[PGT] Flames beat Montreal, 3-1!

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

But this is it, isn’t it. By virtue of his rep and what Treliving has said, this is not true of Sutter.

And in LA, it took a few years for the mutiny, such that it was, and it took guys like Doughty becoming huge stars.

Treliving was probably showing loyalty to the players hoping that by working with them they would step up and show leadership. These guys are hockey players and have never really won anything as a group together. A better approach would have been to hire a Darryl caliber coach from the start and instill that experience through an experienced coach. Young players grow through good practices and leadership. Treliving, leaning on these players who have shown very little and have never won anything at this level puts that power in the wrong hands. The team ran the asylum and it showed. With a real coach they are no longer left wandering like untamed horses, but now wear a harness!!

[Roof-Daddy]

I'm not buying the fear angle either. Not this day and age.

I think it may be a combination of respect, and a better job of getting the message across to the players...IE communication.

Sutter has been there and done that. He brings an air of confidence to the message he's preaching. Confidence in himself, because he's made it work before, and confidence from the players because they can look at his body of work and realize he knows what he's talking about.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I think it may be a combination of respect, and a better job of getting the message across to the players...IE communication.

This is my take too.

I also think the message itself is probably better in terms of x's and o's.

[Enoch Root]

Yeah, it isn't fear.

It's communication, clarity, and accountability. And a smart, simple system that players can buy into and execute consistently.

[JohnnyB]

Anyone taking bets on what Markstrom's stats will be in the Sutter era? He's a 1.0 GAA and .953 save percentage so far. I wonder where he ends the season. The 4 games coming up will be a challenge for the team to keep GAA down.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Big deal.

The players can still choose to not play hard for Sutter. If a Monahan or a Tkachuk don't like what Sutter is selling, they have all the power to get themselves traded. They don't care if the Calgary Flames lose Sean Monahan, the Calgary Flames care if the Calgary Flames lose Sean Monahan.

But there's the thing.

This idea that the players - the core - just tune out the coaches is just sensationalism.

They do buy what Sutter is selling, and it's got nothing to do with fear.

Fear is maybe the wrong word, but it’s pure unfounded speculation to believe the players aren’t more concerned about performing poorly for Sutter than other coaches. Or that they were “confused” about Ward’s systems especially when Sutter’s aren’t that much different, aside from work rate and execution.

They can choose not to work hard for Sutter, and players have in the past, and the consequences were not fun for the players. They may be millionaires, but they are also 20 year old kids. Sutter uses intimidation when he thinks it works - ask his former players. He also uses a bunch of other motivational techniques. And Treliving has made it clear about 3 or 4 times now that Sutter will win any contests going forward. He’s not getting fired.

[1qqaaz]

I wish the Flames would score an empty net goal for once.

The Flames must be one of the few teams that have a negative goal differential when the other team has their goalie pulled.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don’t find that hockey boring at all. It’s not a trapping system. It’s a smart forecheck, which is fun, it’s a physical style, which is fun, and the puck is turned up ice quickly, which is fun.

And the exact same system as Ward, right?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Millionaire Athletes on guarunteed contracts?

Did Sutter intimidate the Kings when they mutinied on him?



You're confusing effectiveness with power.

Glen Gulutzan, Bill Peters, and Geoff Ward all had power.

Their choice to not exercise that power on time to the betterment of the team, is their failing as coaches. Peters not benching James Neal until game 6, when he was #### ALL SEASON? That was not on the core of this team. That was on Bill Peters.



Who said anything about hating those things?

I'm sure they loved his direction and practices because it was easy.

But loving it, and finding it effective, are two different things.

The team was not very good in the bubble. They barely beat a 9th seed and got their ass handed to them by Dallas.

The team was not very good prior to the bubble under Ward.

These are facts.



When you have all 18+ skaters playing "listless" hockey, it's got nothing to do with the five or six players who represent the "core".

Blaming the players is the easy way out, because it's easy to call them lazy and heartless and prisoners running the asylum.

It's easy to do that.

But they want to win too, and they sure as #### didn't WANT to put out those listless performances.

The fear of Darryl Sutter did not make them suddenly WANT to start playing hard.

These are millionaire athletes with guaranteed contracts. They don't fear coaches, benchings, trades. And in the year 2021, they can get a coach fired with a basic tweet if it comes down to it.

You're certainly welcome to your opinion, .... I just don't agree with it.

All coaches have shelf lives, but Sutter clearly would demand more respect and "fear" than any other guy that has come in in the last five years.

They'll tune him out eventually, but they haven't yet, they won't this year, and I'm guessing they won't next year.

But really what are we arguing here? We both like the move to hire Sutter. We both think Sutter is the better coach.

Just comes down the players. You're happy to assume the entire problem was Ward with zero accountability to the players, and I'm not.

Seeing that typed out makes the likelihood between the two pretty obvious doesn't it?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by jayswin

And the exact same system as Ward, right?

On paper, pretty similar. In execution - no. I’d say his actual systemic differences are on dump-in forecheck, and on some more aggressive D zone coverage. His breakouts? I think the only real difference in speed of execution.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

On paper, pretty similar. In execution - no. I’d say his actual systemic differences are on dump-in forecheck, and on some more aggressive D zone coverage. His breakouts? I think the only real difference in speed of execution.

I always get a kick out of posters that answer obviously sarcastic questions with just a straight up answer.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

On paper, pretty similar. In execution - no. I’d say his actual systemic differences are on dump-in forecheck, and on some more aggressive D zone coverage. His breakouts? I think the only real difference in speed of execution.

How come I don't see them bumping it back to the defence allowing the opposition to get fully prepared on every second breakout anymore?

[Bingo]

I honestly think there are more changes they he's selling.

Probably trying to not throw Ward under the bus. But it's pretty different.

North South pretty much always.
Stronger F2
Stronger pinch
Supporting F3
No setup behind the net
Dmen carrying the puck more
Shot volume
PP bump back gone

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by jayswin

How come I don't see them bumping it back to the defence allowing the opposition to get fully prepared on every second breakout anymore?

They never did that as a general practice and ended up having to do it maybe one of every 5 breakout attempts. It was just pointed out when they did do it. And half the time it was on a line change. They one-passed it out a lot more than people said.

What is more likely is that Sutter has told his forwards to get back so the D doesn’t have to wait. And I suspect he’s imposed more discipline on fast line changes so the D doesn’t have to wait.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I honestly think there are more changes they he's selling.

Probably trying to not throw Ward under the bus. But it's pretty different.

North South pretty much always.
Stronger F2
Stronger pinch
Supporting F3
No setup behind the net
Dmen carrying the puck more
Shot volume
PP bump back gone

That's what I was getting at. The whole "We're not changing the system" was a day 1 statement as to not commit to anything or give the players on out. He's changed a lot and it shows on top of the higher compete.

[jayswin]

nm

[jayswin]

The neutral zone is one of the main places where you see the changes made under Sutter. Before Sutter, the Flames would spend a lot of time re-grouping, have their forwards loop back, and try to launch an attack from there.

The obvious problem with that strategy is that in the time it takes to have all of your forwards circle back, the opposing defence can either change or set up their forecheck. In the past, this has led to a lot of difficult stretch pass attempts from their defencemen which rarely work, and in general the Flames end up settling for turnovers or chip-in dump attempts with no speed.

It is clear under Sutter that there is a new urgency in the neutral zone to get the puck back into the offensive zone as quickly as possible.

Exactly what I was seeing.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Exactly what I was seeing.

This is an execution upgrade, not a system change. Can’t you see that? Sutter has improved them on their breakout gap control. That’s attention to detail and effort.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Exactly what I was seeing.

Interesting bisection of two philosophies.

Ward's transition keeps the puck in hand, Sutter's pushes the play North even if you don't have the horses - more likely to surrender it.

But Ward's allows the opposition to reset.

Sutter's catches them on their heels.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Interesting bisection of two philosophies.

Ward's transition keeps the puck in hand, Sutter's pushes the play North even if you don't have the horses - more likely to surrender it.

But Ward's allows the opposition to reset.

Sutter's catches them on their heels.

Yep, Ward's was better "in theory" as a ready five man group with a breakout to execute sounds better on paper. But really hockey doesn't work that way. Turn and go whether you have five horses or not. Most successful rushes in the NHL end up being 3-4 man anyways.