The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[Erick Estrada]

Brouwer is going to be back. No way ownership buys out the remaining two years of that deal. Wideman never got bought out and he was barely an NHL caliber player in his last season.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Brouwer has been bounced around with a bad coach.

Simple fix this year would have been to put him with Backlund and Frolik.
Put Tkachuk with Bennett and Janko.
Then you have 3 actual lines.

Hathaway - the guy is a 4th liner at best, really a fringe player /AHLer.

Brouwer has not shown great value for money but has been deployed in the bottom 6 blender.

They can’t get rid of Gulutzan quickly enough.

[Mr.Coffee]

Gulutzan should have been gone in December. When it was clear he was the wrong fit for the team, enough time had passed to evaluate effectively, he still wasn't able to get things working, and he'd lost confidence of the team and fans.

Every day since mid-December in my opinion is a day wasted and one day closer to the inevitable. Nobody, and I mean nobody, that I have talked to, thinks the Flames can win the Cup with Gulutzan behind the bench.

I presume the only reason he's still here is because the "right" coach isn't available.

If the fans on this site can sense the problems the coaching has created, you can bet the management of the team has recognized what has to happen long ago. And if they can't, they should go too. Personally, if I was in charge and Gulutzan hadn't been canned within 1 week of season ending, Treliving should go too.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Brouwer has been bounced around with a bad coach.

Simple fix this year would have been to put him with Backlund and Frolik.
Put Tkachuk with Bennett and Janko.
Then you have 3 actual lines.

Hathaway - the guy is a 4th liner at best, really a fringe player /AHLer.

Brouwer has not shown great value for money but has been deployed in the bottom 6 blender.

They can’t get rid of Gulutzan quickly enough.

In this case, there was good reason for that. He's not been good enough as a top 6 guy.

Brouwer being deployed in the bottom 6 blender is largely his fault because he was crap for 80% of last year when he got hurt and hasn't been much better for a good portion of this year.

He had a fair chance to redeem himself this year by getting a regular shot in the top 6 earlier in the year but he whiffed on that chance.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I presume the only reason he's still here is because the "right" coach isn't available.

If the fans on this site can sense the problems the coaching has created, you can bet the management of the team has recognized what has to happen long ago. And if they can't, they should go too. Personally, if I was in charge and Gulutzan hadn't been canned within 1 week of season ending, Treliving should go too.

Agree with your general thought process. But if the right coach is not available, what happens? If Treliving remains then he is stuck in a catch 22. If Treliving gets fired, the organization loses needs a relatively competent GM *and* is still without a good coach.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Agree with your general thought process. But if the right coach is not available, what happens? If Treliving remains then he is stuck in a catch 22. If Treliving gets fired, the organization loses a relatively competent GM *and* is still without a good coach.

Treliving has been here for several years and there have been some good moves and some stinkers.

Honestly, what is his impact on the team and its corresponding results?

Sutter got Kipper, plus the 2004 lineup enhancements and made it to game 7.
He arguably ran his course chasing that
Feaster blew it up, brought in Hartley and the always earned mantra, drafted Johnny etc. and started the rebuild, making the playoffs earlier than expected and winning a round.
Treliving has made the playoffs with Feaster’s roster, got to round 2, fired the Jack Adams winner that did that, and brought in a milquetoast coach that has the team underachieving and fans as frustrated as they have been since Brent Sutter.

What makes him relatively competent beyond the average GM again? Not on ice results atttrbutable to his roster moves. Yet. Good contracts for existing players, sure. Fine but average drafting. Poor professional scouting. Poor goalie management. Let’s call a spade a spade. The team is worse on ice than on paper and ultimately someone has to be responsible for that.

[Wastedyouth]

I am no booster of Gulutzan, but lamenting firing Hartley is hilarious.

The Flames were one of the worst possession teams in the league under Hartley. They were handily outshot and outplayed by almost every team in the league.

I think there is some revisionist history going on here in some peoples minds.

[djsFlames]

Hartley was poor in different areas than Gulutzan. Gulutzan's weaknesses are just (far) more frustrating from a fan/viewer perspective.

I remember us being a low possession team, but also remember there being a lot of stretch passes, odd man breaks and active D when we did attack which was a lot of fun. It makes sense that it's more entertaining to watch a team attack with speed and creativity several times a game with a shot blocking style defense than seeing a team break out as a full unit with the same set play, cued drop passes and cycling around the perimeter for a good portion of the game while generating vastly perimeter shots with little room for creativity because most often the other team's defenders are already in place to keep them out of high danger areas.

Cumulatively, the results were pretty similar between both teams with Hartley's Flames getting the fortune of landing the declining Canucks the one season. The shot blocking of Hartley's system led to unnecessary injuries and the same inconsistency of play within games was there then too. Controlling the flow of play a bit more than they did would've helped the team be more effective. But while still allowing creativity and utilizing the players strengths, unlike with GG. But #### did that team believe every night and that's so sorely missing under this coach. At the same time it makes sense that it's lacking because their system does not allow for goals to come easily in situations where they're trying to overcome a deficit.

I must also say the opportunistic, speed attacking style of hockey of Bob's I think is FAR more effective in playoffs than what we're employing right now. Especially when everybody is on their defensive assignments like they are in the post season. Sure, people said the Flames looked good against the Ducks despite being swept, but it was the same symptoms of the system that we're seeing this season. The Ducks were opportunistic and made good on high danger opportunities while we played low danger, perimeter hockey that looks like heavy pressure but just isn't effective in putting up the needed offence.

We need something in the middle of the two systems/styles, with a coach on the bench that will recognize opportunities to make an impact on the flow of the game, and put his players in the best positions to succeed.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I am no booster of Gulutzan, but lamenting firing Hartley is hilarious.

The Flames were one of the worst possession teams in the league under Hartley. They were handily outshot and outplayed by almost every team in the league.

I think there is some revisionist history going on here in some peoples minds.

I can't take credit for the post below but I suggest you read the two links as Flamesnation went deep digging stats that disprove that theory. They aren't articles defending Hartley but proving that the team has played worse under Gulutzan. It's eye opening and shows the team in fact did play better under Hartley;

Originally Posted by Itse

Someone on this board mentioned the Flamesnation three part story on why Gulutzan should be fired, and it was indeed excellent. There's a lot of stats for those who like them.

Parts two and three are highly recommended reading.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Karl

In this case, there was good reason for that. He's not been good enough as a top 6 guy.

Brouwer being deployed in the bottom 6 blender is largely his fault because he was crap for 80% of last year when he got hurt and hasn't been much better for a good portion of this year.

He had a fair chance to redeem himself this year by getting a regular shot in the top 6 earlier in the year but he whiffed on that chance.

Brouwer isn't even good enough to be a bottom six guy. He's a black hole on whatever line he's placed on.

There is literally no reason why he shouldn't be bought out. Even the "they are too cheap" argument doesn't hold water. You could buy Brouwer out and bring on a minimum wage player who would do no worse, and still save $2 million. And, in fact, buying him out gives us an extra $3 million to spend next year on a better player, and $3 million in 2019-20 to help pay for Matt Tkachuk's raise. The $1.5 mil in dead space in 20-21 and 21-22 is worth getting out from under that mistake.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Hartley was poor in different areas than Gulutzan. Gulutzan's weaknesses are just (far) more frustrating from a fan/viewer perspective.

I remember us being a low possession team, but also remember there being a lot of stretch passes, odd man breaks and active D when we did attack which was a lot of fun. It makes sense that it's more entertaining to watch a team attack with speed and creativity several times a game with a shot blocking style defense than seeing a team break out as a full unit with the same set play, cued drop passes and cycling around the perimeter for a good portion of the game while generating vastly perimeter shots with little room for creativity because most often the other team's defenders are already in place to keep them out of high danger areas.

Cumulatively, the results were pretty similar between both teams with Hartley's Flames getting the fortune of landing the declining Canucks the one season. The shot blocking of Hartley's system led to unnecessary injuries and the same inconsistency of play within games was there then too. Controlling the flow of play a bit more than they did would've helped the team be more effective. But while still allowing creativity and utilizing the players strengths, unlike with GG. But #### did that team believe every night and that's so sorely missing under this coach. At the same time it makes sense that it's lacking because their system does not allow for goals to come easily in situations where they're trying to overcome a deficit.

I must also say the opportunistic, speed attacking style of hockey of Bob's I think is FAR more effective in playoffs than what we're employing right now. Especially when everybody is on their defensive assignments like they are in the post season. Sure, people said the Flames looked good against the Ducks despite being swept, but it was the same symptoms of the system that we're seeing this season. The Ducks were opportunistic and made good on high danger opportunities while we played low danger, perimeter hockey that looks like heavy pressure but just isn't effective in putting up the needed offence.

We need something in the middle of the two systems/styles, with a coach on the bench that will recognize opportunities to make an impact on the flow of the game, and put his players in the best positions to succeed.

This is absolutely at the heart of the issue... GGs system, the stupid D to D pass before leaving the defensive zone, the slow methodical pace, When it’s effective and working it’s great and generates good offensive zone time but when the other team has time to set up and knows what is coming and keeps the flames to the outside or taking low percentage high danger shots it is boring and frustrating to watch.

Hartleys team was exciting but terrifying and frustrating because they would get hemmed into their own zone regularly for extended periods of time.

Honestly I think people would be generally happier with GG if he would adapt his game plan more often. (I’m not gonna mention personnel deployment since I think we’ve beat that horse pretty thoroughly here already)

I had to turn off the islanders game because down 2 goals in the first and second they were still trying the same D to D pass and moving slowly up the ice as a unit of 5 and then getting a weak shot off and then backpedaling and starting again. Whereas the games onthe roadtrip the flames were activating the D, I saw Brodie Hamilton and Gio all below the hashmarks involved in the cycle and making things happen and it was effective! But for some reason they abandon this at home...

[The Fonz]

I want GG gone as much as anyone, but was December really the right time? Unless they wanted Darryl Sutter coaching this team (which it's obvious they did/do not, otherwise the switch would have happened by now), I think it's a move that always had to be made this summer when some quality coaches become available.

I don't particularly believe in having an interim coach in place for a few months - it's far too much of a coaching carousel. If waiting it out means getting one of Trotz or Vigneault this summer, then it will all be worth it, IMO.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Brouwer isn't even good enough to be a bottom six guy. He's a black hole on whatever line he's placed on.

There is literally no reason why he shouldn't be bought out. Even the "they are too cheap" argument doesn't hold water. You could buy Brouwer out and bring on a minimum wage player who would do no worse, and still save $2 million. And, in fact, buying him out gives us an extra $3 million to spend next year on a better player, and $3 million in 2019-20 to help pay for Matt Tkachuk's raise. The $1.5 mil in dead space in 20-21 and 21-22 is worth getting out from under that mistake.

It's easy to say when it's not your $9 million dollars. If the Flames buy him out there's no doubt another team picks him up. I imagine the owners tell the GM over and over; "We are going to give you the resources to spend to the cap but we expect that we will be paying for players to contribute to the Flames." I can imagine that nothing ruffles these owners feathers more than paying out two years salary for an employee that is working for a competitor. We have never seen the Flames buyout a contract with the size and term of Brouwer's and I simply don't think that's going to change. I would love to see him gone but I simply don't think it's going to happen.

[The Boy Wonder]

I honestly don’t think this is the off-season to buy Brouwer out... Stajans money comes off the board so if you replace him with a minimum level salary you’re already cheaper in the bottom 6 than this season and then you hope for a turnaround and/or a coach who deploys him properly (ie: way less often) then if you need to buy him out after next year it’s only the one year left that you’re buying out but honestly as long as he doesn’t dive any further off the cliff he is an extremely overpaid 4th liner / injury cover and that’s not that terrible if he is our worst contract

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I can't take credit for the post below but I suggest you read the two links as Flamesnation went deep digging stats that disprove that theory. They aren't articles defending Hartley but proving that the team has played worse under Gulutzan. It's eye opening and shows the team in fact did play better under Hartley;

That Flames nation article is a bit bias - since the notion of the article was to build a case for firing Gulutzan.

And even then they show the year over year change in the scoring chances against and use that as the argument as for why to fire him.

Even though if you look at it the team is still in the top half of the league when it comes to suppressing chances - both at home and on the road.

Posted this in the other coaching thread but the teams shot suppression and scoring chance against rate that the article uses are actually worse on the road than at home - that is where we actually have a good record.

Also where we have a good save percentage. For comparisons sake our save percentage at home last season was .906 with our "terrible" goaltending, this year it's .895.

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

It is an interesting one.

Looking at some of the underlying stats in all scenarios (ES / PP / PK) and a big problem at home is they aren't getting saves and the puck just won't go in. The underlying numbers are pretty consistent and it's only shooting percentage and save percentage that have wild swings.

Home
GF: 91 (27TH)
GA: 106 (26TH)

Shots For: 34.6 (5TH)
Shots Against: 29.6 (8TH)
Shooting %: 7.65% (29TH)
Save %: .895 (30TH)

Corsi For: 67.54 (2ND)
Corsi Against: 53.99 (6TH)
Corsi %: 55.57% (2ND)
Corsi Shooting %: 3.92% (29TH)

Scoring Chance For: 32.22 (9TH)
Scoring Chance Against: 26.31 (10TH)
Scoring Chance %: 55.13% (5TH)

Road
GF: 104 (6TH)
GA: 95 (5TH)

Shots For: 31.8 (8TH)
Shots Against: 32.9 (21ST)
Shooting %: 8.94% (14TH)
Save %: .921 (4TH)

Corsi For: 61.18 (2ND)
Corsi Against: 60.28 (19TH)
Corsi %: 50.37% (9TH)
Corsi Shooting %: 4.64% (19TH)

Scoring Chance For: 31.15 (2ND)
Scoring Chance Against: 29.89 (14TH)
Scoring Chance %: 51.03% (5TH)

So according to this they actually do a better job of creating scoring chances and limiting scoring chances at home. The big difference is that on the road the puck goes in the net at an average rate, and we get way above average goaltending.

I think that matches the eye test too. I feel like at home every game this year starts with some type of soft or "unlucky" goal that bounces in off of our own guy. Then they spend all game peppering the other team and nothing goes in while every chance the other team gets ends up in the Flames net.

[Toonage]

The most interesting points in that Flamesnation article were the comparisons to his time in Dallas. Almost mirror images. Its telling. I'm sure most coaches have those similarities with all their stops like how they shoehorn players into roles they aren't good at, ignoring their strengths (ie: Torts asking the Sedins to block shots). But it at least shines a light on how this coach may not be the best fit for this team given the unlikelihood that he's going to make any major changes to how he runs a bench.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That Flames nation article is a bit bias - since the notion of the article was to build a case for firing Gulutzan.

And even then they show the year over year change in the scoring chances against and use that as the argument as for why to fire him.

Even though if you look at it the team is still in the top half of the league when it comes to suppressing chances - both at home and on the road.

Posted this in the other coaching thread but the teams shot suppression and scoring chance against rate that the article uses are actually worse on the road than at home - that is where we actually have a good record.

Also where we have a good save percentage. For comparisons sake our save percentage at home last season was .906 with our "terrible" goaltending, this year it's .895.

When you spend most of the game trailing you are gonna have better looking stats.

The flames look like such a good advanced analytics team at home because they have played among the least minutes with the lead out of the entire league (not sure the actual position but it was bad as of a few weeks ago)

When you have a lead it is very common to sit back. The flames therefore have better advanced stats because they are more often than not playing from behind.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by colbym72

If the new coach looked at this forum 20 games into last season, I would understand why he doesnt want to come here

If the new has an awful start 20 games into the season, he probably won't be the coach the team needs once again.

Bad starts should not be acceptable for this franchise, because they've indicated how mediocre the team has been season in, season out for the most part of the past 30 years.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Brouwer is going to be back. No way ownership buys out the remaining two years of that deal. Wideman never got bought out and he was barely an NHL caliber player in his last season.

Buying him out both saves money and $3mln of cap space. So if they think they can get a better player for $3mln they will do it.

[Toonage]

My understanding is Treliving can make whatever moves he sees fit as far as the roster / cap goes. If he wants to buyout Brouwer, he could do it.