Francis: Treliving filled with disappointment, anger after team's collapse

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Locke

Hes no Larsson. He wont net you a Top line RW.

Maybe. Maybe not. But there are 30 other GMs out there and one of them is still Marc Bergevin. There is always a chance.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Locke

I doubt it because Brodie wont get you anything and you'd have to be high as balls to trade Hamilton.

Nonsense. Defensemen—especially of the top-four variety—are probably the most valuable commodity in today's NHL. Brodie has struggled, but is still a NHL top-four defenseman with a tantalizing skill-set. He is not junk.

[Resolute 14]

I can easily see Treliving wanting to move a core player if he thinks there is a problem in the room. That would be prudent. However, if Treliving doesn't realize that Gulutzan himself is one of those problems, then I would just as soon we replaced the GM before we started moving core pieces as it puts Brad's ability to do his own job in doubt.

[Calgary4LIfe]

So there are some players that have a lack of emotion. I would probably agree with this, and we have heard about this recently with the Smith comments (and what we witness on the ice all season).

So...

Under Hartley, I can't comment as of course I don't have insight there (and none of us do), but it sure seemed like a lack of emotion was basically the opposite of the Calgary Flames then. Maybe some players had a lack of emotion then, but as a fan watching the games, they sure seemed really engaged and full of emotion.

So the players approached the GM and said that Hartley was too much of a hard ass. Fair enough. Coaches like him usually have a shelf-life.

Treliving fires Hartley, and replaces him with an easy-going player's coach in Gulutzan. That didn't work. Players seem less engaged. Rumors are coming out that this team has a lack of emotion. Gulutzan called out the vets during his stick throwing incident. Smith made those comments - mostly trying to praise Glass - but revealing some insight into the team dynamics as well.

So what to do?

In my opinion, Gulutzan is finished either way. You allowed the vets the freedom to not be fully engaged. That's an indictment as far as I am concerned. I still recall one of Conroy's stories about a game when Conroy and Iginla were having a poor game, and Darryl benched them in the game and yelled out at them that 'you princesses don't have to worry about breaking a sweat out there. You can just sit on the bench and watch." (or something like that).

Under Gulutzan, he allowed these vets to dictate the play. I am going to assume this had a lot to do with the poor starts, and the overall... crapiness... that we witnessed, especially in the last month. Gulutzan SHOULD have been benching vets. Hartley did it, and he got that team to perform at an exceptional level relative to their ability. You don't need to be a hard ass to bench/scratch a player. You just need to identify poor play, lack of energy/focus, etc., especially when it becomes a theme, rather than an isolated shift or game.

So, in my opinion, Gulutzan HAS to go. He didn't show enough leadership there to nip it in the bud before it seemingly became a full-blown disease on this team again (AGAIN - as it was under Keenan and Brent Sutter - Feaster stated as much).

I hope that Treliving figures out which players were mailing it in. I don't want them in a Calgary Flames uniform, regardless of who it was. I don't care if it is a core player or just a declining vet. You didn't play hard for that jersey? You don't get to remain a Flame.

There was a lot of work put in under Hartley's tenure to make sure that the Flames get back to being a hard working team. To get rid of that 'disease' that they had for years and years. Now it seems it is back.

The coach and every player out there that felt he can just mail it in can GTFO.

No Treliving, you don't reward the players by getting rid of the coach. You get rid of the coach because he allowed that attitude to grab a firm hold of the team, and you get rid of the players that were responsible for it.

You do both.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Nonsense. Defensemen—especially of the top-four variety—are probably the most valuable commodity in today's NHL. Brodie has struggled, but is still a NHL top-four defenseman with a tantalizing skill-set. He is not junk.

I don’t think Brodie has enough value to land the Flames the top line forward they need.

I feel Hamilton is the piece that moves. He can bring back potentially a young top 6 and a pick in he first 2 rounds depending on the player in the package.

Move Brodie back to the right side and see if he can recapture his game pre Gulutzan. If not Hamonic can likely handle those tough minutes with Gio.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

October: -6
November: -2
December: -1
January: +8
February: -5
March: -25
April: -4

They middled for most of the season, but that number from March is clearly an outlier.

Take out both outliers and they are -18. Why take out only the bad outlier?

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The thing is that he's probably the smartest player on the team or one of the smartest as he won the Ivan Tennant Memorial Award and Bobby Smith Trophy in the OHL given to the top academic/scholastic player. I personally believe he's right up there with Tkachuk as untouchable at 24 years old and considering his size, skating and offensive production I just don't see any trade scenario that doesn't come back to haunt this team. He's really the only offensively gifted goal scoring defenseman in the organization and IMO simply not replaceable as this organization has a lot of good skating & passing defensemen but few of them can actually shoot the puck or have Hamilton's offensive instincts. I think fans have to realize he's not going to be Chara or Pronger and he doesn't have to be as a double digit scoring defenseman carries a lot of value on their own. Too many fans expect him to be everything when they really should be happy he's leading the league in goals by a defenseman is an advanced stats darling. As well we aren't talking about a smooth skating guy like Bouwmeester that has a muffin for a shot and isn't really offensively gifted. Hamilton is more than that and more than Bouwmeester ever amounted to.

Fair enough, and you may be right. Hopefully, Treliving et al have a better read on him that either of us. Chara or Pronger is a false flag, which is why I used Hedman, a less violent projection. Smart is good because you can't teach that. Though there is smart and then there is "hockey smart", so the scholastic stuff is not necessarily conclusive...

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Nonsense. Defensemen—especially of the top-four variety—are probably the most valuable commodity in today's NHL. Brodie has struggled, but is still a NHL top-four defenseman with a tantalizing skill-set. He is not junk.

But it's still the worst time to move him - right at the lowest value point...

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

So there are some players that have a lack of emotion. I would probably agree with this, and we have heard about this recently with the Smith comments (and what we witness on the ice all season).

So...

Under Hartley, I can't comment as of course I don't have insight there (and none of us do), but it sure seemed like a lack of emotion was basically the opposite of the Calgary Flames then. Maybe some players had a lack of emotion then, but as a fan watching the games, they sure seemed really engaged and full of emotion.

So the players approached the GM and said that Hartley was too much of a hard ass. Fair enough. Coaches like him usually have a shelf-life.

Treliving fires Hartley, and replaces him with an easy-going player's coach in Gulutzan. That didn't work. Players seem less engaged. Rumors are coming out that this team has a lack of emotion. Gulutzan called out the vets during his stick throwing incident. Smith made those comments - mostly trying to praise Glass - but revealing some insight into the team dynamics as well.

So what to do?

In my opinion, Gulutzan is finished either way. You allowed the vets the freedom to not be fully engaged. That's an indictment as far as I am concerned. I still recall one of Conroy's stories about a game when Conroy and Iginla were having a poor game, and Darryl benched them in the game and yelled out at them that 'you princesses don't have to worry about breaking a sweat out there. You can just sit on the bench and watch." (or something like that).

Under Gulutzan, he allowed these vets to dictate the play. I am going to assume this had a lot to do with the poor starts, and the overall... crapiness... that we witnessed, especially in the last month. Gulutzan SHOULD have been benching vets. Hartley did it, and he got that team to perform at an exceptional level relative to their ability. You don't need to be a hard ass to bench/scratch a player. You just need to identify poor play, lack of energy/focus, etc., especially when it becomes a theme, rather than an isolated shift or game.

So, in my opinion, Gulutzan HAS to go. He didn't show enough leadership there to nip it in the bud before it seemingly became a full-blown disease on this team again (AGAIN - as it was under Keenan and Brent Sutter - Feaster stated as much).

I hope that Treliving figures out which players were mailing it in. I don't want them in a Calgary Flames uniform, regardless of who it was. I don't care if it is a core player or just a declining vet. You didn't play hard for that jersey? You don't get to remain a Flame.

There was a lot of work put in under Hartley's tenure to make sure that the Flames get back to being a hard working team. To get rid of that 'disease' that they had for years and years. Now it seems it is back.

The coach and every player out there that felt he can just mail it in can GTFO.

No Treliving, you don't reward the players by getting rid of the coach. You get rid of the coach because he allowed that attitude to grab a firm hold of the team, and you get rid of the players that were responsible for it.

You do both.

Some coaches can get more out of players, and have different ways of doing it. Darryl Sutter, Gerard Gallant. What is it really? It is a lack of identity. Those vets are playing with their own identity from one player to the next instead of dictating the style of play as a team. It is GG's job to identify that and get them to play with a certain type of identity.

BT should identify successful teams and coaches, and covet a coach breeds a winning culture. Obviously BT miscalculated with GG.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by redforever

Take out both outliers and they are -18. Why take out only the bad outlier?

Because that was besides the point which was to show that the -36 goal differential is not a good indication of where the team is.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by zamler

Go here and sort by goal differential, notice the playoff teams versus not and said goal differential.

I already agreed to this. Maybe you need to read what I wrote again as I said goal differential is "Naturally a marker of success as wins and losses are defined by your ability to score more goals than you give up."

But I don't take it as gospel because it doesn't automatically mean you're better. Just look at Toronto and Washington, +43 vs +18, that's a 25 goal differential, yet they have the exact same record with 103 points. Or how about Detroit and Boston in 2016. Detroit was a -13 and Boston was a +10, a 23 goal difference yet Detroit made the playoffs and Boston didn't. That's why it's not gospel to me.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Because that was besides the point which was to show that the -36 goal differential is not a good indication of where the team is.

Only from our biased homer Flame fan perspective. From the perspective of the rest of the league, seems about right. But I would say -18 is fairer.

[browna]

Including the disaster Vegas game Jan 30:

Ferland, 28 GP, 2g, 8 assists. -5 - Flames top line RW
Frolik, 32gp, 3g, 7a, -16 - Top 6 fwd
Backlund 32gp, 5g, 8a, -17 - 2nd line centre and former Selke candidate as a defensive centre...who got a 5y contract extension during that span too.

Total 92gp 10 goals for half of our top 6 forwards after what was a tough loss, in over the next 2 calendar months when the action got tougher. Those guys flat out disappeared.

These stats above are the main reason why this team fumbled its chance away on the ice.
Nowhere near good enough.

Tkachuk carried that second line, Frolik was injured earlier in the season but no excuses, but Backlund fell off a cliff. Ferland is the definition of a streaky player but these two+ months have been especially bad, especially with JG lighting it up.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I already agreed to this. Maybe you need to read what I wrote again as I said goal differential is "Naturally a marker of success as wins and losses are defined by your ability to score more goals than you give up."



But I don't take it as gospel because it doesn't automatically mean you're better. Just look at Toronto and Washington, +43 vs +18, that's a 25 goal differential, yet they have the exact same record with 103 points. Or how about Detroit and Boston in 2016. Detroit was a -13 and Boston was a +10, a 23 goal difference yet Detroit made the playoffs and Boston didn't. That's why it's not gospel to me.

I would bet on Toronto to outperform Washington in the playoffs based on those numbers. I’ve made good money in hockey pools using goal differential as my basis for predicting winners, including the 2004 Flames.
</anecdote>

[Resolute 14]

We're 20th in the NHL by record and 26th by goal differential. While it's not precise, I would say GD is providing a far greater indication of what this team was this year than most other stats.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yes. They really are. When Matthew Tkachuk left the NYI game with an injury the Flames had a -3 goal differential, which is close to what they maintained over the course of 70 games. Since then it has plummeted to -28.

[/I]
That is not what happened. In the space of two weeks the Flames lost their three top-scoring forwards and their #3 and #4 defensemen. That is why they are finishing the season having scored 36-fewer goals than they allowed.

I get why people are emotional about this, but it doesn't help when trying to gauge where this team is and what needs to be done. All I am saying is that the Flames are not one of the worst teams in the NHL, and I expect the changes made over the summer to reflect that.

standings on Feb 12... Smith won his game on Feb 11 and then was gone for a month

Flames tied for 7/8 in the conference 3rd in Pacific 1 pt ahead of both Anahiem and LA

at that point in time they had lost 2.49 M in cap to injuries. The lowest amount in the conference. The most injured team the Ducks 12.51 M the median, middle of the pack #8 most injured team was Edmonton with 5.04M lost to injury.

The Flames were exactly at even goals for and against.

The Flames were hanging on to a bubble spot by being injury free.

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Central Division W-L-OT ROW Pts GF GA Home Away Div Cnf Icf
Nashville 33-12-9 28 75 169 140 18-5-3 15-7-6 10-4-2 21-7-5 12-5-4
Winnipeg 32-15-9 30 73 179 151 20-5-2 12-10-7 8-6-2 23-9-4 9-6-5
St Louis 34-21-3 31 71 167 147 19-12-0 15-9-3 9-5-1 17-12-2 17-9-1
Dallas 33-20-4 29 70 175 151 20-9-1 13-11-3 9-10-0 19-15-0 14-5-4
Minnesota 30-19-6 27 66 165 156 19-4-5 11-15-1 10-9-0 16-12-3 14-7-3
Colorado 30-21-4 29 64 174 163 19-7-1 11-14-3 7-8-1 13-11-3 17-10-1
Chicago 24-24-8 24 56 158 161 12-12-3 12-12-5 6-9-2 11-16-5 13-8-3

Pacific Division W-L-OT ROW Pts GF GA Home Away Div Cnf Icf
Vegas 36-15-4 34 76 187 152 19-4-2 17-11-2 12-1-1 22-7-1 14-8-3
San Jose 30-18-8 26 68 165 156 15-8-3 15-10-5 14-3-3 16-7-5 14-11-3
Calgary 29-19-8 27 66 159 159 13-13-3 16-6-5 8-6-3 17-11-5 12-8-3
Los Angeles 30-20-5 28 65 159 133 14-9-3 16-11-2 8-9-3 13-13-4 17-7-1
Anaheim 27-19-11 24 65 160 164 15-9-4 12-10-7 9-5-6 12-10-8 15-9-3
Edmonton 23-28-4 21 50 157 184 12-14-2 11-14-2 10-5-0 14-15-2 9-13-2
Vancouver 22-28-6 22 50 147 180 10-14-3 12-14-3 5-8-1 12-13-3 10-15-3
Arizona 14-32-10 13 38 135 194 7-16-4 7-16-6 1-8-5 6-17-7 8-15-3

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Because that was besides the point which was to show that the -36 goal differential is not a good indication of where the team is.

-18 is pretty telling.

[VilleN]

^Using cap hits to gauge the impact of injuries to a roster doesn't make any sense. Do you think it hurts Minnesota as much to lose Parise as it hurts the Flames to lose Tkachuk?

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Under Gulutzan, he allowed these vets to dictate the play. I am going to assume this had a lot to do with the poor starts, and the overall... crapiness... that we witnessed, especially in the last month. Gulutzan SHOULD have been benching vets. Hartley did it, and he got that team to perform at an exceptional level relative to their ability. You don't need to be a hard ass to bench/scratch a player. You just need to identify poor play, lack of energy/focus, etc., especially when it becomes a theme, rather than an isolated shift or game.

So, in my opinion, Gulutzan HAS to go. He didn't show enough leadership there to nip it in the bud before it seemingly became a full-blown disease on this team again (AGAIN - as it was under Keenan and Brent Sutter - Feaster stated as much).

Lots of great points. One thing to note. Hartley had no problems whatsover to bench their stars to send a message. Gaudreau, Monahan, Bouma late for practice? All 3 benched. Gets Karri Ramo sent to the minors for lack of compete. Directly sends a message to them.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...ticle28704283/


What does the team do? Fire Hartley.

In comes Gulutzan. Who does he bench or scratch? Kulak, Jankowski, Tkachuk within his first 10 games, Sam Bennett. What player was never scratched? Brouwer (and continuously got PP time). what player was never scratched? Brodie. Frolik and Backlund have both been awful on the home stretch, clearly packed it in. What message do you send your younger guys when they get sat, while the vets run the room like a country club? We've seen that on the Flames not too far in the past.

Lindy Ruff had no problem scratching Jason Spezza earlier in the year. Quenville had no problems scratching Patrick Sharp or Seabrook. Good coaches scratch to send a message. Throwing a stick around may make the news, but players understand a message better is they are sitting on their butts and disciplined for lack of effort and it has to be consistent.

[sa226]

I guess silver lining wise, this summer should be much more interesting than last summer

Last summer the feeling was, lets fix the goaltending maybe make some tweaks. This is a team on the upswing. I couldn't wait to get going in October.

Now here we are.

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk