Fire Dave Cameron

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

...I just see the PP coach's head called for on every team with a poor PP. Not sure these guys really have as much control as people think they do.

I have been suggesting much the same all season, and the continued Flames power play woes got me to doing some digging into historical trends. I looked into how much change teams on average will experience on the power play, and unsurprisingly the numbers are all over the map.

I surveyed just the past four seasons to see how much a team improved or declined in their power play effectiveness and rank from one year to the next. For example, last year the Buffalo Sabres iced the #1 power play, which was up ten places from 2015–16, when they ranked 11th.

Over the course of the last three years every NHL team has seen an average change in their power play rank of over nine places:
· From 2014–15 to 2015–16 teams fluctuated between improvements of 27 places (Anaheim) and declines of 16 places (Vancouver).
· In 2016–17 teams fluctuated between improvements of 27 places (Toronto) and declines of 22 places (SJ).
· This year teams have fluctuated between improvements of 22 places (SJ) and declines of 24 places (Edmonton).

Over the course of three years an average of 13 teams sees a rank-change in less than ten places—that is less than half the League—and 6 teams every year will move more than 15 places.

In other words, it is fairly commonplace to see dramatic changes from one year to the next in the performance of a team's power play. Some of this is explained through changes in coaches and personnel, but these do not account for all of it.

Yes, the Flames power play is currently bad, but I am not convinced that a coaching change will resolve it. As has already been mentioned a few times, this is the SAME group that produced a top-ten NHL power play last year with essentially the SAME personnel (sans Kris Versteeg, but I am continually informed by other posters that he makes no perceptible difference). I think this is just something the players will work through. Maybe it doesn't happen this season; maybe it occurs during the playoffs (the Flames powerplay in last year's first round was positively lethal); maybe Versteeg's reinsertion will ignite whatever is missing at present with this group. It sucks right now, but I am not overly worried about it in the long run.

[taxbuster]

Was just listening to Kerr and Steinberg on 960 while in the car. I think this might be the first time I've heard them discussing the question of coaching and the PP....no "suggestion" of course, but a discussion about whether one starts to point fingers at Cameron, Gulutzan and even Burke and Tre.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have been suggesting much the same all season, and the continued Flames power play woes got me to doing some digging into historical trends. I looked into how much change teams on average will experience on the power play, and unsurprisingly the numbers are all over the map.

I surveyed just the past four seasons to see how much a team improved or declined in their power play effectiveness and rank from one year to the next. For example, last year the Buffalo Sabres iced the #1 power play, which was up ten places from 2015–16, when they ranked 11th.

Over the course of the last three years every NHL team has seen an average change in their power play rank of over nine places:
· From 2014–15 to 2015–16 teams fluctuated between improvements of 27 places (Anaheim) and declines of 16 places (Vancouver).
· In 2016–17 teams fluctuated between improvements of 27 places (Toronto) and declines of 22 places (SJ).
· This year teams have fluctuated between improvements of 22 places (SJ) and declines of 24 places (Edmonton).

Over the course of three years an average of 13 teams sees a rank-change in less than ten places—that is less than half the League—and 6 teams every year will move more than 15 places.

In other words, it is fairly commonplace to see dramatic changes from one year to the next in the performance of a team's power play. Some of this is explained through changes in coaches and personnel, but these do not account for all of it.

Yes, the Flames power play is currently bad, but I am not convinced that a coaching change will resolve it. As has already been mentioned a few times, this is the SAME group that produced a top-ten NHL power play last year with essentially the SAME personnel (sans Kris Versteeg, but I am continually informed by other posters that he makes no perceptible difference). I think this is just something the players will work through. Maybe it doesn't happen this season; maybe it occurs during the playoffs (the Flames powerplay in last year's first round was positively lethal); maybe Versteeg's reinsertion will ignite whatever is missing at present with this group. It sucks right now, but I am not overly worried about it in the long run.

The PP is bad because of a poor strategy.
Last year, the PP was statistically 'good' despite a poor strategy.

Evaluating PPs quantitatively is impractical because of how volatile these things are and how small the sample sizes are for goal events. There is a lot of noise.

Qualitatively, the strategy continues to be bizarre and not reflective of any dangerous PPs. How does a Gaudreau wrister from the high left circle or Versteeg/Hamilton wrister from the high right circle ever accomplish anything against half-decent coverage and goaltending? Only by luck and goalie whiffs do we ever appear to score. That and outlier games / playoff series where Monahan is confoundingly left wide open in the slot by poor PK units.

We do not utilize one timers, cross ice passing plays, or playmaking from behind the goal line. That is on the coaching staff.

Even last year, our 2nd PP unit was more effective than the first, which we knew was not something you want to depend on. We had TJ Brodie manning PP1 for all of that top PP unit last year... where ever was the logic in that when Brodie is awful at point shots and both flanking forwards are playing their strong wing? Brodie is a passer and he's passing to guys who have to collect the puck and wrist it? It's just ridiculous. If you want Brodie to be the dedicated point passer he has to be setting up one-timers for guys on their offwing, anybody really... Monahan, Gio, Stone, Hamilton, Versteeg, Gaudreau, Jankowski, Backlund, Tkachuk, Bennett.... It was never even an option.

They shouldn't get a pass because 'it worked last year'. This year's PP might even be unlucky - who knows - but it is without a doubt an area where better strategies could and should be implemented ASAP. Just ask Gaskal for one. It's no coincidence Gaudreau's PP goal scoring has been cut in half under this coaching staff - he is playing the opposite side for some reason.

Hell, our inept PP strategy may very well be the primary driver of the decline of Troy Brouwer. He was hardly a great 5v5 player in other stops but he made a living as a designated shooter from the mid-slot. Is Monahan not versatile enough to play any other role on a PP that you can't use Brouwer in the specific role he was paid 4.5 million to play? We may never find out, because experimentation and adaptation are foreign concepts to this coaching staff.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

The PP is bad because of a poor strategy.
Last year, the PP was statistically 'good' despite a poor strategy.

Evaluating PPs quantitatively is impractical because of how volatile these things are and how small the sample sizes are for goal events. There is a lot of noise.

Qualitatively, the strategy continues to be bizarre and not reflective of any dangerous PPs. How does a Gaudreau wrister from the high left circle or Versteeg/Hamilton wrister from the high right circle ever accomplish anything against half-decent coverage and goaltending? Only by luck and goalie whiffs do we ever appear to score. That and outlier games / playoff series where Monahan is confoundingly left wide open in the slot by poor PK units.

We do not utilize one timers, cross ice passing plays, or playmaking from behind the goal line. That is on the coaching staff.

Even last year, our 2nd PP unit was more effective than the first, which we knew was not something you want to depend on. We had TJ Brodie manning PP1 for all of that top PP unit last year... where ever was the logic in that when Brodie is awful at point shots and both flanking forwards are playing their strong wing? Brodie is a passer and he's passing to guys who have to collect the puck and wrist it? It's just ridiculous. If you want Brodie to be the dedicated point passer he has to be setting up one-timers for guys on their offwing, anybody really... Monahan, Gio, Stone, Hamilton, Versteeg, Gaudreau, Jankowski, Backlund. It was never even an option.

They shouldn't get a pass because 'it worked last year'. This year's PP might even be unlucky - who knows - but it is without a doubt an area where better strategies could and should be implemented ASAP. Just ask Gaskal for one. It's no coincidence Gaudreau's PP goal scoring has been cut in half under this coaching staff - he is playing the opposite side for some reason.

Hell, our inept PP strategy may very well be the primary driver of the decline of Troy Brouwer. He was hardly a great 5v5 player in other stops but he made a living as a designated shooter from the mid-slot. Is Monahan not versatile enough to play any other role on a PP that you can't use Brouwer in the specific role he was paid 4.5 million to play? We may never find out, because experimentation and adaptation are foreign concepts to this coaching staff.

Did Gaudreau play on the right side in Hartley's PP?

[theinfinitejar]

Islanders fans raised money to buy a "Snow Must Go" billboard near the Arena.

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2018/02/14/...to-protest-gm/

Maybe something Flames fans should consider?

I can't think of any catchy slogan that rhymes with Cameron at the moment.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Did Gaudreau play on the right side in Hartley's PP?

At times. He roamed a lot more because there was more player movement. Hartley's PP had its ups and downs too, but I think that was more a talent thing as our second unit was often employing guys like David Jones, Mason Raymond, Joe Colborne, Lee Stempniak, Josh Jooris, Lance Bouma saw PP time and Dennis Wideman's decline was practically the consequence of dividing by negative zero.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

Islanders fans raised money to buy a "Snow Must Go" billboard near the Arena.

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2018/02/14/...to-protest-gm/

Maybe something Flames fans should consider?

I can't think of any catchy slogan that rhymes with Cameron at the moment.

Wow, you'd think he'd at least get some props for trading Griffin Reinhart and getting Matt Barzal. Whatever you think of Hamonic, pretty huge haul there too. They need to shore up their goaltending and defence but...harsh critics!

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Fan in Exile

Wow, you'd think he'd at least get some props for trading Griffin Reinhart and getting Matt Barzal. Whatever you think of Hamonic, pretty huge haul there too. They need to shore up their goaltending and defence but...harsh critics!

I know. Cameron deserves this treatment so much more.

[btimbit]

A billboard or something would just make the fanbase look so toxic. However I do wish there was a more effective way to show how fed up we are about the handling of the PP other than whining on the internet.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have been suggesting much the same all season, and the continued Flames power play woes got me to doing some digging into historical trends. I looked into how much change teams on average will experience on the power play, and unsurprisingly the numbers are all over the map.

I surveyed just the past four seasons to see how much a team improved or declined in their power play effectiveness and rank from one year to the next. For example, last year the Buffalo Sabres iced the #1 power play, which was up ten places from 2015–16, when they ranked 11th.

Over the course of the last three years every NHL team has seen an average change in their power play rank of over nine places:
· From 2014–15 to 2015–16 teams fluctuated between improvements of 27 places (Anaheim) and declines of 16 places (Vancouver).
· In 2016–17 teams fluctuated between improvements of 27 places (Toronto) and declines of 22 places (SJ).
· This year teams have fluctuated between improvements of 22 places (SJ) and declines of 24 places (Edmonton).

Over the course of three years an average of 13 teams sees a rank-change in less than ten places—that is less than half the League—and 6 teams every year will move more than 15 places.

In other words, it is fairly commonplace to see dramatic changes from one year to the next in the performance of a team's power play. Some of this is explained through changes in coaches and personnel, but these do not account for all of it.

Yes, the Flames power play is currently bad, but I am not convinced that a coaching change will resolve it. As has already been mentioned a few times, this is the SAME group that produced a top-ten NHL power play last year with essentially the SAME personnel (sans Kris Versteeg, but I am continually informed by other posters that he makes no perceptible difference). I think this is just something the players will work through. Maybe it doesn't happen this season; maybe it occurs during the playoffs (the Flames powerplay in last year's first round was positively lethal); maybe Versteeg's reinsertion will ignite whatever is missing at present with this group. It sucks right now, but I am not overly worried about it in the long run.

What is the point in paying a coach if a coach has no impact?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

What is the point in paying a coach if a coach has no impact?

I did not say the coach has no impact. I did say that I don't believe the power play issues are primarily systemic, and I am not convinced that a coaching change will result in a significant improvement. It might—but I suspect there is a lot more involved.

It strikes me as fairly naive to imagine that the professionally employed coaching staff has not seen what a bunch of armchair critics from the comforts of their living room are seeing. If they are not implementing changes that you imagine they ought to be there is likely a good reason.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I did not say the coach has no impact. I did say that I don't believe the power play issues are primarily systemic, and I am not convinced that a coaching change will result in a significant improvement. It might—but I suspect there is a lot more involved.

It strikes me as fairly naive to imagine that the professionally employed coaching staff has not seen what a bunch of armchair critics from the comforts of their living room are seeing. If they are not implementing changes that you imagine they ought to be there is likely a good reason.

Yeah, but did he think of yelling "Shoot!"?

That's pretty much foolproof to fix a PP.

[GullFoss]

I think the PP improves drastically once a RH shot comes in. If that's Versteeg on the first unit, great. But they also need a RH shot on the 2nd unit. Perhaps they will trade for one.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I think the PP improves drastically once a RH shot comes in. If that's Versteeg on the first unit, great. But they also need a RH shot on the 2nd unit. Perhaps they will trade for one.

Edit nm

[Freeway]

He's a rightie.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Was just listening to Kerr and Steinberg on 960 while in the car. I think this might be the first time I've heard them discussing the question of coaching and the PP....no "suggestion" of course, but a discussion about whether one starts to point fingers at Cameron, Gulutzan and even Burke and Tre.

Heard the same thing yesterday and was glad that the media is actually making this a conversation. Its an important one that I hope continues.

[belsarius]

I think Versteeg brings more than a RH shot. I think its experience and vision that is most valuable for him on the PP. Gaudreau is an amazing player, but he has never struck me as a cycle player, he is a transition threat, and the PP is a cycle game. I don't think he is as effective in a stationary position trying to view the ice. Monahan can get into the right spots but he also seems to be a primary mark for defensemen to keep on a leash and not get into a hole. Brodie also is a great passer, but I don't see the instincts of a PP quarterback there.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the PP has looked better recently with the addition of Tkachuk (cycle machine), and Giordano (much more experience than Brodie). The Right hand shot is an issue, and so is the lack of movement and variety of threats. And right now confidence is a huge issue.

[GioforPM]

It's funny - Brouwer is RH and has a decent shot (or at least he did). But he's positioned in front of the net, where his shot is a non-factor. I recognize that he's the biggest forward, but Jankowski is tall as well, and has reach to get at pucks.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I think Versteeg brings more than a RH shot. I think its experience and vision that is most valuable for him on the PP. Gaudreau is an amazing player, but he has never struck me as a cycle player, he is a transition threat, and the PP is a cycle game. I don't think he is as effective in a stationary position trying to view the ice. Monahan can get into the right spots but he also seems to be a primary mark for defensemen to keep on a leash and not get into a hole. Brodie also is a great passer, but I don't see the instincts of a PP quarterback there.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the PP has looked better recently with the addition of Tkachuk (cycle machine), and Giordano (much more experience than Brodie). The Right hand shot is an issue, and so is the lack of movement and variety of threats. And right now confidence is a huge issue.

I was trying to put into words why Gaudreau is not that effective on the PP and this is it. He passes very well on the fly - he's best at area passes which let the receiver skate into the pass. On the PP he's good at puck retrieval due to his quick stick, but his cross ice passes just aren't there. Hamilton may be a better stationary passer.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I was trying to put into words why Gaudreau is not that effective on the PP and this is it. He passes very well on the fly - he's best at area passes which let the receiver skate into the pass. On the PP he's good at puck retrieval due to his quick stick, but his cross ice passes just aren't there. Hamilton may be a better stationary passer.

I see this too but I just can't believe Johnny's skill level isn't high enough to figure this out. Seems like it would be more mental than anything else.

Some people want to simply point to bad luck but this seems like too large a sample size. Bingo has pointed out in his game takes that there are some things the Flames have simply not tried on the PP (like switching sides on the point) which does seem a little perplexing considering the PP has the potential of crashing their entire season.

I am sure the coaching staff has their reasons for what they are doing. Unfortunately that doesn't equate to it working.