[CP Story] Was the Firing of Hartley a surprise?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Common man, don't do that........

You're right

Sorry to be "wanky"

[Northendzone]

like others I thought they would have given him until around Christmas - but then as also mentioned, why start the season with a guy who you don't want and then risk getting into a hole you can't get out of.

will be interesting to see who the executive team deems to be better

[Shazam]

Got lost in the other thread but I found out last week Pringle is moving so I figured something was happening.

[polak]

Wasn't expecting it to happen until next season but than I thought it was a real possibility with Boudreau becoming available.

The fact that they haven't announced that Boudreau has been hired is a surprise because the timing is really too perfect to ignore.

I'm still hoping that they'll announce Boudreau tomorrow and are just letting today be about Hartley.

[DoubleF]

Personally.

Firing, not a huge surprise.
Timing, a bit of a surprise.

[Bingo]

the one thing I'll say on timing is that this doesn't have to do with Boudreau.

He was pretty up front about a process, so three weeks is certainly a time line for such. Add in that he's likely to be heading over sees early (maybe he said that today, I don't know).

So unless he wants to pull and Oiler and let him go on Skype he kind of had to get it done today or tomorrow I would guess.

[Rick M.]

There may also be other coaches available as the playoffs progress. The off-season likely is the best time to hire a replacement.

[GranteedEV]

Not a surprise nor an obvious conclusion.

[simonsays]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I figured he had enough rope to last through the 1/3 point of next season. If things started poorly he would be gone by Christmas.

Well Treviling tried that strategy (long rope/see how it plays out) with the 3 goalie situation this season and I think hedging his bets burned him a lot more than he'd anticipated. I'd rather our GM be proactive rather than reactive much of the time, and I think there are enough legitimate concerns about Hartleys coaching style that I'd rather be ahead of the wave than in its wake.

The timing of this seems a little odd, but it could simply be that with Treviling heading to the worlds there just wasn't any more time to put off the decision.

[Vulcan]

A little surprised because I thought like others he'd get a chance to start the next season. One thing about his tenure, I mostly enjoyed the style of play he used. Maybe not the best for a winning team but entertaining for a rebuilding team. I agree though if he's going to get fired, do it now.

Someone mentioned that he was hated by the players. This could be true and I think it had something to do with Iginla wanting out.

Over in the Back Burner Forum a number of people wanted Huska fired as well. I guess now he'll be introducing a new system to jibe with our new NHL coach. We'll get to see how he handles this.

[CaptainYooh]

No, not surprised at all.

The way I look at it: Hartley has had a better team this season to work with than he had last season:

1. Better defensive core in healthy Giordano, Brodie and Hamilton; plus better playing Engelland and a nice bonus in Nakladal.
2. Bennett playing the whole season and scoring.
3. Backlund finally playing like a 2nd liner should play.
4. Same goaltenders as last year.

And with all of the above, the team performed much worse. So, as a coach, he could not use a standard excuse of "I can only work with whatever players GM got me", because the GM got him the better players.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Was it a surprise? Yes. Should it have been? No. With the brutal special teams, the number of times the team didn't look prepared, the failure to adjust, and his willingness to play his favorites, no matter how badly they played, he should have been sacked a while ago.

[Sylvanfan]

When Daryl Sutter first came to Calgary I remember him talking about the low expectations. If they won games against the Oilers and Iginla scored goals everyone seemed to be happy.

I see a similar thing with last years team. If Gaudreau scored some points and they were beating Vancouver and Edmonton it was okay. Everyone was happy.

I think what happened last year was bad. Not just the goaltending but a lot of the overall team play lacked and for a while it did look like the players really weren't engaged. It wasn't good enough to just stay the course. Something had to change and now it has.

We'll see what it changes to.

[Stay Golden]

Complete surprise, shocked was more like it.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

When Daryl Sutter first came to Calgary I remember him talking about the low expectations. If they won games against the Oilers and Iginla scored goals everyone seemed to be happy.

I see a similar thing with last years team. If Gaudreau scored some points and they were beating Vancouver and Edmonton it was okay. Everyone was happy.

I think what happened last year was bad. Not just the goaltending but a lot of the overall team play lacked and for a while it did look like the players really weren't engaged. It wasn't good enough to just stay the course. Something had to change and now it has.

We'll see what it changes to.

Yeah returning to being a loser franchise has lost everything we gained from 2014/15 season and it's not easy to get that winning atmosphere back.

[thefoss1957]

Obviously, you guys aren't a "big market" team...Hartley did well enough last year, but, had no answers for this year...clearly, the advanced stat devotees would be unhappy with both Hartley's advanced stat results, and his ultimate game outcomes...but, to be fair, the guy had the WORST GOALTENDING IN THE LEAGUE. (IMO advanced stat proficiency OR deficiency is COMPLETLY trumped by inability to perform at the most basic level of the game...stopping the damn puck from crossing the goal line). Is that ALL on Hartley? I doubt it.

Now, you have a mid-budget team, that is paying a guy NOT TO COACH. I really don't know how much capital your owner will be willing to commit to new coaching PLUS on-ice talent improvements, when he now has dead salary committed to the prior regime.

Myself, If I were a Flame fan, I would like to have seen Hartley get at least one more chance, WITH an NHL level goaltender in net, and perhaps an upgrade in the bottom 3 D.

But, the dice are cast, and if too much money is thrown at a new coach, it remains to be seen how much money will be made available for on-ice upgrades.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

Obviously, you guys aren't a "big market" team...Hartley did well enough last year, but, had no answers for this year...clearly, the advanced stat devotees would be unhappy with both Hartley's advanced stat results, and his ultimate game outcomes...but, to be fair, the guy had the WORST GOALTENDING IN THE LEAGUE. (IMO advanced stat proficiency OR deficiency is COMPLETLY trumped by inability to perform at the most basic level of the game...stopping the damn puck from crossing the goal line). Is that ALL on Hartley? I doubt it.

Now, you have a mid-budget team, that is paying a guy NOT TO COACH. I really don't know how much capital your owner will be willing to commit to new coaching PLUS on-ice talent improvements, when he now has dead salary committed to the prior regime.

Myself, If I were a Flame fan, I would like to have seen Hartley get at least one more chance, WITH an NHL level goaltender in net, and perhaps an upgrade in the bottom 3 D.

But, the dice are cast, and if too much money is thrown at a new coach, it remains to be seen how much money will be made available for on-ice upgrades.

1) Hartley has had 4 years already.

2) the Flames are not a 'mid-budget team'. They will spend whatever is necessary, and have demonstrated that on multiple fronts, including coaching, development, willingness to spend to the cap even on a non-playoff team, etc.

He established a work ethic and a character to the team. But took it as far as he was able. He simply couldn't adjust when the league adjusted to him.

Was he let down by the goaltending this year? Absolutely.

Does it really make a difference in the grand scheme of things? No, IMO. His defensive strategy was abhorrent.

And he doesn't promote physical play. In Calgary, where there has been a long history of physical, hard-to-play-against teams, and where Burke and Treliving demand it (as do fans, IMO), Hartley's passive, shot-blocking style was simply unacceptable.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Surprised? A little.
Shocked? No.
My jaw didn't hit the floor, but it hung lower than its usual position for sure.

This is my thought exactly. I thought they would have given him another year because of the goalie cluster.... that was largely on the GM in the first place.

However, if the Flames are able to get an upgrade, that is fine by me. The sooner a new coach is hired, the better.

The Flames aren't that far away from being a top team and the things they need to address are relatively simple (add 1 goalie, 1 or 2 top 9 forwards and maybe a #4 D-man)

We'll see how it shakes out.

[AltaGuy]

I thought he would be fired after the season.

Even the "good" season we had under Hartley was an unsustainable, adrenaline-fueled roller-coaster where we played nothing like the style Treliving and Burke believe we should play to develop a winning team.

Not surprised.

[Jay Random]

I turned on the car radio about 10:30 this morning, after dropping the GF off at work. Jim Rome was not on, and I wondered why not. They were talking hockey and sounding serious, so my next thought was: ‘I guess they fired Hartley after all.’

So no, I can't say that I was surprised. But if you follow me, I was a bit surprised that I wasn't surprised.