Should the Flames fire Gulutzan?

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

You couldn't possibly know for certain that all of these decisions are on the coach. Bennett was drafted as a center before Gulutzen even arrived and for all we know, upper management was stanch on the idea of keeping him as a center which ultimately meant sending Jankowski down because of a lack of playing time. That's a management decision, not just the coach.

Kulak struggled mightily in the preseason so I'm not surprised that Bartkowski started the season. Brodie had to move to the left side because Treliving acquired another right shot defensemen to give the team 3 righties and 3 lefties, so that's clearly a management decision and lastly, the 4th line is currently assembled not by choice. Do you know for a fact that the team's owners and executives are ok with paying 2 players nearly $8 million to sit in Stockton while Lazar gets claimed by another team effectively burning a 2nd round pick on nothing? I think you might need to learn a couple things on NHL decision making before you blame everything one guy.

You cant just point out the things that management may have a hand in and say that means the coach isn't to blame for anything.

Most posters are saying that management isn't without fault either. Doesn't mean the coaching staff isn't falling short.

And then to demean the OP by saying he or she should learn a thing or two about NHL desicion making before blaming one guy? See above for a response to that.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Throw out all the expectations about playoffs and overall placement at the end of the season.

Let's look at the division. I argue it is the weakest division in hockey. One expansion team, the worst rebuilding team by a mile, another team that is half rebuilding, half competing by signing vets, a 'has been' team that many were predicting should start to rebuild, the expected top team completely decimated by injuries... yet the Flames are 5th in the division and closer to 2nd last than 2nd best.

Does anyone want to argue the following statements:

1) Gallant has been an EXCELLENT coach for Vegas this season.

2) John Stevens has the Kings playing very good hockey.

3) DeBoer has been fantastic with the Sharks - a team that many pundits expected to enter a rebuild. This season, they are the best defensive team in the league.

4) Carlyle has done a masterful job of keeping that Anaheim ship together after it got absolutely decimated by injuries. The AHL Ducks have been doing really well all things considering.

5) The Canucks have been out-performing expectations this year.

What can we say about the Flames?

Gulutzan has Calgary playing an absolutely beastly CORSI game.

I can't say they have been better than I thought. I would like to say they have been worse overall than I expected. They have had the luxury of a very healthy roster (Jagr's groin notwithstanding).

I just don't see why after 1.5 seasons, there is a really great reason to keep Gulutzan around. if this was a really tough division, I can see the argument. If the Flames were in the Central? Heck, if they were last or near last, at least we could point and say: "This is an incredibly difficult division. Anyone can come in last!"

There is no excuse for being in 5th. For having Vancouver ahead of the Flames for so long. For having any team ahead of them right now actually ahead of the Flames. This is a weak division, and weaker teams are seemingly getting the benefit from stronger coaching.

Unless you subscribe to the notion that this iteration of the Flames is yet another 'tough to coach' group. I thought Darryl labeled the Flames that years ago as more of an excuse than anything, as he consistently failed to deliver a proper coach for the squad since stepping down. However, even if true back then, what are the chances that it is true once again?

I don't know... I look at coaching as a very likely missing piece of the puzzle. I don't see a team that is over-achieving in the slightest (other than CORSI). I don't see a team that is improving - no consistent upward trajectory that causes me to think that they are on the right path. I think the last two seasons, the Pacific division has been an easier division to confound the issue.

It may not be Gulutzan that is the problem, but he also doesn't seem to really be making much of a difference. Less talented teams in the division have been much better. Less healthy teams in the division have been doing better. Teams that people have written-off are consistently better. Teams that are MUCH worse are nipping at Calgary's heels (and have been ahead of the Flames often).

This healthy Flames team that is 'all-in' and is playing in the weakest division in the NHL, and who has had a pretty damn good schedule up until this point (back to backs, and so on) finds itself as the 5th best team. Not out of it by any stretch, but worse than expected. MUCH worse than expected given a look at the rest of the Pacific.

I don't have confidence in the coaching staff. I don't see this team trending up. I don't see anything in this team other than CORSI stats why this coach should be retained. Treliving fired a coach who did more with much less on the roster. It seems like Gulutzan has been a step down from Hartley, instead of a step up.

Hartley got this group to over-achieve, even for only part of his tenure. Can anyone say that about Gulutzan?

I want that coach that was promised to be an upgrade over Hartley. That coach that would be able to lead Calgary 'further'.

[I_H8_Crawford]

One thing I do know - the core of this team used to CRUSH the Oilers. Now they get absolutely dominated each time they step on the ice against them... I personally put that on GG.

Yes, the Oilers are better than they were a couple years ago, but are they undefeated (with most being very easy wins) better than the Flames?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Table 5

A great coach gets more out of his team than what you think is possible.
An average coach gets what's generally expected out of the roster.
A bad coach is one that gets less than what's expected.

I would say that generally Gulutzan has spent about a third of his tenure in the 2nd category and two-thirds in the 3rd category. Apart from a couple streaks, I'm not sure if this team has ever consistently performed above what people generally think is possible with this roster... especially this year when the goaltending has normalized.

Unless Treliving wants to make massive changes, I think we know what we can expect from this combo of coach plus roster...average at best.

Average-at-best has generally been the Flames motto for 3 decades now though, so I'm assuming management will let this one ride till the summer for fear of looking bad or hurting feelings. Then they will probably go out and hire another cheap rookie coach.

Exactly. Which, on average, makes him a below-average coach.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Table 5

A great coach gets more out of his team than what you think is possible.
An average coach gets what's generally expected out of the roster.
A bad coach is one that gets less than what's expected.

I would say that generally Gulutzan has spent about a third of his tenure in the 2nd category and two-thirds in the 3rd category. Apart from a couple streaks, I'm not sure if this team has ever consistently performed above what people generally think is possible with this roster... especially this year when the goaltending has normalized.

Unless Treliving wants to make massive changes, I think we know what we can expect from this combo of coach plus roster...average at best.

Average-at-best has generally been the Flames motto for 3 decades now though, so I'm assuming management will let this one ride till the summer for fear of looking bad or hurting feelings. Then they will probably go out and hire another cheap rookie coach.

Yep, pretty much this.

If you spend the better part of 16 months wondering, Is this guy the weakest link? then his value over replacement is probably low enough that it can't possibly hurt to try something new.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by #-3

Yep, pretty much this.

If you spend the better part of 16 months wondering, Is this guy the weakest link? then his value over replacement is probably low enough that it can't possibly hurt to try something new.

Agree with this except one minor little details, the word new. I don't want them to fire GG and put Cameron in charge. Cameron is actually the first guy I want gone.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I agree with all this, but I still feel like this team is stagnating. This may not be the right coach with the right message for this group at this particular point in their development. Maybe it's not the worst idea to change it up in the hopes of getting this team to the next stage. Who knows, maybe they would regress under another coach.


All I know is that they are horribly inconsistent, and it's not just about young players carrying the team consistently. The only player who shows up each and every night seems to be Giordano.

If this team was getting worked night in and night out I'd be with you guys on stagnating and and the wrong message and make a change.

But they're just not.

You don't have an issue with a team not following their coach when they routinely outplay the opposition.

They are on their way in my mind. I honestly think they are a game or a week away from a stretch (something like 7-2-1) that will put this whole discussion to rest.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If this team was getting worked night in and night out I'd be with you guys on stagnating and and the wrong message and make a change.

But they're just not.

You don't have an issue with a team not following their coach when they routinely outplay the opposition.

They are on their way in my mind. I honestly think they are a game or a week away from a stretch (something like 7-2-1) that will put this whole discussion to rest.

How often are we gonna keep saying this though, until it finally happens? Last year, and this season, it's been repeated that the Flames are close to breaking through, but they've been consistent on coming out extremely flat on occasion, and having the least amount of 1st period goals this season. They're good at setting themselves behind against the opponent.

I feel the Flames we've been seeing are what they are until they get a new a coach. I feel if the team was going to trend in the right direction, and win on a regular basis, Gulutzan would have this team delivering by now. This is his second year, and there hasn't been a big roster turnover, and the team has been healthy. So it's not an issue of the team trying to gel with a new coach or system.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If this team was getting worked night in and night out I'd be with you guys on stagnating and and the wrong message and make a change.

But they're just not.

You don't have an issue with a team not following their coach when they routinely outplay the opposition.

They are on their way in my mind. I honestly think they are a game or a week away from a stretch (something like 7-2-1) that will put this whole discussion to rest.

It's a results based league. These are pros so competing is expected and outplaying opposition while not getting the results is still not getting the expected results. This isn't kids soccer when they leave 0's on the scoreboard to hide the final result and pat each other on the back for effort. The team is currently out of the playoffs and another loss to the Sharks tonight and this team will almost be relegated to permanent bubble status for the remainder of the season seeing that 3rd in the division will be a tall task. We all mocked McTavish years back for saying the Oilers were visually better but it seems many are willing to resort to the same to back up a coach that isn't getting it done. Results are all that matter.

[Table 5]

The day Treliving traded our 1st round pick for Hamonic is the day expectations were changed for this roster.

This is not a team that should be waiting for a nice "stretch". This is a team that should have been performing in the top 3rd of the league consistently from the beginning of the season.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If this team was getting worked night in and night out I'd be with you guys on stagnating and and the wrong message and make a change.

But they're just not.

You don't have an issue with a team not following their coach when they routinely outplay the opposition.

They are on their way in my mind. I honestly think they are a game or a week away from a stretch (something like 7-2-1) that will put this whole discussion to rest.

What would change your mind about the coach Bingo? Not get that 7-2-1 streak? Miss the playoffs? Get easily bounced in the first round again?

I would need to see a 30 game clip of consistently good play. A winning record and good goal differential. If GG delivers that he gains a fan.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Realtor 1

We can agree to disagree

We barely got into the playoffs and if not for a magical 10 game win streak, there was no playoffs. At the end of the day, playoffs is playoffs so I will give you that....until we are man handled in 4 games and done for the year. Even so, it was a learning curve... GG used learning new systems as the excuse for early failures and we all know goaltending was another issue. Tre solves Glens goalie problems and Glen has a team that now knows his system....whats this years excuse?


If I watched a consistent effort each night and we were having the issues we are, then absolutely I would agree with you. I feel like there are 1 of 3 teams we could watch on any given night.

Watch the game tonight and count the number of times

On the breakout, there is no pressure on the d man but they force a long pass. 1 of 3 things will happen
- A very high % of these are turnovers.
-A fwd now has the puck with a guy all over him.
- It is deflected into the zone to chase but the D man takes too long to make their decision so the fwds are standing still and the other team easily retrieves the dump in.

The D could easily continue to bring the puck up ice which eventually opens up a passing lane or easy entry into the zone.

On the PP, count the shots from the point or high wing that are wide, blocked or ring around the boards and leave the zone. Watch other teams use the point to draw attackers high to open up some nifty play down low. Watch the flames use the point as the main shot with incredibly low odds of getting through. The best was when we decided to mix the quick pass into the slot to Monahan and all of a sudden we started scoring for a few games. Who would have thought other teams would pick up on that and take it away all while we have no answer but to go back to the point shot.

Watch the number of times Smith plays the puck and the D men are along the boards near the hashmarks. By the time the puck is played, there is pressure on the D man. It counts as a turnover but they really had no chance and we now get hemmed into our own zone. I believe this is why we have the success we do with Rittich in net. He stops it behind the net and allows the team to regroup. As the coach you either need to tell Smith when he wants the puck left behind the net or draw up a plan to utilize his elite puck handling.

All I know is that the current expectations on this team are way too high which is likely the reason for all this sourness because it's not like we're toiling in the basement of the NHL right now. I expected this team to battle it out for a wild card position or the final spot in the Pacific division which is exactly where we are.

We've seen consistency over the last month right now, we're just not getting the desired results. I'm not a big advanced stats guy, but we're a top possession team right now and it shows with the way we're consistently out playing and out chancing our opponents. We've run into some bad luck with bounces and outstanding goaltending performances, but I like the process in which we've played. Everyone had these conversations last season regarding poor special teams and inconsistencies, but this same group figured it out and I think they can do it again. We just need to preach some patience instead bringing out the pitchforks after one bad game.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Red

Sounds like you already have all the right answers...wow, what an arrogant post.

I don't care. Your post was complete junk. Pinning all that on just one guy is just straight up unfair and ignorant. I'm not even a big Glen Gulutzen fan, I don't care if he gets canned or not. But the type of things being said in this thread makes me shake my head.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If this team was getting worked night in and night out I'd be with you guys on stagnating and and the wrong message and make a change.

But they're just not.

You don't have an issue with a team not following their coach when they routinely outplay the opposition.

They are on their way in my mind. I honestly think they are a game or a week away from a stretch (something like 7-2-1) that will put this whole discussion to rest.

Their best stretch at home was when they looked pretty crap, and i believe the underlying stats stated as much.

Now they're stats look better, yet it's not translating to Ws.

What i see is a team that is ok 5 on 5, with pretty frigin ugly special teams play (yes, the Pk sucks too, it almost feels like a fluke that they don't get scored against rather than a strong puck pressure PK). A team that is extremely mentally weak, as soon as they have an inevitably poor PP they basically "Crumple" and are only able to figure out how to get momentum back once the game has already been given away.

Most of all i see a team that is a below average break out team, despite having arguably a top5-10 mobile/pucking moving d core. It seems they have ONE means to getting the puck moving up ice, and if the opposition coach has half a brain to adjust, the flames will look completely ineffective and useless the rest of the night. There have been SO many games where the team looks like the team is braindead. I seriously don't believe it's for a lack of effort. It's a complete inability for the coaching staff to figure out a breakout play once the only strategy they employ is taken away.

The arguments/opinions i pose that this coaching staff is a below average one can be summarized as:
- Terrible special teams
- terrible breakouts
- terrible in game adjustments

Oh, and if this team fails to beat the oilers again this season, that would more or less solidify him as a deadbeat coach in my eyes, strictly from an emotional fan perspective.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

You cant just point out the things that management may have a hand in and say that means the coach isn't to blame for anything.

Most posters are saying that management isn't without fault either. Doesn't mean the coaching staff isn't falling short.

And then to demean the OP by saying he or she should learn a thing or two about NHL desicion making before blaming one guy? See above for a response to that.

I'm not saying that it's completely the fault of management. What I was replying to was the fact that we can't 100% pin all that on the coach. How does anyone here actually know whether it was a call from the coach or from upper management. It could very well be a 50-50 decision, so you can't pin it all on just one guy.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I want that coach that was promised to be an upgrade over Hartley. That coach that would be able to lead Calgary 'further'.

I think that problem is that Treliving probably approached the coaching hire like he does everything else...with sound research and methodology, and a focus on stats and things you can track. But he didn't really take into account account the gooey things that you can't measure. Leadership, presence, voice, personality, and the general ability to get people to do what you ask.

Hartley had plenty of the second group of items, but seemed to lack in the first. Gultuzan looks to be the complete opposite...he's so focused on methodology that he forgets he has to be a leader of men. He might do all the rights things on paper, but he may just not have that quality that makes people follow you.

You need somebody to be that guy. Either you have leadership in the dressing room that does that, or you need your head coach to be the general. The Flames seem to have neither.

This team is desperate for somebody to come in and take charge again.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

Oh, and if this team fails to beat the oilers again this season, that would more or less solidify him as a deadbeat coach in my eyes, strictly from an emotional fan perspective.

yup a lot of people have Jan 25 circled on their calendars as the last straw.
Then 5 days later the mighty Golden Knights come to town.

it's a very tough month coming up.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

All I know is that the current expectations on this team are way too high which is likely the reason for all this sourness because it's not like we're toiling in the basement of the NHL right now. I expected this team to battle it out for a wild card position or the final spot in the Pacific division which is exactly where we are.

We've seen consistency over the last month right now, we're just not getting the desired results. I'm not a big advanced stats guy, but we're a top possession team right now and it shows with the way we're consistently out playing and out chancing our opponents. We've run into some bad luck with bounces and outstanding goaltending performances, but I like the process in which we've played. Everyone had these conversations last season regarding poor special teams and inconsistencies, but this same group figured it out and I think they can do it again. We just need to preach some patience instead bringing out the pitchforks after one bad game.

You keep saying expectations are way to high. I'm curious what's your expectations of the team this year as far as how far they go/where they finish? Not what you hope for but what you expected going into the season

[Red]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I don't care. Your post was complete junk. Pinning all that on just one guy is just straight up unfair and ignorant. I'm not even a big Glen Gulutzen fan, I don't care if he gets canned or not. But the type of things being said in this thread makes me shake my head.

My posts may be junk and all, but at least I am not the one insinuating that Murray Edwards or some other higher up tells GG to play a guy with 0 PP goals on the top PP unit. Edwards probably liked what he saw in Chiasson last year when he played on the top line.
I guess Edwards also suggested what the 4th line should look like.
Is Treliving line matching during games? Oh yes, silly me, our coach doesn't like to line match. Because you now, our 4th line is as good as any line in the NHL. After all, it was Murray fricken Edwards that built it.

I can respect other's opinions why GG should get a pass. But that's because some of them actually brought some arguments and statistics. Your upper management meddling theories (unfounded I might say) don't hold any water. Maybe when I learn a thing or two about decision making in the NHL it will make more sense to me. Maybe.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If this team was getting worked night in and night out I'd be with you guys on stagnating and and the wrong message and make a change.

But they're just not.

You don't have an issue with a team not following their coach when they routinely outplay the opposition.

They are on their way in my mind. I honestly think they are a game or a week away from a stretch (something like 7-2-1) that will put this whole discussion to rest.

What is the end goal? Making the playoffs? Okay, let's say we tetris our way into a playoff spot in April.

What can a Gulutzan led team accomplish when the opponent can isolate our achlles heels? Between the Canucks' meltdown in 2015 as they kept stubbornly forcing Sbisa and Bieksa, to the Flames meltdown in 2017 where Gulutzan kept stubbornly forcing Engelland and Bartkowski, to the general inability of either team to activate a second wave of offense when the checking got tight, what about Gulutzan do you believe can take this team deep past round one?

Hiscoaching is neither proven for regular season success (unlike Barry Trotz, Gerard Gallant, Mike Babcock, or Bruce Boudreau) nor has he been showing any penchant for postseason cleverness/desperation like Darryl Sutter, Joel Quennville, or Peter Laviolette. Honestly, I don't even know if he is a good coach, but what I have seen from Jack Capuano in the playoffs would instill me woth a lot more confidence than what I have seen from teams in which Gulutzan has played a part.