[News] Darryl Sutter out as Head Coach. Maloney presser at 11:30 AM MT

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Spurs

I am sorry but this is insane to me. First, I am not sure which side of the argument I am supposed to be on being in my early 40's but I have spent the past 20 years being managed by many Boomers who managed in that "new style" you seem to credit with the new generations. I have never met a single manager who was a do what I say because I am manager.

Seems like a lot of millenials here wanting to credit themselves and their peers for being great managers by making BS generalizations about "boomers" that aren't really true at all.

Perhaps all this does is out me as an out of touch "Boomer" but I am not sure why experience and knowledge are bad things while just having a pulse and #### for brains means you should get an equal spot at the table.

Amazing.

[Delthefunky]

Nevermind

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Fair ...

But I see your final comment as the same thing.

If you're not following the game plan you're quitting on the team no?

That's reasonable.

Here's how Im thinking about it. Huby is unarguably a talented player right? He put up 115 pts and was seemingly the star of that line last year. And it wasn't a fluke season because he's had years ppg production under many different coaches. He's clearly a star. How does that guy put up 55 points?

We can all agree he played the system - he didn't go rogue. But he was super ineffective. No other player has seen his point production drop that much under any coach, let alone Sutter. It's a complete outlier.

There's a difference between playing the system and committing to be the best you can be within the system. Committing to struggle up the learning curve of a new system. It's hard to imagine he really did his best to adapt and buy-in. A player with that kind of talent will find some type of success in any system. In Sutter's system, maybe success is only putting up 80 points instead of 115. We saw that reduced output with Kopitar and Iginla. It's wasn't a reduction to 55 points though

So did Huby quit on the team? I wouldn't say that. Quitting on the team would be 40 points in the first half and 15 points in the second half. That didn't happen.

But it sure looks like he gave up on trying to find success within the system for a large swath of the season. We saw him really try to find success in system in the fall of 2022. And we saw him really try to find success within the system starting again in March of 2023. But for a large swatch of season, he showed zero improvement in his ability to generate offense within the system. Instead of continuing to try and increase his success within the system, it seemed very much like "this is the output I can generate with this system." And he just dug in.

[Paulie Walnuts]

He had 55 points while watching Kadri Andersson Toffoli run the powerplay and got relegated to the second unit.

He's the 3rd highest producing powerplay player in the last few seasons and the Flames decided he was a decoy or just barely put in efforts to use him properly.

If they utilized him properly on the PP we probably make the playoffs with all the other warts.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That's reasonable.

Here's how Im thinking about it. Huby is unarguably a talented player right? He put up 115 pts and was seemingly the star of that line last year. And it wasn't a fluke season because he's had years ppg production under many different coaches. He's clearly a star. How does that guy put up 55 points?

We can all agree he played the system - he didn't go rogue. But he was super ineffective. No other player has seen his point production drop that much under any coach, let alone Sutter. It's a complete outlier.

There's a difference between playing the system and committing to be the best you can be within the system. Committing to struggle up the learning curve of a new system. It's hard to imagine he really did his best to adapt and buy-in. A player with that kind of talent will find some type of success in any system. In Sutter's system, maybe success is only putting up 80 points instead of 115. We saw that reduced output with Kopitar and Iginla. It's wasn't a reduction to 55 points though

So did Huby quit on the team? I wouldn't say that. Quitting on the team would be 40 points in the first half and 15 points in the second half. That didn't happen.

But it sure looks like he gave up on trying to find success within the system for a large swath of the season. We saw him really try to find success in system in the fall of 2022. And we saw him really try to find success within the system starting again in March of 2023. But for a large swatch of season, he showed zero improvement in his ability to generate offense within the system. Instead of continuing to try and increase his success within the system, it seemed very much like "this is the output I can generate with this system." And he just dug in.

I think confidence was a big factor and then not meshing with Lindholm; "Coming in he was really excited play with Elias" and then being asked to play on the other wing furthered his production decline.

You have Sutter still reeling from the playoff loss thinking the Flames got away from the system "which he and Tre both mentioned" So team starts playing poorly, Sutter is grumpy and any trust Huberdeau has with the coach gets eroded. I think Sutter's goal from the beginning was to have the team playing a safe defensive structure, but lack of scoring, poor goaltending added to the problems.

As for Huberdeau I don't think it was a lack of trying, I think it was a lot of factors. I don't think Sutter connected well with the room earlier in he season. He should have given Huberdeau the reins on the top line and eased him into a defensive structure. Maybe Sutter was not happy losing 2 star players, but he did a lot of odd and uncharacteristic things .

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That's reasonable.

Here's how Im thinking about it. Huby is unarguably a talented player right? He put up 115 pts and was seemingly the star of that line last year. And it wasn't a fluke season because he's had years ppg production under many different coaches. He's clearly a star. How does that guy put up 55 points?

We can all agree he played the system - he didn't go rogue. But he was super ineffective. No other player has seen his point production drop that much under any coach, let alone Sutter. It's a complete outlier.

There's a difference between playing the system and committing to be the best you can be within the system. Committing to struggle up the learning curve of a new system. It's hard to imagine he really did his best to adapt and buy-in. A player with that kind of talent will find some type of success in any system. In Sutter's system, maybe success is only putting up 80 points instead of 115. We saw that reduced output with Kopitar and Iginla. It's wasn't a reduction to 55 points though

So did Huby quit on the team? I wouldn't say that. Quitting on the team would be 40 points in the first half and 15 points in the second half. That didn't happen.

But it sure looks like he gave up on trying to find success within the system for a large swath of the season. We saw him really try to find success in system in the fall of 2022. And we saw him really try to find success within the system starting again in March of 2023. But for a large swatch of season, he showed zero improvement in his ability to generate offense within the system. Instead of continuing to try and increase his success within the system, it seemed very much like "this is the output I can generate with this system." And he just dug in.

Using him incorrectly on the pp was a big part of this. Second his linemates were pretty terrible. I bet if they had kept him on the top line, and used him correctly on the PP he would have finished with 70 - 80 pts.

Can't give a playmaker linemates like Lucic, a disinterested Kadri, Backlund/Coleman, and expect him to light it up.

He made lots of nice passes to the slot that went nowhere. He needs to be way better but I don't think he was really given much of an opportunity to succeed either.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That's reasonable.

Here's how Im thinking about it. Huby is unarguably a talented player right? He put up 115 pts and was seemingly the star of that line last year. And it wasn't a fluke season because he's had years ppg production under many different coaches. He's clearly a star. How does that guy put up 55 points?

We can all agree he played the system - he didn't go rogue. But he was super ineffective. No other player has seen his point production drop that much under any coach, let alone Sutter. It's a complete outlier.

There's a difference between playing the system and committing to be the best you can be within the system. Committing to struggle up the learning curve of a new system. It's hard to imagine he really did his best to adapt and buy-in. A player with that kind of talent will find some type of success in any system. In Sutter's system, maybe success is only putting up 80 points instead of 115. We saw that reduced output with Kopitar and Iginla. It's wasn't a reduction to 55 points though

So did Huby quit on the team? I wouldn't say that. Quitting on the team would be 40 points in the first half and 15 points in the second half. That didn't happen.

But it sure looks like he gave up on trying to find success within the system for a large swath of the season. We saw him really try to find success in system in the fall of 2022. And we saw him really try to find success within the system starting again in March of 2023. But for a large swatch of season, he showed zero improvement in his ability to generate offense within the system. Instead of continuing to try and increase his success within the system, it seemed very much like "this is the output I can generate with this system." And he just dug in.

He definitely didn’t quit. He got a lot better the last 25-30 games. He needs a trigger man smart enough to play with him. The flames forward group is full of clubs.

[Bandwagon Surfer]

Originally Posted by Spurs

I am sorry but this is insane to me. First, I am not sure which side of the argument I am supposed to be on being in my early 40's but I have spent the past 20 years being managed by many Boomers who managed in that "new style" you seem to credit with the new generations. I have never met a single manager who was a do what I say because I am manager.

Seems like a lot of millenials here wanting to credit themselves and their peers for being great managers by making BS generalizations about "boomers" that aren't really true at all.

Perhaps all this does is out me as an out of touch "Boomer" but I am not sure why experience and knowledge are bad things while just having a pulse and #### for brains means you should get an equal spot at the table.

I am sorry if this came off as me saying you are supposed to be anything. I was talking at a demographics level, not a personal level. Demographics can only say things about large groups, they do not mean anything when it comes to an individual person. In the same way an individual does not say anything about a group.


I got into in more in a previous post, but cultural shifts over time, and how human brains change as they age, people who are older are more likely to take a do as I say approach to management. That does not mean that you or the people you have interacted with are like that. Only that if you took random samples of populations you would be more likely to older people would be more likely to be a "do as I say" person.



Experience and knowledge do not mean nothing, but they do not mean as much as people think. The average person is at their peak intelligence in their mid 20s, but experience lets them improve their job performance until their 40s. Experience can only compensate so much as our brains degrade with age. At a certain point experience becomes out of date, and relying on it instead of learning something new becomes a detriment.


To get back to the topic of Sutter, I see him as someone who crossed that threshold of overly relying on out of date experience and knowledge, while undervaluing learning new things and changing. He has had am amazing career, and was a great coach. He just aged out and can no longer adapt to what works better now.

[Heavy Jack]

Can’t wait for a gm to be named so the bickering can stop for a bit. Pretty sure I believe Huberdeau is closer to being an 80-90 point guy at least for the front half of the contract than he is to being a 50-60 guy which I suspect he’ll be in the back half.

It’s good we’ve moved on from Sutter and honestly I’m happy we’ve moved on from Treliving too and really hope this team’s direction rings true to what Maloney eluded to with what a new GM candidate would look like and how young, productive, ELC players can and have produced in this league and frankly need to on competitive rosters.

Treliving for too long relied on an internal cap be it through the direction of ownership or not and it burned this team out of still having that core in tact for some more swings. Gaudreau at 7.5 to 8 for 2 more years and Tkachuk at 8 to 8.5 for 4 more years is looking pretty good right now but Gio cap played a role in getting in the way of that. As did paying bloated UFA contracts like Brouwer, Raymond and Neal at literally the most in opportune times and it’s easy to see why this franchise got in the way of itself yet again. Really holding out hope for an exciting new chapter and eagerly await the new management and coaching decisions.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don’t know about that video, calumniate

Some random internet guy with definitely not 20/20 hindsight and not really that good

The whole point of it is being a know it all dick about Frolik

(Cool that he calls Scorp out as a legitimate source. But in 2019, I don’t think Scorp was on the beat yet. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Snipped your quote a bit but yeah, I agree. Who knows!
Marner and Matthew's are in similar situations. Sucks for Canada really.. Sign a bridge then frig off to the USA.

[NewFan]

Huberdeau is great player and I'm sure he will bounce back next season if he has a couple linemates who can play his style of game.
But in my eye, he is not player who can carry this team, even his line. So I have little worry if they wants to build the team around him.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by NewFan

Huberdeau is great player and I'm sure he will bounce back next season if he has a couple linemates who can play his style of game.
But in my eye, he is not player who can carry this team, even his line. So I have little worry if they wants to build the team around him.

You should check out his highlights from Florida

He did not get 115 points playing with star line mates

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

Can’t wait for a gm to be named so the bickering can stop for a bit....

As long as the new GM's not shutting down CP, the bickering will continue

[Moneyhands23]

I like BT. But seeing Tkachuk, Bennett killing it kills me

So glad he is gone

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

I like BT. But seeing Tkachuk, Bennett killing it kills me

So glad he is gone

You never know where a new beginning starts. Maybe this is it. I'm as optimistic as I've ever been right now, it's an exciting off season.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon Surfer

I am sorry if this came off as me saying you are supposed to be anything. I was talking at a demographics level, not a personal level. Demographics can only say things about large groups, they do not mean anything when it comes to an individual person. In the same way an individual does not say anything about a group.


I got into in more in a previous post, but cultural shifts over time, and how human brains change as they age, people who are older are more likely to take a do as I say approach to management. That does not mean that you or the people you have interacted with are like that. Only that if you took random samples of populations you would be more likely to older people would be more likely to be a "do as I say" person.




Experience and knowledge do not mean nothing, but they do not mean as much as people think. The average person is at their peak intelligence in their mid 20s, but experience lets them improve their job performance until their 40s. Experience can only compensate so much as our brains degrade with age. At a certain point experience becomes out of date, and relying on it instead of learning something new becomes a detriment.


To get back to the topic of Sutter, I see him as someone who crossed that threshold of overly relying on out of date experience and knowledge, while undervaluing learning new things and changing. He has had am amazing career, and was a great coach. He just aged out and can no longer adapt to what works better now.

Didn’t they win their division last year? He must have aged a lot in the few months between the seasons.

Or maybe he lost his two best players and his goalie forgot how to stop pucks.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by jayswin

You never know where a new beginning starts. Maybe this is it. I'm as optimistic as I've ever been right now, it's an exciting off season.

I'm a fan...but I've moved away and gained some insight in doing so.

I can say a lot of folks on here eat a daily dose of #### burgers and call it Iice cream in life, job, weather, and hockey team.

Next year...yeah...more of the same and we've got major assets that need to be moved at the draft that won't be.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by jayswin

You never know where a new beginning starts. Maybe this is it. I'm as optimistic as I've ever been right now, it's an exciting off season.

I'm not overly optimistic about the roster and prospect base but I am optimistic about the organizational change. There was a lot of good and bad with Treliving and most of the really good was offset by really bad and those cancelled out we were left with average management at best. I'm hoping with new management the overall decision making will be better than average. All GM's make mistakes but some of Trelvings bad mistakes really hurt the team as the mishandling of the Gaudreau and Tkachuk will set the organization back at least five years.

[JohnnyB]

I'm as pessimistic as I've ever been about the organization. The way things have gone down with Tre, Sutter, the old stars leaving, the toxic environment this year, and even the stuff with the previous arena deal, I find the organization kind of unlikable. It looks like a mess, and with a key part of the problem likely being the ownership my expectations of things ever being radically different are low. The team may bounce back next season with some players returning to form and some youth breaking out, but I'm not seeing a lot in the organization's leadership that makes me want to support the Flames as a brand. As a brand, the Flames don't stand for much of anything positive to me at this point.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Apologies in advance as this is a derail.

Originally Posted by Bandwagon Surfer

I got into in more in a previous post, but cultural shifts over time, and how human brains change as they age, people who are older are more likely to take a do as I say approach to management. That does not mean that you or the people you have interacted with are like that. Only that if you took random samples of populations you would be more likely to older people would be more likely to be a "do as I say" person.

Some really bad assumptions made here. Cultural shifts, aging, brain changes over time, and authoritarian behaviors are four very different things. A lot of variables there that can lead to some dramatic differences.

You mentioned making assumptions based on demographics and study the data to make many of your determinations, but demographics are not used to study and determine generalizations about personalities, behaviors, values, opinions, etc., that is where psychographics comes in. I don't think the data supports your assumptions.

People raised in rigid authoritarian environments are more likely to be accepting of such structure and allow that to become the backbone of their culture and identity. It is why cultural shifts take time and do not spontaneously happen overnight. Millennials and GenZers are the way they are because they grew up in environments where they were given the freedom and latitude to develop these democratic and open attitudes toward issues and each other. You can attribute this to many things, like a shift from the patriarchy to matriarchical foundation in the home, or broad social/ethnic integration in our culture, or the shifting attitudes in masculine and feminine energies of the sexes (women becoming more masculine and men becoming more feminine in their natures and behaviors), and so on. There are lots of influences that have nothing to do with age or demographics.

Experience and knowledge do not mean nothing, but they do not mean as much as people think.

I don't think this is accurate. Knowledge is the intersection of learning and experience. Learning means nothing without application. You may have all the book learning in the world but until you have the experience of applying that learning you have not achieved knowledge. The more experience you have the greater your knowledge on a subject is going to be. It is why those who have experience are thrust into leadership roles, either through direction or through organic means. It's why kids coming out of school aren't just handed leadership roles in most organizations. The knowledge to be an expert has not yet been achieved and the experience to be a successful leader has yet to happen. Cross pollination of certain experiences may contribute to gaining knowledge more quickly, but it takes time and opportunities to learn.

The average person is at their peak intelligence in their mid 20s, but experience lets them improve their job performance until their 40s. Experience can only compensate so much as our brains degrade with age. At a certain point experience becomes out of date, and relying on it instead of learning something new becomes a detriment.

A real over simplification and misunderstanding of peak intelligence as there are many ways to approach and identify intelligence. Generally speaking, speed processing and information recall (fluid intelligence) peak in our early 20's and then slowly degrade over time beyond that age. For some people they do not achieve their peak their peak fluid intelligence until their 40s. That is only one of dozens of measures used to determine cognitive function and performance, many of which don't peak until later in life. Emotional intelligence is thought not to peak until the late 40s or early 50s and accumulated intelligence is thought not to peak until the 60s or even the 70s. It is not easy to make these determinations for individuals without consistent psychological testing. Cognitive decline is a very real thing and affects everyone, just not on the schedule and not all functions at the same time.

To get back to the topic of Sutter, I see him as someone who crossed that threshold of overly relying on out of date experience and knowledge, while undervaluing learning new things and changing. He has had am amazing career, and was a great coach. He just aged out and can no longer adapt to what works better now.

Nawww, he's just stuck in his ways having grown up in a very rigid patriarchical environment and he used that as the foundation of everything he has done. His success was borne out of this so he was not incentivized to change this thinking. Could he? Yes. We all have the ability to change and adapt. Would he? Not a chance. He likes being the cranky old bastard behind the bench and playing mind games. He's not going to change because he's comfortable in who he is and how he does things. There comes a point in everyone's life when you just say, "I'm comfortable, I like who and where I am, #### everything and everyone else." That point comes at different times and different places for different people. Sutter reached his a long time ago. So while he could change, he just isn't changing because that is who Darryl Sutter is.