[News] Ryan Huska named HC. 12:30 PM MT presser

[browna]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

His entire tenure is at best pedestrian. Couple missed seasons, couple early playoff exits, not exactly promotion worthy in my books. I'm not happy about promoting this agent of averageness, but really I have no control over it and it reeks of a typical flames move which for some reason gives you anime googly eyes. Weird.

I'll bite...who's the coach you pegged in what would be a seemingly important "non typical Flames move"?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Yeah he did say that but said zone time is important and making those shots more dangerous and getting into the hard areas.

Basically what everyone has been saying all day the offensive zone is being opened up to allow more freedom.

Huska also mentioned how they want the D more involved and that's with moving into the danger areas.

I don’t know. I read it as an endorsement of the system they’ve been playing. I’m fine with that. Just need goaltending and guys who can finish.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don’t know. I read it as an endorsement of the system they’ve been playing. I’m fine with that. Just need goaltending and guys who can finish.

How is him saying they will make tweaks and changes in both sides to what was done a endorsement.

He wouldn't have gotten the job if he came back and said we will just play the same.

That's why they are targeting someone offensively minded for the assistant coach and apparently Tanguay is that guy.

The season wasn't lost just on goaltending teams with just as poor goalies made it in. One is in the Finals.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by dino7c

My takes haven't been extreme at all on this...I said I was hoping for Love because he won in the AHL but when you really look at it Huska would have won in the AHL too with that roster.

Maybe give the guy a chance is all I am saying, what is the point of being all negative all the time about a game.

I'll agree there on Mitch Love, would have much preferred to see him run the show. With the overpowering mediocrity of this clubs lengthy history, what would have made me optimistic is a complete gutting of the coaching staff.

Here we are though, hired a (from the outside) weaker candidate and they kept Sigalet because he knows the real reason Murray Edward's ex wife split the sheets. My #1 choice is Huska turfed along with all other coaches, #2 Huska to be Loves assistant, #3 Huska HC, #4 those dog crap rumors of outside coaches.

[taxbuster]

Not sure exactly what the big concern is with internal hires not being a change in direction or a "fresh approach". A company I work with had a management team in place that didn't change for the best part of 20 years. Over the past few years people have left, retired or moved to other parts of the world. New management - ALL internal hires - have taken over for the most part. Guess what? There has been a HUGE culture shift and changes in approach.

When an "underling" (for lack of a better word) does NOT have the final say, it doesn't mean that they agree with the "boss" (again, for lack of a better term). All it means is they want to keep their job and are willing to be a team player...doing what the "boss" wants. They may well have a different perspective, may have stated it and were overruled. Once they get "their turn"....things change.

That is what I see at play here.

Conny isn't the most polished speaker compared to, say, Tre...but he's forthright, direct and speaks his mind...and listens to others apparently. He has mentioned many times comments made to him by others, and he's remembered and catalogued them.

I'm on the wait and see team.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Sure but at some point don't we have to accept this team isn't going to do a full re-build and tank? It could happen by virtue of having a really bad single year, but otherwise I think we should think about what they could do realistically within the likely guard rails they have in place.

A related fun what-if is apparently the Panthers were going to take Jason Robertson, but the Stars snagged him one pick earlier. Florida picked Aleksi Heponiemi. Florida was also interested in Oettinger that year and were hoping he would fall to the 2nd.

The thing is I don't even know if the win-now mandate saves the current situation? 7 pending UFAs, even if these guys want to stay, the cap doesn't work to keep the band together. It'd be cap suicide for Conroy.

It's almost inevitable some sort of significant roster transition is on the horizon, and if you can't sign these guys then you'll be hard-pressed to get win-now value for pending UFAs. So in that case, you'd better get some futures to give yourself some options moving forward.

I guess the point is, despite their best efforts and being philosophically opposed to it, a rebuild of some sort may be coming whether they like it or not.

[blender]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don’t know. I read it as an endorsement of the system they’ve been playing. I’m fine with that. Just need goaltending and guys who can finish.

No kidding.
Is anyone watching Vegas right now?
They look a lot like the Flames last season.
Flames have a lot of the personnel to be a very competitive team.
I don't know what is going on around here, but it's more delusional than usual.
Obviously only time will tell if Huska can get the job done, but the certainty that all is lost is utterly bizarre. It reads like complaining for the sake of complaining.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

How is him saying they will make tweaks and changes in both sides to what was done a endorsement.

He wouldn't have gotten the job if he came back and said we will just play the same.

That's why they are targeting someone offensively minded for the assistant coach and apparently Tanguay is that guy.

The season wasn't lost just on goaltending teams with just as poor goalies made it in. One is in the Finals.

Congratulations for immediately answering your own question. Of course he is going to do things his way and there will be some things different. But listen to his interview. He said it's important you wear down the other team through possession and shots. That is the current system and not different from many teams.

And yeah IMO this season was lost on:
goaltending
not enough players who can finish, or willing to do what is needed to finish
some players who quit on the team

I'll bet Huska helps with the third and to some extent the second.

Or maybe some of the quitters get moved but that won't be easy.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Congratulations for immediately answering your own question. Of course he is going to do things his way and there will be some things different. But listen to his interview. He said it's important you wear down the other team through possession and shots. That is the current system and not different from many teams.

And yeah IMO this season was lost on:
goaltending
not enough players who can finish, or willing to do what is needed to finish
some players who quit on the team

I'll bet Huska helps with the third and to some extent the second.

Or maybe some of the quitters get moved but that won't be easy.

Congratulations because you want to turn it back to Sutter.

I know your upset he's gone but he's the reason we here's today. The season was lost in him mishandling the team and killing offensive creativity.
No one quit on the team maybe Kadri at the end that's it.

Of course you want to put pressure on the team and hold possession that's why I've been saying taking what he put in and make the change so the players are allowed to makes those chance dangerous and not a useless shot on net for a whistle.

It's pretty clear they all saw the issues. We want to play star players and during important points of the game. Poor bench management was brought up.

Theh goalies didn’t cost the season they played a part in it but again teams with just as bad goaltending made the playoffs. The Panthers are in the final.

[Teroy]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

So you think Connor is just a hell of a Captain for the Oilers then? Because he's great on the ice, how he relates to the team in the room doesn't matter. Being totally selfish and yelling at underperforming players is cool as he puts up lots of points?

Didn't say that but I don't get to see what he's like in the dressing room. I only get what's on the ice. Someone said he couldn't do the heavy lifting that was expected. Interesting how many blamed his line mates. I also agree with the poster who said the players should choose. Looking back at the interviews, it sounded like that's what Backlund was (captain) in the dressing room.

[Ferarri]

As far as pressers are concerned I really enjoyed this one. Nothing earth shattering but it’s always exciting to hear a new perspective and vision for the team moving forward. One thing is certain is that we have high quality individuals in the GM and head coach chairs (and that’s not to say Tre or Darryl were not those types of people as I really like both of them).

A few things that stood out for me both good and bad about the team moving forward.

Positive:

1. Huska is very humble and understands the honour that’s been given to him. I think he will be more flexible in adapting and understands the relationships needed with players to succeed. It’s cool to see someone living their dream and he’s certainly paid his dues.

2. Communication - he seems like a guy who will be firm but will also lay down expectations. Shouldn’t be any ambiguity as to why someone isn’t playing or getting ice time.

3. Defence approach. I know some people will disagree and say offence is what this group needs but I like hearing the attention to detail in our own end first. We gave up way too many opportunities last year and by cleaning this up will allow the team to stop chasing. Also, he didn’t say no to offensive creativity and in fact encourages players to have that as part of their game.

4. Student of the game - he’s had an opportunity to learn from some pretty impressive coaches including Darryl Sutter. Now I’m sure he won’t be mimicking his communication style but having learned from one of the best of all time is certainly an advantage. Darryl is a multi cup champion and Jack Adams winner who is labelled as one of the best thinkers in the game. His knowledge and expertise, along with the other coaches who have served here should be invaluable experience.

What I didn’t like from the presser was the following:

1. Just make the playoffs. Personally goals should be higher than this but I get it. Anything can happen when you get in and Darryl said the same types of things. The 04 team and LA King championships are prime examples of this so I can live with these types of statements.

2. Player Input - seems like Conroy spent a lot of time starting with Huberdeau and then Lindholm to get their input on the coach. I don’t like the type of control this group seems to have especially with how things ended last year and multiple people saying they wouldn’t come back if Darryl was around. Sure their input is necessary but I wouldn’t necessarily cater to their demands. Players play, coaches coach and management makes personnel decisions.

3. Roster - the organization firmly believes that this group can achieve more (and probably not wrong) but they just don’t seem like they have that drive. The effort that Kadri put forth towards the end of the season was pathetic and I don’t know how you win with these types of players. Backlund requesting a trade and Huberdeau being miserable for most of last year makes me question the character of this group. You look at what Tkachuk has done in Florida and I don’t see anyone on the roster as passionate about winning as him. Yes, it sucks that he wanted out but I’ll reiterate that I don’t see that passion to win at all costs.

I really hope Conroy makes some bold moves but it seems that they are adamant about locking some of these guys up and rolling the dice on this team again. I don’t share this philosophy but I guess we’ll see how it all plays out.

[Sylvanfan]

I'm happy for Huska. Watched his entire junior career in Kamloops where he was a very intelligent player who won 3 Memorial Cups. Was far from a skilled player but wss s key piece for the 94 and 95 teams as the top shut down Center.

Hopefully he can make the tweaks needed to re-engage this group and be able to keep them focused. I get the trepidation that some have. It's not a move that has a good history in terms of results. But the guy has put in the work so maybe he can be the outlier.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by blender

No kidding.
Is anyone watching Vegas right now?
They look a lot like the Flames last season.
Flames have a lot of the personnel to be a very competitive team.
I don't know what is going on around here, but it's more delusional than usual.
Obviously only time will tell if Huska can get the job done, but the certainty that all is lost is utterly bizarre. It reads like complaining for the sake of complaining.

This is the most asinine take around here. Like full on glue snorting bat#### crazy.

Vegas looks nothing like the flames, I've watched Vegas play for the cup twice since their inception. This year I got to see Zadorov, Lewis and a couple others golfing at Blue Devil the Monday after they failed to make the playoffs. Pretty similar. Also of note the flames haven't played for the cup in 19 and soon to be 20 years, Vegas has done it twice since 2018. The resemblance is uncanny.

The flames do have some elite personnel. Huberdeau is an NHL all time record holder and should be treated as such. Unfortunately though the flames players are too competent to get a good draft pick and far too ####ty from actually being a post season threat.

Give me either young elite talent or a perennial contender to cheer for. We are neither.

Huska is the coaching hire equivalent of an unenthusiastic hand job.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I am happy with Huska - more than I thought I would be - after watching both the press conference and the interview afterwards with Brendan Parker.


This may prove to be a long post, so sorry in advance. It has been a long time since I have made a large post, so just skip this if you don't like (or know) how to read.


I disagree that the Flames have been through too many head coaches thus far. I think the Peters' issue made things seem worse than they were as it was a fairly quick dismissal, followed by a weird season that saw an assistant be promoted in a difficult time (and quite honestly, an assistant that was widely thought of as one of the next 'up and comers', and who turned the Devil's PP around just like Brunette did? Funny!). I am going to do a quick summary of the coaches in Calgary from this 'core' until now, as I see it. I am sure people will disagree with some of my summaries, and that's fine.


Bob Hartley: Fantastic coach. Yes, Fantastic. I will die on this hill. I didn't enjoy his overly passive defensive system relying a lot on shot blocking. I Just don't think he had the talent to implement a better system. However, he was extremely demanding from a defensive point of view, and I swear you can hear him tearing the strip off a player for not getting back in coverage properly (I remember one specifically with Backlund). Offensively he let this team be creative. As long as there was coverage, defencemen were given the green light. This caused a tonne of defensive zone breakdowns. He was a wizard on the 3on3 too. Hartley knew how to get the most out of his team offensively, and he demanded his team to be responsible defensively. Sure sounds a lot like what Conroy wants right now - but I am sure it Huska comes with a better defensive system (that I will guess at later). This team was able to score off the rush. People remember it all just as stretch passes, but it was way more than that. It was creative offensive hockey that caused the other teams to break-down. Until the goalies stopped being able to make routine saves, this was extremely entertaining hockey. Practices were intense and at game speed, and even morning skates on game-days were intense and run similarly to practices. Hartley had his warts, but one thing he was very exceptional at was being a teaching coach - he was lauded by all opposing team's broadcasts when they took in his morning skates for that very reason.



Gulutzan: I can't say I enjoyed much about his tenure here. The Flames were a fast-paced and hard-working team, and it seemed he brought back the Brent Sutter systems. 5 man units, puck possession, shot volume that went nowhere and seemed purposefully designed around maximizing CORSI. The team never really got it right defensively either. It gave up on Hartley's overly passive system with shot-blocking, but there were too many hiccups constantly that never seemingly got it ironed-out. It was something else watching a team that would push the puck up the ice the instant it got the puck on their stick to a system where we would see the defencemen passing it back and forth a few times before starting a transition. It was also incredibly boring to watch.
Practices were 'slow' - not run at game speed.


Peters: I hated the hire when it was made as it SEEMED Peters was a mirror image of what was wrong with Calgary and Carolina - good underlying numbers, but couldn't score. So many stats were so eerily similar. However, he 'won' me over when talking about the transition, and I said right away that Giordano is going to have a monster season. Peters' transition was reminiscent of Hartley's, except now there was even more talent on the team. I also enjoyed the more aggressive defending. However, after that all-star break, the wheels fell off for some inexplicable reason. i am not sure if it was because defensively the Flames became a bit loose, and things were modified somewhat for 'playoff winning hockey', but it seemed to me like "Gulutzan hockey" returned. The transition slowed down. Colorado severely exposed Calgary, and Peters didn't seem able to modify anything to get Johnny away from the 2-1 and even 3-1 coverage. Flames were a fairly fast team, but they were so thoroughly exposed that series. The rest is history. I still don't understand how the wheels fell apart so thoroughly, but that team was never the same under Peters until he got fired for off-ice reasons. He almost seemed like a 'one trick pony' to me? One hell of a good trick at first, but didn't have the knowledge (or perhaps the ability?) to make the required changes in a timely manner? Still blows my mind how different this team was under him - the most Jekyll and Hyde team in recent memory.



Ward: Practices slowed down - not at game speed. I think Ward's biggest problem (and this is 100% me theorizing here with very little in the way of evidence) is that Ward didn't seem to have answers. Those post-game press conferences were downright uncomfortable as it seemed at times that Ward had absolutely no answers or insight at all. Sure, maybe this was just playing dumb to the media, but towards the end of the season, I was struck by that notion listening to those press conferences. The team just seemed like a disjointed mess. Breakouts were poor, there were always poor defensive breakdowns - the team neither looked dangerous or in any way cohesive. They looked substantially slower, and I do believe that practices had a lot to do with this. It was the same with Edmonton during Eakins years where they had slow practices - that team wasn't able to really put together a complete game.


Sutter: We all saw the creativity (or lack thereof) in goal scoring. The top line (the Gaudreau year) was able to fit their creativity within the confines of the system, but that was all. IIRC, even that really good year the other lines were somewhat underwater, and that 'excellence' of the top line, along with Markstrom making some big saves, hid a lot of those warts. Last year, those warts were all exposed. Shot volume with not enough creativity was hard to watch when the team wasn't winning. I also thought that under Sutter, this team would be massively better defensively without so many GRADE A chances going the other way. This team kept giving up those chances (though not as often as I saw under Ward). Too many breakaways, 2-on-1s, too many cross-ice passes, etc. Just too many 'hiccups'. I was convinced that Sutter was going to get those ironed-out, and when he didn't, I became convinced that it was because it was either a culture problem or a personnel problem (or both!). After all, this was Darryl Sutter - a very good coach on the defensive side of things. Yes, the Huberdeau (and Lindholm, Mangiapane, etc) issues offensively was a huge problem, but those defensive breakdowns and the lack of elite-level play by Markstrom really sunk this team. Rittich would have been the better goalie last year in some ways (ok, I don't really believe that either - but there is logic here) because Rittich was good at making those '10 bell saves', but would lose focus and concentration and easy goals would go in. The year we acquired Markstrom, he was the only goalie in the league not to have allowed a single bad goal. Remember that? He just wasn't AS good with the 10 bell saves (especially rebounds). Something definitely affected him last season, and maybe it was a little bit like what Dubynk suffered from in Edmonton - an over correction from facing too many grade A shots since the players in front of him were giving up too much.



Hartley, Peters and Sutter were all coaches with limited shelf-lives. I think Gulutzan and Ward were players coaches, but simply either not as 'brilliant' in their systems and applications, or perhaps had difficulty managing a bench.


After listening to Huska speaking, I am much more confident in the direction he wants this team to head into than I have been with either Gulutzan or Ward. He specifically mentioned Peters' transition (which I do think was very good for 3/4 of the season - absolutely lethal in fact). I like how he identified Sutter's reoccurring defensive breakdowns. IIRC, Hartley used a defensive zone coverage, but one that was passive. Sutter preferred to employ man-to-man coverage. Both of these have their strengths and weaknesses. I just think that offensively, players are just so damn good now. Simple picks can cause too much disruption and breakdowns. I think it is too easy to create a breakdown, but it is easier to pressure the puck carriers. It sounds like Huska is going to employ zone coverage, but keep it aggressive. I really look forward to seeing how it works.


Listening to Huska speak felt as good to listen to as Hartley's presser when he was hired (and I REALLY detested that hire right up until his presser when he described how he wanted Calgary to play, which was night and day better than Brent Sutter's Flames). I disliked the Gulutzan hire, and his press conference didn't impress me at all. I hated the Peters' hire, but loved that presser when he described how important it was to have a fast transition. Ward's hire I was optimistic with, but I don't remember having any positive or negative feelings. Obviously that didn't work out. Sutter's hiring and presser was damn exciting though, but we all know that he comes with shelf life.


I mostly liked Hartley and Sutter as coaches. I think they are both very smart. You can't argue with results - both of them have it. Name another coach that has won in every league he has been? Hartley is a much smarter coach than people give him credit for, but unfortunately, he relies on being too abrasive to get his players to buy-in. I would have loved to see him coach one more year as I do think it would have made a huge difference to Bennett and perhaps some of the other younger players, but I also can't argue that his shelf-life might have simply expired. Sutter's definitely did, and we all witnessed it happening in front of our eyes with so many things going wrong, and obvious decision making and player utilization right until the end, including 'must win games' down the stretch.



Huska to me comes off as extremely intelligent, and a coach that I really agree with. Him speaking about the transition, and figuring out how to plug some holes defensively has me very excited to see this team play. He also seems to come across as not exactly a 'player's coach' - especially the comments from Andersson and Mangiapane. He seems like a coach that is willing to actually teach (iike Hartley), but with better ideas defensively and with more interpersonal ability. I hope that he really learned from his time with Sutter. Yes, those defensive 'hiccups' I do think were huge, but the Flames otherwise played 'air-tight' games. It was air-tight for 55+ minutes of an entire game, with hiccups randomly popping up. I think Sutter's system is incredibly effective, but like anything, it needs to be altered to better suit the personnel and the opposing teams. I hope that Huska is right about what he wants accomplish here.


I also really enjoyed listening to Conroy talking about wanting Huska to be the coach for the next 10+ years. I don't share the notion that the Flames as an organization have had 'too many' coaches, or that coaching has been too unstable. If anything, I think Calgary has been too patient with coaching at times. They just hired too many poor ones. I hope this is a good one, and I 100% agree with wanting to establish a long-term partnership here in Calgary between the GM and the coach. Treliving was never able to achieve that I think. I do think having a long-term coach in Calgary will help to finally establish a culture like they have in Tampa, or even in Boston. Although I do not think that Calgary has necessarily gone through more coaches than average, I also do think that there is great benefit in having stability in management and coaching.


Huska SEEMS like the type of coach you can build that with. I love Hartley (I know I am one of the few here who do), but there is no way you can bring him in as a long-term stable presence. You bring him in to kick-start a rebuild and use his 'teaching' energy to help develop players, or you bring him into a group that is about ready to 'win'. Sutter you bring to a team that is destabilized and needs a quick turnaround, and has the talent to win - he can get that group to win - but he is hardly a long-term solution.



Huska seems strong enough not to allow the inmates to run the asylum, but with enough interpersonal skills to not drive the inmates crazy either. He sure seems smart enough for the job, and seems to understand what it takes to be successful in today's NHL.


I still think that without Lindholm agreeing to an extension, this team is still very much in limbo when it comes to the immediate plans, but that's ok. I do think that Conroy made a good choice. I wasn't too sure, but I really did enjoy listening to what Huska had to say, and I feel much more relieved. I prefer this hire over Love right now. Love may prove to be the better coach later on, but I do agree with Conroy that with Love's lack of experience, we just don't know if he is really ready or not, regardless of how confident Love is. Huska has been learning on the job what is effective and what is not effective, and how to manage a team properly. I really love this hire, even if there is no Love in it.

[blender]

"This is the most asinine take around here. Like full on glue snorting bat#### crazy."

Omg, lol. How do I make this my signature?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Ferarri

Backlund requesting a trade and Huberdeau being miserable for most of last year makes me question the character of this group. You look at what Tkachuk has done in Florida and I don’t see anyone on the roster as passionate about winning as him. Yes, it sucks that he wanted out but I’ll reiterate that I don’t see that passion to win at all costs.

Great post overall and I agree with 99% of it. I just quoted the one instance I didn't quite agree with.


AFAIK, Backlund's trade request seemed to be all about wanting to win, rather than not getting along with Sutter. Gaudreau left, and Tkachuk let it be known that the Flames better trade him too. That's the two best players on the team. Backlund asked for a trade.


When the Tkachuk trade was completed, and the returns seemed really good - plus Kadri signing here - Backlund rescinded his request. If he had an issue with Sutter, there was no reason to rescind the request.



Flames had a tough season. Backlund has only a few more years left in the tank, and he wants to win a cup. He stated that he prefers to win one here, but that he would like to see what direction this team is heading in. With so many key pieces being upcoming UFAs, I think this is Backlund just being a realist here. If this team enters a rebuild, he will have no chance at a cup. If the team is trying to win, but has obviously glaring holes, he doesn't have a chance at a cup. In those situations, I would imagine he would prefer to go to a team that has a better chance at winning a cup. I can't fault him for his reasoning.


There could have been other confirmed explanations, but what I wrote seems to be the best supported theory until now. At the presser, he specifically cites his age and his desire to win a cup, and stating that he prefers that it happen here, but if it is not going to happen, then he will be looking elsewhere to re-sign. That's fair to me.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Not enthusiastic nor disappointed about the hire. It is a meh hire. Doesn’t move the needle in my opinion. The only thing that I can take away as a positive here is Huska can work effectively with young players and has a history of giving them a chance. Of course that was in lower developmental leagues where young players are the lifeblood to the team, so we’ll see if that continues or if Sutter has rubbed off on him. To be frank, the only people this hire will mean anything to, and have the biggest impact, is the players. Is the hiring of Huska going to provide the confidence to Lindholm and the host of soon to be UFAs to hang around and sign another contract or does this signing reinforce their desire to move on. That’s all that matters IMO. The rest is noise at this point.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by blender

No kidding.
Is anyone watching Vegas right now?
They look a lot like the Flames last season.
Flames have a lot of the personnel to be a very competitive team.
I don't know what is going on around here, but it's more delusional than usual.
Obviously only time will tell if Huska can get the job done, but the certainty that all is lost is utterly bizarre. It reads like complaining for the sake of complaining.

This is not a crazy post. I’ve said that to an extent Vegas and Caroline play similar systems to Sutter. They just have better team speed, and Vegas at least is more creative and patient in the offensive zone. And of course they received goaltending (and they both seem to allow less catastrophic breakdowns and grade A chances which affected goaltending a lot).

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Congratulations for immediately answering your own question. Of course he is going to do things his way and there will be some things different. But listen to his interview. He said it's important you wear down the other team through possession and shots. That is the current system and not different from many teams.

And yeah IMO this season was lost on:
goaltending
not enough players who can finish, or willing to do what is needed to finish
some players who quit on the team

I'll bet Huska helps with the third and to some extent the second.

Or maybe some of the quitters get moved but that won't be easy.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

This is not a crazy post. I’ve said that to an extent Vegas and Caroline play similar systems to Sutter. They just have better team speed, and Vegas at least is more creative and patient in the offensive zone. And of course they received goaltending (and they both seem to allow less catastrophic breakdowns and grade A chances which affected goaltending a lot).

Carolina for sure.

Vegas is a bit different as I don't think they focus on volume as much as motion and creating side to side plays.

They also play fast and get the puck up ice with one touch or skate it up.

Carolina seemed to play slow and go to d to d with controlled entries.

One comment of Huska that stood out in a odd way we when he discussed coaches. Said Ward wanted to go things different offensively and how he thought the game was innovative and ahead of its time and a lot of teams are doing that now.

If I recall that time the team looked slow at doing everything and the attack was just terrible. Wonder if he was unable to implement what he wanted.

[GioforPM]

Vegas is different once they get into the zone for sure - they cycle a lot more. But like Sutter, they place a premium on getting the puck out of the zone, dogging the puck had up ice, etc. I think they play “faster” because they just are faster. Frankly, I don’t think their zone exits are very clean at all - they tend to muscle the puck out of the zone as best they can and then try to regain the puck.

EDIT: Carolina gave the Panthers the same issues as Vegas, but they don’t have the same kind of finish, so Bob stopped them.