Sutter is the problem

[Rollin22x]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Which is funny seeing how many odd man rushes and breakaways we give up almost every game. I don't care what the advance stats say, anybody who watches the games see it.

Does anyone track this because this is how I feel as well. They're not just ordinary odd man rushes, they're usually brutal giveaways that result in the best possible rush for the opposing team. Really bad decisions made by multiple Flames players.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Is there a secondary playoffs I'm unaware of for teams with sweet advanced stats?

Reading this site you'd think it's what matters the most.

Just sick of this pissy crap.

They're all facts. A person that wants to dig a bit further isn't ignoring the standings.

Nor am I seeing anyone saying everything is perfect because the advanced stats are pretty good.

Just let it go.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Which is funny seeing how many odd man rushes and breakaways we give up almost every game. I don't care what the advance stats say, anybody who watches the games see it.

Can't we put this to bed.

Do we really think anyone arguing about Sutter for 100 pages doesn't watch the games?

The key though ... is you have to watch all the games from every team, look for the same thing with an unbiased lens, keep track of all of it, and then get back to us with your findings!

Then we can have a discussion.

Without that ... yeah it's advanced stats.

[FlamesAddiction]

The thing about defensive breakdowns which lead to scoring chances, people only remember them in detail when puck goes in. When the goalie makes the save, the details get put in the vault pretty quickly. It creates a confirmatory bias situation.

[Jing]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, Treliving's contract is up. It's a crossroads no matter what.

Sounded like it was greater than that, and more of a shift in the overall approach/philosophy (ownership level).

[NegativeSpace]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Can't we put this to bed.

Do we really think anyone arguing about Sutter for 100 pages doesn't watch the games?

The key though ... is you have to watch all the games, look for the same thing with an unbiased lens, keep track of all of it, and then get back to us with your findings!

Then we can have a discussion.

Without that ... yeah it's advanced stats.

And not just your team but every game in the NHL by every team.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Just sick of this pissy crap.

They're all facts. A person that wants to dig a bit further isn't ignoring the standings.

Nor am I seeing anyone saying everything is perfect because the advanced stats are pretty good.

Just let it go.

Who is getting “pissy”? I’m not being pissy, not sure where you get that from.

Person A “creates a narrative” (I’ll use your words) and post an opinion.

Person B says, “your narrative is wrong, here’s some advanced stats, and these actually suggest the team is not that bad at X, Y, and Z.”

Person A says, “sure, but they’re still bad and losing.”

Stats are just data pulled from a game to help explain what’s happening, but can you admit they aren’t the be all and end all?

Further, I notice that you’ll post a lot of stats and advance stats to “fight the narrative” (debate opinions), which is actually honestly good and welcome as I think it adds quite a bit to the discussion personally, but you haven’t really given your actual opinion of what plagues the team this year. Not that I have read anyway. Nothing that actually captures the “that’s the issue” type of statement that helps make your stance make sense.

In my opinion, the failure to succeed in hockey hinges on only a handful of things:
A) team is not skilled enough
B) team is not working hard enough
C) the plan / tactics / strategy is not good enough

Now, I posit that we have seen performances from this collection of players that they are better than how the team has performed. Which means to me it is either B or C, but, I think you know my opinion leans to B. What is your opinion? Do you have one?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Of all the issues this season I would rank hard work right at the bottom of the list.

I just don't see it.

I see a team doing what they are asked of each and every night.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Of all the issues this season I would rank hard work right at the bottom of the list.

I just don't see it.

I see a team doing what they are asked of each and every night.

I disagree. And speaking of narratives...

You need to look at individual performances to debate how hard or not hard people are working. I would fully admit it's not very black / white and it changes game to game. I'm talking about generally, over the course of the season. Definitely some passengers on many, many nights this year. More specifically, think back to those first 5 games. What made them absolutely dominate those games, and then all of a sudden stop dominating?

Now, that's all fine if that's your opinion anyway, so what is the issue then?

Team just lacks skill?

Strategy sucks?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Who is getting “pissy”? I’m not being pissy, not sure where you get that from.

Person A “creates a narrative” (I’ll use your words) and post an opinion.

Person B says, “your narrative is wrong, here’s some advanced stats, and these actually suggest the team is not that bad at X, Y, and Z.”

Person A says, “sure, but they’re still bad and losing.”

Person A had the following pissy post with heavy sarcasm

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Is there a secondary playoffs I'm unaware of for teams with sweet advanced stats?

Reading this site you'd think it's what matters the most.

[Yeah_Baby]

at the end of the day, Sutter is the guy you bring into to get over the hump. The Flames did that last year in the regular season, finally won a round, and then flamed out in magnificent fashion. This group isn't last year's group, it's not winning now. Not sure Darryl wants to coach a team that isn't contending, philosophic discussion aside.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by theslymonkey

Sutter wins his first Jack Adams nine months ago and fans are ready to run him out of town? Mind boggling.

Except that winning the Jack Adams doesn't really mean anything in terms of job security. Plenty of coaches have been fired the next season or two.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Person A had the following pissy post with heavy sarcasm

It's sarcastic, sure, but is it pissy? haha I dunno. Pissy infers I'm like annoyed or something- and I'm not at all. Hell, I don't even mean it as mocking, if that makes sense. I'm just saying that advanced stats used as a counter to any criticism against the Flames feels hollow, given the results which at the end of the day is all that matters. So I think we should debate more honestly about why the results are the way they are.

[blender]

Originally Posted by Jing

Sounded like it was greater than that, and more of a shift in the overall approach/philosophy (ownership level).

The thing with a philosophical approach from an ownership level, is how are we to know there is a change?
The philosophy has never been described to us. We have inferred that it is "get in and anything can happen/playoff revenue at all costs/struggle in perpetual mediocrity" based on results, and then we repeat it here so often we believe it is a fact. The actual fact is we don't know what the ownership of this team thinks or what their plan is. We've never had a moment like the Rangers did where they wrote a letter to their fans detailing their plan, or the Oilers with their declarations of certain future success, lol!

I would love to hear their thoughts and plans, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jing

Sounded like it was greater than that, and more of a shift in the overall approach/philosophy (ownership level).

I imagine any long term major decision made by this ownership group is made with the arena situation in mind. Not to say I know how they all play together but it is a major consideration. I also wonder what Edwards long term plan is for owning the team. Does he want to cash out? Leave it for heirs? Only thinking about next few years?

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Except that winning the Jack Adams doesn't really mean anything in terms of job security. Plenty of coaches have been fired the next season or two.

Not to mention it's not really the same team in many ways. I really think after the Summer of Brad(TM) we (me, most folks with some exceptions) imagined it was a plug and play situation and they'd build off last year. We didn't account for the chemistry issues etc. And it seems like neither did Brad.

I keep thinking about the Ference/Kobasew for Stuart/Primeau trade, and the impacts of that on the team. Feels kind of similar but on a larger scale.

Granted the last few seasons I hadn't been following like I have this year, but going into the Fall I don't think I'd been as excited about the Flames as when they first traded for Jokinen and 'finally' got Iggy a number one centre. Come to think of it this season has gone about as well as the Iggy/OJ experiment.

[zamler]

If a team consistently wins the advanced stats war but doesn't consistently win games they are supposed to then the stats are flawed at best. Don't know what other possible conclusion there is.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

It's sarcastic, sure, but is it pissy? haha I dunno. Pissy infers I'm like annoyed or something- and I'm not at all. Hell, I don't even mean it as mocking, if that makes sense. I'm just saying that advanced stats used as a counter to any criticism against the Flames feels hollow, given the results which at the end of the day is all that matters. So I think we should debate more honestly about why the results are the way they are.

You clearly insinuated that some feel underlying stats are more important then wins and losses which is patently unfair.

So just talk about the standings then.

Don't say it's the coach if there are stats that suggest otherwise.
Don't say it's about work ethic if the stats suggest that may not be true.

[Burning Beard]

Originally Posted by zamler

If a team consistently wins the advanced stats war but doesn't consistently win games they are supposed to then the stats are flawed at best. Don't know what other possible conclusion there is.

One stat they never seem to win this year is save percentage...

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Don't say it's the coach if there are stats that suggest otherwise.
Don't say it's about work ethic if the stats suggest that may not be true.

I strive to be this level headed.