Is Bob Hartley the right coach for this team?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by nik-

Well I guess I'm just a dumb caveman since I didn't see the reason Baertschi needed to be a scratch.

Not at all. It's the extreme thoughts on here that Sven being scratch = the opposite of what a rebuild means, or that it was definetely bad for his development and what the team is trying to do. Or the thoughts that because he was scratched that the Flames are "lying" about what this season is about.

I don't know why Sven was scratched either, but it's the thoughts that scratching him means the Flames are re-building wrong or aren't even rebuilding at all or that the coach doesn't like young players at all that are just so strange.

The Flames can be rebuilding and still scrartch Sven, the two things are mutually exclusive. Both can be true, they aren't dependent on each other. And it's this thought that scratching is for sure bad for his development that are so strange.

[Rerun]

Reasons why Sven got scratched last night.:

• Hartley has a hard on for Glencross and he apparently can do no wrong so scratching Scoreface is out of the question
• Stajan is back in the lineup and Hartley expects to see magic out of the Glencross-Stajan-Stempniak line
• You have to move LW Cammy somewhere and you obviously wouldn’t put him on the 3rd or 4th lines… so voila… Cammy gets Sven’s place on the Monahan line.
• Hartley likes LW TJ Galiardi and Lance Bouma so they aren't getting scratched so Sven can play on their lines.
  
  Any other reason is BS

[TjRhythmic]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Not at all. It's the extreme thoughts on here that Sven being scratch = the opposite of what a rebuild means, or that it was definetely bad for his development and what the team is trying to do. Or the thoughts that because he was scratched that the Flames are "lying" about what this season is about.

I don't know why Sven was scratched either, but it's the thoughts that scratching him means the Flames are re-building wrong or aren't even rebuilding at all or that the coach doesn't like young players at all that are just so strange.

The Flames can be rebuilding and still scrartch Sven, the two things are mutually exclusive. Both can be true, they aren't dependent on each other. And it's this thought that scratching is for sure bad for his development that are so strange.

What I think is funny is that the same people that are pissed about scratching Sven and feel that Sven should be given minutes because it's a rebuild, laugh at Edmonton with how they went about their rebuild by just giving minutes to their young stars.

Like many have said, and what I believe as well, is that young players benefit greatly by getting a chance to sit back and see the game. Pretty sure sometime in the year Monahan will in the press box for a game or 2. Sven might end up there again... it's all part of learning the NHL, and paying your dues.

It's amazing how fast cp changes... laughable actually. 1st 5 games, best team and coach ever. 2nd 5 games... they are the worst. They have 10 points in 10 games... by all accounts, I'm more than happy with that right now.

[TurnedTheCorner]

I'm content with Hartley's tenure so far, and have no desire to replace him. I think he's doing a good job so far.

[bubbsy]

i need to see more before making a judgement call. This year, to start, has been pretty good, the kind of energy and effort he has created, for the most part, has been great to see throughout the lineup.

Not judging him on the scratches/line-up decisions, as we'll see how those decisions impact different players and the team throughout the year before making a judgement.

my primary concern from a coaching perspective has been the attention to detail (and effectiveness) with regards to defensive zone coverage. Team seems pretty lost in their own zone and on the PK at times. Hope they have a plan on not only pushing/developing the offensive confidence of the team, but also teaching them how to be sound 2-way players.

[FlamesAddiction]

I think it's silly to compare Baertschi's situation to Glencross, Galiardi, Bouma, etc...

This year (and likely the next one), is all about development. It's nice to get wins along the way, but that shouldn't make them lose sight of the big picture. For right or wrong, Hartley thinks Baertschi can be a better all around player and he thinks tough love is the way to get him on the same page.

Perhaps rewarding him with games even when he isn't buying in isn't the best thing for his future development. What's better.... play him constantly with no repercussions, get a few extra wins along the way in a re-building year and have him develop into a Marco Sturm; or make him want to work on his overall game by threat of being scratched and have him develop into a Marian Hossa (like many say he has the potential) for when the team is ready?

With Glencross, he is a vet and what you see is what you get. Bouma and Galiardi also have limited upside and aren't likely to benefit from the tough love approach.

Maybe a better approach would be to keep him in the line-up and hope he comes around. I would think that is still an option later in the season if this tactic doesn't work.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I think it's silly to compare Baertschi's situation to Glencross, Galiardi, Bouma, etc...

This year (and likely the next one), is all about development. It's nice to get wins along the way, but that shouldn't make them lose sight of the big picture. For right or wrong, Hartley thinks Baertschi can be a better all around player and he thinks tough love is the way to get him on the same page.

Perhaps rewarding him with games even when he isn't buying in isn't the best thing for him future development. What's better.... play him constantly with no repercussions, get a few extra wins along the way in a re-building year and have him develop into a Marco Sturm; or make him want to work on his overall game by threat of being scratched and have him develop into a Marian Hossa (like many say he has the potential)?

With Glencross, he is a vet and what you see is what you get. Bouma and Galiardi also have limited upside and aren't likely to benefit from the tough love approach.

Maybe a better approach would be to keep him in the line-up and hope he comes around. I would think that is still an option later in the season if this tactic doesn't work.

So if you're a vet you have immunity? Perhaps if a vet is playing below what he's capable, being benched is exactly what should happen. Too bad various coaches didn't bench Iggy a few games. If they had, perhaps things might have been different the past few years.


Bench the players who deserve it... not the rookie that doesn't and is playing better than vet who does.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Rerun

So if you're a vet you have immunity? Perhaps if a vet is playing below what he's capable, being benched is exactly what should happen. Too bad various coaches didn't bench Iggy a few games. If they had, perhaps things might have been different the past few years.


Bench the players who deserve it... not the rookie that doesn't and is playing better than vet who does.

Yes and no. As a vet, you've earned a longer rope than a rookie should have.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by strombad

Yes and no. As a vet, you've earned a longer rope than a rookie should have.

Disagree. I think a rookie should be given a break more often than a veteran, especially one with an "A" on their jersey because they're expected to provide leadership, not play lazy, uninterested hockey.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by codynw

Disagree. I think a rookie should be given a break more often than a veteran, especially one with an "A" on their jersey because they're expected to provide leadership, not play lazy, uninterested hockey.

IMO, that's how you potentially ruin a rookie's development. Just look at the team up north. They play the kids regardless of performance. They're given free reign to do what they want, and the result is good invidual stats, but a basement dwelling team. You have to instill good work ethic in them early.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by strombad

Yes and no. As a vet, you've earned a longer rope than a rookie should have.

What happened to the much vaunted meritocracy? Or do different rules apply to different players and "meritocracy" is just bs.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

IMO, that's how you potentially ruin a rookie's development. Just look at the team up north. They play the kids regardless of performance. They're given free reign to do what they want, and the result is good invidual stats, but a basement dwelling team. You have to instill good work ethic in them early.

Edmonton doesn't have any choice. The team is virtually overrun with rookies and the like and very few veterans.

And anyways, if they started benching the poor performers, there'd be nobody left to play.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by strombad

Yes and no. As a vet, you've earned a longer rope than a rookie should have.

Ridiculous.

If that's how it's being run, then we're screwed - because it guarantees all but the drunkest veterans will maintain their ice-time simply because they don't have to go through the growing pains a young player does.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Rerun

So if you're a vet you have immunity? Perhaps if a vet is playing below what he's capable, being benched is exactly what should happen. Too bad various coaches didn't bench Iggy a few games. If they had, perhaps things might have been different the past few years.


Bench the players who deserve it... not the rookie that doesn't and is playing better than vet who does.

Are you upset because Sven got benched, or because Glencross didn't? Because the two are completely un-related, but it would seem from the outside that you feel the two are linked?

That's fine if you are mad Glencross is still getting ice time, but whether Sven should or shouldn't be getting ice time has nothing to do with whether Glencross is or should. Flames Addiction spelled out how the team should be looking at this very well.

Sven's play so far this year absolutley hasn't warranted a benching if the Flames are focused on winning today. The Flames have a better chance winning with him in the line up. But given we are rebuilding and don't care about results today, it nicely allows the coaches to take one of our better players out the line up, for whatever reason, if they think it will make Sven, and therefore the Flames better long term.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Ridiculous.

If that's how it's being run, then we're screwed - because it guarantees all but the drunkest veterans will maintain their ice-time simply because they don't have to go through the growing pains a young player does.

Younger players should be given the same amount of leeway - and possibly even more so long as they're showing the desire and work ethic to improve (something that Sven has in fact shown by all accounts).

It's not like we're talking about Mark Recchi (uncanny work ethic, true professional) here either. In most cases, we're talking about Glencross continuing to get ice time while Sven doesn't. Glencross has a notoriously inconsistent work ethic and has been known to pout about being benched (and, he also has shown an ability to respond positively to being benched). Scratching Glencross could actually be viewed as a motivational tool - but with a player as young as Sven, he isn't going to be able to work on his game at the NHL level unless he's allowed to make the odd mistake and learn from it.

So, if Sven was scratched to let him watch the game from above and study it, so be it - that'd make sense.

But to state that it's because he's not playing a full 3 zone game is the reason (as voiced by Hartley), then we have a reason to be upset - because he's unjustly playing favourites.

I agree it has nothing to do with earning "rope" or "leeway". It has to do with how much you care about developing each individual player.

The Flames, don't give two ####s about developing Glencross. He is what he is, and he will not develop into any better player than he is. Therefore, unless they feel Glencross is mailing it in and poisoning the team culture (maybe he is I don't know) there is no point in benching him. Probably the best course of action for Glencross to find his game is play through it...........but who knows.

Sven on the other hand, the Flames are very concerned with what he will become. They likely hope he's a key player, if not maybe even a franchise player for us down the road. So, if there are even small things he's not doing, and either refuses to do, or doesn't understand how to do, and the Flames coaching staff feels the only way to motivate him to do it is take away ice time, or the only way to make him understand is to have him watch, the you do it.

People need to stop oversimplifying this. It's not as black and white as "coach has one set of rules for veterans and another for rookies". Give you head a shake. It's that coach has a different development plan for every single team member on this team, vets and rookies alike, that requires different things to be worked on and different methods to be used to reach each players goals.

No company, let alone sports team worth it's weight evaluates employees or staff with one treatment path for all, each person needs something different and gets different treatment, good and bad. It's not fricken McD's where the jobs are so simple that its one consistent treatment path for all and one way to succeed and be reward for all, it's far more complex and individualized than that.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I agree it has nothing to do with earning "rope" or "leeway". It has to do with how much you care about developing each individual player.

The Flames, don't give two ####s about developing Glencross. He is what he is, and he will not develop into any better player than he is. Therefore, unless they feel Glencross is mailing it in and poisoning the team culture (maybe he is I don't know) there is no point in benching him. Probably the best course of action for Glencross to find his game is play through it...........but who knows.

Sven on the other hand, the Flames are very concerned with what he will become. They likely hope he's a key player, if not maybe even a franchise player for us down the road. So, if there are even small things he's not doing, and either refuses to do, or doesn't understand how to do, and the Flames coaching staff feels the only way to motivate him to do it is take away ice time, or the only way to make him understand is to have him watch, the you do it.

People need to stop oversimplifying this. It's not as black and white as "coach has one set of rules for veterans and another for rookies". Give you head a shake. It's that coach has a different development plan for every single team member on this team, vets and rookies alike, that requires different things to be worked on and different methods to be used to reach each players goals.

No company, let alone sports team worth it's weight evaluates employees or staff with one treatment path for all, each person needs something different and gets different treatment, good and bad. It's not fricken McD's where the jobs are so simple that its one consistent treatment path for all and one way to succeed and be reward for all, it's far more complex and individualized than that.

I agree with most of this but the bolded part I disagree. I am not sure if Glencross is injured, but him playing uninspired hockey rubs other players. While the team is playing hard some of Glencross's plays have been questionable and risky. We can attribute a couple games where his plays have potentially affected the outcome. The team has been on a high, winning, playing hard and then Glencross carelessly tosses the puck down the ice with less than a minute to go. The other game I recall was also right at the end of the game we needed a goal and he does a back pass to the opposition player at the blue line and skates the other way. I think benching Glencross might not be a bad idea, but letting one guy kill plays at the end of games is just brutal. I am not a big fan of letting him play through that.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Whistle is nailing it all on the head for me with how I see things.

I would just like to add that with the addition of everything he says, you still have to do your best as an organization to manage your assets well.

This means that if an opportunity comes to trade for a Colborne type prospect on the cheap, you do it, even if it pushes another deserving rookie down the depth chart and onto the Heat.

You also have to give your existing vets ice time - to help shoulder the load and work your rookies in the right way (i.e. not the Edmonton way - make them earn their icetime, not just let them get them in over their heads) AND allow the vets to showcase themselves.

I think the Flames' plan for rebuilding is to trade a few additional vets and not re-sign/acquire as many for next season. I truly see next season as the 'bottoming out' zone. I think Glencross could very well become one of those players (whether the Flames are leaning one way or the other, they would be pretty dumb not to look at all their options). The better the vets do, the more assets the Flames can reap from trading them.

I think this year they went shopping for hard-working vets to not only shoulder the load, but also provide some leadership for the rookies to show them what it takes to play in the NHL. Next season, there will be fewer vets (though I imagine there will still be solid veteran presence).

Benching Baertschi was not such a horrible move. It is part of developing a player. Hartley is a guy that has a reputation for developing players. Sure, he loves the hard-nosed guys like McGrattan (whom he makes no secret of having a man-crush on), but he also did a heck of a job developing guys like Tanguay, Hejduk and arguably Kovalchuk to name a few. I didn't like Baertschi being benched, but historically there is enough experience and a proven track record from Hartley that I trust what he is doing.

Meritocracy is part of the culture. However, you still have to properly manage assets, and properly develop them. If that means that some high-flying rookie now or in the future has to sit out a game now and then, so be it. Sven is responding the right way thus far, and I expect him to keep responding that way. Vets are going to be pushed out soon enough.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Ridiculous.

If that's how it's being run, then we're screwed - because it guarantees all but the drunkest veterans will maintain their ice-time simply because they don't have to go through the growing pains a young player does.

It may be ridiculous, but it's how pretty much every team in the NHL is run. Your salary and how many years you've played in a the league play a big part in how you're treated by coaches and management.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Are you upset because Sven got benched, or because Glencross didn't? Because the two are completely un-related, but it would seem from the outside that you feel the two are linked?

That's fine if you are mad Glencross is still getting ice time, but whether Sven should or shouldn't be getting ice time has nothing to do with whether Glencross is or should. Flames Addiction spelled out how the team should be looking at this very well.

Sven's play so far this year absolutley hasn't warranted a benching if the Flames are focused on winning today. The Flames have a better chance winning with him in the line up. But given we are rebuilding and don't care about results today, it nicely allows the coaches to take one of our better players out the line up, for whatever reason, if they think it will make Sven, and therefore the Flames better long term.

Sven got benched because...

Originally Posted by Rerun

Reasons why Sven got scratched last night.:

• Hartley has a hard on for Glencross and he apparently can do no wrong so scratching Scoreface is out of the question
• Stajan is back in the lineup and Hartley expects to see magic out of the Glencross-Stajan-Stempniak line
• You have to move LW Cammy somewhere and you obviously wouldn’t put him on the 3rd or 4th lines… so voila… Cammy gets Sven’s place on the Monahan line.
• Hartley likes LW TJ Galiardi and Lance Bouma so they aren't getting scratched so Sven can play on their lines.
  
  Any other reason is BS

[Petert]

Stop sugar coating the benching.
It was the wrong decision, move on.

Get Jackman out, exile Glencross to the 4th line, and let the kids play.
Otherwise, may as well beg Iggy and Kipper to come back, those two are much better "veterans" to watch than what we have now.