[PGT] Flames beat Montreal, 3-1!

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

No kidding. We should be debating what we see on the ice, not what Sutter tells the media he is going to do.

Bingo did a pretty nice job os listing all the things that look different after two games. It's not just execution.

Who said it was “just execution”? I said he made changes to the dump in and the ensuing forecheck but his breakouts were the same (only done better).

FWIW he also has more pressure in the D zone.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Who said it was “just execution”? I said he made changes to the dump in and the ensuing forecheck but his breakouts were the same (only done better).

FWIW he also has more pressure in the D zone.

You said it was higher intensity and better execution. I mean if he has higher intensity, better execution and has made changes to the way they play, what is the threshold for calling it changes to the system?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by jayswin

You said it was higher intensity and better execution. I mean if he has higher intensity, better execution and has made changes to the way they play, what is the threshold for changes to the system?

The breakout is the “system” that people were complaining about. I think he’s gotten them to do the same one faster and with better execution.

The only thing he’s changed systemically is using a dump in. And I’m betting he just told them “quit skating into the pressure - dump it in”, not as a part of some Xs and Os session.

But if you think “higher intensity” and “better execution” are changes to the system, I guess he changed the system.

Frankly, if you think a “systems” change is all that it takes to get the Flames playing better, then they didn’t need Sutter at all, just any guy that uses the same “system”.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The breakout is the “system” that people were complaining about. I think he’s gotten them to do the same one faster and with better execution.

The only thing he’s changed systemically is using a dump in. And I’m betting he just told them “quit skating into the pressure - dump it in”, not as a part of some Xs and Os session.

But if you think “higher intensity” and “better execution” are changes to the system, I guess he changed the system.

Frankly, if you think a “systems” change is all that it takes to get the Flames playing better, then they didn’t need Sutter at all, just any guy that uses the same “system”.

No I don't think that, I was suggesting that earlier you were referring to those as the only changes. I may have muddied up that sentence a bit, though.

[jayswin]

Definitlely disagree on the breakout, though. You seem to think "1 in every 5" breakouts leading to the bump back as nothing special or different from what Sutter is doing. I feel like I watched a much different Flames breakout under Ward that fundamentally required near perfection in formation and if not there then the team was to "slow" things down and break out as a five man unit.

Sutter is the exact opposite of this. This is not "more intensity" it's a fundamental system change. I don't know why some here are so adverse to calling things changes to the system.

[Strange Brew]

The breakout looks different. More north/south, less gathering and retreating.
The forecheck looks different.
The D seem to be playing differently.
The PP bump back sure seems to be out of favor.
Speed and pace is not just style. A system that requires coming out of your zone as a unit vs. your first move always being forward results in faster play.

I see a lot of changes personally.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Definitlely disagree on the breakout, though. You seem to think "1 in every 5" breakouts leading to the bump back as nothing special or different from what Sutter is doing. I feel like I watched a much different Flames breakout under Ward that fundamentally required near perfection in formation and if not there then the team was to "slow" things down and break out as a five man unit.

Sutter is the exact opposite of this.

We do disagree, but it really doesn’t matter. The result is the same. I guess the only difference is whether it takes a Sutter or any coach with a better system to get these guys winning. I feel like you need a coach with his credibility because most systems are winning systems if they are played well. And I don’t buy the “it was the wrong system for this team” argument, since this team has such a mix of players. And the argument was always “Ward coaches a dump and chase system which is wrong for this team”. Of course now it’s “I didn’t mean this kind of dump and chase”. This team is absolutely built for dump and chase, the same system the champion Lightning uses.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The breakout is the “system” that people were complaining about. I think he’s gotten them to do the same one faster and with better execution.

The only thing he’s changed systemically is using a dump in. And I’m betting he just told them “quit skating into the pressure - dump it in”, not as a part of some Xs and Os session.

But if you think “higher intensity” and “better execution” are changes to the system, I guess he changed the system.

Frankly, if you think a “systems” change is all that it takes to get the Flames playing better, then they didn’t need Sutter at all, just any guy that uses the same “system”.

I think you've completely missed the boat here.

'The breakout' under Ward was to regroup, set up behind the net, wait for all 5 players to be set, then go.

Now, it is go north as soon as you get possession. That isn't the same breakout, only faster, it is a completely different mindset and gameplan - forget waiting until the forwards are set, go before the other team can get set. Literally the opposite.

And again, dumping it in more isn't the change in their system, it is a result of the change I was describing: the idea is attack immediately, regardless of how many bodies are available. If they cross center and don't have enough support, they dump it in. Cause and effect: the gameplan is attack with speed, one of the effects is dump it in if you are under-manned.

It's a result of the system you are refusing to see, not 'the only thing he's changed systematically'.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think you've completely missed the boat here.

'The breakout' under Ward was to regroup, set up behind the net, wait for all 5 players to be set, then go.

Now, it is go north as soon as you get possession. That isn't the same breakout, only faster, it is a completely different mindset and gameplan - forget waiting until the forwards are set, go before the other team can get set. Literally the opposite.

And again, dumping it in more isn't the change in their system, it is a result of the change I was describing: the idea is attack immediately, regardless of how many bodies are available. If they cross center and don't have enough support, they dump it in. Cause and effect: the gameplan is attack with speed, one of the effects is dump it in if you are under-manned.

It's a result of the system you are refusing to see, not 'the only thing he's changed systematically'.

See here’s the thing. People said they were setting up behind the net, so I watched specifically for that, just to see why there were doing it, because it’s true, that’s not good. But the thing was - they just weren’t doing that - not in Toronto and not in Ottawa. And it wasn’t confirmation bias because I was excepting them to do it, because people said they were. The only exception was on a line change, when they always had a long pause. Sutter has improved that a lot - that’s a discipline thing. But, and this is a big thing - no matter what they did, behind the net, one pass up, or skating and passing - they were not passing quickly. Everything was a hesitation. They were looking for guys who weren’t there. The forwards were way too high and they’d have to circle back. It actually was not a f man group, it was too spread out, with not enough options. Now the guys are there and the D don’t have to wait.

I’m not refusing to see it - what you are refusing to see is that this is an execution and detail change. The breakout gaps being better is execution, not system. The quicker line changes to avoid delays in the breakout is execution, not system. And Ward had utterly failed to get them to execute, so yeah, I was in favour of his dismissal, though not for a Gallant - for at least a Boudreau, because I felt that the team would only respond to a coach who was a bigger name than them. Off season I wanted Sutter but mid-season I didn’t think he was possible.

I agree the game plan is attack with speed. I don’t think there’s a single coach who doesn’t say attack with speed. But Sutter has gotten them to actually do it. Ward didn’t.

[GioforPM]

Again, arguing about what Sutter has done to improve the team is largely irrelevant anyway - they obviously are improved. Whether it’s a change of system under Sutter, or a change in work and execution, they are better. If it was a lesser coach I’d be worried it was not going to be sustained, like every other time. But I think Sutter is a top five coach in the NHL, one of a handful that actually makes a difference to his team.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

See here’s the thing. People said they were setting up behind the net, so I watched specifically for that, just to see why there were doing it, because it’s true, that’s not good. But the thing was - they just weren’t doing that - not in Toronto and not in Ottawa. And it wasn’t confirmation bias because I was excepting them to do it, because people said they were. The only exception was on a line change, when they always had a long pause. Sutter has improved that a lot - that’s a discipline thing. But, and this is a big thing - no matter what they did, behind the net, one pass up, or skating and passing - they were not passing quickly. Everything was a hesitation. They were looking for guys who weren’t there. The forwards were way too high and they’d have to circle back. It actually was not a f man group, it was too spread out, with not enough options. Now the guys are there and the D don’t have to wait.

I’m not refusing to see it - what you are refusing to see is that this is an execution and detail change. The breakout gaps being better is execution, not system. The quicker line changes to avoid delays in the breakout is execution, not system. And Ward had utterly failed to get them to execute, so yeah, I was in favour of his dismissal, though not for a Gallant - for at least a Boudreau, because I felt that the team would only respond to a coach who was a bigger name than them. Off season I wanted Sutter but mid-season I didn’t think he was possible.

I agree the game plan is attack with speed. I don’t think there’s a single coach who doesn’t say attack with speed. But Sutter has gotten them to actually do it. Ward didn’t.

Yes, I remember you saying that. And I remember you also dismissing some of the occurrences for whatever reasons. So I counted the next game - 19 times they did it. IN THE FIRST PERIOD. So I stopped counting.

Last night, 3 times.

Yes, the breakout gaps being better is execution. However, the big gaps were largely a result of the D setting up and delaying. By the time the D moved the puck to the forwards, they were often at center ice already, and forced to stop. That's systems, because the D were purposely setting up before moving forward.

It's both: they are passing faster, no question (i.e. executing). But they are also playing a completely different strategy - or prioritization, if you want a different word. The name of the game before was set it up. That slowed everything down. Now, it's head north. And that speeds everything up.

Anyway, I am done discussing this - it is ruining the enjoyment of it all.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by edslunch

I’d love to see him in OT with Backlund and Lindholm as guardians

Kylington in OT would be scary haha.

But also fun. You have me intrigued.

[Red]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He was asked a question and like he always does, he gave a straight answer. no one is saying he didn’t make adjustments. I just accept he didn’t need to make major system changes, and he focussed on improving execution and effort. Because, not only did he say it, that’s what happened.

What are the prospects of making trades today?

Sutter would never give a calculated answer. He is just an honest to god farmer always saying like it is.

[CSharp]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Again, arguing about what Sutter has done to improve the team is largely irrelevant anyway - they obviously are improved. Whether it’s a change of system under Sutter, or a change in work and execution, they are better. If it was a lesser coach I’d be worried it was not going to be sustained, like every other time. But I think Sutter is a top five coach in the NHL, one of a handful that actually makes a difference to his team.

Flames will be at the honeymoon stage until they get knocked out of the playoffs. We'll see the full extent of Sutter when it begins next season or until that honeymoon phase is met with vinegar on the team when the players go back to their ways.

[troutman]

Montréal n'est pas bon

[Always Earned Never Given]

Conclusion:

Puck moving north ASAP= Excellent
Puck moving NE or NW ASAP= Great

Puck moving east west-west east= trouble
Puck moving south, SE or SW= Yikes

So far though there has been a lot of ASAP in their decisions which I likey!

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

What are the prospects of making trades today?

Sutter would never give a calculated answer. He is just an honest to god farmer always saying like it is.

Show me a deliberately misleading statement by Sutter aimed at playing 4D chess with the opposition. It has nothing to do with being a "farmer".

If he doesn't want to answer to the press, he just snarks them, he doesn't say A when the answer is B. Honestly, you guys are searching for stuff that just ain't there.

[Red]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Show me a deliberately misleading statement by Sutter aimed at playing 4D chess with the opposition. It has nothing to do with being a "farmer".

If he doesn't want to answer to the press, he just snarks them, he doesn't say A when the answer is B. Honestly, you guys are searching for stuff that just ain't there.

I will do that as soon as you prove that Sutter always gives a straight answer.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

I will do that as soon as you prove that Sutter always gives a straight answer.

OK, he doesn't "always" give a stright answer. But there's a difference between "not a straight answer" and an out and out lie. Will Sutter evade like anyone else when he doesn't want to spill? Sure. Does he lie? Never heard it.

But moreover, this was well before the Montreal games, which were supposedly the aim of this legerdemain. They still had an Ottawa game and an Edmonton game. It was right in his post-hire press conferences, where he was happy to answer questions. It wasn't some strategic, obviously well thought out answer. Someone asked a question and he said what was on his mind, like every other answer.

Here's an typical Sutter non-answer: that Irish reporter asked him about his immediate priorities and he laughed and said "well, we have a game against Edmonton and a game against Ottawa to win". He knew that wasn't the point of the question and he didn't want to ID a particular issue that he had noticed. So he non-answered. But on systems - he was asked a question and gave a direct answer. Occam says it's most likely that he was just saying what he thought.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Show me a deliberately misleading statement by Sutter aimed at playing 4D chess with the opposition. It has nothing to do with being a "farmer".

If he doesn't want to answer to the press, he just snarks them, he doesn't say A when the answer is B. Honestly, you guys are searching for stuff that just ain't there.

Who is making this claim? I just wouldn't use a Sutter statement to the media as evidence supporting anything, one way or the other.