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

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by TOfan

^
Dillon Dube
Tyler Parsons
Matthew Tkachuck
Rasmus Anderson
Oliver Kylington
Adam Fox
Spencer Foo
Jusso Valimaki

Since Cliff Fletcher, who has been better?

That’s an average list of prospects, get back to us when they accomplish anything..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[zamler]

I've seen enough advanced stats talk to last a lifetime.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

You can't fire 23 people.

You obviously aren’t connected to downtown Calgary.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Red

A fact you are forgetting or are unaware is that GG had to abandon his system midway thru last season because it was deemed to difficult for the players to learn.

Is this a joke? How is this a fact in anyway? Please find me any documentation that states that this team abandoned their system midway through the season.
You want to know an actual fact? This team was 40-23-3 after their first month of games when it took them some time to adjust to a brand new system.

This team didn’t need to abandon any system because they were one of the best teams in the league after their rough start. I would also say that they blossomed under their new system because they moved up 17 spots in the GA department from last place to 14th.

I know there’s a lot of hatred for this coach for whatever ridiculous reasons. But making stuff up like this is just embarrassing.

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Is this a joke? How is this a fact in anyway? Please find me any documentation that states that this team abandoned their system midway through the season.
You want to know an actual fact? This team was 40-23-3 after their first month of games when it took them some time to adjust to a brand new system.

This team didn’t need to abandon any system because they were one of the best teams in the league after their rough start. I would also say that they blossomed under their new system because they moved up 17 spots in the GA department from last place to 14th.

I know there’s a lot of hatred for this coach for whatever ridiculous reasons. But making stuff up like this is just embarrassing.

You don’t remember GG saying they simplified some things in the system part way through last year?

I can’t remember exactly when they did it, and I’m not looking for the quotes, but it definitely occurred. Now who knows if and when the system was re-complicated, but he did admit to some sort of a change.

Now I don’t think he ever said they abandoned the system, that is an exaggeration.

Doesn’t really matter, I can tell that your empassioned defence of all things coaching isn’t changing. And I can assure you that what you are saying is not going to affect any of the people who feel he has compromised the performance of this team.

You don’t understand why people find so much blame with the coaching, I can’t understand how you can choose to be so oblivious to it.

Hopefully the team can actually find some level of success after this year and we can all start to feel some more joy from watching this team again.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Ryan Coke is right - Gulutzan did in fact simplify the system that the Flames were unable to execute properly last season. IIRC, the suggestion came from above as well.

I have no idea if the Flames played this season with the simplified version or the full version. Either way, hopefully that is the end of that.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

You don’t remember GG saying they simplified some things in the system part way through last year?

I can’t remember exactly when they did it, and I’m not looking for the quotes, but it definitely occurred. Now who knows if and when the system was re-complicated, but he did admit to some sort of a change.

Now I don’t think he ever said they abandoned the system, that is an exaggeration.

Doesn’t really matter, I can tell that your empassioned defence of all things coaching isn’t changing. And I can assure you that what you are saying is not going to affect any of the people who feel he has compromised the performance of this team.

You don’t understand why people find so much blame with the coaching, I can’t understand how you can choose to be so oblivious to it.

Hopefully the team can actually find some level of success after this year and we can all start to feel some more joy from watching this team again.

Probably because there’s no guarantee of any improvement with a new coach anyway as this team could just as easily tumble even further in the standings. This organization has seen the same consistent failures over the last 29 years with 14 different coaches, so my apologies for not believing that a new coach is going to change anything as history would be on my side.

If everyone is so adamant that a change needs to be made, then you had all better hope that it doesn’t turn out like the way it has for coaches like Claude Julien, Ken Hitchcock, Dan Bylsma, Todd McLellan and etc because these experienced and expensive coaches who have several Stanley Cups between them have done diddly squat to improve their respective teams.

[zamler]

So are you saying GG should be back next season?

[4X4]

Originally Posted by zamler

I've seen enough advanced stats talk to last a lifetime.

They have Corsi, ok? Just stop your whining. What else do you expect, wins?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by 4X4

They have Corsi, ok? Just stop your whining. What else do you expect, wins?

Is it a win if you win the corsi? Or a loss?

[4X4]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Is it a win if you win the corsi? Or a loss?

Not sure. It might just be bad luck.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Ryan Coke is right - Gulutzan did in fact simplify the system that the Flames were unable to execute properly last season. IIRC, the suggestion came from above as well.

I have no idea if the Flames played this season with the simplified version or the full version. Either way, hopefully that is the end of that.

Yeah all this hearsay is just anecdotal. Nobody has any actual facts in hand, nobody has any idea about what was actually changed or simplified, nobody knows if or when they went back to anything, nobody knows anything really, it’s all just a bunch of guesses.

What we do know though is that Gulutzan is the coach of this team and if he did decide to make any form of changes despite the very rigid reputation he gets around here, then it worked as the team was very successful last season after a very horrid start.

They were also sitting pretty at 25-16-4 before the 5 day mandated break, good enough for 8th in the league and then injuries and player regression started to seep through. But like Treliving said, blaming the coach is easy and blame has to go around everywhere rather just scapegoating coaches all the time.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by zamler

So are you saying GG should be back next season?

I don’t have an answer for that because I don’t know who’s going to be on the market. But if Gulutzan does come back, I know I won’t be freaking out like everyone here will be.

Teams in this league are always rising and failling and if every fan had it their way, I bet Paul Maurice, David Hakstol and Jared Bednar would be out of jobs right now, but instead, they’re getting ready for the playoffs and they proved a whole lot of people wrong along the way.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Is this a joke? How is this a fact in anyway? Please find me any documentation that states that this team abandoned their system midway through the season.
You want to know an actual fact? This team was 40-23-3 after their first month of games when it took them some time to adjust to a brand new system.

This team didn’t need to abandon any system because they were one of the best teams in the league after their rough start. I would also say that they blossomed under their new system because they moved up 17 spots in the GA department from last place to 14th.

I know there’s a lot of hatred for this coach for whatever ridiculous reasons. But making stuff up like this is just embarrassing.

I recall Burke being interviewed where he mentions the system was too much for the players to grasp and they had to scale it back.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I don’t have an answer for that because I don’t know who’s going to be on the market. But if Gulutzan does come back, I know I won’t be freaking out like everyone here will be.

Teams in this league are always rising and failling and if every fan had it their way, I bet Paul Maurice, David Hakstol and Jared Bednar would be out of jobs right now, but instead, they’re getting ready for the playoffs and they proved a whole lot of people wrong along the way.

I'd love to be proven wrong about Gulutzan, but his track record is poor. Made the playoffs once in four tries as head coach, zero wins.

I'd wager he doesn't just figure it out like a switch going on. TJ Brodie would never play RHD again. Extremely predictable stuff.

Also, fans who don't even know who Gulutzan is think this hockey sucks.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Well an NHL team should hire you because clearly you have access to stats that the rest of us don’t. Either that or you still aren’t willing to recognize that things like wins and goal diff aren’t predictive, they are the results. They provide no useful data from game to game. This is about so much more than saying you think the correlation between goal diff and points is a positive one.

Proof of the predictive power of standings and goals has been posted on this board dozens of times by now. Just because you don't bother to read the facts doesn't change the fact that they exist.

But here, let's go again.

Goal-based Metrics Better than Shot-Based Metrics at predicting hockey success

NHL teams know better than you. The fact that since you don’t know you dismiss the entire concept of advanced stats makes this an effort in futility.

Wait, I thought we can't know how the Flames use stats? Make up your mind?

Me not following posts on CP that discuss advanced stats is irrelevant to their usefulness to NHL teams because you don’t know what they are.

Ok, so essentially your argument is that there might be advanced stats nobody knows about that are actually good, and therefore you shouldn't dismiss it? This is just absolutely ridiculous.

But okay, let's limit the argument to advanced stats we know exist and are used, shot-based metrics, and agree that there might exist stats we don't know about that provide useful additional information.

(I actually assume there are, but this isn't what is commonly meant by "advanced stats" and thus I find it a disingenuous point.)

BTW, while that SJ journal article isn't supposed to be about "advanced stats are useless", this is not what the numbers really show.

Sure, they have some predictive power, but they are just not that great, and there's never been shown any proof that you can combine them with primary stats in a meaningful way the way he suggests.

Here's a few quotes:

Despite the recent trend towards shot-based metrics for evaluating team and individual success, I found that comparable goal-based metrics consistently outperformed shot-based metrics at predicting team success and individual player contributions to that team success. Linear models showed that the best single predictor of team success was the amount of goals a team allows, while the best overall model predicted team success using goal differential. Of all single parameter and composite parameter models, those incorporating goals invariably outperformed those using shots. The “shots for” model was not even as highly ranked as the “faceoff wins” model. When applied to data from 2015-16, which was withheld from model building, the top goal-based model “goal differential” correctly predicted future winning %, while the comparable shot-based model “shot differential” did not.

Given the poor value of shot-based metrics at predicting team success, it was then not unexpected that shot-based metrics were also poor measures of individual player contributions to team success.

Also, the argument that "since teams are using them they must be useful" is ridiculous even if assume that you somehow know they are actually making significant decisions based on them. (We don't know how many teams use them and how, so your argument that somehow 31 teams know something I don't is just an appeal to authority who's stand you don't actually know.)

Here's the thing; most statistics are not actually reliable enough to base single actions on. Like, you can't hire a man over a woman based on gender-based statistics because the variation between individuals is so big. Even if statistically men were better at something.

Even if there's strong statistical evidence that men are stronger than women, if you have actual strength tests, adding gender to that equation doesn't actually improve your decision making process.

Despite this, people and organizations CONSTANTLY do things like this, to the point where you have to go out of your way to hide information from them to get them to ignore it. Like hide gender information from applications.

It's also so much easier to defend your decision making if you say you based them on some stat rather than intuition, or more stats rather than less. Even if that means including stats that don't add value but rather just confuse the issue.

In hockey there's just no evidence that shot-based metrics are a good tool for acquiring players.
Of course there's the problem that this is almost impossible to prove either way, because there's just so much randomness and so many variables and the number of players moved each year is just too small. IMO a good statistician with understanding of basic psychology should say that most likely it's just better to mostly ignore the advanced stats.

The human psychological desire to believe in what looks like evidence is essentially how we got the science replication crisis. If scientists specifically trained to not get fooled by statistical evidence constantly get fooled by it on a massive scale, I don't see why it wouldn't be likely that you can easily fool most NHL GM's.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by zamler

So are you saying GG should be back next season?

I don't think he should, but I totally agree that (a) a coaching change won't solve a bunch of issues surrounding goalscoring, effort and luck; (b) hiring a coach with a bunch of experience guarantees success; (c) a lot of criticism of GG is made up, cherry picked and avoids giving any credit for successes.

[Itse]

Oh, and here's another problem with the whole logic of shot-based metrics: goal differential already includes all relevant shots, the ones that go in.

It's like your math score already includes the effect of your intelligence in math scores, and thus it's hard to think of a scenario where intelligence score is useful for math hirings, because you can always just get math scores (or academic math success measurements).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

That’s an average list of prospects, get back to us when they accomplish anything..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rasmus and Foo have already had success in their callups and Rasmus is a sure fire roster player next season. Valimaki and Dube are going to get serious looks and I bet one of them at least makes the team. Parsons is a great goalie candidate, Fox has a lot of talent. And that Tkachuk guy seems good.

[GioforPM]

When you give either Treliving or Feaster credit for their good picks you also have to look at the Kanzigs, Poiriers, etc.