The Deal With Geoff Ward

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

They didn’t do it to Hartley on the ice, though, if you remember how that last season went

It was in season review and player interviews after, and he was never Tre’s guy to begin with

They sure did it on the ice, which is how they were a sub-.500 team both in front of Ramo and Hiller. 7-13 in their 1st 20 games, 9 wins in their last 22 (2 in garbage time) 77 points - that’s a drop of 20 points and 14 below league average. Powerplay below league average, PK below league average, taking a ton of penalties, etc. Hiller was terrible but he only played 26 games. Ramo and Ortio were over .900 but they were shelled and had losing records.

He lost the team.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

They were fine with Ward in the bubble, what’s changed?

They were fine against a beat up Jets team. I wouldn't say they were fine against Dallas.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

They were fine with Ward in the bubble, what’s changed? They even started pretty good this season 2-0-1. Played well against Toronto, but lost a couple close ones. They gave Montreal their 1st regulation loss. All that accomplished without the team firing on all cylinders too.

I think a big part of the problem at this very moment at least, is this team bought into their hype after the Markstrom signing. They thought they were a Stanley Cup contender and now that it’s clear to them they’re not, they’re playing with no confidence. I’ve personally have always liked this team as an underdog instead, they play harder, they don’t give up when they’re down, they’re the find away Flames.

I dont think they were fine. They beat a very badly injured Jets and got sh*t kicked by Dallas. They won the first game because Dallas was stone cold, no play-in games to shake the rust off. And let's remember, in that game the Flames had a 3-0 lead and got curb stomped in periods 2 and 3 to end up a very tight 3-2 win.
The second win was a shutout where the Dallas coach threw his arms up during the post game. Had no words to explain how you can lose a game having dominated like they did. It was an absolute steal by Talbot.

As for this season. They had a great 1st period vs the Jets in the season opener. The jets owned them periods 2 and 3.

The 2 Vancouver wins were very up and down play as well. Markstrom held them in. Neither game was really that good. They were good enough to win, but not really great.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Red

I dont think they were fine. They beat a very badly injured Jets and got sh*t kicked by Dallas. They won the first game because Dallas was stone cold, no play-in games to shake the rust off. And let's remember, in that game the Flames had a 3-0 lead and got curb stomped in periods 2 and 3 to end up a very tight 3-2 win.
The second win was a shutout where the Dallas coach threw his arms up during the post game. Had no words to explain how you can lose a game having dominated like they did. It was an absolute steal by Talbot.

As for this season. They had a great 1st period vs the Jets in the season opener. The jets owned them periods 2 and 3.

The 2 Vancouver wins were very up and down play as well. Markstrom held them in. Neither game was really that good. They were good enough to win, but not really great.

Ok sure, the Jets were beaten up, but the Flames still crushed them. It wasn’t even a close series. Laine wasn’t impactful in game 1. The team completely neutralized Connor, Wheeler and to a lesser extent Ehlers.

With Dallas, the series was pretty competitive up until Tkachuk was injured. That injury killed the most important line on the team which was the shutdown line. The Flames top scoring line was once against extremely underwhelming 5 on 5, which has been a problem well before Ward came into the picture. I was in favor of a trade to fix this problem which never came to fruition.

This season has been a disaster. Still a small window of time to fix things, but it’s closing. The players have been the biggest problem for me this season though. Current line combos have been Ward’s biggest failings. But I’m not even sure that’s on Ward anyway because Treliving made the specific player acquisitions to build a team with Monahan-Lindholm-Backlund up the middle and that’s been a monumental failure as well. Leivo, Simon, Nordstrom and and Nesterov have still combined for exactly 0 goals a third way into the season.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They sure did it on the ice, which is how they were a sub-.500 team both in front of Ramo and Hiller. 7-13 in their 1st 20 games, 9 wins in their last 22 (2 in garbage time) 77 points - that’s a drop of 20 points and 14 below league average. Powerplay below league average, PK below league average, taking a ton of penalties, etc. Hiller was terrible but he only played 26 games. Ramo and Ortio were over .900 but they were shelled and had losing records.

He lost the team.

I do remember a ton of penalties being called towards the end of that season, but what I remember is that this was the Wideman year and the penalties saw a significant uptick after that infamous event, not in terms of what was taken but a lot of phantom calls and one-sided officiating. There were even articles written about it.

I didn't observe the players played any less disciplined. The calls that year were just bizarre to my eye. Maybe I'm a homer but I remember going full tin foil hat with the officiating following the wideman event.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I have to ask, with all the talk of systems and confusion and comparing previous coaches like Peters and Gulutzan, can anyone even tell the difference between the systems of all 3 of Treliving’s coaches?

Because from what I’ve seen and what I’ve remembered, there isn’t much difference at all, all 3 had very similar if not identical systems. Milan Lucic just the other day, said to the media that it’s the exact same system. The same system that got them into the playoffs, the same system that saw Sam Bennett play the best hockey (playoffs) of his career and the same system that won them the series against the Jets. If someone could tell me what part of this system that’s still confusing to the players, then I’d like to know.

Here's the thing - the system wasn't great last year down the stretch either. This passive, low event, collapse in front of the net system that Ward played wasn't that great down the stretch, and wasn't that great against Dallas.

We had success down the stretch last year because we got hot goaltending and our PP was good but our play at 5v5 was really poor. Then the only reason it worked against Winnipeg is that they were riddled by injury and had no d-men that could take advantage of the time and space they were being given in the offensive zone. That quickly changed against Dallas though with Heiskanen and Klingberg eating us alive.

It's no different this year. If our PP is good and we get goaltending we have a chance to win. However it's a slim margin for error and if either of those things are bad we will lose, and if both of them are bad then we're getting blown out.

Even if this coaching staff isn't fired - what I don't get is why the GM wouldn't make the phone call down and say "Lets go back to what worked as a system in 18-19, enough of this crap".

This team started playing a different system going into 19-20 season that was meant to be better defensively and more tailored for playoff hockey but it just hasn't worked. If anything we've been worse defensively and useless offensively.



Go Back to what worked as a system in 18-19 and forget about what happened against Colorado in the playoffs. That 18-19 system and playstyle, with Markstrom holding down the fort behind him would likely work really well.

[mile]

This team looked broken last night. How is Ward still HC?

Guess he’s here to stay for the rest of the season.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I have to ask, with all the talk of systems and confusion and comparing previous coaches like Peters and Gulutzan, can anyone even tell the difference between the systems of all 3 of Treliving’s coaches?

Because from what I’ve seen and what I’ve remembered, there isn’t much difference at all, all 3 had very similar if not identical systems. Milan Lucic just the other day, said to the media that it’s the exact same system.

To some extent, you're correct. All three of Treliving's hires do follow and preach a lot of the same basic principles. Things like moving in tightly-packed 5 man units, boxing out in front of the net instead of fronting, little things like that are pretty consistent, especially when contrasted with Bob Hartley's systems, where the forwards were essentially a different entity altogether from the defensemen, and the defensemen were asked to do very different things in the defensive zone.

I will say however, that all coaches have things they want to preach. Maybe "systems" isn't even the right word for it, but areas-of-focus. One coach might really dislike plays right up the middle of the ice, another coach might be willing to take that risk. One coach might want his defensemen to be more engaged and active offensively, the other coach might see his defensemen as a point shot source and nothing more.

Here's what I believe I have seen based on what I've watched of these three coaches:

Glen Gulutzan disliked the stretch pass. He had a really firm grasp on playing a tight neutral zone game. Offensively, he really emphasized cycle play and we generated most of our offense off of the cycle. Defensively, he played a very aggressive style - the kind that sometimes got you burned but more often got you out of the zone quickly. I mentioned Hartley above saw the forwards and defensemen as separate entities in the defensive zone... well Gulutzan saw the forwards and defensemen as separate entities in the offensive zone. He wanted three forwards to score on teams of five most of the time, with the defensemen simply firing blind pucks at the net from the boards.

Bill Peters was more open to the stretch pass, although he had much more aggressive approach than Hartley's collapse defense. Early on he was more open to taking some chances and driving the middle of the ice as well - when the Flames would use the middle of the ice, they had a ton of rush scoring opportunties. In the playoffs however, all that aggressiveness that was characteristic of the team seemed to disappear. If I had to guess, this was due to the Hanifin - Hamonic defense pairing losing all confidence in their gap control (the other two pairings Giordano-Brodie and Valimaki-Andersson seemed to be decent) but the result was easy zone entries against. Maybe it was a small sample size, but it really felt like the team was not playing the style that originally made Peters successful. They defaulted to safe glass and out breakouts and gave up way too much room on zone entries against. Their forecheck, which was pretty effective in game 1, was adjusted to by Bednar and Peters had no real answer. I think I'm digressing here though. My point is this - Out of Treliving's three coaches, at least when the team appeared to be winning, they had a lot of VARIETY in their attack. If they need to break out with a textbook D-W-C, they could. If they need a stretch pass, they could. If they needed Brodie or Hanifin or Ryan or Backlund to simply skate the puck into open ice... they could. They gave themselves options. This to me was apparently one mark of a well-coached team - I'm sure they preached a lot of their principles, but they usually had multiple strategies, and never got too stuck doing things one way on breakouts or on offense. On offense, they also had their defensemen more involved in the play than Gulutzan's teams. The D weren't just guys posted along the wall to shovel a puck at the net, they had a green light that they NEEDED!

Geoff Ward hockey is, to my eyes, a style that is allergic to the middle of the ice when the team has control of the puck. His preference appears to be have defensemen rim the puck along the boards on the breakout, and the stationary wingers along the boards then have two options

Option A) Chip the puck past the opposing defensemen to the neutral zone
Option B) Chip the puck to the nearby center

The problem isn't that this is a BAD breakout strategy. The problem is that this feels like the ONLY breakout strategy. Going back to Hartley's stretch pass obsession, we've come around to the exact opposite end of the spectrum. Every play is so predictible under Ward. Maybe he's not actively preaching this as the only way they need to play, but his failure to preach variety in breakout styles, one way or the other, gives his teams an identity that we describe as his system. Where are the defensemen skating the puck into open ice? Where are the stretch passes? I just don't see any of those things, and it's not as if guys like Hanifin or Andersson are not capable of those things. So what we end up with are breakouts that force the stationary wingers to the two above options. And the accuracy of option B drops considerably because the other team is so well-prepared for that short area pass.

Additionally, I believe Ward implements a more passive defensive strategy in general. Teams under him play much more compact to the center of the ice - a collapse defense if you will. This is also true of our neutral zone play under Ward... just loose gaps - our whole team plays like that Hanifin - Hamonic pairing did in that Avs series right now. If this is not being coached, then I don't know why they're not being coached to play tighter. A top end coach would not be satisfied with our neutral zone play under Ward - if the players aren't executing then you tell them to go take more risks.

Ultimately though, Geoff Ward hockey is risk-averse. And by being risk-averse, they spend a lot of time in their own zone, and when they are able to break the puck out, they don't have the multitude of options presented to them that a well-constructed system would encourage.

I don't believe this is a case of "Geoff tells them NEVER to stretch pass or use the middle of the ice". I think this is a case of "Geoff overlooks the importance of practicing different breakout situations, because he favours risk averse strategies like the ones outlined above". Them not using the middle of the ice, is thus a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. But because that symptom manifests, the breakout strategies that should be second nature are so well-covered by opponents that the players play with panic. Because the game is very fast.

I saw a play, maybe two nights ago against the Leafs, where Hanifin has the puck around the left circle with a clear lane to simple skate the puck out of the zone. Instead he passes the puck to his stationary winger along the walls. Why would someone make such a stupid play? Because that's the sort of play that gets preached in practice, and their instincts are to do what they practice.

I know this isn't an in-depth look at systems in terms of 1-2-2 or 1-1-3 or 2-1-2. I do think that there are some differences there as well but that would be worth its own thread and you'd really need video evidence to back it up. And I'm not smart enough to be the guy doing that because I don't even have the attention span to do video work in general.

The same system that got them into the playoffs, the same system that saw Sam Bennett play the best hockey (playoffs) of his career and the same system that won them the series against the Jets. If someone could tell me what part of this system that’s still confusing to the players, then I’d like to know.

The Flames played an even series against the Jets, who were missing their #1 AND #2 centres. And the Jets were not even a playoff team - this was a team who had finished the season 9th in the standings before the pandemic. I would not read a ton into it. A system designed to stop a team with no offensive talent (which is a valid description of the team we faced) is not the same as a system designed to stop an NHL playoff team with NHL star forwards.

The Flames were outplayed by the Stars.

And that was not Sam Bennett's best hockey. If you want the best playoff hockey of Bennett's career, look to his series in 2017 centering Versteeg and Chiasson. He had better linemates last year, but wasn't playing to his peak level.

[TheSquatch]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I saw a play, maybe two nights ago against the Leafs, where Hanifin has the puck around the left circle with a clear lane to simple skate the puck out of the zone. Instead he passes the puck to his stationary winger along the walls. Why would someone make such a stupid play? Because that's the sort of play that gets preached in practice, and their instincts are to do what they practice..

Yes. Saw Rasmus do the same thing, can't remember what game it was, a couple weeks ago. Got the puck below his own blueline, had no one for a mile, and instead of taking off, he pushed it up to a guy standing still at the redline, who was immediately hit and the puck turned over.

It's a system thing, and it's total crap.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They sure did it on the ice, which is how they were a sub-.500 team both in front of Ramo and Hiller. 7-13 in their 1st 20 games, 9 wins in their last 22 (2 in garbage time) 77 points - that’s a drop of 20 points and 14 below league average. Powerplay below league average, PK below league average, taking a ton of penalties, etc. Hiller was terrible but he only played 26 games. Ramo and Ortio were over .900 but they were shelled and had losing records.

He lost the team.

Okay, since you brought it up... let’s talk a bit more about what *really* happened that year.

October and into November, yes they sucked, and dug themselves a hole they couldn’t get out of. New Dougie Hamilton took a while settling in, Brodie was injured, Gio just coming back from his injury. Hartley couldn’t run a normal practice with 3 goalies, and yeah, they were horrid out of the gates.

All of the goalies were in the .800s for sv% in October. Tre at one point late Oct sent Ramo down

But do you remember how Ramo did in his last 20 games before getting hurt?

Starting Dec 8, through his injury Feb 11 - over those 20 games, his stats were 2.25, .919. Pretty darn good! Very stabilizing.

Now the next 11 games after Ramo’s injury, they were 1-9-1, giving up 5 goals 3 times, and giving up 6 goals 3 times.

Oh, you mentioned “taking a ton of penalties”.

This tells me you really don’t remember that season, so let me remind you.

On Jan 27, 2016 was the Wideman hit on Henderson. So the Flames took a step change up in penalties, almost like they were facing 2 teams some nights

In the first 47 games, prior to Wideman’s crosscheck on Henderson — the Flames averaged 2.62 minors per game. In the 34 games after the incident, they averaged 3.88. That was a 48 per cent jump, for the same Flames team, with the same roster.

Young team with no confidence in goaltending, down a veteran defenseman who also contributed on the PP, and suddenly facing 2 teams?


You go ahead and create the narrative they quit on the coach, but they were a bad young roster, who overcame trash goaltending and D early, had settled things down when Ramo stabilized things, and then when he went down, they were stuck with Hiller and Ortio and a new level of time on the PK, and the confidence vanished

I do remember the PP was abysmal that year.

I agree they reportedly didn’t like the hardass coaching. At the same time, both Darryl Sutter and Hartley had in common that unity / loyalty to their players when the media was on them

Anyways, that’s it for this little stroll down memory lane.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

In the first 47 games, prior to Wideman’s crosscheck on Henderson — the Flames averaged 2.62 minors per game. In the 34 games after the incident, they averaged 3.88. That was a 48 per cent jump, for the same Flames team, with the same roster.

Didn't they go from 30th overall for penalties, straight to 1st overall? Or something close to that?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Didn't they go from 30th overall for penalties, straight to 1st overall? Or something close to that?

I know that for the prior 5 years, they were not in the top 20 for penalties, then they were instantly at or near the top

It was pretty blatant


Edit: in Burke’s book, he says exactly that - they went from 30th to 1st

[Gaskal]

Lol I actually think Burke is still pissed off at Donnie Henderson to this day. Spent a few pages griping about it in his book.

[Red_Baron]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Okay, since you brought it up... let’s talk a bit more about what *really* happened that year.

October and into November, yes they sucked, and dug themselves a hole they couldn’t get out of. New Dougie Hamilton took a while settling in, Brodie was injured, Gio just coming back from his injury. Hartley couldn’t run a normal practice with 3 goalies, and yeah, they were horrid out of the gates.

All of the goalies were in the .800s for sv% in October. Tre at one point late Oct sent Ramo down

But do you remember how Ramo did in his last 20 games before getting hurt?

Starting Dec 8, through his injury Feb 11 - over those 20 games, his stats were 2.25, .919. Pretty darn good! Very stabilizing.

Now the next 11 games after Ramo’s injury, they were 1-9-1, giving up 5 goals 3 times, and giving up 6 goals 3 times.

Oh, you mentioned “taking a ton of penalties”.

This tells me you really don’t remember that season, so let me remind you.

On Jan 27, 2016 was the Wideman hit on Henderson. So the Flames took a step change up in penalties, almost like they were facing 2 teams some nights

In the first 47 games, prior to Wideman’s crosscheck on Henderson — the Flames averaged 2.62 minors per game. In the 34 games after the incident, they averaged 3.88. That was a 48 per cent jump, for the same Flames team, with the same roster.

Young team with no confidence in goaltending, down a veteran defenseman who also contributed on the PP, and suddenly facing 2 teams?


You go ahead and create the narrative they quit on the coach, but they were a bad young roster, who overcame trash goaltending and D early, had settled things down when Ramo stabilized things, and then when he went down, they were stuck with Hiller and Ortio and a new level of time on the PK, and the confidence vanished

I do remember the PP was abysmal that year.

I agree they reportedly didn’t like the hardass coaching. At the same time, both Darryl Sutter and Hartley had in common that unity / loyalty to their players when the media was on them

Anyways, that’s it for this little stroll down memory lane.

That's how I remembered it as well. It was a young team with lots of holes but they put in plenty of solid efforts despite the fact they were outmatched almost every night.

[ComixZone]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1365465010139357188

[Red]

Ugh too much red. Red is bad.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Red_Baron

That's how I remembered it as well. It was a young team with lots of holes but they put in plenty of solid efforts despite the fact they were outmatched almost every night.

Yeah. I remember it as a team not quitting on the coach on ice.

The overall record of 35-40-7 was a bit worse than anybody would have liked, but it was October, and the post Ramo injury slump that torpedoed them.

I mentioned that Dougie Hamilton that year took a while to settle in. By Oct 26 he had played 9 games, had 1 point, and was -11

Anyways, I reject the narrative that the team quit on Hartley

They preferred a friendlier coach, and he had a shelf life, but it wasn’t that simple of a story

[zamler]

Twitter thinks those graphs contain sensitive material.

[t0rrent98]

Ward's only signed to a 2 year deal right? I'd say let him finish both years than let him walk or if they are off to a bad start than let him go before his 2 years are done.

Who goes first if the team fails to do well this/next season, Tre or ward?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by t0rrent98

Ward's only signed to a 2 year deal right? I'd say let him finish both years than let him walk or if they are off to a bad start than let him go before his 2 years are done.

Who goes first if the team fails to do well this/next season, Tre or ward?

Yes. Only two years of this.