If the assistants have been signed as rumoured, it is likely that Treliving is on board and details are being worked out. After this past season, I would assume that Treliving is wanting some hand in dealing with the roster and hopefully he is wanting to pursue a youth retool/rebuild. Last year was pressured and understandable, as you had a veteran coach who signed on to coach a seasoned team. Treliving's actions over the summer ensured that would happen, and Sutter was likely given an extension to give him control over the room, and because he had power at that time to demand more years.
Fast forward a year and the Flames find themselves with a decent, albeit aging roster, and a number of expiring contracts. If I were Treliving I would want certainty going into next season, meaning if I couldn't get key guys inked in the offseason we'll help them move onto the next stage of their professional journey and go in a younger direction. There is nothing to suggest that at this stage of his career Sutter wants to mentor and mold a younger squad, but if Treliving were to be given the power to alter the course of the franchise it would force Sutter to either get on board, or return to farming. I personally think a looser, bit more humble version of Sutter could go a long ways in developing a young roster, but at this point in his career that is likely not an option, you know, the whole zebra and it's stripes thing.
Regardless, I would like to see Treliving back and empowered to build, not just maintain, and if a smiling Sutter were part of the equation, I'd be okay with that. We live in interesting times...
8th in 5 on 5 offence is a fact. No point in getting all testy about it. It's top ten. Offence wasn't a problem.
The powerplay was a problem.
You could be right on Huberdeau. You honestly could be.
But 90% of what you spew is your opinion and not a fact. A player that puts up 60 points is a 60 point player. He was asked to play defense and within a system like pretty much every player in the league. I'm sure Sutter wished he was more like the 115 point guy too.
I like the player, I think he'll be fine, but he doesn't get a pass. It's on him.
Yeah, I mean it's not like Sutter didn't have two 100 point players last season. It's not his fault that Huberdeau can't chew bubble gum and walk at the same time.
I get some of the dislike for Sutter, I really do. By many accounts, he is an abrasive coach to the players and they don't like it. Some of his deployment decisions baffle a layman like me. But as far as systems and what he asks players to do, it's not off the grid compared to most coaches. If Huberdeau was really as good as people think, and really a $10.5 million player, he would have been able to adjust and at least be a PPG. I think he just isn't as adaptive or creative as he gets credit for. He is a skilled, but high maintenance player that needs to have lines crafted around him to make him good, but not the kind of player that elevates others, which is unfortunate considering the contract he received.
Having said all that, the only solution might be to cater to him in this regard, because that contract ain't going anywhere, and Sutter is not the coach who will cater to one player. Maybe Sutter has to go for that reason, but not because he isn't a good coach.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
It is very Flames to give a vote of confidence to management the day after the end of the probably the most disappointing and frustrating season in team history.
You may have long term memory loss. It was frustrating sure, but there's been like 10 years in a row worse than this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by midniteowl
No, I'd rather bring Love up instead. What has Brunette done that has shown he's a good coach?
I don't know if Brunette is good or not - but circumstantially he coached Florida last year to the President's trophy and then went to New Jersey this year and they suddenly improved from 63 points to 110 (with 1 game left)
The Following User Says Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I mean it's not like Sutter didn't have two 100 point players last season. It's not his fault that Huberdeau can't chew bubble gum and walk at the same time.
I get some of the dislike for Sutter, I really do. By many accounts, he is an abrasive coach to the players and they don't like it. Some of his deployment decisions baffle a layman like me. But as far as systems and what he asks players to do, it's not off the grid compared to most coaches. If Huberdeau was really as good as people think, and really a $10.5 million player, he would have been able to adjust and at least be a PPG. I think he just isn't as adaptive or creative as he gets credit for. He is a skilled, but high maintenance player that needs to have lines crafted around him to make him good, but not the kind of player that elevates others, which is unfortunate considering the contract he received.
Having said all that, the only solution might be to cater to him in this regard, because that contract ain't going anywhere, and Sutter is not the coach who will cater to one player. Maybe Sutter has to go for that reason, but not because he isn't a good coach.
My thoughts as well. Sutter is a good coach who did odd things this year. The season was cratered by goaltending and good players have terrible years. That is not necessarily going to repeat itself, so I worry about over correcting.
I have very little faith that they will find a better coach for the role next year if Sutter is gone. The system was not the problem. His line deployment was odd, but I can at least understand some of the reasoning behind it as he likes to have balanced lines that can be rolled. I'd prefer that they figure out the relationships in the room and try again next year (obviously with the caveat that they need to make some decisions on expiring contracts like Lindholm). If they can't figure out the relationships, then Sutter should probably go and hope the Flames can find a decent coach elsewhere.
Again - I am not sure what people are expecting from a forward whom was 141st among NHL forwards in ice time per game. That's middling second line deployment at best and he produced above his usage. Was it a great year for the guy? Certainly not, but he was going through massive changes both personally and professionally and the coach certainly didn't do him any favors. His resume speaks for itself and he should have been shown more trust and given a much greater opportunity from the get go.
That was just one of the many failures that the coaching staff had this season.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to HighLifeMan For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I mean it's not like Sutter didn't have two 100 point players last season. It's not his fault that Huberdeau can't chew bubble gum and walk at the same time.
I get some of the dislike for Sutter, I really do. By many accounts, he is an abrasive coach to the players and they don't like it. Some of his deployment decisions baffle a layman like me. But as far as systems and what he asks players to do, it's not off the grid compared to most coaches. If Huberdeau was really as good as people think, and really a $10.5 million player, he would have been able to adjust and at least be a PPG. I think he just isn't as adaptive or creative as he gets credit for. He is a skilled, but high maintenance player that needs to have lines crafted around him to make him good, but not the kind of player that elevates others, which is unfortunate considering the contract he received.
Having said all that, the only solution might be to cater to him in this regard, because that contract ain't going anywhere, and Sutter is not the coach who will cater to one player. Maybe Sutter has to go for that reason, but not because he isn't a good coach.
That's easily debunked by Duclair and Bennet having by far their career seasons playing with Huberdeau.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Is it, though? I mean, better OT luck and Markstrom bouncing back to even .910 and this is probably a 100 point team as built. Could they win the Cup? That's probably less likely but if 95% of this roster comes back next season with the same coaching and management, I'd bet on a return to the playoffs.
Sure, they could sneak in next year. After all, 17th overall...a couple of OT wins and they're in right now. With the contract status of key players, I'd hope they're looking beyond next season.
Holding on to our UFAs to make playoffs next year, they're missing the forest through the trees. Whether they want to admit it or not, big changes are coming. Failure to recoup assets for the UFAs...I'd consider that a huge missed opportunity to jumpstart a now inevitable rebuild of some sort.
That's easily debunked by Duclair and Bennet having by far their career seasons playing with Huberdeau.
Bennett went from 0.690 PPG with Huberdeau to 0.635 PPG without. It's not a very remarkable decrease and could easily be seasonal variation. Duclair's difference is a little greater (0.606 from before to 0.743 with), which I don't think is substantial enough to debunk anything I said.
The argument is that Huberdeau needs to have lines created around him and players need to elevate him to have success, not that the other players on the line won't have modest gains as a result. Obviously if one player is doing really well on the line, there will be scraps to be picked up by the others. But we're not talking superstar levels of increases here.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
They had the 9th worst 5v5 save percentage going back to the 09-10 season...and still should have made the playoffs. Honestly I'm not sure as a organization you can overreact to that.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 04-13-2023 at 04:02 PM.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I mean it's not like Sutter didn't have two 100 point players last season. It's not his fault that Huberdeau can't chew bubble gum and walk at the same time.
I get some of the dislike for Sutter, I really do. By many accounts, he is an abrasive coach to the players and they don't like it. Some of his deployment decisions baffle a layman like me. But as far as systems and what he asks players to do, it's not off the grid compared to most coaches. If Huberdeau was really as good as people think, and really a $10.5 million player, he would have been able to adjust and at least be a PPG. I think he just isn't as adaptive or creative as he gets credit for. He is a skilled, but high maintenance player that needs to have lines crafted around him to make him good, but not the kind of player that elevates others, which is unfortunate considering the contract he received.
Having said all that, the only solution might be to cater to him in this regard, because that contract ain't going anywhere, and Sutter is not the coach who will cater to one player. Maybe Sutter has to go for that reason, but not because he isn't a good coach.
Huberdeau and Sutter worked perfectly fine together the last 22 games this season.
Yeah, I mean it's not like Sutter didn't have two 100 point players last season. It's not his fault that Huberdeau can't chew bubble gum and walk at the same time.
I get some of the dislike for Sutter, I really do. By many accounts, he is an abrasive coach to the players and they don't like it. Some of his deployment decisions baffle a layman like me. But as far as systems and what he asks players to do, it's not off the grid compared to most coaches. If Huberdeau was really as good as people think, and really a $10.5 million player, he would have been able to adjust and at least be a PPG. I think he just isn't as adaptive or creative as he gets credit for. He is a skilled, but high maintenance player that needs to have lines crafted around him to make him good, but not the kind of player that elevates others, which is unfortunate considering the contract he received.
Having said all that, the only solution might be to cater to him in this regard, because that contract ain't going anywhere, and Sutter is not the coach who will cater to one player. Maybe Sutter has to go for that reason, but not because he isn't a good coach.
I doubt Johnny or Matthew gets to 100 points last year if Lucic is their linemate for 1/4 of the season.
I have been severely underwhelmed by Huberdeau this season, but Sutter's attitude and decisions did not help in anyway shape or form.
I do feel like we have a competent management staff and hope Tree decides to stick around. On top of that Darryl is a good coach (although very stubborn) and I personally wouldn't mind seeing both parties around to start the year off. This team needs a youth injection and players like Cornato, Pelltier and Wolf would be welcome additions. Getting rid of guys like Lewis and Lucic should hopefully open some spots for the kids. As many have said the goaltending needs to improve, and if that does then we have a decent shot at making the playoffs next season.
Where things get dicey is if Sutter refuses to play kids or if some of the players ask for a trade if he's back. That alone could cause a coaching change. At the very least I wouldn't be opposed to getting rid of the assistants as I did not like there contributions (especially Muller).
I'm not convinced Kadri is back next year as management and coaching probably saw his effort down the stretch. There's certain principles the organization values and his attitude could lead to his departure (which is unfortunate given his value at the moment). Huberdeau is the primary question mark. Do you change coaches to satisfy his style of game? Could his game improve next year under Sutter as he had a season to adjust? Tough to say.
Insanity is thinking that crediting Einstein for the quote was the point of my post
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With respect, the whole point of quoting a statement by a figure like Einstein is that their are perceived to have authority on the topic. If Einstein didn't say it, then the "point" you are trying to make doesn't actually land.
The Following User Says Thank You to NegativeSpace For This Useful Post:
