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

[OmegaV4]

Originally Posted by dammage79

According to Wills, the #1 advanced stats team in the league was......
The Carolina Hurricanes. I see where this is going.

Flames were top 4 in advanced stats so the answer must be to hire the coach who is #1!

That above all else scares the bejesus out of me. Not who it is but the reliance on advanced stats to dictate your hire.

Just play the fracking game, don't let math dictate how you play. It doesn't work!

Especially with this new math. That's probably what happened, the Flames tried this "New Math" curriculum, and it is confusing as hell. Makes all sense.

[Drunk Uncle]

Originally Posted by Itse

I really hope the management doesn't pretend they are suited to make these kinds of judgements, being that they are not NHL coaches. But it wouldn't surprise me if they did.

I really hope they leave those decisions to actual professional NHL head coaches.

I agree that management should not be in the kitchen of a coach telling them how to coach. Nor should they try to change a coaches systems/styles. I wasn't trying to suggest that. However I do think that management's job is to try and define what coaching systems can/will work with your team and find a coach that suits your team and the way you want to play.

The hard part is there is a tipping point where you just pick the best coach available even if he doesn't fully suit your want, because he is much better than the guys below him. Given the choice, I'd pick Sutter over Peters in a heartbeat even though I don't think Sutter's coaching style/systems suits the way the flames are built or the philosophy I think management has in mind. Contrarily I'm not sure I'd pick Ruff over Peters.

I think, the hard part for management will be deciding where that tipping point is, because I personally don't see some of the ideal candidates we want being available.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by dammage79

According to Wills, the #1 advanced stats team in the league was......
The Carolina Hurricanes. I see where this is going.

Flames were top 4 in advanced stats so the answer must be to hire the coach who is #1!

So what you're telling me is... we're going deeper.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Blaming Gulutzan for the Anaheim series last year is nonsensical.

That was 100% on Elliot. He was terrible, but Gulutzan had no other decent options as Chad Johnson had been recently injured and when he came back was terrible.

His choices were go with terrible goalie #1 or terrible goalie #2.

Nobody in their right mind would have fired the coach one year after hiring when the team improved as much as it did in the standing, made the playoffs, and only got swept because the goalie was a tire fire.

Really?

I dont see that. You could see the underlying issues.

You know how people always say that getting rid of the coach is the easy answer? Its easier to get rid of 1 guy than to change your entire roster?

Yet we acquired new defencemen, jettisoned both goaltenders and replaced them, ironically with goaltenders who played better, brought up new forwards and yet achieved worse results.

You blame the goalie for the Anaheim series? I blame the guy that didnt see that the goalie was the problem until it was too late.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Could have thrown Gillies into the deep end too. Elliott was shellshocked. Any other goalie would have been a better option.

Only in hind sight. If GG puts in any other goalie in that spot and that goalie fails (Johnson or Gillies) he gets roasted even worse for not giving the starter a chance to bounce back.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by OmegaV4

Anyone think that Crisp would leave his Preds Analyst role and come back?

lol

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

So what you're telling me is... we're going deeper.

Getting Alvin ready.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Locke

Really?

I dont see that. You could see the underlying issues.

You know how people always say that getting rid of the coach is the easy answer? Its easier to get rid of 1 guy than to change your entire roster?

Yet we acquired new defencemen, jettisoned both goaltenders and replaced them, ironically with goaltenders who played better, brought up new forwards and yet achieved worse results.

You blame the goalie for the Anaheim series? I blame the guy that didnt see that the goalie was the problem until it was too late.

Again, ZERO other REALISTIC options to put in the net.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dammage79

According to Wills, the #1 advanced stats team in the league was......
The Carolina Hurricanes. I see where this is going.

Flames were top 4 in advanced stats so the answer must be to hire the coach who is #1!

That above all else scares the bejesus out of me. Not who it is but the reliance on advanced stats to dictate your hire.

Just play the fracking game, don't let math dictate how you play. It doesn't work!

It's only a problem if the way Treliving made the decision was:

"Holy smokes the Coach that had the highest Corsi last year is available, we need to do whatever we can do to get that guy!!!"

That seems highly unlikely to me - I doubt his corsi results last season would have any meaningful impact to how Treliving makes his decision here.

If that was a big part of decision making process then GG likely would still be head coach here.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by OmegaV4

Anyone think that Crisp would leave his Preds Analyst role and come back?

Is this green text? The man is 75 years old.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

It's only a problem if the way Treliving made the decision was:

"Holy smokes the Coach that had the highest Corsi last year is available, we need to do whatever we can do to get that guy!!!"

That seems highly unlikely to me - I doubt his corsi results last season would have any meaningful impact to how Treliving makes his decision here.

If that was a big part of decision making process then GG likely would still be head coach here.

We will see. But I do believe that it is a factor that makes up a good chuck of his hiring profile.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dammage79

We will see. But I do believe that it is a factor that makes up a good chuck of his hiring profile.

I don't think it's the results that impact that though, more how Treliving thinks the game should be played.

From what Treliving has said in the past I think he wants them to play as a five man unit, he wants them to keep possession of the puck, he wants them to play with speed, and he wants them to play with some "grit".

I think GG actually met the first two criteria but where he failed was getting them to play a faster game (offensively), and to bear down with some grit in the defensive zone.

Personally I think he looks at Peters and sees a guy who has some similar beliefs to Gulutzan (whom my guess is Treliving was as down on as many on here) but whom he thinks will get the team to play with speed, and has a bit more edge that he wants his team to bring.

Or maybe they just get along since neither of them really seem to like Eddie Lack after dealing with him. Who knows.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I remember back when the Flames were in their coaching search in 2016 seeing Nate Leeman's name thrown into the mix. Based on Treliving's comments about experience I am not sure he would get a look this time around, but that is a guy that would also intrigue me.

No thanks, I know nothing about the guy but every time I heard his last name my blood would boil.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Blaming Gulutzan for the Anaheim series last year is nonsensical.

That was 100% on Elliot. He was terrible, but Gulutzan had no other decent options as Chad Johnson had been recently injured and when he came back was terrible.

His choices were go with terrible goalie #1 or terrible goalie #2.

Nobody in their right mind would have fired the coach one year after hiring when the team improved as much as it did in the standing, made the playoffs, and only got swept because the goalie was a tire fire.

Not true. The team did crumble when Elliott let in a soft one which was their MO under Gulutzan.

If Elliott was half decent they surely would have won game 3. If the team was stronger willed they would have won more games in that series.


But I agree that you don’t fire a coach that improved a bottom 5 team by 17pts based on how those playoffs ended. The sweep did add to the narrative this team couldn’t get up for big games under Gulutzan

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by transplant99

See I dont think so, but I could be entirely incorrect. No he hasn't got the resume of some of the others mentioned, but again his coaching chops have been praised around the league for years and years. He isn't just showing up now.


I am not advocating for him at all. I certainly prefer someone else as well but only because i think the fit would be terrific for a guy like Trotz.

The problem is as others have said. You would be replacing a guy who had no success in the NHL over four years with another guy who has had no success in the NHL over four years. And doing so after stating experience is an important criteria.

If you go with Peters when everyone is saying you need a Vigneault, Trotz or Sutter, you are definitely bucking conventional thought, and that is very much reminiscent of that "smartest guy in the room" attitude I mentioned.

And if you are Treliving, you had better be right.

[Bingo]

This hate for possession stats and scoring chances is just beyond bizarre to me.

It should never be the only thing looked at but to ignore it is crazy.

Pretty sure most fans would want their hockey team to have more scoring chances that the opposition, and if a coach is consistently under water and winning it's likely best to find out why isn't it?

Queue the drive by "deep dive" pot shots.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dammage79

According to Wills, the #1 advanced stats team in the league was......
The Carolina Hurricanes. I see where this is going.

Flames were top 4 in advanced stats so the answer must be to hire the coach who is #1!

That above all else scares the bejesus out of me. Not who it is but the reliance on advanced stats to dictate your hire.

Just play the fracking game, don't let math dictate how you play. It doesn't work!

I actually see this as a clear indication that the GM is looking for more than merely the underlying numbers in his evaluation of the team and its coaches. If he saw the answer in the advanced stats, then I suspect there would be no reason for a change.

[SuperMatt18]

The other thing about just "advanced stats" too is that it's not like Sutter's team haven't been really good at possession too, so if that was the biggest indicator for Treliving then he might actually be leaning to D.Sutter.

The last 4 seasons - here are the top possession/corsi teams:

1) LA Kings
2) Carolina
3) Boston
4) Nashville
5) Tampa Bay
6) Pittsburgh
7) Chicago
8) Dallas
9) St. Louis
10) San Jose

Honestly it is weird to me that a team like Carolina that has been pretty bad in that time frame, is looped into a group of teams that get pretty favorably looked at in that time.

It's funny. They have the possession stats of the elite teams but the PDO (Shooting + Save Percentage) of the worst teams in the league.

1) Carolina
2) Buffalo
3) Edmonton
4) Arizona
5) Vancouver

I haven't watched enough games to see if that is something caused by Peters system, or if the team is just really lacking talent.

Looking at that though there is the potential that Peters coaching is keeping Carolina within spitting distance of a playoff spot the last 3 years, when they should probably be a bottom 3 team picking top 3 each year like the Sabres based on their team talent alone.

[JTech780]

Originally Posted by dammage79

According to Wills, the #1 advanced stats team in the league was......
The Carolina Hurricanes. I see where this is going.

Flames were top 4 in advanced stats so the answer must be to hire the coach who is #1!

That above all else scares the bejesus out of me. Not who it is but the reliance on advanced stats to dictate your hire.

Just play the fracking game, don't let math dictate how you play. It doesn't work!

I agree to a point that you can't just base decisions solely on advanced stats, but you can't ignore them either. They do tell a part of the story. The Bruins, Penguins, Jets, Predators, Lightning and Blue Jackets were top 10 in SAT%, and I don't think I would be going to far out on the limb to suggest that one of those teams is winning the Cup this year. I think to ignore the advanced stats and just say hire someone that wins, is ignoring a big piece of the winning puzzle.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The other thing about just "advanced stats" too is that it's not like Sutter's team haven't been really good at possession too, so if that was the biggest indicator for Treliving then he might actually be leaning to D.Sutter.

The last 4 seasons - here are the top possession/corsi teams:

1) LA Kings
2) Carolina
3) Boston
4) Nashville
5) Tampa Bay
6) Pittsburgh
7) Chicago
8) Dallas
9) St. Louis
10) San Jose

Honestly it is weird to me that a team like Carolina that has been pretty bad in that time frame, is looped into a group of teams that get pretty favorably looked at in that time.

I know that a big part of their failure has been shooting percentage (2nd worst), and save percentage (worst) over that time but I haven't watched enough games to see if that is something caused by Peters system, or if the team is just really lacking talent.

So Carolina is ranked high in possession stats and low in shooting percentage.

How are they ranked for high danger scoring chances? Does anyone know?

Are they actually using strong possession stats to create quality scoring chances and just can't bury them or are they creating good possession numbers by tossing weak shots from anywhere towards the net?