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

[Red]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I said respected in hockey circles which is a paraphrase of something he certainly said. I certainly didn't say he was "respected by every single person in said hockey circles"

I recall that now too, odd comment from Friedman. It was a bit like saying that brussel sprouts are gross, but some people like them.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

This one puzzles me. He traded a guy likely not to sign here (or there), a back-up goalie and a pick for Smith.
This doesn't seem like overpayment in the least.
Can you expand on that?

Sure but might be a little off topic.

That summer there was an abundance of goalies in the market. It was my belief that Smith held little value in the trade market and the Flames were dealing from a position of strength. The Coyotes had no interest in keeping him at that point and I can't think of many NHL teams who would have been interested in Smith as a starter.

I guess you are ascribing little value to Hickey as he wasn't going to sign here. Maybe you're right but at that time, I believed he was a legitimate prospect.

The backup goalie was worthless obviously.

The pick is what it is. I am having a hard time taking solace in fact that it should have been a 2nd rounder but for Flames abysmal season.

And it's hard to quantify what it cost for the Flames to Arizona to absorb salary. Probably could have been a lesser pick. What value have the Flames received from that additional cap space?

What could the Flames trade Smith for today? I don't think there is much of a market for the guy. And Arizona has zero regrets about the deal, no doubt.

So I'm calling it a push, not a loss. It's also hard to look at each deal in isolation. The grand sum is a bunch of traded draft picks in a league where it has been proven that winners build through the draft.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Stats are objective until they don't fit our narrative, and then we have to make them subjective.

The correlations aren't strong. You have said a few times that there are two teams that don't fit the stats. That isn't true, there are plenty.

Check out the correlation between points by defensemen and making the playoffs... now that's a solid correlation!

Fair enough.

I think your response is a little strong, but you're welcome to it.

I don't just look at standings in anything I do. It's a quick look at a result that often misses out on too many other things that I would use to make an assessment of good teams from bad.

You don't have to agree with my opinions though, I certainly admit that.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Nelson

That's a very good point. HDSC does not take into account how the teams got to the areas close to the net with the puck, just that they did. If Peters' system produces less odd-man rushes because they don't push the puck forward fast enough like the Penguins, Bruins, Knights, or Lightning, that would be a huge concern to me.

Are we certain Peters' system has allowed for less odd-man rushes in the past? Or are we just inferring this from the lack of goal-scoring?

I haven't watched enough Carolina Hurricanes to know how many odd-man rushes they have. Have you? Or have you read someone who has?

I'm not certain there is data available for free on this I have searched for the past ten minutes and can't find anything that would give this. I'm basing it solely off the eye test and conjecture

[Vinny01]

Sorry Strange Brew butnitnis tough to call our legit starting goalie at $4.25M we acquired for a 3rd a push. It was a clear win and if thst pick was a 2nd likely still would be a clear win.

[Robbob]

I voted that I want Peters. You hear that he is well thought of in hockey circles. I don't put too much weight into the record as Friedman said, Carolina was 15-20M under the cap trying to compete in a pretty tough division. The biggest thing is he is cut from a much different cloth than GG in terms of personality (by the sounds of it more in the lines of a Sutter). I think he will be more of a presence in the room, which may be what this team needs.

[Red]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Well are we going to state what Friedman ACTUALLY said, or just the parts that fit with your narrative?

Let me know the rules here so i can play along properly.

I am not here to play along. If Friedman's praise holds that much value to you then fine. To me it is nothing more but empty words from someone whose job is to play nice.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Fair enough.

I think your response is a little strong, but you're welcome to it.

I don't just look at standings in anything I do. It's a quick look at a result that often misses out on too many other things that I would use to make an assessment of good teams from bad.

You don't have to agree with my opinions though, I certainly admit that.

Bingo - none of us do. We are all making our analyses, and forming our opinions, with all available information. It is perfectly fine to disagree, and to want to give more or less weight to different factors.

But continually saying you want to consider all information just comes off as an insult to the rest of us.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You are seeing what you want to see if you only see Calgary and Carolina as outliers.

Top 10 teams CF%: 4 of the top 6 didn't make the playoffs

Top ten teams in Scoring Chances %: 2 of the top 3, 3 of the top 7, and 4 of the top 9 didn't make the playoffs.

Top ten teams in High Danger Chance %: top 2, and 4 of the top 6 didn't make the playoffs

Honestly it's better to look at it over a longer period of time if you want to see the outliers.

Here is 5v5 Corsi Looking at the last 4 seasons:

1) Los Angeles: 54.16%
2) Carolina: 52.43%
3) Boston: 52.42%
4) Nashville: 52.03%
5) Tampa Bay: 52.01%
6) Pittsburgh: 51.95%
7) Chicago: 51.77%
8) Dallas: 51.47%
9) St. Louis: 51.40%
10) San Jose: 51.40%

In that situation I think it's pretty clear that the teams that people usually think of as "elite" are in the top 10. It really is astounding that the team would be in that company over a 4 year period and not have one playoff appearance to show for it.

Really the failure comes down to save percentage + shooting percentage issues. Over the same 4 year period Carolina is last...by a lot.

31: Carolina - .981
30: Buffalo - .989
29: Edmonton - .991
28: Arizona - .993
27: Vancouver - .994

So they have the Corsi of an elite team, but the PDO of a lottery team.

The problem is these stats don't tell us why this is. And my worry is that when you see these results over a 4 year period that they are no longer an outlier but that there is something structurally wrong with that team.

Then the question is:

A) Are those PDO problems due to the lack of talent on that roster. Poor goaltending & shooting talent has cratered what is actually a really strong system.

or

B) There is something structurally in Peters system that causes his team to give up a higher proportion of high quality scoring chances, while failing to generate their own high quality chances.

Tough to know since I really haven't watched much of Carolina outside of when they play the Flames.

[shutout]

[QUOTE=dissentowner;6661646]Glen Gulutzan NHL coaching record: 146-125

Bill Peters NHL coaching record: 137-138

QUOTE]

I thought that this was an anti advanced stats board.
Quit throwing around those advanced stats metrics of your to try and make your view point look valid.
The only way to judge the coaches is with the "hockey eye-test" and how many Hurricanes games have you actually watched?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Your omissions and additions are certainly fair, and we all have our ways of grading things.

For me Feaster bumbled the Iginla and Bouwmeester deals so badly that I consider asset shedding deals to be pretty impact.

)

I absolutely agree with this and they are impact deals for sure. But it must be a different process to go through vs. calling about specific players. I really do see it as an auction vs. a trade.

I had high hopes for BT based on how he handled those initial deals and I thought we had ourselves a real smart, next great GM kind of guy.

But I'm both puzzled and disappointed at the last 18 months or so, and feels like we have gone from playing a long game to the "just get into the playoffs game". I am concerned we could see a Hall for Larsson type trade this summer and would almost prefer a deal to get some draft picks and leave it at that.

Feaster screwed the pooch on the Iginla and Bouwmeester deals, particularly because he let the other teams throw in garbage to supplement the first round picks. We'd have been so much better off just getting more picks as part of those deals. Very lucky that Berra was turned into a 2nd rounder, which I'm thinking was 100% because of Colorado's incompetence.

[sureLoss]

News Update

https://twitter.com/user/status/987354245602004993

[ComixZone]

...who's on the Fan right now with Pinder? He's hammering Peters pretty significantly.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by The Boy Wonder

I'm not certain there is data available for free on this I have searched for the past ten minutes and can't find anything that would give this. I'm basing it solely off the eye test and conjecture

Fair enough. I am just listening to the Commodore interview. Bill Peters doesn't sound like a guy I would want to play for.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

...who's on the Fan right now with Pinder? He's hammering Peters pretty significantly.

Commodore

[Red]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Just so I'm clear ...

good things are cliche
bad things are bankable

And you wonder why people are so frustrated. In what world does Elliott Friedman bash a coach that he is so obviously going to have to work with in the future?

His opinion is completely irrelevant. As is any "on record" opinion from other NHL coaches or executives.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

...who's on the Fan right now with Pinder? He's hammering Peters pretty significantly.

Commodore hates Babcock. Peters was an assistant coach with Babcock when Commodore played with the Wings.

Not at all surprising that he would bash Peters.

[Toonage]

The Commodore interview is a weird one. Starts by saying he really doesn't know Peters all that well and then dove tails his hate of Babcock into a summary of what he thinks Peters is.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Sure but might be a little off topic.

That summer there was an abundance of goalies in the market. It was my belief that Smith held little value in the trade market and the Flames were dealing from a position of strength. The Coyotes had no interest in keeping him at that point and I can't think of many NHL teams who would have been interested in Smith as a starter.

I guess you are ascribing little value to Hickey as he wasn't going to sign here. Maybe you're right but at that time, I believed he was a legitimate prospect.

The backup goalie was worthless obviously.

The pick is what it is. I am having a hard time taking solace in fact that it should have been a 2nd rounder but for Flames abysmal season.

And it's hard to quantify what it cost for the Flames to Arizona to absorb salary. Probably could have been a lesser pick. What value have the Flames received from that additional cap space?

What could the Flames trade Smith for today? I don't think there is much of a market for the guy. And Arizona has zero regrets about the deal, no doubt.

So I'm calling it a push, not a loss. It's also hard to look at each deal in isolation. The grand sum is a bunch of traded draft picks in a league where it has been proven that winners build through the draft.

Either you look at the trade in hindsight or with the facts in hand at the time. You have evaluated using the parts which suggest to you it was a bad trade at the time (Hickey was a good prospect) and hindsight (what could Smith garner now).

For the record, Treliving would have known that Hickey wasn't going to sign so it's not really even hindsight - he just knew more than you. And what could be garnered now is irrelevant but I think Smith would get picks from the right team. The cost for other goalies was significantly more, or the goalies were worse.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Commodore hates Babcock. Peters was an assistant coach with Babcock when Commodore played with the Wings.

Not at all surprising that he would bash Peters.

Yeah, thought that as well. Commodore isn't really the greatest source of knowledge either, but it's interesting to hear nonetheless. If Peters signs, I'm going to watch a lot of Canes hockey this summer...