Why did we have a coach one year removed from the Jack Adams award fired?
It happens... coaches have shelf life’s and hartleys isn’t that long due to his demanding nature that will get the best of a team in a short window.
GG is the opposite and more of a players coach which also can have a short shelf life if he isn’t able to find a way to to elevate his demand on guys.
Quenville and many other elite coaches are able to wear both hats at the right time which keeps them employed as long as they are.
__________________ OFFICIAL CP REALTOR & PROPERTY MANAGER
Travis Munroe | Century 21 Elevate | 403.971.4300
It happens... coaches have shelf life’s and hartleys isn’t that long due to his demanding nature that will get the best of a team in a short window.
GG is the opposite and more of a players coach which also can have a short shelf life if he isn’t able to find a way to to elevate his demand on guys.
Quenville and many other elite coaches are able to wear both hats at the right time which keeps them employed as long as they are.
Further to which its almost like a running gag in the NHL that the Jack Adams is the 'Kiss of Death' for most coaches.
Isnt there a stunning stat that a lot winners end up being fired the next season?
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Further to which its almost like a running gag in the NHL that the Jack Adams is the 'Kiss of Death' for most coaches.
Isnt there a stunning stat that a lot winners end up being fired the next season?
I think i once heard it was 35% of them within 2 years IIRC.
No question GG looks to be done here. I don't think there is a way out of it now. I still dont lay the blame at his feet entirely myself. Its just to easy to say that. Issues on this club run much deeper. There are players here who simply appear not to care enough to make a difference when it matters most.
Lots and lots of work to be done.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Instead of doing a personal attack drive-by, how about explaining where I'm wrong?
First off, I never claimed I like Hartley, Feaster or King but please by all means explain to myself and the 2 other "dummies" who agreed with me where I'm wrong.
Here's where I think I'm right.
-Hartley got more out of less and at least the team showed some exciting play instead of this garbage that GG imposes
-Feaster gets a bum rap but he is responsible for most of the best draft picks on the team, he took over a team full of cap problems and players with no trade/movement clauses and had the fans liking the future. The O'Reilly offer sheet could have been a disaster but 99% of hockey people including the Colorado brass had no clue about the new CBA rule, but had we got O'Reilly the flames would have been much better off with O'Reilly than with Bennett, McDonald and Hickey. Treliving has had no brainer draft picks and other than getting Hamilton for picks in a weak draft has done nothing to help this teams weaknesses, even after admitting this team needs speed and scoring he continues to ignore the needs and still keeps paying our putrid defense about $26 million(probably a league high) while over cooking defensive prospects in the minors. Treliving is good at is contract negotiations but not building an exciting winning team, ask yourself...has he ever stepped out to make a hockey trade to at least try to make the team better? NO, he's like his dad on Dragon Den, unless the deal is a guaranteed win he won't take the chance.
-King over Burke is a no brainer, Burke stuffs $3 million a year in his jeans to not only to do nothing, he does it while living in Toronto and using a cell phone once a week back to Calgary. total waste considering King also gets paid more to do about the same
Again, I don't like any of these 6, but the current 3 is terrible but please keep proving me wrong with personal attacks without proving a damn thing
Hartley had one year where the flames made comebacks because teams took them lightly at the start and then a bunch of lucky bounces. The following year teams figured out his stretch pass/river hockey and he could not adapt . While GG has just as many flaws, at least he taught this group the fundamentals of hockey. At least the coach that replaces GG won't have to start from scratch like, GG did.
The crowd that thinks Feaster stock piled the organization with prospects better start to look at how those prospects are turning out. He hit a grand slam with Johnny Hockey , but whiffed on all returns for Iggy, Jbo, Reggie, and Tanguay. We have nothing , absolutely nothing to show for them. As for your Oreilly trade it's not Bennett that would have been missed it was Mony. Don't forget about Brad Richards. Jesus flames would still be paying that contract, or close to it.
Burke was hired because Ken King had turned the flames into a joke. That is not a lie. The rest of the league was starting to think the flames was a joke organization. For that alone he is better than King will ever be.
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to kyuss275 For This Useful Post:
The roster is not deep enough up front and BT knew it. We've been lucky with injuries, imagine one of JG, Monahan, Backlund going down - ouch.
That doesn't excuse GG however. Mind blowing player utilisation, weird system implementation and now he shows emotional investment - after hanging on to a loose thread. This wolf pack #### didn't work with B Sutter, the Swarm didn't work with (lol the swarm) the Oilers and it does #### all for the flames. Look at our D, they are probably the best (potentially) puck moving D in the league - Use them! They should pinch, they should shoot, they should skate the puck or move it up the ice fast....
This team never outnumbers the opposition in transition and allows them to set up and collapse.
Why is the discussion Hartley vs Gulutzan? Hartley was getting fired. It was the right move. The decision never was between GG and Hartley, it was between GG and the other available coaches at the time.
__________________
Harry, I'm gonna let you in on a little secret. Every day, once a day, give yourself a present. Don't plan it, don't wait for it, just... let it happen. Could be a new shirt at the men's store, a catnap in your office chair, or... two cups of good, hot, black coffee.
The Following 17 Users Say Thank You to wingmaker For This Useful Post:
Why is the discussion Hartley vs Gulutzan? Hartley was getting fired. It was the right move. The decision never was between GG and Hartley, it was between GG and the other available coaches at the time.
I think their refusal to look at Boudreau was a huge mistake. He might not check all the advanced stats boxes, but he gets results...at least in the regular season.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Infinit47 For This Useful Post:
Because we got rid of Hartley for Gully, so with the disappointment comes the dismay that we got rid of that for......this?
It’s like if you don’t feel Monahan is a #1 Center, so you trade him for.....Nick Shore. There’d then be a lot of people making the comparison for what we gave up vs. what we got instead.
If something is supposed to be an improvement, and instead is a step backwards, there is going to be some buyers remorse.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
I wonder how we compare in the league in breakaways given and odd man rushes. frick its been ugly all year and when you consider the talent on our back end, there is no excuses
I think their refusal to look at Boudreau was a huge mistake. He might not check all the advanced stats boxes, but he gets results...at least in the regular season.
I'm pretty sure he did at the time, his stints with Washington and Anaheim had his teams consistently corsi'ing the crap out of the opposition, except in the good actual dangerous way. both those teams had more elite cores than ours though.
that's why it was weird, seemed like the exact type of coach BT would have been looking for, maybe he heard something bad that scared him away.
When BH comes up in GG discussion I read the posts in Trump voice;
“... why is everyone so mean to GG? Crooked Hillary and Bill, I mean Coach Bob, were terrible and corrupt and no one was ever mean to them, I mean him.”
It was slim pickings back when GG was hired. This summer there might be star coaches available. And this roster must look good to a coach that’s confident in their ability to get the most from a team.
I'm pretty sure he did at the time, his stints with Washington and Anaheim had his teams consistently corsi'ing the crap out of the opposition, except in the good actual dangerous way. both those teams had more elite cores than ours though.
that's why it was weird, seemed like the exact type of coach BT would have been looking for, maybe he heard something bad that scared him away.
He might have been approached and declined due to a desire to prove his detractors wrong - which would require a contender team to coach.
Hartley had one year where the flames made comebacks because teams took them lightly at the start and then a bunch of lucky bounces. The following year teams figured out his stretch pass/river hockey and he could not adapt . While GG has just as many flaws, at least he taught this group the fundamentals of hockey. At least the coach that replaces GG won't have to start from scratch like, GG did.
The crowd that thinks Feaster stock piled the organization with prospects better start to look at how those prospects are turning out. He hit a grand slam with Johnny Hockey , but whiffed on all returns for Iggy, Jbo, Reggie, and Tanguay. We have nothing , absolutely nothing to show for them. As for your Oreilly trade it's not Bennett that would have been missed it was Mony. Don't forget about Brad Richards. Jesus flames would still be paying that contract, or close to it.
Burke was hired because Ken King had turned the flames into a joke. That is not a lie. The rest of the league was starting to think the flames was a joke organization. For that alone he is better than King will ever be.
I agree 100% on your take on Feaster. Feaster's biggest strength it seemed was his relative incompetence. He allowed the 'experts' on his club to their jobs - mainly let Todd Button decide who to draft or not.
I thought he was terrible in the media. I thought his trades were abysmal. I thought his plans - especially in hindsight - were lunacy.
As for Hartley, I actually quite disagree. It wasn't 'river hockey'.
Hartley would chew out his players right on the bench for not covering defensively. The Flames were really good at defensive awareness I thought. The forwards on the team really did a great job that year at rotating with the defencemen and not allowing that many odd-man opportunities. When they did blow it, Hartley didn't waste any time blowing up at them right on the bench. I remember him chewing out Backlund specifically one game.
Monahan under Hartley was turning into a really good 2-way center. Remember when Backlund and Stajan were both out? It was Monahan - the 2nd year, 3rd line center - that ended up playing on the 1st line. He was GOOD defensively that year. How good? Hartley came out and said: "You need to focus on offence too, not just defence. You need to do both well."
The Flames under Hartley had a very strict system defensively, with a very open offensive system. Hartley made everyone play 2-way hockey. What sucked was the goalie situation, and everyone came unglued that last year. Look at any team that plays in front of weak goaltending, and you will see a rattled team.
You say it was river hockey - and MANY posters say this still. However, how does one explain the following:
2015-16 - Shots Against per game: 29.0 (11th in the NHL)
2017-18 - Shots against per game: 31.9 (17th in the NHL)
Hartley's really bad year where he received crap goaltending, with less capable forwards, less capable defencemen and an arguably tougher Pacific Division to deal with, allowed fewer shots on net.
Mind blowing, right?
In fact, in 2014-15, the Flames allowed 29.2 (12th)
and in 2013-14, they allowed 28.6 (8th!).
Gulutzan's first year: 2016-17: 28.7 (8th)
The Flames allowed less shots against in Gulutzan's first year, which was close to Hartley's second season (and first rebuild year) in Calgary. All of Hartley's years were still better than Gulutzan this year.
It doesn't compute to the notion that the Flames were playing "River Hockey". In fact, Hartley's defensive system was more stifling than Gulutzan's system (both in actual shots on goal allowed AND relative ranking among other teams).
The defensive structures are very similar. Both are relatively passive defensive systems (which really bug me at times). Hartley relied on shot blocking with a quick transition out (either with a stretch pass, or skating up the ice - Brodie was PHENOMENAL under Hartley). Gulutzan wants that puck moved around in the zone and set-up a as a 5 man unit on the counter.
The transition and the offensive systems differ greatly. Gulutzan is, IMO, still a big upgrade on Brent Sutter. This is why I can't say that Gulutzan is a horrible coach. However, he is NOT a better DEFENSIVE coach than Hartley. That is simply mind-blowing. It becomes especially apparent when you look at the actual differences in talent level between the two rosters.
The point of this whole exercise is to figure out if Gulutzan has, so far in his tenure, taken the Flames 'further'. I get that Treliving fired Hartley. What is NOT happening right now is Gulutzan taking this team further. Sure, their underlying analytics are better, but one would expect a much more talented team (especially defensively) would have much better numbers, especially when they aren't rattled by shaking goaltending.
This team has not taken a step defensively under Gulutzan (sans a good goalie). They have taken a huge step back in goals scored (which is laughable considering how Gaudreau and Monahan are doing in that respect).
I was not so against Gulutzan before, but taking a closer look at the differences, and I really don't see any reason why the Flames should tie themselves to him. Sure, Hartley had to go for one reason or another. That is very apparent to some, less apparent to others. What I think is just as apparent is that Gulutzan is simply NOT an upgrade anywhere but on the advanced metrics. That's two seasons of: "the underlying stats are good, so this thing should be turning around".
Scratch Hartley's first year with the team with a half season to play due to the lockout and lack of a training camp. The following season - first year of a rebuild - this team had terrible numbers that predicted this team would stumble. They played hard and were lauded league-wide, and didn't stumble - not for that second half of the season. They next season they improved and made the playoffs (playing just as well as that back-half of the first rebuild year). The underlying metrics kept saying: "They are just lucky".
Sure, that last year the team stumbled. However, it had injuries and it had the worst goaltending period.
It wasn't other teams taking the Flames lightly. That's not why they made the playoffs. It was a complete effort every night with forwards hustling back on defence. It was the entire team hustling out there.
Now under Gulutzan, the advanced metrics point that this team is just 'unlucky'. Hogwash. They were damn lucky that the game last night wasn't a 8-1 blowout. We can wait another season of "just unlucky and are poised to break out".
Well, Hartley's team did breakout and did much better than expected, even though the advanced metrics predicted that they wouldn't. Gulutzan's teams have advanced metrics that say they should be doing better than they are, but just don't.
All I care is about what I see and what the standings are. I cheer for a boring team that is not meeting expectations. I used to cheer for a team that was damn exciting to watch and that exceeded expectations.
Sorry, but the analytic crowd is wrong. It is painfully wrong while watching this team flounder. This is not a team that is on the verge of breaking out. My eyes tell me that this is a team on the verge of imploding. I want a coach on this team that can actually implement a system that works and gets results, not just one that seems to cater to advanced analytics.
Hartley was a very popular coach with the fanbase and media for exceeding expectations and winning the Jack Adams - and when you look at the shots against, . That's fine - I am not arguing that at all. My argument is that Gulutzan has not been an upgrade anywhere but on advanced analytics. He should be done too. Flames are currently 18th in goals against. In 2015-16, the Flames were last (hardly surprising since goaltending imploded, but were good at SA on net), and in 2014-15, they were 16th. That was with mediocre goaltending with Hiller and Ramo's good years.
For Gulutzan to survive into next season, I argue that he needs to not only make the playoffs, but have a better than expected playoffs winning a round or two.
Judging by how Hartley's shelf life probably wore off, I won't argue with his dismissal. It just really seems like the wrong replacement, and that needs to be looked at this off-season. What Hartley didn't get this team to play was river hockey.
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
As for your last point, I completely disagree. All I've been doing in this thread is answer or respond to questions and remarks and today I'll flip the table here:
If the majority of people here feel like the coach is 100% to blame or 90% or whatever percentage. How do you guys explain Jared Bednar's 48 point Colorado team of 16-17 vs his current 95 point pace team? Or how about Boucher's 98 point Senator team that was 1 win away from the Cup Finals last year to his current 69 point pace team? How are these records so different despite having virtually the same roster and coaching staff?
I can't speak to Colorado, but my take on Ottawa:
They weren't actually that good last season - They finished 6th in the East, but their GF/GA was -2, 11th in the East. They got the right bounces / performances at the right time in the regular season to cover their marginal performance, and caught fire in the playoffs;
Karlsson came back down to earth from God Mode to generally good;
Anderson came down from great to sub par - his SV% went from .926 to .900, which was aided by the above and the following;
They lost Methot, a 19+ min defenseman often pairing with Karlsson (IIRC) and didn't really replace him.
The result is a team scoring on roughly the same pace, but letting in way, way more goals, which decimated an already not great team.
Hartley's defensive system was to protect the 'rink within the rink' aka the middle of the ice. When defending the rush his D would allow entry if it came down the wings, they stayed inside the circles.
Hartley allowed teams to gain the blue line and he relied on shot blocking by defending inside the dots. He also had his forwards track back hard and collapse in.
Gulutzan wants his D to shift over to oncoming rushers and he tries to kill plays early at the blue line. Gulutzan details the difference quite well in this video:
Gulutzan wants his D to shift over to oncoming rushers and he tries to kill plays early at the blue line. Gulutzan details the difference quite well in this video:
This defensive corps isn't suited to play that style though. Which is why I pointed out earlier that Willie Desjardins taught him this. He rolls four lines just like Willie too. Hartley beat his Canucks team down 3-0 in game 6 with tank commander Hiller manning the posts. Wideman was on his top pairing.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Frank MetaMusil For This Useful Post:
Hartley had one year where the flames made comebacks because teams took them lightly at the start and then a bunch of lucky bounces. The following year teams figured out his stretch pass/river hockey and he could not adapt . While GG has just as many flaws, at least he taught this group the fundamentals of hockey. At least the coach that replaces GG won't have to start from scratch like, GG did.
You really think GG taught these highly paid professionals the fundamentals of hockey? Come on, are you serious?
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Badgers Nose For This Useful Post:
Another tell tail sign of GG's incompetence is his home record where he has last change. Good possibility that his selection of lines to put out is so bad that he's probably better off letting the opposition coach pick for him ala road game.
