The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Table 5

How many first-time coaches flame out compared to the ones that have success? I mean I guess we can keep playing the cheapo coach lottery for another 3 decades, and hope we hit a winner. Or maybe, just this time, we can pay up. The one time we did that in the last couple of decades, we went to the Finals.

I suspect they "paid up" for Brent Sutter.

I think that first time versus fired a few times is a real mixed bag. And coaches records vary so much even within a team season to season it's ridiculous. Look at Maurice. I think he was on the brink of being fired. Hellebyuck has made him a genius this year.

[colbym72]

Originally Posted by Table 5

If Joel Quenneville becomes available this summer, you back up the money truck for him. Make him the highest paid coach in the league...whatever it takes. A guy like that can be just as important as a Gaudreau or Giordano.

This team is dying for some leadership...and it's clearly not in the room right now. It needs to be imported, and it needs to be done relatively soon before we waste this cycle.

I also think in terms of leadership, Tkachuk should be given an A. Increase his role going forward

[dissentowner]

GG employs a solid hockey system, the problem is he is terrible at in game tactics. I have no idea how such an obviously smart man who understands the game of hockey so well can be so damn clueless when it comes to putting out the wrong players in key situations. His bench management can not even be called poor it is so bad. You would think when he was reviewing film a lightbulb would go off in his head and he would be like "wtf was I thinking?"

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Ask Treliving. He's the one who fired the reigning Adams winner after he couldn't duplicate a 2nd round playoff series.

I also don't understand the sentiment of ownership being cheap on coaches. The Flames paid for both Hartley and Gulutzan at one point. They paid a guy to not coach.

I think Treliving fired Bob not 100% based on performance but more so Treliving didn't like his style of play. I liked Bob and was hoping he'd get one more year out of it, but obviously Treliving's vision and Hartley's style did not mesh.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

I seem to remember hearing the Flanes owners dont like to pay for coaching.

Flames ownership must not like winning stanley cups then.

Explains how the team has only made it to the second round twice in the past 28(!) years.

[Kovaz]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I think Treliving fired Bob not 100% based on performance but more so Treliving didn't like his style of play. I liked Bob and was hoping he'd get one more year out of it, but obviously Treliving's vision and Hartley's style did not mesh.

I remember reading that his firing was also because of what was said in the player exit interviews. Specifically I remember reading some vets were concerned with how he treated some young players (Bennett, maybe Baertschi?). After Sarich's descriptions of being coached by him it wouldn't shock me if those same criticisms came up in the exit interviews as well.

I think the style of play also factored in, but it wasn't the only reason.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

I remember reading that his firing was also because of what was said in the player exit interviews. Specifically I remember reading some vets were concerned with how he treated some young players (Bennett, maybe Baertschi?). After Sarich's descriptions of being coached by him it wouldn't shock me if those same criticisms came up in the exit interviews as well.

I think the style of play also factored in, but it wasn't the only reason.

Also think the impending Gaudreau, & Monahan contract negotiations had a part to play.

If the players hated the coach and wanted him out of there then trying to sign them is going to be more difficult.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

I remember reading that his firing was also because of what was said in the player exit interviews. Specifically I remember reading some vets were concerned with how he treated some young players (Bennett, maybe Baertschi?). After Sarich's descriptions of being coached by him it wouldn't shock me if those same criticisms came up in the exit interviews as well.

I think the style of play also factored in, but it wasn't the only reason.

That likely played a factor as well. I just remember listening to the final press conference and hearing Hartley talk about what needs to improve for next season and he mentioned things like winning more faceoffs and blocking more shots and then next thing you know Bob's fired. I just know Treliving thought right then and there that this is the opposite style that he wants to play.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

That likely played a factor as well. I just remember listening to the final press conference and hearing Hartley talk about what needs to improve for next season and he mentioned things like winning more faceoffs and blocking more shots and then next thing you know Bob's fired. I just know Treliving thought right then and there that this is the opposite style that he wants to play.

Well this style sucks.

Great Hair though.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Also think the impending Gaudreau, & Monahan contract negotiations had a part to play.

If the players hated the coach and wanted him out of there then trying to sign them is going to be more difficult.

I actually think Gaudreau and Monahan really liked Hartley. I remember the media interviewing Monahan and specifically asking him about Bob's dismissal and what the players thought about it and I remember Monahan saying something to the effect that he was happy with Bob because he was playing a lot of minutes and producing.

[atb]

I agree with Button that the Flames D are too passive compared to past years. The team's strength is supposed to be the D's ability to move the puck and create chances, but on a PPG basis this is the worst it's been in the past 4 years:

17/18: 0.27 ppg to date
16/17: 0.36 ppg
15/16: 0.41 ppg
14/15: 0.40 ppg

They've lost so many close games which could have gone the other way with a little bit more offense from the D and a better performing PP.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by atb

I agree with Button that the Flames D are too passive compared to past years. The team's strength is supposed to be the D's ability to move the puck and create chances, but on a PPG basis this is the worst it's been in the past 4 years:

17/18: 0.27 ppg to date
16/17: 0.36 ppg
15/16: 0.41 ppg
14/15: 0.40 ppg

They've lost so many close games which could have gone the other way with a little bit more offense from the D and a better performing PP.

We're a team built from the Defence out. You have to use them. You have to.

Smith is awesome, so let your defence take risks.

When we had 'Goala' Elliott in net okay, protect the net, but that didnt work. Take risks.

We cant have Glen Gulutzan Ned Flanders be too scared to take risks. This is the NHL. It isnt easy. Just playing safe isnt going to get you anywhere.

[mikeecho]

Originally Posted by Corral

The same Craig Button who hired Greg Gilbert as the Flames head coach in 2001. Yeah he knows a lot about good coaching ....

I guess you don't need to be a hockey genius to figure out what's wrong with the Flames PP. He absolutely nailed his analysis.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Corral

The same Craig Button who hired Greg Gilbert as the Flames head coach in 2001. Yeah he knows a lot about good coaching ....

And also hired Daryl Sutter whom, I think, won some things?

[Major Major]

Well now I just want Ned Flanders transposed over stick toss GG.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

That likely played a factor as well. I just remember listening to the final press conference and hearing Hartley talk about what needs to improve for next season and he mentioned things like winning more faceoffs and blocking more shots and then next thing you know Bob's fired. I just know Treliving thought right then and there that this is the opposite style that he wants to play.

I can understand not wanting more blocked shots (because it implies the other team is getting lots of shots) but who doesn't want to win more faceoffs?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Locke

And also hired Daryl Sutter whom, I think, won some things?

Craig button hired Darryl in the same way Darryl hired feaster

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I can understand not wanting more blocked shots (because it implies the other team is getting lots of shots) but who doesn't want to win more faceoffs?

Oh without a doubt. But winning more faceoffs isn't necessarily a sustainable strategy. You're likely going to be in around 50%, it's not like you can just ask everyone to be at 55% next season just so less goals are scored. Bob was definitely popular and he gave us an incredibly fun and unforgettable 14-15 season, but his style of play was a little antiquated.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

GG employs a solid hockey system, the problem is he is terrible at in game tactics. I have no idea how such an obviously smart man who understands the game of hockey so well can be so damn clueless when it comes to putting out the wrong players in key situations. His bench management can not even be called poor it is so bad. You would think when he was reviewing film a lightbulb would go off in his head and he would be like "wtf was I thinking?"

Hopefully he learns from those mistakes. Like you said, he has a solid system, seems to be very intelligent. Maybe he just needs a couple years to put it all together. Who here was a genious, or knocked it out of the park in their profession in the first year or two? He made the playoffs his first season. Has the team in the mix this season. The Vegas game is the first game he has lost when the team had a lead going into the third. Good things to build on.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I can understand not wanting more blocked shots (because it implies the other team is getting lots of shots) but who doesn't want to win more faceoffs?

Links to this press conference? Can't find a single 2016 press conference where he says those things.