[POLL] Calgary Flames coaching change mega-thread—with poll

[Drunk Uncle]

I voted AV as the coach I want. I think he is the best fit for the Flames.

[bax]

Originally Posted by devo22

so the sales pitch to the public is in full swing huh? Sigh.

Having to sell a potential hire in the first place is never a good sign.

The article I was referencing also had similar sections for Vigneualt, Tippett, and Trotz.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Well that is what I asked. If you believe this team doesn't handle pressure well, wouldn't that be important in the next coach?

Will these NHL players be emboldened by junior hockey success? I guess the world championship was with NHL players but then many people seem to dismiss that tournament.

Or is it the message and approach that's important?

It's not just about hiring the best coach necessarily, but the best coach for this team.

Don't forget that Peters was also behind the same bench as some of the best coaches in the world of the last World Cup winner. His inclusion in that group of NHL luminaries stands out to me as perhaps his best accomplishment.

I can't say if he is what this team needs, but I will say that Bill Peters has won a hell of a lot more than any of the current Flames players.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by bax

The article I was referencing also had similar sections for Vigneualt, Tippett, and Trotz.

yep, but Rick Ball mentioned Peters too and referenced Mike Sullivan in defense of his mediocre record with the Canes. Which IMO is extremely silly because Peters would not enter a locker room with Crosby and Malkin like Sullivan did.

[The Fonz]

I can't believe we're doing this again. Two years of this... and we've hired a GG clone, only angrier.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I can't believe we're doing this again. Two years of this... and we've hired a GG clone, only angrier.

Whats that saying about the definition of insanity?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Svartsengi

Carolina's power play was 18.4% and the penalty kill was 77.4%. I wouldn't be eager to hire Bill Peters based on that. Hurricanes pp was only slightly better than Flames and penalty kill was worse. The Rangers pp was over 21% and penalty kill over 81%. I would rather have Alain Vigneault come here. Don't know if Alain is the right guy but whoever Treliving hires better be known for having a history of good special teams.

Chicago had a poor PP and Penalty Kill this year, and those numbers have fluctuated quite a bit during their recent successful run.

I doubt that Quennville's coaching ability has fluctuated that much during those times.

I'm not sure if drawing a direct correlation between those numbers and your decision as to who to hire is that fruitful without looking at the underlying reasons why those numbers may be poor in any given year.

[EVERLAST]

My question is not who the head coach will be but who the assistants will be handling the pp and the defence.

If Sutter returns does he have a good assistant in mind to coach the defence? I ask because when we had playfair running the defence we did quite well (not at all suggesting Jim comes back).

As for the powerplay who was the brains back then Cookson or Preston?

I see thier still coaching in Ottawa and Anaheim.

Anyway. I hope we aren't just hiring a coach without knowing who this guys assts might end up being.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Locke

And now?

I came to the same conclusion. Just much, much faster.

This is your honest summary of our discussion?

I was suggesting getting to the bottom of a few things before making the final call, but that I'd let Gulutzan go because of the team's collapse rate.

You accused the GM of dragging his feet and having decision paralysis because it hadn't been done in 8 days.

Result comes in and you're patting yourself on the back for being right? I think you completely missed your own conversation.

[sun]

I want one of the guys with 1200+ games as a head coach in the NHL.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Don't forget that Peters was also behind the same bench as some of the best coaches in the world of the last World Cup winner. His inclusion in that group of NHL luminaries stands out to me as perhaps his best accomplishment.

I can't say if he is what this team needs, but I will say that Bill Peters has won a hell of a lot more than any of the current Flames players.

That was a novelty tournament. Oilers coaches and managers have rubbed shoulders with luminaries at international tournaments too. I don't think this specific point really says anything about Peters one way or another.

Some of the Flames players have actually been in NHL playoff games. Some have even won a round. Peters hasn't done that. People are concerned with his NHL record.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Peters has been a guy held in high regard for many years...long before he ever got the Canes job. He was Babcocks right hand guy in Detroit, and they had great success.

Babcock's most successful years in Detroit were before Peters arrived.

Peters was Babcock's assistant for 3 seasons in Detroit. They won one playoff round in those three seasons, losing the first round in five games in the other two seasons.

[howard_the_duck]

I actually really liked what I saw from Bill Peters when digging into him a bit more. Gruff kind of guy that will command a presence in the room, but also a really strong communicator and seems to have great leadership skills. And you cannot deny the coaches he's worked with (and even played under) to help shape his approach.

I'd also recalled hearing earlier this season (I think it was on Hockey Central?) that opposing teams were really impressed with the details in the 'Canes game, that the impression around the league was they were very well coached.

A hard coach that demands accountability from the players, but also gets buy-in to a structured team game. To me, that's exactly what this team needs.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bingo

This is your honest summary of our discussion?

I was suggesting getting to the bottom of a few things before making the final call, but that I'd let Gulutzan go because of the team's collapse rate.

You accused the GM of dragging his feet and having decision paralysis because it hadn't been done in 8 days.

Result comes in and you're patting yourself on the back for being right? I think you completely missed your own conversation.

No, Bingo. He accused the GM of dragging his feet and having decision paralysis because it wasn't done last December.

Many of us knew Gulutzan was a dud a long time ago. And many of us knew that a change needed to happen to save the season. Treliving held on too long.

[SuperMatt18]

People who are writing off Peters strictly because of his record should just look back and see that there are more to that team than just results.

Look at other coaches first couple seasons on bad teams.

Vigneault: .498 points percentage in his first stop in Montreal

Gallant: .480 points percentage in his first stop in Columbus / First Season in Florida

DeBoer: .492 points percentage in his 3 seasons in Florida

Peters: .498 points percentage in his 4 seasons in Carolina.

Just because a team/coach wasn't successful on a team that's historically been bad, doesn't mean they are a bad head coach.

That Carolina roster is pretty sparse, they have made the playoffs once in 12 years since winning the cup, and didn't make the playoffs in the 5 years before Peters either. So more structural problem in that org. than just the coaching.

So not my preferred choice either but it also wouldn't be some guaranteed disaster, and IMO would still be a better hire than the choice of Gulutzan when they made that hire.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Don't forget that Peters was also behind the same bench as some of the best coaches in the world of the last World Cup winner. His inclusion in that group of NHL luminaries stands out to me as perhaps his best accomplishment.

I can't say if he is what this team needs, but I will say that Bill Peters has won a hell of a lot more than any of the current Flames players.

The World Cup selection does seem like quite an accomplishment. I wonder if the Babcock connection had anything to do with that.

Since his career has been twice as long as most Flames players, I would hope he has won more. Is it enough? I guess you shouldn't necessarily need a SC winner behind the bench to convince players.

[cross16]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Rick Ball just brought up a great example of not judging a guy based strictly on his past.

Mike Sullivan was HC in Boston...went out round 1 and then missed the playoffs in 2 seasons. He then joined Tortorella as an assistant in NY where they missed once and went out in round, round 2 and round 3 in their 4 years there. Then they went to Vancouver for that one meltdown season and missed.

Now? 2 time SC winner and looking pretty good to go deep again.

AV was fired from the Habs when he had the team below 2 expansion teams in the standings.

Gallant sure didn't have any success in Columbus

Pete DeBeor never made the playoffs in Florida.

Just because it didn't work with Gulutzan does not mean a similar profile won't again. Every coach is different.

[Shazam]

There are very experienced coaches available right now, and there will be more very experienced coaches available in a few weeks' time.

No need for a rash decision. Or even a rationalized decision.

[Resolute 14]

As far as Peters goes, the only way he's "GG v2" is if his in-game management is as atrocious as Gulutzan's was. And I'd be freaking stunned if that was the case.

However, Peters' general lack of success at the NHL level, regardless of any reasons for it, would make his hire a tremendously risky move for Treliving. Not only would he be gone himself if it didn't work out, but he would be damaging his own future prospects to a far greater degree than if he hired a proven coach that subsequently failed.

[Drunk Uncle]

I want AV, BT, Sutter or Dave Tippett, but I think that it will be Peters. Here's why:

1) I don't think AV will come to Calgary if there is a chance to coach a cup contender. If I'm him, I think Dallas/Washington are closer than Calgary to a cup. Ditto for Trots if he gets let go. I doubt either of these coaches sign anything until June to see what is available for contending team coaching positions.

2) I think Flames management thought long and hard about what type of 5 on 5 system they wanted in place before hiring Gulutzan and I believe an aggressive defensive zone shoot first offensive zone system designed for puck possession ala Babcock was where they landed. Sutter's system from when he coached the Flames was an aggressive forecheck with a passive defensive zone designed to keep the shots low and to the outside. I don't think Flames management will see this as a fit with how they want the team to play. Additionally, Sutter likes his teams to be physical everywhere on the ice. I don't think that Sutter will see the Flames as a fit for his coaching style. Add to that any potential concerns surrounding ownership and Sutter, and I don't think he ends up here even though I think he's the best coach of the bunch available.

3) I don't think you get Dave Tippett. Again, I think he'd be great, but I don't think he's coming the Calgary to be a part of a management group that let him go in Phoenix. While I'm not sure all of the details, it was mentioned in Friedman's April 11th 31 thoughts that Tippet left money on the table upon exiting. That to me says the exit was an emotionally charged one and I doubt everything is just fine now.

4) Once you get past Sutter, AV, BT, Dave Tippet I think you are left with Ruff or Peters as the only NHL experienced coaches. I think management will see Peters over Ruff as the best fit for the type of system Flames management wants to see played. Bill Peters is essentially the Babcock/Gulutzan system 5 on 5. I don't think it's a bad system and as I mentioned in another thread to me it can work really well when you can get bodies to the nets for screens, tips and rebounds from your low quality shots. I haven't watched enough of Carolina's games over the last 4 years to see if Peters has good command of these details. I also can't comment on whether his in-game and roster decisions, PP and PK are sound but if I had to guess who we get (not who I want) I think we end up with Peters, unless more coaches are let go.