Should the Flames fire Gulutzan?

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

The same can be said on the flip side, for some posters it doesn't matter what the man does or failed, they are going to want to keep him because it's the hill they want to die on?

Made up. Conflating what GG supporters have said with your statement is hilarious. The truth is, there are reasons and data on both sides of this debate right now, and our propensity for living and dieing with every game blinds some to the fact that the sample size is still quite small. Really, fans do not have enough information to make a call right now, one way or another.

But what you said would be comparable to someone saying, "I don't care if GG wins a single game for the next 10 years. I think he should stay and I like his hair!"

If that poster existed, he/she would be ridiculed, as should you.

[kukkudo]

GG is done if they don't get past the first round. If he makes it into the second round and does decent they probably keep him. It all depends who becomes available in the summer. If the Hawks fire Quinvelle, GG is toast.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Hey Connor, It's Mess

Fair enough, I didn't know that. Thanks for the answer.

Also it's worth considering that, as GM, he signed Gio as a free agent and called out Backlund, Ferland, and Brodie's names at the draft... like half this team's current core.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Was part of the bad luck in Anaheim that they were a better hockey team and swept us?

You must not have watched the playoffs...they lost 4 one goal games with .800 goal tending.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Made up. Conflating what GG supporters have said with your statement is hilarious. The truth is, there are reasons and data on both sides of this debate right now, and our propensity for living and dieing with every game blinds some to the fact that the sample size is still quite small. Really, fans do not have enough information to make a call right now, one way or another.

But what you said would be comparable to someone saying, "I don't care if GG wins a single game for the next 10 years. I think he should stay and I like his hair!"

If that poster existed, he/she would be ridiculed, as should you.

Not sure why you stuck that in your post. There is plenty of sample size to make informed assertions at this point - over 120 games to be exact. Plus playoffs.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Not sure why you stuck that in your post. There is plenty of sample size to make informed assertions at this point - over 120 games to be exact. Plus playoffs.

Because it's true. If those 120 games all pointed one way, I would agree, but they don't. There is enough variance in the data to suggest that this team could do pretty well for themselves under this coach.

120 games is actually not that large for a game with as much randomness in it as hockey.

[CampbellsTransgressions]

I was done with Gulutzan the first game when he put a very unpracticed Kris Versteeg on the first line. How the hell does it make any sense to shake up your lines on game one of the regular season?

[EVERLAST]

Originally Posted by CampbellsTransgressions

I was done with Gulutzan the first game when he put a very unpracticed Kris Versteeg on the first line. How the hell does it make any sense to shake up your lines on game one of the regular season?

Not disagreeing here but GG has said too many times the coaches have to help build confidence in struggling players.

I think him doing that with Versteeg is the best example of it. I mean on one hand they do that and then saddle Bennett with our worst vets and Bennett suffers.

As I type this I realize they just did the same damn thing with Mangiapane but he did well.

2 different players in #93....#88 but a funny approach.

As a coach are you trying to shelter a young player with a veteran regardless of how horrible they are??

I just don't get it. I think GG needs to go.

They said Bob took this team as far as he'd take them and that left me smfh.

GG got lucky last year with the win streak , playoffs , Elliot playing well prior to the playoffs ......we all know the outcome....Elliot crapped the bed and we were done.

He also kept playing Elliot. Just.....yeah. Wow.

[Badgers Nose]

IMO to be a credible team you have to give a GM five years and a coach three.

You have to live with your decisions unless a Babcock caliber hire is available. In that case, cutting ties early makes sense due to the upgrade.

GM has to always be looking for upgrades at every position. Coaches too.

If GG goes do you let an assistant take over? No way. Do you hire another young GG like coach?

I don’t see Sutter coming back. He’s smarter than just about everyone in this org and IMO only BT would be OK with that. In other words I see no scenario where B.B. and DS work together.

I’d rather not have half a season of garbage.

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by kukkudo

GG is done if they don't get past the first round. If he makes it into the second round and does decent they probably keep him. It all depends who becomes available in the summer. If the Hawks fire Quinvelle, GG is toast.

Oh goodie, another pedigree coach the Flames can ignore so they can be smarter and cheaper than everyone else and get GG 2.0

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

IMO to be a credible team you have to give a GM five years and a coach three.

You have to live with your decisions unless a Babcock caliber hire is available. In that case, cutting ties early makes sense due to the upgrade.

GM has to always be looking for upgrades at every position. Coaches too.

If GG goes do you let an assistant take over? No way. Do you hire another young GG like coach?

I don’t see Sutter coming back. He’s smarter than just about everyone in this org and IMO only BT would be OK with that. In other words I see no scenario where B.B. and DS work together.

I’d rather not have half a season of garbage.

Being a credible team has absolutely nothing to do with how long you keep coaches. Credible teams hired the right coach in the first place. The Penguins skipped a beat when they hired the wrong guy in Johnston. Rather than waste another season or two of Crosby & Malkin’s prime hoping for their coach to turn it around they cut bait, got a better coach and won two cups opposed to zero they would have won under Johnston.

Look I haven't been overly posting in this thread of late because I don't want to beat the same drum and recycle the same crap but lets take a look at the roster today compared to when Treliving took over. It looks considerably better on paper today so you can argue he's done a commendable job improving the talent year over year. The issue is that while better on paper we simply haven't seen the results on the ice consistently. Maybe myself and others (including the GM who traded his 2018 futures for a veteran defenseman) overrated the talent of the team to an extent but I do know this roster is too good to be toiling with the likes of the Canucks, Oilers, Avalanche in the standings and it's too good to be a below .500 team 5 on 5 for the past two seasons. Even the most optimistic of fans surely must realize that it's not working and something has to change.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

And there it is. Like I have pointed out before, for some posters it does not matter at this point what the man does or accomplishes. they are going to want him gone simply because it is the hill they are going to die on no matter what.

As bad as many think this first half of the season has gone, they are a couple points from making this the most successful first half going back to 2010 with 2 games remaining.

He is definitely a lightning rod. Sign of the times I guess.

[Toonage]

So this roster is almost as successful as an aging one that ended up missing the playoffs 7-8 years ago?

Great!

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Toonage

So this roster is almost as successful as an aging one that ended up missing the playoffs 7-8 years ago?

Great!

With 2 games remaining before their half way mark, they are 2 points behind last years team and are 3 points behind where the playoff Hartley team was at the 41 game mark. They have already blown by those other teams.

Keenan had 47 and 54 points in his years at the half way point.

[tvp2003]

Just throwing this out there -- Dustin Brown was on the Players Tribune last week and talked about the 2011/12 season (when Sutter took over mid-season and the Kings won the Cup as an 8th seed). He mentions the play of Jonathan Quick as being a key factor, but also talked about the impact of Sutter:

And then in 2011–12 we came out of the trade deadline still outside the playoffs with just two months to go. It didn’t make sense, we had the talent and we knew we could get to the playoffs. It just wasn’t working.

Then we added Jeff Carter. Then Tim Leiweke spoke to me. And then we got hot, and we never cooled off.

We snuck into the playoffs as the eighth seed. We had to play Vancouver — the Presidents’ Trophy winners – in the first round. I remember toward the end of Game 1, Mike Richards absolutely obliterated Alex Burrows in front of their bench. We were up 3–2 with under a minute to go and were holding on and Mike stepped up and made a huge play. And after that, it just felt like we had the edge on them.

We found a different way to win every series that year. Quickie was unbelievable, like out-of-this-world good. It was the best goaltending I had ever seen in my life. Darryl Sutter had taken over as coach in December and he really made a big difference in the playoffs. He pumped a lot of emotion into our game.

Link: https://www.theplayerstribune.com/du...angeles-kings/

[dash_pinched]

I haven't read the player's tribune article, but thanked tvp2003's post for Burrows being obliterated by Mike Richards.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

Just throwing this out there -- Dustin Brown was on the Players Tribune last week and talked about the 2011/12 season (when Sutter took over mid-season and the Kings won the Cup as an 8th seed). He mentions the play of Jonathan Quick as being a key factor, but also talked about the impact of Sutter:



Link: https://www.theplayerstribune.com/du...angeles-kings/

Robyn Regehr was on 960 this morning and was pretty frank about Darryl. He said some players could handle him and some can't, said he had a shelf life where players could simply no longer handle the constant pushing. I don't think he ever coaches the Flames again but I also thought Gruden would never coach the Raiders again so nothing surprises me anymore.

[Locke]

Its no secret that Sutter has a shelf-life, just as Hartley did.

I recall most of the players loved Hartley but you cant run players like rented mules and put them away wet forever. The effectiveness has a limit.

[NiklasSundblad]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Robyn Regehr was on 960 this morning and was pretty frank about Darryl. He said some players could handle him and some can't, said he had a shelf life where players could simply no longer handle the constant pushing. I don't think he ever coaches the Flames again but I also thought Gruden would never coach the Raiders again so nothing surprises me anymore.

That's fine. It would be great if he could push this team now.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Robyn Regehr was on 960 this morning and was pretty frank about Darryl. He said some players could handle him and some can't, said he had a shelf life where players could simply no longer handle the constant pushing. I don't think he ever coaches the Flames again but I also thought Gruden would never coach the Raiders again so nothing surprises me anymore.

All coaches push their players or should...some harder than others. Scotty Bowman pushed real hard too.

In the end, you look at the big picture. Pretty well all coaches have a shelf life so which coach is optimum for the shelf life that coach exhibits?