Sutter is the problem

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Even if it's true that he didn't like playing for Sutter it's very unlikely to be the only reason he chose to leave, as you basically framed it.

Who said it would be the only reason? It only has to be part of their reasoning as we all know money, weather, cities all play a role. We are talking about a coach the Kings players locked out of the locker room and Doughty said publicly that the Kings needed a coaching change. He's got a shelf life and things never get better in time with Sutter, only worse as he wears on everyone over time.

[Hustle]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Who said it would be the only reason? It only has to be part of their reasoning as we all know money, weather, cities all play a role. We are talking about a coach the Kings players locked out of the locker room and Doughty said publicly that the Kings needed a coaching change. He's got a shelf life and things never get better in time with Sutter, only worse as he wears on everyone over time.

To this point - wasn't there a bunch of reporting during the end of his tenure here as GM that he was basically a dark cloud hanging over the franchise from both a management and player perspective? I could be dreaming that but i seem to recall that the entire organization was in a extremely bad place during the last 18 months when he had too much oversight.

I'm forever grateful for what he's given to this organization but this is starting to feel like last time around when there were a bunch of whispers of organizational dysfunction.

The team has clearly underperformed, and the players need to own that as they have not lived up to their end either........ but it just seems like it's time for a fresh start across the board.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I just kind of wonder how many players in the locker room will be happy to play under Sutter another year and how that will affect all the decisions of pending UFA's. Last season went great on the ice and Tkachuk still didn't want anything to do with Darryl. After this season I have to think some players are getting a little exhausted.

Well we can't re-sign all the pending UFA's anyway. For any of those that have a hard time playing for a demanding coach with a track record of winning, maybe they are not the ones we want.

Sutter puts pressure on his players, no doubt about that. I truly believe it's because he wants them to be better and be able to handle the inevitable pressure of a long playoff run.

I don't want to be the defender of all things Darryl and I've been pretty clear he says things that I just can't stomach. But racking up points on a team that plays a carefree style of hockey is no measure of success I'm interested in.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Who said it would be the only reason? It only has to be part of their reasoning as we all know money, weather, cities all play a role. We are talking about a coach the Kings players locked out of the locker room and Doughty said publicly that the Kings needed a coaching change. He's got a shelf life and things never get better in time with Sutter, only worse as he wears on everyone over time.

I think some people are underselling how much of a role a coach can play on players wanting to stay or leave.

Someone had Bob Hartley on their trade list.

Alex Tanguay asked to be traded when we brought in Mike Keenan. Mike Keenan also ran Juice out of town when he started playing mind games with him again.

Players told the team they wouldn't sign if we kept Bob Hartley.

Now we have a recent example of Matthew and Johnny. I don't think Matthew stays if Sutter was here or not but as we know they disliked each other and have thrown shots at each other through the media this season.

On the flip side players do come to a team based on relationships and to play for a coach. Trevor Lewis, Brad Richardson and Erik Gudbranson.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Who said it would be the only reason? It only has to be part of their reasoning as we all know money, weather, cities all play a role. We are talking about a coach the Kings players locked out of the locker room and Doughty said publicly that the Kings needed a coaching change. He's got a shelf life and things never get better in time with Sutter, only worse as he wears on everyone over time.

How many more coaches is gonna take? We know Tre probably can't hire another coach right now, but what if the players don't like the next coach. Hartley, Brent, Peters GG and Ward. Now we have a problem with Surtter. What's the common denominator the players aren't playing for the coach. Not sure why use Tkachuk as an example when he himself wasn’t getting along with the team.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

How many more coaches is gonna take? We know Tre probably can't hire another coach right now, but what if the players don't like the next coach. Hartley, Brent, Peters GG and Ward. Now we have a problem with Surtter. What's the common denominator the players aren't playing for the coach. Not sure why use Tkachuk as an example when he himself wasn’t getting along with the team.

The only coaches the players didn;t like that I ever heard of were Hartley and (to a degree) Sutter. Though I haven't looked at what they said about Brent. I think they liked Ward a lot.

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by Ferarri

So much of what was posted here lacks any sort of fact based observations and is purely defined to fit a personal narrative about Sutter.

Let's start with the "offensive stifling system." Is this not that same system that saw Johnny Gaudreau put up 115 points, Matthew Tkachuk put up 104 points, Elias Lindholm score 42 goals and Andrew Mangiapane score 35 goals. How can that be discredited and argued that the system is holding Huberdeau to an unfair position to succeed. Let me guess last year will be deemed an outlier and a fluke but the real Sutter system does not approve offensive performance?

It appears you are the one spinning narratives here. Last year was absolutely the outlier in Darryl's coaching career in terms of getting production out of his top end talent. Outside of last year you have to go all the way back to 1999 to find the last time a player scored a point per game or more under him. That's one time in fifteen NHL seasons, but sure, we should just expect Huberdeau to do it while playing his off-wing, in a new system, with a mishmash of linemates because the top line last year had a one off season while scoring at unsustainable rates.

Secondly, being glued to Lucic for an extended period of time happened organically for a variety of different reasons. Those reasons were because pretty much every other combination of wingers was tried with and produced minimal results. You make it sound like this was the coaches default option and from day one he decided that this was the guy to ride shotgun. He tried various versions of Toffolli, Pelltier, Mangiapane, Dube etc and there was essentially zero chemistry.

The only player that he got a meaningful look next to prior to being stapled to Lucic was Toffoli, and maybe Coleman (if you call a 5-6 game sample size a legit look)

Pelletier was not up with the big club at that time
Mangiapane had spent 33 minutes with Huberdeau to that point
Dube had spent 5 minutes with Huberdeau to that point
Ruzicka saw just 37 seconds with Huberdeau to that point
He played 32 minutes with Trevor Lewis.

So essentially he played 2.5 ish games with Mangiapane, 2.5ish games with Trevor Lewis, and about 5.5ish games with Coleman.

Lucic then came off the bench due to being healthy scratched and received an 18ish game stretch alongside him.

This is the part that really gets me though. People argue he's such an elite player and that his passing/vision is one of the best in the league. If this were the case then he should be making those around him succeed. Elite players should be able to play with a different cast of players and make them better. Why are we blaming his line-mates when he's supposed to be the superstar. I've even heard ridiculous arguments that his "passing is too good" and that others on the team aren't ready to handle that. Right...I mean he's only played with virtually everyone and nobody can pot empty net goals from his all star passes. It doesn't add up.

He has a history of making those around him significantly better, though, so again, you are taking the small sample size from this year and extrapolating it to suite your narrative.

Sam Bennett.
Anthony Duclair.
Evegeny Dadonov.
Mike Hoffman.

These are the guy's who saw significant time with Huberdeau over the past five seasons and they all enjoyed career years by a substantial margin

Finally, do you want to know why a guy like Backlund is averaging more ice time than Huberdeau? Look what his teammates say about the guy:

I don't think anyone has an issue with Backlund's deployment. He's arguably been the best player on this team all season, and quite frankly probably should have seen a much larger look with Huberdeau as they were lights out together.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Who said it would be the only reason? It only has to be part of their reasoning as we all know money, weather, cities all play a role. We are talking about a coach the Kings players locked out of the locker room and Doughty said publicly that the Kings needed a coaching change. He's got a shelf life and things never get better in time with Sutter, only worse as he wears on everyone over time.

Yeah you had a laundry list of reasons beyond Sutter in your post. Didn't attribute it souley to that at all

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I just kind of wonder how many players in the locker room will be happy to play under Sutter another year and how that will affect all the decisions of pending UFA's. Last season went great on the ice and Tkachuk still didn't want anything to do with Darryl. After this season I have to think some players are getting a little exhausted.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

How many more coaches is gonna take? We know Tre probably can't hire another coach right now, but what if the players don't like the next coach. Hartley, Brent, Peters GG and Ward. Now we have a problem with Surtter. What's the common denominator the players aren't playing for the coach. Not sure why use Tkachuk as an example when he himself wasn’t getting along with the team.

This isn't new in the NHL.

Coaches don't last that long and when you hire a guy like Sutter he is hired to be fired based on how he coaches meaning he will get the most of his team the first few years but after that its ugly. He is not a grow with the team developmental type of coach.

I actually thought he would last longer because we changed over a bunch of guys, I was more worried of the old core tuning him out if they came back. I was not expecting what we are seeing this season.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The only coaches the players didn;t like that I ever heard of were Hartley and (to a degree) Sutter. Though I haven't looked at what they said about Brent. I think they liked Ward a lot.

But that doesn't answer the question how many more coaches is it going to take? The issue wasn't whether they liked or disliked Ward, he wasn't getting results. It was Tres decision to fire Ward. What about Ward's relationship with Bennett? Didn't Bennett say Ward's was not communicating with him but Sutter was. Like I said how many more coaches is it gonna take before the players are happy and getting results.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

But that doesn't answer the question how many more coaches is it going to take? The issue wasn't whether they liked or disliked Ward, he wasn't getting results. It was Tres decision to fire Ward. What about Ward's relationship with Bennett? Didn't Bennett say Ward's was not communicating with him but Sutter was. Like I said how many more coaches is it gonna take before the players are happy and getting results.

Remember what Brad said when he brought him in. This team needed Darryl.

Well that team is pretty much gone.

TO put the blame on this group of players for coaching turnover that the previous core caused is unfair.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

But that doesn't answer the question how many more coaches is it going to take? The issue wasn't whether they liked or disliked Ward, he wasn't getting results. It was Tres decision to fire Ward. What about Ward's relationship with Bennett? Didn't Bennett say Ward's was not communicating with him but Sutter was. Like I said how many more coaches is it gonna take before the players are happy and getting results.

Hartley - Players hated him, had to go
Gulutzan - Players tuned him out, had to go
Peters - Players hated him (not that people remember him for that because he got “fired” for racism)
Ward - Players tuned him out, had to go
Sutter - Players hate him, has to go?

You do have to question how much player sentiment should matter. Every coach either gets tuned out right away or is hated by several players. And for every guy that hates the coach, there seems to be guys that love the coach.

We are due for a likeable coach that the players tune out after half a season or so. Excited for that!

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Hartley - Players hated him, had to go
Gulutzan - Players tuned him out, had to go
Peters - Players hated him (not that people remember him for that because he got “fired” for racism)
Ward - Players tuned him out, had to go
Sutter - Players hate him, has to go?

You do have to question how much player sentiment should matter. Every coach either gets tuned out right away or is hated by several players. And for every guy that hates the coach, there seems to be guys that love the coach.

We are due for a likeable coach that the players tune out after half a season or so. Excited for that!

All of those coaches came in for the previous core of players.

Why should the blame fall on this group of players for the coaching turnover?

Look I agree that we can't keep firing coaches but bringing Sutter was never going to be a long-term answer like a Jon Cooper type.

What this team needs going forward is a coach to grow with the group especially with the young players ready to step in.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

All of those coaches came in for the previous core of players.

Why should the blame fall on this group of players for the coaching turnover?

Look I agree that we can't keep firing coaches but bringing Sutter was never going to be a long-term answer like a Jon Cooper type.

What this team needs going forward is a coach to grow with the group especially with the young players ready to step in.

Younger, smaller and faster is anti-Sutter. If the Flames want to compete they have to get younger, faster and more creative. North/south hockey is boring and dead.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

All of those coaches came in for the previous core of players.

Why should the blame fall on this group of players for the coaching turnover?

Look I agree that we can't keep firing coaches but bringing Sutter was never going to be a long-term answer like a Jon Cooper type.

What this team needs going forward is a coach to grow with the group especially with the young players ready to step in.

I’m not blaming the core, it just seems like it’s always the coach. Regardless of the player mix, it’s always the coach. They’re too nice, or too mean, or too hard, or too soft, or too green, or too old school, etc. At a certain point you have to laugh at the fact that whether it’s a coach getting their first NHL games in or one who has a couple cup rings, they’re always the wrong answer to the problem. How does that even happen?

I’m also not saying Sutter is the answer, I just have low confidence that this cobbled-together version of a “core” is going to be easy to find a coach for, especially if it’s Treliving or management picking them. It’s partially a Sutter team and partially not, which is fine if it’s bottom roster guys, but it goes all the way up. Treliving could have played Tkachuk into assets that better served Sutter’s game, or not traded Bennett when he was finally excelling under Sutter. We’ve got a weird mix. Just as Sutter isn’t adapting his game to fit a few players, Treliving isn’t adapting his game to fit the coach.

And nobody in charge has picked a good coach yet, so why now?

It’d be nice to have some idea what the vision for this team is.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Hartley - Players hated him, had to go
Gulutzan - Players tuned him out, had to go
Peters - Players hated him (not that people remember him for that because he got “fired” for racism)
Ward - Players tuned him out, had to go
Sutter - Players hate him, has to go?

You do have to question how much player sentiment should matter. Every coach either gets tuned out right away or is hated by several players. And for every guy that hates the coach, there seems to be guys that love the coach.

We are due for a likeable coach that the players tune out after half a season or so. Excited for that!

And then add in what I'm guessing happens behind the scenes.

Elite Candidate - Flames offer. Rejected
Above Average Candidate - Flames offer. Rejected
Average Candidate - Flames Offer. Rejected

Re think the coaching pool ...

Retread Candidate - Make offer?
Inexperienced Candidate - Make offer?
Search database for Alberta birth place?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

How many more coaches is gonna take? We know Tre probably can't hire another coach right now, but what if the players don't like the next coach. Hartley, Brent, Peters GG and Ward. Now we have a problem with Surtter. What's the common denominator the players aren't playing for the coach. Not sure why use Tkachuk as an example when he himself wasn’t getting along with the team.

It's going to take as many coaches as it takes to get the right one, just like it's going to take as many roster moves it takes until they get the right one. It's clear that the coach and the roster are not working. Anyone defending him ask themselves how they would like to go to work everyday under a man as dour as him that takes shots at teammates in the media, continually tells the media that you and your teammates don't have talent, doesn't talk openly to a lot of players in the room, just delegates, etc. I can't imagine there are a lot of sunny days for players. As we all know winning is fun so when the team is winning players have that to fall back on but when they aren't winning it has to be pretty miserable to come to work everyday.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I’m not blaming the core, it just seems like it’s always the coach. Regardless of the player mix, it’s always the coach. They’re too nice, or too mean, or too hard, or too soft, or too green, or too old school, etc. At a certain point you have to laugh at the fact that whether it’s a coach getting their first NHL games in or one who has a couple cup rings, they’re always the wrong answer to the problem. How does that even happen?

I’m also not saying Sutter is the answer, I just have low confidence that this cobbled-together version of a “core” is going to be easy to find a coach for, especially if it’s Treliving or management picking them. It’s partially a Sutter team and partially not, which is fine if it’s bottom roster guys, but it goes all the way up. Treliving could have played Tkachuk into assets that better served Sutter’s game, or not traded Bennett when he was finally excelling under Sutter. We’ve got a weird mix. Just as Sutter isn’t adapting his game to fit a few players, Treliving isn’t adapting his game to fit the coach.

And nobody in charge has picked a good coach yet, so why now?

It’d be nice to have some idea what the vision for this team is.

If Treliving is indeed out I think the team needs a reset with fresh eyes from the GM chair and coaching.

With the incoming players being on the smaller side its just not going to work with Sutter, and we have a GM who has done a terrible job finding the right man behind the bench.

I agree the vision needs to be plain and clear how do we want to play, and how will the players we have excel to play that way.

This is not a 4 line team currently and playing for shot metrics is not working.

It honestly seems like the don't ask the coach how they will utilize each player to their strengths, but how will they get the shot volume up at times.

What is your plan for each player and how will you build your lines and how will that fit in the overall scheme of team success.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

This isn't new in the NHL.

Coaches don't last that long and when you hire a guy like Sutter he is hired to be fired based on how he coaches meaning he will get the most of his team the first few years but after that its ugly. He is not a grow with the team developmental type of coach.

I actually thought he would last longer because we changed over a bunch of guys, I was more worried of the old core tuning him out if they came back. I was not expecting what we are seeing this season.

I totally get what you're saying and I have had those same concerns too. I have been around a while. I wasn't a big fan of Brent Sutter.

I think where you and I may have some differences, I think some key players are under performing which is contributing to the problem. The same problem with had when the players stopped playing for coaches the Flames have already hired. Sutter was brought in to change the culture and to turn us back into a hard working team; Something we haven't seen from Huberdeau. I think he is better than he is playing and a top guys effort can have an effect on whole team not just the coach.

I like some things Sutter has done, I have some concerns too. Let's just say we hire another coach who can't get anything out of 1 or 2 players or this group, then what? We could end up a few more years with another useless coach? Thoughts?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

If Treliving is indeed out I think the team needs a reset with fresh eyes from the GM chair and coaching.

At this rate, since we can’t rebuild the team on the ice, rebuild off it. Put Conroy in the GM chair and bring Love up to be the head coach. They’re both ready for the step up at this point, and both fresh enough that you’d hope to avoid some ego battle. Love knows and has had success with the young guys we need to call up to fill out a capped roster, and Conroy is good at selling guys on joining the Flames.

Keep the scouting department, bring in an experienced guy as an assistant or advisor to the GM, bring in new assistant coaches for the PP/PK and let’s see what happens.