I’m not asking for a run-and-gun system. I just don’t want the dump-and-chase, perimeter-shot mentality we see every night. You can still play structured hockey while giving skilled players some freedom to create instead of constantly defaulting to low-danger plays.
No team is coached to stay away from the dangerous scoring areas. As plenty of other posters have pointed out, you can't generate dangerous chances unless you have one of three advantages over your opponent:
1. More size, so you can muscle your way into the heavily defended areas.
2. More speed, so you can beat your opponents to those areas.
3. Exceptional skill, so you can make passes and/or shots that your opponents can't counter.
The Flames' roster at this moment has very few players with any of those qualities. They're not executing a system, they are simply trying and failing to perform the hardest part of offence in hockey, because they aren't good enough to do it consistently.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Last edited by Jay Random; 10-23-2025 at 03:02 PM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
We all kind of agree in a way, but we're hung up on if its Huska telling the players to play perimiter or if the players just suck so they're staying outside.
The above video, coupled with the game stats and player totals from the last 2 years would suggest to me that Huska plays a defensive brand of low-event hockey whilst trying to capitalize on high amounts of pucks towards the net with players net-front making it hard on the goalies.
Get pucks up and out of the zone with pace - Have few of these D-men available and our best he gives less than 15m a night to
Get pucks into the o-zone ASAP - Dump and chase - Could argue perfect for your 3rd and 4th line
Have guys driving the net always - Never a bad thing
More shots = More chances, get the puck on net fast - **low danger/high shot volumes** Flames in a nutshell
Dont hold onto the puck long, risky - Dont get creative, just be simple
The problem is every team does this to an extent, but they also have skilled guys (at least 1 line) who are allowed to go out and make plays and play an east-west brand of possession hockey and be a bit more risky with the intent of having a dangerous shift as often as possible when the game allows it.
He's repeatedly said in interviews post the above that he wants more pucks at the net, he wants guys simplifying their game and not getting fancy.
These are all indicators of a defensive-minded, low-danger style of play where you hope to get a bounce or tip and score via grit and resilience in front of the net.
Montreal was not just throwing the puck in at the net the minute they get into the zone, there were numerous sequences of Hutson walking the line looking for a play off the half-boards, lots of east-west cross ice passing for 1 timers that Wolf saved and kept us in it, all game for that matter.
We keep smashing the Flames as a whole for not having enough skill to play anything but low-event hockey, but I think we do have enough for at least 1 line to play something else. Huberdeau's best hockey was in an offensive east-west possession based system, where he carried the puck into the zone and made some amazing plays just a few years ago. Do we all think he couldn't do that again?
Frost has great vision, Coronato seemingly has a knack for finding the right spot and has a top level release in the league if I'm being honest.
Parekh surely has the tools to jump into the play and get creative/walk the line, might need someone to sit back and back him up though.
Nobody is saying they have to play this way all the time, or that all 4 lines have to play this way. You can have your defensive 3rd line with Backlund and Coleman, you can have your 4th line big body dump and chase be hard on their d-men line as well.
But I do think you need to have at least 1 line get the green light to be creative and make things happen, and yea they may get burned from time to time but I'd wager today you'd score more goals right now doing this than what we're watching.
We keep saying we dont have the skill, and I'd agree we have very few with the ability to play like that.
But we have enough for a line, and we certainly cant be any worse than we are as of right now... so can we maybe try? Couple games? See what happens....
Last edited by Royle9; 10-23-2025 at 03:03 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Royle9 For This Useful Post:
The players with the skill to do that offensively, alas, also seem to be the ones who are weakest defensively. It's not much help scoring an extra goal every two or three games if you get caved in for an extra goal per game going the other way.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Huska’s system seems built around getting pucks to the net and crashing hard for rebounds.
It’s all about volume shooting and bodies driving the crease, not a lot of playmaking or cycling.
On a 3-on-2, for example, one guy shoots while the other two crash the net, instead of trying for a high-danger cross-slot pass.
It really stands out, especially when you compare it to how the Habs play, or how the Flames used to look with Gaudreau and Tkachuk. Nobody’s really trying to create, it’s very straight-line hockey.
His comments are more about people not driving the net. But he's not necessarily looking for higher "quality" shots with lateral passes.
It's very boring hockey to watch unless you have guys like Brady or MacK who are exceptional at it and bull through.
The Following User Says Thank You to traptor For This Useful Post:
I don't think there is anything wrong with any of those tactics, but you have to be versatile and a little less predictable. It's the same thing every game, opponents know what to expect and are prepared for it. There is just very little adaptability and few surprises when facing the Flames. Every team traps from time to time, every team dumps and chases when they need to, every team will sometimes utilize shot volume or creativity when appropriate. Applying the same thing for 60 minutes every game doesn't work though.
Is it a personnel thing more than a coaching thing? I honestly don't know. I think they should have the potential to score more based on talent, but there is a lack of game breaking offensive players, so probably a little of both.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 10-23-2025 at 03:22 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
I have seen this argument pop-up a little over the years, and I think it should die.
"Gaudreau, Lindholm and Tkahcuk didn't play play in Sutter's system, and just did what they wanted to do."
This is patently false. Sutter doesn't care who you are - don't play his system, he will bench you. Sutter would have moved Tkachuk down and inserted Brett Ritche in his spot instead who would do everything in the system, and would do so right away.
Lindholm and Tkachuk were both defensively sound. Gaudreau never played better defence than way back under Hartley when he was a back-checking, puck-stripping Datsyuk-lite. Gaudreau couldn't win puck-battles along the boards - that wasn't his forte obviously - but he came back defensively. The entire line was very defensively responsible.
That's why they were the top line in hockey FFS. They were the best 2-way, puck-possession line in the entire NHL that season. They didn't play outside of the system - they were the model for the system and how Sutter expects you to play.
As for Huska's system, people aren't seeing the missed passes across the slot regularly? It isn't all about perimeter shots. I am seeing a lot of plays down low that aren't connecting, and the players on a whole are missing shots, or not getting second and third chances since their battle level was very low outside the last 2 games.
This team has the green light to be offensively dynamic. They just aren't. This isn't the offensive system. There isn't much in the way of an offensive system. Conroy and Huska have both stated a number of times that the players have the freedom to make plays, but that they must fit structurally on the defensive side of the puck when the play is going the other way. Remove that defensive sructure, and you will start seeing way more hard to watch Wolf post-game interviews.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
I cannot stress how bad of an idea it would be to address immediate needs.
Embrace the tank.
Don't be short sighted.
Eh, these sound bites aren’t ever anything to worry about. The most he has done to win now is shuffle out Kuzmenko and Pelletier for Frost and Farabee. Offensive hep could be shuffling out Sharangovich for another struggling player at this point. He didn’t really spend any cap in the summer, can’t see him doing so now.
The problem with how this roster is composed is there's a log jam of leadership eating up key roles that could be used to give kids a proper placement for their personal skillset to flourish and provide some offense.
This is my opinion only but Kadri is not a fit for the way this team plays under this current management team. He provides a desire to be here and help win and can put up points but for an organic meshing of linemates, I find he sticks out like a sore thumb.
Backlund should be the 4th line C and used accordingly. Great leader, clearly missing a step with age.
Coleman, efforts there's, he's a leader on the ice performance wise, I haven't seen him sucking tailpipe so far this year but really, with such an overload on wingers under 27, we could live without him.
Then there's the Defense. We all know Anderssons gone, make it happen already. Love the guy, but Parekh needs his ice.
And get some Left side D or see what you got on the farm.
If there's a real concern about scoring, maybe deploying the same essential FW pairings and switching up the 3rd linemates isn't the answer.
Either way, you're not going to crawl out of the basement sticking to a recipe that isn't really moving the needle.
__________________ "Everybody's so desperate to look smart that nobody is having fun anymore" -Jackie Redmond
I cannot stress how bad of an idea it would be to address immediate needs.
Embrace the tank.
Don't be short sighted.
My take-away from seeing that image is "wow, Chris and Darren got old but Pierre looks terrible".
Anyway... regardless of what happens within this season the Flames need to make a trade for a future #1C with a secondary priority of a top 4 calibre LD. It was true last year, it was true over the summer, and it does not stop being true if the team blows this season. Even if we draft McKenna, we still need those two things because McKenna is a LW and not a C or LD.
Also, tank or no tank, unless Andersson agrees to an extension soon we need to trade him and ideally get one or two of the priority assets back. Having the team tank likely makes that trade easier as there is no need to "maintain the leadership core of the locker room" or whatever.
I really do not see how you can suggest that Conroy or anyone is being short-sighted by sticking to the plan. Short sighted is what you are doing when you look at this season, and only this season, and try to make decisions accordingly. Conroy is doing the opposite, he is working to address organizational needs that go beyond this season.
I bet Conny has both 1sts this year in play hoping to add a player to turn this start around.
It's his MO after all. He's done nothing but trade away futures since he took the big chair.
If we don’t trade at least the Vegas fist and a 2nd for a mid 20’s scoring forward to try to turn this around we are not following the Habs rebuild playbook, which I have been told was very successful.
