[Trade] Elias Lindholm + Noah Hanifin to Flames for D. Hamilton, Micheal Ferland, & Adam Fox

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

How do you know they didn’t use different criteria
The truth is you know next to nothing about what process they followed or decision criteria

I do know that whatever criteria they used, it resulted in the hiring of a coach that gave us two years of the worst hockey this franchise has ever seen. So perhaps a change in approach was called for.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You guys honestly don’t think this sort of stuff is a secret? That these guys don’t have these conversations? Don’t go to clinics with each other and run in similar circles and that any of this is a closely guarded secret?

Again, it’s not an interview where these things are a surprise. How many people here know how Daryl works the media after a big win and after a big loss? How many here know how Daryl runs his team, how he sets them up for success?

If you’ve been paying attention, I’m betting a lot, and that’s from the perspective of a fan. Now imagine being in a league for 10 years where he’s one of the 30 guys doing a job. You don’t think you’d get an even better perspective?

Like, I get maybe there will be some high level platitude you might learn, but the grits and gravy is laid bare, these aren’t mystery boxes.

Again, I get it if we’re talking about a coach who is coming in from college or junior or the AHL, sure, but history is littered with coaches coming in without a big interview process, because most GMs know what they’re building, have an idea of what they need to support that, and go out and get it. If that don’t think the 95% of what they know about a guy is a fit, they’re not going to sit down to clear up the 5%.

Fine. Whatever.

I see it differently. At the NHL level you are dealing with a lot of different personalities, egos, etc. Being able to get them on the same page and performing at their best is not simple, it is quite involved. Every team is different and every coach is different. And just because he may have talked to or heard about how guys coach, he doesn’t have the insight you would get from seeing their work every day.

I think it is absurd to think you can’t learn something from a guy by having a detailed, focused conversation with him.

Frankly, I think there are other things that were factors for Treliving as well.

Either way, he hired the guy he wanted. Decisively and unapologetically.

And if Peters does not succeed, both heads should roll.

And if I was an owner, my window for him would be one (1) year. No playoffs, no job.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

I do know that whatever criteria they used, it resulted in the hiring of a coach that gave us two years of the worst hockey this franchise has ever seen. So perhaps a change in approach was called for.

And perhaps there was a change in approach

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by tkflames

I agree with the argument that Carolina has had a light schedule, but actually looking at the QOC (based on average points that the opposition achieved last year) for the month of October, Carolina and Calgary have had a similar quality of schedule. The below list ranks this easiest to hardest schedule (the number following each team is the average total points achieved by the opposition)

Boston Bruins 78.3
Columbus Blue Jackets 84.8
Pittsburgh Penguins 84.9
Los Angeles Kings 85.6
Anaheim Ducks 85.8
Tampa Bay Lightning 88.2
San Jose Sharks 89.3
Chicago Blackhawks 89.5
Montreal Canadiens 89.7
Colorado Avalanche 89.8
Nashville Predators 90.2
Winnipeg Jets 90.2
Florida Panthers 90.3
Arizona Coyotes 90.6
Toronto Maple Leafs 90.7
Dallas Stars 90.7
New York Rangers 91.2
St. Louis Blues 91.4
Vegas Golden Knights 91.4
Minnesota Wild 91.6
Calgary Flames 92.4
Carolina Hurricanes 92.9
Washington Capitals 93.1
Buffalo Sabres 93.6
Ottawa Senators 94.4
Vancouver Canucks 96.2
Philadelphia Flyers 96.5
Detroit Red Wings 98.3
New Jersey Devils 99.3
New York Islanders 99.4
Edmonton Oilers 102.5

**Statistics disclaimer, a team playing 5 really good teams and 5 really bad teams could have the same "average quality of opposition" as a team playing 10 mediocre teams.

Let me know when Carolina goes to china...goes west for two games, goes east for two games and then goes back west for two games and then back again.

Flames have probably put on more miles already than Carolina will before Christmas.

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Let me know when Carolina goes to china...goes west for two games, goes east for two games and then goes back west for two games and then back again.

Flames have probably put on more miles already than Carolina will before Christmas.

No one is arguing with that, I just found the quality of competition interesting as this does make a difference.

As you noted, it makes no sense to compare Calgary and Carolina, regardless of schedule. Carolina's success in this trade and coaching change will be measured based on where they finish relative to last year. Calgary's success in this trade will likewise be measured against last season. So far both are outperforming last year's start.

[stang]

Maybe the comparison is to picking cars to go to the race track with. There’s a couple cars that have won the race in the past and there’s the new race car that hasn’t done very well but you have a good feeling about.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

And perhaps there was a change in approach

If there was, it certainly hasn’t translated into the one area that can’t be handwaved away with a “you don’t know!” Results in the standings.

So let’s hope Peters can orchestrate something this franchise hasn’t seen in decades - a miraculous turnaround from mediocre hockey. But so far his team has looked exactly how I expected it to.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

If there was, it certainly hasn’t translated into the one area that can’t be handwaved away with a “you don’t know!” Results in the standings.

So let’s hope Peters can orchestrate something this franchise hasn’t seen in decades - a miraculous turnaround from mediocre hockey. But so far his team has looked exactly how I expected it to.

Maybe you're the smartest guy in the room!

Standings are the bottom line, but they're not the be all and end all of analysis when it comes to rosters and coaches in any organisation worth it's salt.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Maybe you're the smartest guy in the room!



Standings are the bottom line, but they're not the be all and end all of analysis when it comes to rosters and coaches in any organisation worth it's salt.

Or maybe I can form reasonable expectations and opinions based on the body of evidence available when he was hired. I could still turn out to be wrong and maybe Peters does turn out to be a diamond in the rough. But can we agree that the returns in this young season have not lived up to that?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Maybe you're the smartest guy in the room!

Standings are the bottom line, but they're not the be all and end all of analysis when it comes to rosters and coaches in any organisation worth it's salt.

Yes. Peters’ time out calling is on point.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

Or maybe I can form reasonable expectations and opinions based on the body of evidence available when he was hired. I could still turn out to be wrong and maybe Peters does turn out to be a diamond in the rough. But can we agree that the returns in this young season have not lived up to that?

I don't think anyone is happy.

I've mentioned they give up too much on numerous occasions, ... something more specific than the standings.

So you look at Peters work in Carolina and his high danger is middle of the pack which a) says what's happening now isn't all on Peters and b) it is middle of the pack so it's an issue in what he does by extending the team in terms of zone time.

Right now there's likely a disconnect between what the coach wants and what the players are able to execute.

[Mr.Coffee]

So far Peters' has been really good. I too was leery of the hire but have been really pleasantly surprised. I thought it was strange how there didn't seem to be a broader search or rumours of interviews when there were some great coaches on the market though too, I just didn't understand that thought process.

It's irrelevant though because Peters has done or said all the things I hoped Gulutzan would. For all the things I complained about Gulutzan, Peters has fixed all those problems. He demonstrates great leadership, uses tactics like timeouts or challenges properly, and most important rewards players who are playing well and demotes players who aren't (true meritocracy). He seems highly tuned into each and every game and he isn't afraid to call people on their BS in a way that doesn't embarrass them.

The most concerning thing for me today is that Peters is showing us that it's actually just that many of the players simply don't care enough or have that passion in them that is needed to be successful.

[heep223]

All I know is that if the team underperforms with Peters, Treliving is going down with the ship.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by heep223

All I know is that if the team underperforms with Peters, Treliving is going down with the ship.

Sure hoping you know more than that because you don’t actually know that



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lanny_McDonald]

Seems a very logical conclusion. How may GMs get to make major trade-after-trade, and coach hire-after-hire? Treliving has been given two cracks at each. If he doesn't get this team to perform, then he should be shown the door.

[FaFaFlamey]

Originally Posted by heep223

All I know is that if the team underperforms with Peters, Treliving is going down with the ship.

I think you’re right. You can go through 3 coaches but soon it’s your job on the line. I like Tre and think he’s done a good job but I also know there’s only so much patience and so many 5 year plans.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by New Era

Seems a very logical conclusion. How may GMs get to make major trade-after-trade, and coach hire-after-hire? Treliving has been given two cracks at each. If he doesn't get this team to perform, then he should be shown the door.

Two strikes you're out?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by New Era

Seems a very logical conclusion. How may GMs get to make major trade-after-trade, and coach hire-after-hire? Treliving has been given two cracks at each. If he doesn't get this team to perform, then he should be shown the door.

Well most were consensus in thinking his moves this summer were solid so there’s most of the job description.

If it’s shown to be Peters fault then for sure he can’t fail in another coach.

If it’s a core issue and the elements of the core in question are players that were here before he arrived then you may have a surprise.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by tkflames

I agree with the argument that Carolina has had a light schedule, but actually looking at the QOC (based on average points that the opposition achieved last year) for the month of October, Carolina and Calgary have had a similar quality of schedule. The below list ranks this easiest to hardest schedule (the number following each team is the average total points achieved by the opposition)

Boston Bruins 78.3
Columbus Blue Jackets 84.8
Pittsburgh Penguins 84.9
Los Angeles Kings 85.6
Anaheim Ducks 85.8
Tampa Bay Lightning 88.2
San Jose Sharks 89.3
Chicago Blackhawks 89.5
Montreal Canadiens 89.7
Colorado Avalanche 89.8
Nashville Predators 90.2
Winnipeg Jets 90.2
Florida Panthers 90.3
Arizona Coyotes 90.6
Toronto Maple Leafs 90.7
Dallas Stars 90.7
New York Rangers 91.2
St. Louis Blues 91.4
Vegas Golden Knights 91.4
Minnesota Wild 91.6
Calgary Flames 92.4
Carolina Hurricanes 92.9
Washington Capitals 93.1
Buffalo Sabres 93.6
Ottawa Senators 94.4
Vancouver Canucks 96.2
Philadelphia Flyers 96.5
Detroit Red Wings 98.3
New Jersey Devils 99.3
New York Islanders 99.4
Edmonton Oilers 102.5

**Statistics disclaimer, a team playing 5 really good teams and 5 really bad teams could have the same "average quality of opposition" as a team playing 10 mediocre teams.

Holy crap. I knew Edmonton had a bad schedule but I didnt see it on paper like that until now.

It looks like it was chosen by Calgarypuck.

[transplant99]

BT has only hired 2 coaches....lots of GM's, at least in the past, have been given 3 or more.

Not saying that happens here, but it is far from unprecedented.