I don't know enough about Peters to have a real opinion. Vigneault was the most well known name and was near the top of my list of who I was hoping they would hire but whoever it is I'll be optimistic for next season. Hopefully lessons were learned and will be corrected.
I'm not gonna pretend I know a lot about Peters, but what makes this any more than a lateral move at best? Replacing a coach who had good stats on paper but mediocre results with another coach who had good stats on paper but mediocre results. At least Gulutzan has made the playoffs in his career.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
Before you call me a pessimist or a downer, the Flames made me this way. Blame them.
I'm not gonna pretend I know a lot about Peters, but what makes this any more than a lateral move at best? Replacing a coach who had good stats on paper but mediocre results with another coach who had good stats on paper but mediocre results. At least Gulutzan has made the playoffs in his career.
The biggest difference is the personality. GG is a players coach through and through. Peters is cut more of a cloth of a prickly coach like Sutter.
Never thought I'd say this, but I would encourage anyone who wants an actual analysis and discussion of Peters' work to head to HF and read the main board thread there. It's actually a decent discussion and good information, unlike this putrid embarrassing thread which has once again been ruined by some of the usual suspects.
I actually have hope for Peters now, given that the information relayed there is by actual fans who have watched him play and realize just how little he had to work with. Some are actually saying that since Calgary has a better roster and better skating D, it might actually work out here. The general consensus I got was that the 'Canes were due for a change as Peters' time had run its course. However he is actually a good coach who had little to work with roster-wise, terrible goaltending (sounds familiar), and given the right situation he can have success.
Other then a couple people who went to the one single 'Canes game this season and someone who watched a couple of their games vs other teams (and said good things about Peters), it seems that no one here has really bothered to watch ANY 'Canes games when it wasn't the Flames playing. And yet those same people are now have expert opinions and are able to magically see the future that this move is doomed to failure.
Funny how so much hyperbole has permeated this thread, and yet nothing has even been announced. And yet the actual fans who had him as their bench boss really do think he's a decent coach who just needed a bit more to work with.
A complete 180 of the perspective CP has vs what actual 'Canes fans think. I have hope now.
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
I'm not gonna pretend I know a lot about Peters, but what makes this any more than a lateral move at best? Replacing a coach who had good stats on paper but mediocre results with another coach who had good stats on paper but mediocre results. At least Gulutzan has made the playoffs in his career.
it's like, you are really in to blondes, right? And you dated this blonde for a couple years, and she was real nice but damn, she was not good at much else. So you dump her, but notice her close friend, also a gorgeous blonde, but a real unpleasant person to be around. You just need to figure out out if she has other redeeming qualities. Unfortunately it's probably going to mean dating her for 2 years to figure that out.
it's like, you are really in to blondes, right? And you dated this blonde for a couple years, and she was real nice but damn, she was not good at much else. So you dump her, but notice her close friend, also a gorgeous blonde, but a real unpleasant person to be around. You just need to figure out out if she has other redeeming qualities. Unfortunately it's probably going to mean dating her for 2 years to figure that out.
My eyes are burning and my brain is hurting as a result of reading all of the pages in this thread. I'm in the hire Sutter camp, but that is because I think he is an awesome human being. I think his ability to turn the Kings from disappointments to 2x cup champs and his success here last time is a reason to hire him.
Having said that, I don't have a problem with hiring Peters. Of the coaches mentioned in the poll, there are none that I would want to hire. I'm in the camp that believes that the coach really only has a +/- 5% impact on the team.
When was the last time a coach made a real impact to push a team over the top. The only 2 I can think of are Sullivan in Pittsburgh and Sutter in LA. Maybe Cassidy in Boston. I don't think Leafs coach is that great compared to peers. There are a number of coaches that have gone to other markets (like Ruff) who were supposed to make those teams better and didn't (maybe Ruff is actually a terrible coach). I think Barry Trotz has a great hockey team, same with the Preds now. No one thought Torts was going to never coach again (and yet there are the Blue Jackets).
I don't think I read a single negative post that actually had any data or real observation that were not just opinion that backed up why Peters will cause the Flames to do any worse.
Will Peters be the tonic to cure the Flames woes? Who knows - I think that is a real crap shoot (just look at coaches hiring and firings that were supposed to make things better).
Lot's of arguments why he isn't that bad - how bad the Hurricanes are (seriously go look at their roster - sure we have some dead wood, but they have some real stiffs that are getting paid). And it is probably true that Treliving's next coach will seal his fate, then he is going to hire the coach that best gives him a chance to keep his job. If I am Tre, I am probably really disappointed in the quality of coaches available.
So if you don't like Peter's as a potential coach, at least back it up with some reasonable evidence of why you feel that way.
__________________
GO FLAMES GO
The Following User Says Thank You to edn88 For This Useful Post:
I'm not calling myself a doctor, I am one. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the people who agree that it's the proper term. I don't make the rules.
__________________
My thanks equals mod team endorsement of your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Jesus this site these days
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnet Flame
He just seemed like a very nice person. I loved Squiggy.
I'm listening to the Elliott Friedman interview and he's basically saying Tre is likely to hire Peters because "(1) he likes him and (2) The prior relationship between the two means there's comfort and therefore Tre should hire who you know best, which is Peters"
How about instead, Tre and Burke do some ####ing research and get to know the top end coaches in AV and Sutter and see if perhaps they're better than Peters. You know how we know Sutter and AV are good - its because they've had incredible success with multiple teams.
The chain of logic Elliott is spouting to suggest Peters is beyond stupid. It's basically advocating Tre should look past the garbage track-record and lack of experience of Peters because he knows him. And it suggests Tre should basically discount the amazing track record and experience of AV and Sutter because he doesn't know them.
And if that's how the organization is thinking of this decision internally, it 100% explains the decades of garbage we've seen on the ice.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts
The fact Gullfoss is not banned for life on here is such an embarrassment. Just a joke.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GullFoss For This Useful Post:
I'm listening to the Elliott Friedman interview and he's basically saying Tre is likely to hire Peters because "(1) he likes him and (2) The prior relationship between the two means there's comfort and therefore Tre should hire who you know best, which is Peters"
How about instead, Tre and Burke do some ####ing research and get to know the top end coaches in AV and Sutter and see if perhaps they're better than Peters. You know how we know Sutter and AV are good - its because they've had incredible success with multiple teams.
The chain of logic Elliott is spouting to suggest Peters is beyond stupid. It's basically advocating Tre should look past the garbage track-record and lack of experience of Peters because he knows him. And it suggests Tre should basically discount the amazing track record and experience of AV and Sutter because he doesn't know them.
And if that's how the organization is thinking of this decision internally, it 100% explains the decades of garbage we've seen on the ice.
Maybe Treliving doesn't want to feel like a small fish?
__________________
I hate just about everyone and just about everything.
I'm listening to the Elliott Friedman interview and he's basically saying Tre is likely to hire Peters because "(1) he likes him and (2) The prior relationship between the two means there's comfort and therefore Tre should hire who you know best, which is Peters"...
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
