Poll: How satisfied are you with the Flames coaching

[Calgary4LIfe]

Without question, last season exceeded expectations. Most of us expected what this season has become, but instead, they accumulated enough points that in any other given year, they would have made the playoffs. They out-worked every opponent consistently. Now the question is - was it simply a lucky season? Is Huska a one-trick pony riding on the coattails of teams not taking them seriously and then simply having a great start snowball?

I do also believe that you have to really look at he 'goal' of the franchise, and see how the coach is or isn't aligning with that goal. is the goal here to win? That's what coaches are supposed to be focused on - just winning, right? If it was only that easy.

If Huska's mandate this season was to win, and that was the only thing he was really focused on, then a lot of the young players/rookies that we have seen cycling through the lineup to various degrees probably wouldn't have happened. He would just stick with the vets.

Is he merely putting guys on the 4th line and not giving them a chance when they are getting called up? Nope. He will demote them to the 4th line at times, but to say that Honzek, Gridin, Kerins and Stromgren were all simply stapled to the 4th line instead of being put into a position to succeed is flat-out wrong. Ditto for the defencemen - Kuznetsov playing huge minutes alongside Weegar, Brzustewicz was coming along nicely and even got placed on the PP, Parekh was on PP1 before his injury, and is working his way back. Heck, the other night Huska had two 19 year olds - Gridin and Parekh - out with the goalie pulled.

I really like Huska for the following reasons:

1) They play hard. Yes, they laid more eggs this season than last season (in which their effort level was simply elite), but they don't often lay eggs. For a rebuilding team that is completely swirling with rumours - and comparing them to other rebuilding teams from the recent past - this team doesn't 'stink up the joint'. They are not getting whooped night in and night out. The GM isn't having to come down and 'lay down the law' to the players. Nobody is calling them a bad team, or a tanking team, etc. They play with a lot of effort most nights.

2) They play structured hockey. Yes, everyone wants to see this team play pond hockey for some reason. Yeah, good luck with that. They would not only get whooped, but the development of the young prospects would be terrible. Firstly, good luck getting them to 'flip the switch' and learn how to win close games and be defensively responsible - so many rebuilding teams flopped because of this (cough Edmonton with Hall, Eberle, etc). Plus, just look at what happened with Dubynk getting run out of town only to win the Vezina, Skinner getting run out of town and excelling, Jarry imploding now in Edmonton and coming out stating that they give up way too much...

3) The system - to contrary opinion - is NOT stifling. They play structured defence, but do you not see Parekh jump into the offensive zone? Did you not see Whitecloud jump-up on a 2on1 a few games ago? Berube mentioning how the Flames often have 4 players attacking? Do you not see them switching to a 2-man forecheck often? This team lacks finishers and offensive talent overall, but they are not stifling. They will trap at times, but they will attack with the players having full control of the creativity, with defencemen having the green light to jump up into the play - even to lead the rush. I am starting to get convinced that anyone stating that this team plays a boring system where players aren't allowed to be creative are simply stat-watching and not actually watching the games. They just suck - lots of flubbed passes, lots of passes that are flubbed by the receiver, lots of shots that miss the net, lots of shots straight into the goalie's chest... They are boring because they don't have talent.

4) Related to the 3 above, but more specific: Are players not experiencing success under Huska?Troy

• People point at Kadri as a player who has experienced a 'downturn' in production since getting here. Like.. what? Do people expect Kadri's BEST SEASON EVER in his career when the Avs won the cup to be the norm? Kadri's next best two seasons were in Calgary, at the ages of 33 and 34! He hit his career best in goal scoring at the age of 34 here in Calgary!
• Blake Coleman's best and second-best seasons were here in Calgary under Huska, including a career high in goals.
• Backlund has had a bit of a downturn in production under Huska to be fair, but how do you explain this season? He is on track to hit 49 points, which will be his 3rd highest point totals - at age 36!!
• Weegar's two best seasons so far were under Huska, including hitting a career high in goals (20).
• Frost is on track to hit around his best seasons in Philadelphia - in the 40's. Actually, he is better than that if you take into account his recent production, so we will see how he finishes.
• Farabee looks like his career is back on track, and will likely hit his averages (30-odd points) and come close to hitting 20 goals.
• Sharangovich hit his highs in Calgary so far. He has been up and down to be fair, but Huska has seemed to really manage Sharangovich well this season, and Sharangovich has returned to being a very effective player for the Flames, even playing much more physical instead of shying away from contact.
• Huberdeau - sure, this is the big example of why "Huska hockey is stifling", right? Let's ignore everyone else's career highs, or getting back to the 'norms'. Does Huska at least get credit for working with Huberdeau and for helping him reinvent himself? He was two goals shy of equaling his best goal-scoring seasons though.
• Hanley - Given his age, it is amazing how Huska has transformed him into a capable every-day defencemen that looks fine in a top 4 role. Hit a new high in most games played last season, and is one game away so far this season of tying that record.
• Pachal has been up and down this season. He was never an every day player, but he became one last season (like Hanley). This season, it is just obvious that Huska has prioritized a few other players ahead of Pachal - like Brzustewicz and Parekh. His career high before coming to Calgary was 17 games played in a season, and even in this down season, he has surpassed that mark already (26).

5) The way he seems like a 'middle coach' - he is neither a player's coach, nor is he a hard ass. He seems confident with who he is and just goes about his business.


6) Media availabilities - Bob Hartley and Glen Gulutzan were pretty good with the media. Press conferences/Pre and Post game media avails - interesting, took the heat when needed, called things out, were intelligible. Huska isn't the soundbite guy like Hartley was, but he seems to articulate really well, and seems to have answers. When he doesn't, he says he doesn't, which is actually refreshing. Coming at the end of Bill Peters and his fast-talking but 'double-talk' nature, to Geoff Ward's often 'silence' and then pushback with questions, instead of actually providing any answers (worst of the bunch it seemed) to Darryl Sutter's often funny, but way too antagonistic approach (and crude at times) - I really enjoy Huska's pressers. He seems like a really good communicator.


7) Not afraid to bench/scratch. Huberdeau's contract kicked in, and he got benched drawing a huge media frenzy right across the NHL - Huska didn't care about that. Sharangovich's new deal just kicked in? Well, he wasn't playing well enough to dress, so he didn't dress. As Sharangovich improved, he worked his way back up the lineup. Lomberg didn't quite bring it for a few games? He gets scratched. Klapka didn't have a good game? He got scratched (and plenty of times). Hanley, Pachal... he will often bench guys who aren't bringing it. Obviously he has to tread lightly - if you do this to vets often, as many posters here would love to happen, he will lose the room, the players will turn on him, and that's that. I think he has walked that line well.



I don't like Huska for the following reasons:

• Weird scratches at times. I particularly noticed some games against physical teams or rivlas. Klapka/Lomberg are the two 'capable guys' on the team, and they should never be scratched for games against those teams I feel.
• A few costly challenges - I know it is Pringle that usually does these things, but Huska has final say, and I think there were some challenges made with very little likelihood of being overturned.
• I felt like he over-used Wolf to start the season, but small gripe as it is obvious it didn't continue.
• I don't agree with some of his choices and combos in the OT and shootouts, though some of those choices have proven me wrong in all fairness.

Development!

Lastly, let's look at the young players breaking-in under Huska, and see how things are going there. I mean, the Flames are in a rebuild, so I think it is absolutely critical to have the right kind of coach and the right kind of environment to help these kids break into the NHL, right? I think this is more important than wins and losses this season and for the next few seasons. Is Huska the right coach moving forward for them?

• Wolf - any complaints about how Wolf is doing? Sure, that is mostly the goaltending coaches, right? 50/50 - Huska gets to defer to them, or not - Sutter road his starter, period. Huska hasn't. Huska has been managing Wolf's starts. Plus, Huska gets to figure out how this team plays in front of Wolf (again, Dubynk, Skinner, Jarry).
• Coronato - broke-in under Huska (very doubtful his 1 game under Sutter has set him up for his NHL career so far, right?). He has become a dependable 2-way player under Huska. Has he been mismanaged in any way?
• Zary - broke out under Huska. Injuries have derailed him, but now he looks like he is back on track in becoming a bit of a difference maker again with confidence.
• Pospisil - broke out under Huska, and has become a fantastic 3rd/4th liner.
• Klapka - broke out under Huska. Any complaints?
• Bahl is a little older, but he only had one full season in NJ before arriving in Calgary. Huska so far has managed him well, and Bahl has really become an effective player in Calgary.
• Parekh - the elephant in the room. I feel Huska has done a good job bringing him along so far. Obviously the AHL would have been the best situation, but that's not up to Huska. Has he helped put Parekh in positions to succeed? You have to ignore the fact that he was on PP1, got increased minutes as the games wore on, and was looking defensively fine for most of the time. Injuries set him back, but with the tiny sample size of one game, in what world has Huska mismanaged Parekh? If Parekh wasn't allowed to jump into the play, he would have been benched rather than being tapped to go out with the goalie pulled, right?
• Brzustewicz - again, I think he has been coming along well under Huska. Third pairing minutes, and then he got a chance at PP2 as well. Back down to the farm since it s a number's game on defence right now, but I can't see how Brzustewicz hasn't been positively handled.
• Kuznetsov - big minutes in big situations. Enough said there.
• Gridin - last season, Huska stated that Gridin would probably challenge for a spot in the lineup this season, and lo and behold, he got one. It didn't last, and Gridin was sent down to work on his game. He is back, and he has been doing really well, and getting a lot of opportunity, right? PP, and like Parekh, was out there with the goalie pulled trying to tie the game. He has looked better and better as the games have gone by in his second call-up.
• Honzek - He was given a great opportunity alongside Backlund, and things looked like they were getting easier for him. Was looking much more confident, and was starting to have some success, but unfortunately a freak injury took him out of the lineup.
• Cooley. Hey, he may be older (28), but he only had 6 games of NHL experience. Huska has given him 18 more this season, and he has looked really good. I like how Huska has been managing the goalies. Wolf is the clear favourite (as he was last season), but he makes sure that Cooley/Vladar were the ones that got exposed in the tougher games like back-to-backs, etc. Cooley thus far looks like a capable NHL starter, though it is too early to definitively conclude that.

tldr; summary:
I gave Huska an 8 out of 10 because I like that this team is still seemingly focused and ready to play, that they play a well-structured game even with all the rumours flying around, that they aren't getting blown up every game, and most importantly, the kids are being developed the right way in the right kind of environment. He may or may not be the coach of tomorrow, but he certainly has been doing a fairly good job today.

[HighLifeMan]

Huska is a decisively average HC - who really hasn't had a lick of success at the professional level. One playoff birth in 7 seasons speaks for itself.

I also truly don't understand the line of thinking that leads to Huska getting all the credit for the 96 point season, but then completely escaping criticism for his team dropping off a cliff a year later.

The list of talent that has regressed or stagnated under Huska is much larger than the list that has improved.

[dammage79]

Huskas task at this point is development. I have my doubts hes coaching here when it's time to put the pedal to the medal.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I always thought Playfair deserved more than one season.

Maybe but that first round loss to the Wings was kind of a tire fire with the Wings routinely putting up 40+ shots on goal. Also IIRC there was chatter that Jarome and some of the veteran players didn't buy into him as the head coach and considering how quickly Darryl pivoted there may have been some merit to that.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

Huska is a decisively average HC - who really hasn't had a lick of success at the professional level. One playoff birth in 7 seasons speaks for itself.

I also truly don't understand the line of thinking that leads to Huska getting all the credit for the 96 point season, but then completely escaping criticism for his team dropping off a cliff a year later.

The list of talent that has regressed or stagnated under Huska is much larger than the list that has improved.

I’d be interested to see that list.

[Strange Brew]

I gave him a 7. He seems to be fine and holds the players accountable. My expectations ofr on ice results aren't that high and team has exceeded them.

I kind of view his performance and Conroy's through the same lense. Right now, team is still in tearing down mode and in the descent part of the rebuild. The job gets much harder once you're on the ascent and have to make some harder decisions with more profound consequences.

I do think Huska is good for the youngest players. You want them building good habits and learning accountability. He seems to do that.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

Huska is a decisively average HC - who really hasn't had a lick of success at the professional level. One playoff birth in 7 seasons speaks for itself.

I also truly don't understand the line of thinking that leads to Huska getting all the credit for the 96 point season, but then completely escaping criticism for his team dropping off a cliff a year later.

The list of talent that has regressed or stagnated under Huska is much larger than the list that has improved.

He's not escaping criticism for this year - however, I don't think much is warranted. This team has possibly the least talent on it's roster in the entire league. We don't have a single game breaker - not even close. And yet, to my eyes the team competes hard and are doing the best with what they have. I honestly don't understand the complaints about him, he's not perfect - but our roster is god awful, and the fact that most of the games are at least competitive says a lot about his ability as a coach. Despite the fact that we're at the bottom of a rebuild and the team seems to be trying hard, the group seems to have a great culture for a losing team... what more can you ask for?

[dino7c]

Huh, funny the vast majority are "apologists and homers" in all these polls lol

[Bonded]

7 for me. He has them playing hard and committed to D and I don’t buy into the argument he is suppressing prospects or offensive play. The biggest knock against him is that he’s hurting the tank

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Huh, funny the vast majority are "apologists and homers" in all these polls lol

Early results.


I expect to see 200-300 votes for the 1-3 selections when more have voted.

[Matty81]

Personally I think he's a good coach and he's overperformed with the quality of personnel he has. His mandate has been to win games and he's done a great job achieving that with such a bad team. Always been a quality coach and if the mandate shifts to developing players he will adjust, focus on that, follow his bosses direction and do a great job.

The problem with the flames over the last few years has been front office reluctance/delay in tearing down a terrible roster and has nothing to do with him.

I think he's good enough to lead the team right through the rebuild.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Pretty weak sauce response.

People can have a different opinion than you and not be labeled apologists. It's such a close minded tell.

When no matter what the same lot jumps to the defense of Huska regardless of what he does, yeah, you're getting the apologists label. That's what it implies. If you aren't that, then show it?

From my perspective and others who aren't under the mysterious spell of a mediocre rookie coach, being unable to dish criticism when it's warranted (and only deviate between apology and praise) shows a certain level of closed mindedness of its own.

There were posts in the other thread that blamed the player for getting benched or scratched, and then in the same breath praising Huska when they played too well to be denied. The double standard is silly.

Not sure calling something out for what it is is the textbook definition of "closed minded". Seems like "blunt" is a better descriptor. Irritatingly impartial also works.

And there were hurt feelings just as predicted over practically nothing, so oh well. Carry on with your Huska lovin' and lashing out at anybody who can actutally evaluate the guy by tougher than kindergarten standards.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

When no matter what the same lot jumps to the defense of Huska regardless of what he does, yeah, you're getting the apologists label. That's what it implies. If you aren't that, then show it?

From my perspective and others who aren't under the mysterious spell of a mediocre rookie coach, being unable to dish criticism when it's warranted (and only deviate between apology and praise) shows a certain level of closed mindedness of its own.

There were posts in the other thread that blamed the player for getting benched or scratched, and then in the same breath praising Huska when they played too well to be denied. The double standard is silly.

Not sure calling something out for what it is is the textbook definition of "closed minded". Seems like "blunt" is a better descriptor. Irritatingly impartial also works.

And there were hurt feelings just as predicted over practically nothing, so oh well. Carry on with your Huska lovin' and lashing out at anybody who can actutally evaluate the guy by tougher than kindergarten standards.

Just a remember YOUR take is the oulier...have an opinon but please get over yourself

[GioforPM]

So little self reflection. LOL.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That's not true.

Jim Playfair, Brent Sutter, Glen Gulutzan, Geoff Ward all did less with more talented teams.

And that's just in the salary cap era.

What's Dallas's record this year? Get real.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

When no matter what the same lot jumps to the defense of Huska regardless of what he does, yeah, you're getting the apologists label. That's what it implies. If you aren't that, then show it?

From my perspective and others who aren't under the mysterious spell of a mediocre rookie coach, being unable to dish criticism when it's warranted (and only deviate between apology and praise) shows a certain level of closed mindedness of its own.

There were posts in the other thread that blamed the player for getting benched or scratched, and then in the same breath praising Huska when they played too well to be denied. The double standard is silly.

Not sure calling something out for what it is is the textbook definition of "closed minded". Seems like "blunt" is a better descriptor. Irritatingly impartial also works.

And there were hurt feelings just as predicted over practically nothing, so oh well. Carry on with your Huska lovin' and lashing out at anybody who can actutally evaluate the guy by tougher than kindergarten standards.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

What's Dallas's record this year? Get real.

Gulutzan had real talent to work with in Calgary and got very little out of it.

He coached badly in Calgary. He is coaching well in Dallas. Both these things can be true.

Why, it's almost as if human beings are capable of learning and improving! Some of them, at any rate.

[Knut]

Huska seems to develop Defensemen. So I am fine with him as the D core gets younger.

It is very North South Lunchpail type hockey which is fine, but it neuters creativity. Its fine for where we are at.

As high end skill starts to come in we will need to get a Coach that gets the most out of that.

[Ryan Coke]

GG is the worst flame coach in the last 30 years. Ok, Gilbert would put up a fight for that title. But GG was terrible in his time here.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Just a remember YOUR take is the oulier...have an opinon but please get over yourself

That's the problem though, there is like a cult following here of some very vocal posters who's opinion is only what Bingo says it is and they don't actually have an original thought of their own and when you have a differing opinion they will pile on you. I could give you a list but it's pretty easy to see who those posters are because they always back whatever Bingo says when someone disagrees, they immediately come to the rescue. We should see some shortly here.