was one of the few who did it, and we still fondly look back at a few of his shifts against Anaheim that playoff year). Sigh...

I do think that a Hartley or Ruff would excel with this group. However, I also think a Sutter or Tippett would also excel. For me, the most important aspect of being a good coach is realizing what the strengths and weaknesses are of your team, implementing a system that keeps those in mind, and keeping your finger on the team knowing what buttons to push and what adjustments to make so you can out-coach the opposition. I like a coach who makes a team better than what they should be, and the Flames in their entire history in Calgary have had only 3 - Johnson, Sutter and Hartley.

I don't think that - outside of a stretch of games - that Gulutzan has made this team better than the sum of their parts. I guess it depends on what you think of those parts, but I have just seen a team that is for the most part under-performing. I want a coach that makes this team out-perform what they are, at least for long stretches, without many stretches of under-performing.

[Racki]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

I think GG is smart...

The Flames sorely needs someone who knows how to push the right buttons, make appropriate changes and who knows that winning at all costs is the difference between making the playoffs.

Edit: GG is a smart hockey coach but doesn't appear to be a master motivator.

In the NFL it is quite common to see coaches that excel as offensive and defensive coordinators but they just don't have the chops to be a good head coach.

Glen Gulutzan might be the Norv Turner, Wade Philips, Romeo Crennel of the NHL. It's not a bad thing. He's obviously very smart with a lot of skills. He just might be a career assistant?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Racki

In the NFL it is quite common to see coaches that excel as offensive and defensive coordinators but they just don't have the chops to be a good head coach.

Glen Gulutzan might be the Norv Turner, Wade Philips, Romeo Crennel of the NHL. It's not a bad thing. He's obviously very smart with a lot of skills. He just might be a career assistant?

The Peter Principle - competent people get promoted until they reach a level beyond their competency. I agree that GG is probably better suited to assistant coach.

[Gaskal]

It's painfully clear at this point to me that Hamonic needs to be either injured or ejected for this coaching staff to go back to trying out Brodie-Stone. Which is really starting to tick me off.

You need to get Brodie going, and trying to ram a square peg into a round hole isn't going to accomplish that. Trying out different things might. This is one scenario where having an experiment with someone else or moving him back to the right go disastrously is still better than sitting on your hands and doing nothing.

[bubbsy]

has anyone from the media flat out asked Treliving if he's thought about trying different pairings?

We've all discussed this at length on CP here, i see it all over twitter, would love to hear the coach's view on the topic and the reluctance to try it.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

At what point will this team realize Gulutzan is about a .500 coach who plays not to lose, instead of trying to win.

"bad bounces"

[bubbsy]

Sounds they had a long ass practice today, despite being a travel day and then playing back to back starting tomorrow...

damned if you do, damned if you don't situation at the moment. This ugly 3 games in 4 nights upcoming could be a back breaker given the 5 games heading into it.

[FiveSeven]

Does anyone actually know what the system is? Does anyone have a grasp on multiple systems or one that would fit this team better?

If we’re gonna nonstop talk smack about systems I think it would be more tolerable if we knew exactly what these systems are and what would be better. Or poetential tweaks to them.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Racki

In the NFL it is quite common to see coaches that excel as offensive and defensive coordinators but they just don't have the chops to be a good head coach.

Glen Gulutzan might be the Norv Turner, Wade Philips, Romeo Crennel of the NHL. It's not a bad thing. He's obviously very smart with a lot of skills. He just might be a career assistant?

Right, a classic introvert, a smart guy but prefers to do everything within the confines of his comfort zone. Sometimes people are talented but lack (certain) social skills, or are exceptionally good at some things but not at others.

Kind of reminds me of a shy guy on a date; he might be a great guy but if he can't start a conversation he is not going to get very far. GG needs to reinvent his style and hang around a master motivator otherwise this pretty girl is not going to dance with him.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

God, I am sick of hearing this. The system is good and when the players go out an execute it they are dominant. Rag on his bench management, motivation ability, or what have you that are valid points but the system is not a problem.

I completely disagree.

This would only be true if you believe the players simply don't want to play the system. You would have to believe they see they can be dominant and win when they play the system, but simply choose not to do it for some reason. This reason would have to be so important that they would prefer to lose.

On the other hand I believe that they are incapable of playing his system, either because they find it too complicated or they physically can not do it.

To me giving your team a system they are unable to implement successfully (and consistently) is trying to put a square peg in a round hole.