Who should replace Ryan Huska as Flames Head Coach?

[Igottago]

Looking to change the coaching at this stage of the retool/rebuild is certifiably insane. And its not about "defending" him. Huska is fine. I don't know if he's an average, good, or great coach. At this point it really doesn't matter too much. Good enough is okay for now. Once the team starts taking steps towards being a decent playoff team you can re-evaluate.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Unless you saw last season as more a result of goaltending than Huska's magic touch (lol).

Considering the track records of jack adams winners getting fired shortly thereafter, its not the accolade people hype it up to be.

We're seeing a huska coached team with average goaltending now and its uuugly. It literally has no strengths.

That people line up to defend him and put it all on roster quality is basically balling him out no matter whar asinine in game decisions he makes.

The truth might be somewhere in fhe middle, but going all the way to absolving him of all blame for the on ice product is its own type of delusional.

At least we'll benefit from it, but im not going to pretend this guy is good or proven solely because of last seaaon.

The apologists are equally as perplexing.

Apologists?

That's a reach. To see a flawed roster and not think it's all the coach's fault isn't being an apologist.

I like world realist better!

Flames are the SECOND best team in xGA60 in the NHL this year by the way. May be a system in place there!

[1Nite]

He has a new job, just got elected as mayor of edmonton.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by mikeecho

Coming into this year, Gulutzan was a career 0.53% Head Coach. He's the definition of mid. Having no coach would yield similar performance as he has had as a Head Coach.

You are assuming that an average team with no coach for an entire season would do no worse than an average team with an average coach.

Show your work. What is the all-time record of NHL teams with no coach? Heck, you can bring in evidence from other leagues if you want.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Apologists?

That's a reach. To see a flawed roster and not think it's all the coach's fault isn't being an apologist.

I like world realist better!

Flames are the SECOND best team in xGA60 in the NHL this year by the way. May be a system in place there!

I did see the Flames were 7th in 5v5 xgf%, which shocks the heck out of me. It just doesn't feel like the Flames are getting either a large volume of shots, or significant number of high danger chances to drive that xgf% up. Truly a perplexing difference in how I would guess people perceive these games and what this metric suggests.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

I did see the Flames were 7th in 5v5 xgf%, which shocks the heck out of me. It just doesn't feel like the Flames are getting either a large volume of shots, or significant number of high danger chances to drive that xgf% up. Truly a perplexing difference in how I would guess people perceive these games and what this metric suggests.

Yeah I think this just proves how flawed advanced stats are. Our shots are mostly from the perimeter with no screen.

I don't know how anyone could watch the Flames and believe they are actually generating a lot of chances.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

I did see the Flames were 7th in 5v5 xgf%, which shocks the heck out of me. It just doesn't feel like the Flames are getting either a large volume of shots, or significant number of high danger chances to drive that xgf% up. Truly a perplexing difference in how I would guess people perceive these games and what this metric suggests.

I think it's possible that expected goal models give too much weight to medium danger shot locations.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

Yeah I think this just proves how flawed advanced stats are. Our shots are mostly from the perimeter with no screen.

I don't know how anyone could watch the Flames and believe they are actually generating a lot of chances.

Guess what!

They're not.

So calling a stat flawed that doesn't even support what you are arguing it supports isn't a good look.

In fact they actually support what you should be advocating.

Flames are 22nd in xGF60
Flames are 2nd in CF60

That's the definition of getting a lift from shooting from everywhere.

However I said they are 2nd in xGA60 which is a defensive system that appears to be working.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

Yeah I think this just proves how flawed advanced stats are. Our shots are mostly from the perimeter with no screen.

I don't know how anyone could watch the Flames and believe they are actually generating a lot of chances.

No they aren't. That's just the narrative. Most of their shot attempts are from close in. Which means they get blocked a lot, and don't make the goalie move much. It's not even true of their successful attempts. They scored twice from the point with people tipping/screening last game. The game before they scored on a rebound and a one timer. The game before they had a one timer and two goals from the slot.

Look at the heat map from a random game, say, the Preds loss:

https://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2025020183

Or the Sens game:
https://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2025020168

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No they aren't. That's just the narrative. Most of their shot attempts are from close in. Which means they get blocked a lot, and don't make the goalie move much. It's not even true of their successful attempts. They scored twice from the point with people tipping/screening last game. The game before they scored on a rebound and a one timer. The game before they had a one timer and two goals from the slot.

Look at the heat map from a random game, say, the Preds loss:

https://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2025020183

Or the Sens game:
https://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2025020168

NHL.com has the new advanced stats.

Flames are more than the NHL average in high danger and low danger shots, below average in mid danger shots.

https://www.nhl.com/nhl-edge/teams/c...-20/20252026/2

[SuperMatt18]

And the problem is little pre puck movement.

Shot from a point, maybe get a tip, smash the puck into the goalies pads on rebounds from in close.

[Ba'alzamon]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

And the problem is little pre puck movement.

Shot from a point, maybe get a tip, smash the puck into the goalies pads on rebounds from in close.

That and shot velocity, which IIRC the Flames also grade rather poor in.

In any case, the Flames' good xG differential has more to do with their defense than their offense. (and defense is what Bingo was referring to when he pointed to xGA)

[FlameyMcFlameFace]

Whoever works well with our new star player next year.... Mckenna

[CroFlames]

You should keep Husk for this season and next. He's your rebuild guy.

If people are upset at the results this year, then complain about Conny putting together a weak team, not the coaching. Make no mistake, this team is WEAK and not even the GOAT coach could do much with it. No high-end star forwards, no scoring depth, no top tier d-men. Only thing they have is good goaltending.

Remember, they OVERACHIEVED last year. This year they are achieving exactly what we thought they would.



No truer words.