[POLL] Calgary Flames coaching change mega-thread—with poll

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

I've advocated for Glen Gulutzan to be fired for some time.

I would like to say that he is a honest, intelligent man, and I think honorable and loyal to his players to a fault. If anything he invested too much into his systems and his guys (players and assistant coaches both) because of his loyalty.

At the end of the day, he's always struck me as classy and smart, and I wish him the best of luck for his future.

I will agree with everything but the bolded. I don't think he has a particularly smart hockey mind.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

See, that scares me. The last thing we need in an organization with a reputation for too much meddling from above is for the team to hire a coach who's the owner's guy and not the GM's guy.

Question, and I'm seriously asking. But does our ownership group actually have a reputation for meddling anywhere else around the league or just on this board? While I certainly can't say I see and hear close to everything said about this team, I can say that Calgaries meddling ownership is not a narrative I pick up on anywhere else but on here, and I certainly haven't heard it from any national sources, but maybe I'm missing it or selectively not hearing it.

[nik-]

I really hope this isn't true. I just can't get why Treliving would bet his job that this guy is going to go totally against his results in the NHL thus far.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

Sutter or hunter would top my list. Peters..... ugh

I would feel about Peters the same way I felt about GG 2 years ago - "well, hopefully, there could be something there, but I am not thrilled". Could turn out great. But, if you are looking for excuses for why he failed previously, you are not exactly going all in with top set... feels more like bottom pair with a gutshot.

[Fire]

For those that think Peters is a bad coach, can you explain what he does wrong?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

How So? We all saw what an analytical, youngish, coach with a good technical background but a losing record in the Nhl did with this team. It seems abundantly clear to me that we should go with a coach with a proven record, someone who will motivate and inspire our players correctly. If even they can't drag this team to the playoffs (We watched Hartley do it) then we know that it's the players and we have bigger problems.

Because it is not either one or the other of these things. Just because Gulutzan failed it does not immediately follow that Peters will also. It is entirely possible that Peters could be the perfect mix of analytical and technical background with the ability to effectively motivate and inspire. I simply do not know from the outset.

Peters does not check either of those boxes, and if he comes in and inevitably fails we will still be left scratching our heads wondering if the players are to blame.

I suspect—and hope to God—there are more boxes for Treliving to check than simply whether the coach has won games and coached in the playoffs. Peters is not my preference, butI suspect that if he is a leading candidate it has something to do with his impressive international record, and his experience with Hockey Canada.

We might not know who the best answer is but it sure as hell seems pretty clear it's not Peters.

It sure does, but that is why you and I are not making this decision.

[The Boy Wonder]

Tre saying on interview with Fan that ownership hasn’t placed any limit on how much he can spend and Kerr has just mentioned AV. And Tre sort of said he wanted more experience

I’m holding out hope still.


Peters would still be boring hockey and no real improvement in reputation


Gotta be AV or sutter because then it’s not the coach who is the issue if they fail next year.

[Matty81]

Really hope the Peters talk is off. The Flames need to minimize the risk around this hire and bring in someone with a track record of success. It would be better to hit a single and make the playoffs again with a guy who knows how to get the most out of his team instead of swinging for the fences with another smartest guy in the room with no track record hire.

Also given the POed state of the fanbase, hire someone who isn't disliked the minute they walk in if you want the person to have any rope at all.

Judging by the reaction on twitter and here they are going straight into damage control if they bring in a guy with a bad track record like him.

[savardandjokinen]

Originally Posted by Fire

For those that think Peters is a bad coach, can you explain what he does wrong?

Career high in wins, 36. Got 30 as his worst. Gulutzan with the flames, 45 and 37

[kukkudo]

Originally Posted by Fire

For those that think Peters is a bad coach, can you explain what he does wrong?

All I need to see is he hasn't done anything the past 4 years with the hurricanes.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The 03-04 team wasn't exactly old.

Beyond age, next year will be Monahan's sixth season, Gaudreau's fifth, Bennett's fourth, Tkachuk's third. We're not exactly talking about rookies here.

When people think Monahan, do they think grizzled vet? How fast they grow up

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Fire

For those that think Peters is a bad coach, can you explain what he does wrong?

His record speaks for itself.

And no one is saying he’s a bad coach, no coach in the nhl is a bad coach but his systems are similar to GG. Really slow methodical possession game which would be more of the same.

That’s what people don’t want. We want to be entertained with up tempo forechecking hockey

[Winsor_Pilates]

Hiring Peters would be so Flames like.

Could work out to be a great coach, but for once it would be nice to go with a proven choice and systems we know can be exciting and successful.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Bill Peters is another coach without a playoff win. That much is certain. He might be able to direct this team to some of those wins, but as it stands today, he has not done that. Its reality, not armchair.

It is "armchair" because that is precisely the mentality so many of us armchair observers employ in making these decisions. Prior to this season Girard Gallant had won only two playoff games, and now he is poised to take his team to the second round.

A coach has not won a playoff game until he has. It is pretty myopic to set this one criterion as the measure by which to hire the next head coach.

[GullFoss]

Sutter has said he would coach again and his two biggest criteria are:

1) the teams window and ability to win - could he see himself winning a cup with the core roster in place and could he see a 5-6 year coaching tenure for himself

2) is it a good fit for his family


Good fit for family: based on his history - California, alberta, BC, Texas maybe

Can he win / 5+ years tenure: From the teams above...Vancouver is in a rebuild, doesn't have enough talent. San Jose and Anahiem seem too old. Not going back to LA. Vegas isn't firing Galant. So that leaves Edmonton and Calgary and maybe Denver.

Calgary has 2 solid top 9 centers, 2 franchise wingers, a solid top 6 defense, amazing depth in defensive prospects, and ~$10m of cap space to allocate. And the age of the core is super young. Objectively the roster is positioned to turn into a contender and the teams window might be 5-6 years.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is "armchair" because that is precisely the mentality so many of us armchair observers employ in making these decisions. Prior to this season Girard Gallant had won only two playoff games, and now he is poised to take his team to the second round.

A coach has not won a playoff game until he has. It is pretty myopic to set this one criterion as the measure by which to hire the next head coach.

Yeah, and maybe if this was the start of this cycle, it wouldn't be insane. But after three mediocre years, why are you taking that gamble? This team needs proven imo, not another experiment.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by EM11

and if they DO hire Peters and I have to hear about how impressive he was in the interview, I'm gonna know that BT is not nearly as smart as everyone thinks.

No. You will know no such thing.

[kukkudo]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is "armchair" because that is precisely the mentality so many of us armchair observers employ in making these decisions. Prior to this season Girard Gallant had won only two playoff games, and now he is poised to take his team to the second round.

A coach has not won a playoff game until he has. It is pretty myopic to set this one criterion as the measure by which to hire the next head coach.

But at this stage you can't really experiment anymore. Flames need to take the next step in a big way, why not just go with coaches that have shown some success?

[PugnaciousIntern]

I'm as anxious as anybody else to find out who will be hired. But whatever coach directs the PP will have pretty solid job security. And a pretty easy job itself. They'll be fine. Don't overthink personnel, and don't force the players to overthink either.

Just say "Ready.....GO!".

[GranteedEV]

Out of options available, the ones I would be most interested in would be:

Lindy Ruff
Alain Vigneault
Dan Muse
Marc Crawford
Todd Nelson
Sheldon Keefe


In that rough order.

As for Peters, while I can't outright say he's a bad coach, having watched like, five 'Canes games in his tenure, I can say that I don't have confidence that he's the right coach for this group given this group's tendencies and skills. Even Gulutzan might have had success with a different group.