[News] Flames hire Bill Peters as the franchise's 19th head coach

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

GG started Jankowski as soon as Treliving called him up. And what line did you propose starting a rookie centre on? Who did you want to bump down - Monahan or Backlund? Or did you want him on the wing instead of Gaudreau, Frolik (who is attached to Backlund's hip), Ferland, who was scoring like crazy or Tkachuk?

This is the problem exactly and what points to conflicting philosophies about where the team is at and where they want it to be.

In a developmental season, sure you, disrupt the lineup to get those guys going. Get Bennett that 20 goal season or rotate a guy through the lineup on a game by game basis to see how he handles the minutes. When you just had one of your worst seasons ever and drafted 3 times in the 1st round, you give Monahan those extra minutes if he's having a tough game.

But you don't do that in a season when you're going for broke and just traded all your draft picks! They needed to win! That means when Bennett takes a bad penalty or otherwise doesn't look like he's in the game, you don't throw him out there to take more penalties and maybe score. You sit him, because you need to stay out of the box and also try to score a goal.

Tkachuk had 3 goals and 8 points in his first 12 games including 2 goals/2 assists in his first 5 games. Ferland had 4 points and gaudreau had 15 points in the first 12 games. 3 of those points for Ferland were goals and he beat the tar out of borowiecki after he gooned Lazar. Frolik had 5 points, +2. Bennett had 0 points in his first 12 games and took 7 minor penalties, leading the team in Penalties per 60 minutes of icetime. Those 12 games represent the month of October.

Why on earth would you consider giving that guy more icetime if you're interested in winning games? Bennett actually played roughly the same minutes as Ferland in October. But Bennett didn't register a point and Ferland had the second highest goals per 60 on the roster.

After 25 games it was even worse, Bennett barely ahead of Hamonic in goals per 60 far and away leader in Penalties Per 60.

By the half way point Ferland was up about a minute and a half on Bennett. Not to be punitive, but to give the team the best chance to win.

The unfortunate part for Bennett is that the organization decided to go for it when they were a couple years removed from arguably their worst franchise finish of all time.

He could've used the Jankowski treatment, but instead got the Gilbert Brule treatment.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Save it for the semantics dome.

anti semantic?

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This is the problem exactly and what points to conflicting philosophies about where the team is at and where they want it to be.

In a developmental season, sure you, disrupt the lineup to get those guys going. Get Bennett that 20 goal season or rotate a guy through the lineup on a game by game basis to see how he handles the minutes. When you just had one of your worst seasons ever and drafted 3 times in the 1st round, you give Monahan those extra minutes if he's having a tough game.

But you don't do that in a season when you're going for broke and just traded all your draft picks! They needed to win! That means when Bennett takes a bad penalty or otherwise doesn't look like he's in the game, you don't throw him out there to take more penalties and maybe score. You sit him, because you need to stay out of the box and also try to score a goal.

Tkachuk had 3 goals and 8 points in his first 12 games including 2 goals/2 assists in his first 5 games. Ferland had 4 points and gaudreau had 15 points in the first 12 games. 3 of those points for Ferland were goals and he beat the tar out of borowiecki after he gooned Lazar. Frolik had 5 points, +2. Bennett had 0 points in his first 12 games and took 7 minor penalties, leading the team in Penalties per 60 minutes of icetime. Those 12 games represent the month of October.

Why on earth would you consider giving that guy more icetime if you're interested in winning games? Bennett actually played roughly the same minutes as Ferland in October. But Bennett didn't register a point and Ferland had the second highest goals per 60 on the roster.

After 25 games it was even worse, Bennett barely ahead of Hamonic in goals per 60 far and away leader in Penalties Per 60.

By the half way point Ferland was up about a minute and a half on Bennett. Not to be punitive, but to give the team the best chance to win.

The unfortunate part for Bennett is that the organization decided to go for it when they were a couple years removed from arguably their worst franchise finish of all time.

He could've used the Jankowski treatment, but instead got the Gilbert Brule treatment.

I’m not gonna defend Bennett’s play in this response but basically say that there were plenty of games where guys should’ve been rotated through. Frolik was awful for ~50% of the games he played

This was the most common complaint about GG was his refusal to shake lines up most times when games weren’t going well.

Otherwise yes I agree they went for it when they didn’t truly have the horses to do so

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Save it for the semantics dome.

How is this entire conversation happening absent PepsiFree?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

How is this entire conversation happening absent PepsiFree?

He’s in the dome, arguing with TextCritic

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I love Haynes. Is there anyone else right now who does a better job writing about the Flames?

Meh. He's OK. Good writer, but there's nothing in there that isn't either common knowledge or easily looked up on any stats site. If I want all the things we already know laid out in a coherent narrative, then yeah, Haynes is your man.

He's also just plain dismissive about the potential "colossal mistake" and instead just takes pot shots at the fanbase. Haynes isn't really known for holding the Flames organization's feet to the fire, so this comes as no surprise. If I'm looking for critical analysis, I'm probably looking elsewhere.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

As of now it appears he had the authority to make all decisions so no

Extremely unlikely, if not downright impossible, that Treliving has complete autonomy to make all decisions. I am certain POHO and ownership had to sign off on GG firing, Peters hire and contract, Hamonic trade, Backlund extension at an absolute minimum. If not, this is run like no business or franchise I have ever heard of.

So back to his shorter leash, the next time he seeks approval for one of these deals, it might be Joe Pesci walking into an empty room.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I worded that poorly as I agree big decisions would likely go through some approvals...my poorly made point was that his authority, whatever it has been, I believe remains the same as it has been

[Spinach]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Meh. He's OK. Good writer, but there's nothing in there that isn't either common knowledge or easily looked up on any stats site. If I want all the things we already know laid out in a coherent narrative, then yeah, Haynes is your man.

Yup. He'll make advanced stats palatable for those of us who are too lazy to look them up, and don't really care for them one way or the other, first and foremost by actually explaining what the bloody acronyms mean and why the fancy stat matters.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Spinach

Yup. He'll make advanced stats palatable for those of us who are too lazy to look them up, and don't really care for them one way or the other, first and foremost by actually explaining what the bloody acronyms mean and why the fancy stat matters.

Unfortunately, guys like him and the radio guys don’t discuss the shortcomings of the stats, and where they break down.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I worded that poorly as I agree big decisions would likely go through some approvals...my poorly made point was that his authority, whatever it has been, I believe remains the same as it has been

It takes a big person to admit he worded something poorly And my use of the term "short leash" should have been replaced with a better expression.

I do think the issue of BT's authority is interesting. The erosion of power and authority in an organization doesn't happen all at once IMO, and rarely is it explicitly communicated, either internally or externally.

I believe with what we know about the history of this organization, BT is creeping into that zone where he will get more scrutiny internally. At some point Burke is going to leave, either because he is sick of commuting, sick of the job etc, OR the owners start feeling they are not getting their money's worth. I suspect this happens sooner than later and IMO, that doesn't solidify Treliving in any way. I think it might reduce the amount of time he has to show success here.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I also argue that the rookies being played higher up the lineups and also being given more minutes just might be a combination of injuries and lack of depth. You can't just arbitrarily say that Peters favours youth because they got to play more minutes without looking at rosters and injuries.

Stempniak played 37 games
Kruger 48
Rask 71
Pesce 67

I think they had a lot more flexibility than the Flames in that regard. Also, how much say did Peters have on the PP? Cameron was in charge of the PP here and it seemed like it was his call on who to play and how much. We can't let Gulutzan off the hook for the lack of change on the PP, but give Peters accolades for placing rookies on it, can we?

I know a lot of people really liked the Haynes articles - and usually I do love them as well. For me, that article came off as overly-defensive rather than enlightening. Nothing written shed any light on what we already knew for the most part, and it just seemed to focus on the potential positives, rather than any shortcomings.

At any rate, it doesn't matter much. I think that the majority on this board would prefer giving Peters a shot over another year of Gulutzan, and I think most on this board are in agreement that it indeed may work. An article focusing on superlatives without digging deeper and speaking to potential issues that may need to be looked at doesn't sway me.

[GioforPM]

Young players - Calgary has a top line of relatively young players. Tkachuk is on the second line. The third line had all young players except when Jagr was playing. Lazar got significant fourth line minutes. Kulak was the main third pairing defenceman.

I'm just not seeing the refusal to play young guys.

[dino7c]

Top line and half the top pairing are all young players...Flames rely on young players to say otherwise is fake news

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

It isn’t semantics.

After 15+ years of arguing hockey on this board I’ve come to the conclusion that almost every argument is about semantics. We define a word or two slightly differently and it causes a back and forth of disagreements. How we define our hockey terms and ideas are central to many debates.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I guess it depends on your definition of semantics.

I got a kick out of this post .

[kyuss275]

Read an article that had John liles giving Peters a good report. Seems Peters likes players skating at all times and d joining in on the rush. Also is very intense and will call out players when they have bad games

[sureLoss]

Boomer just said 11AM press conference today is expected.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Boomer just said 11AM press conference today is expected.

Who would have thought Bill Peters would have been the first hire of the coaching UFA circuit.

[Racki]

I sure hope Treliving comes out of this one looking like a genius. I'm all in on Bill Peters. What the heck? I'm done complaining about it and I'm full of hope. Give 'em hell Bill!