Geoff Ward - Worst head coach ever

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Thousands?
I wonder if there has ever been any goals scored without a timeout? Probably a few there too.

Not defending Ward, just saying let's not be ridiculous.

Yes thousands, and I'm also with you in that I'm not really for or against Ward. I find Troutmans implication of time outs not having an affect to be quite honestly stupid so his comment got treated as such.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Thousands?
I wonder if there has ever been any goals scored without a timeout? Probably a few there too.

Not defending Ward, just saying let's not be ridiculous.

Timeouts are commonly used in the NHL to rest players, break up the opponent's momentum, help your team refocus etc. Ward doesn't seem to either 1. believe in this, or 2. be able to identify when this could be done.

It's possible Ward knows more than the many coaches who do this, but he has essentially no relevant head coaching experience, so I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt.

[Erick Estrada]

Ward's missteps are frustrating but he is a first time head coach after all so given the situation he's done admirably. It's also obvious that he's not the long term answer at head coach for this team but that's an offseason discussion.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

Timeouts are commonly used in the NHL to rest players, break up the opponent's momentum, help your team refocus etc. Ward doesn't seem to either 1. believe in this, or 2. be able to identify when this could be done.

It's possible Ward knows more than the many coaches who do this, but he has essentially no relevant head coaching experience, so I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt.

They’re not commonly used at all, especially at certain times when posters are hollering for them (a tie game, a goal after their first shot, etc.). It’s most commonly used to rest players after an icing at the end of the game, when ahead by one.

Last game, when the Knights scored, they had their best players on the ice. Calgary didn’t have its top line on (at least not the one most people would throw out for an extra man goal). So a timeout would have rested the Vegas players whereas the Calgary guys were already rested.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Yes thousands, and I'm also with you in that I'm not really for or against Ward. I find Troutmans implication of time outs not having an affect to be quite honestly stupid so his comment got treated as such.

Surely you can show us evidence of thousands of examples of games impacted by timeouts, that can’t can’t be explained by other factors. I’ve searched and have not found anything. I assume when timeouts are taken to change momentum, the team with the lead is already sitting back, so you have to account for that.

There are many television timeouts too (three per period).

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Ward's missteps are frustrating but he is a first time head coach after all so given the situation he's done admirably. It's also obvious that he's not the long term answer at head coach for this team but that's an offseason discussion.

Exactly. As a franchise thats goal, and annual best case scenario is to just get in, he's an ideal flames guy.

I mean, it's not like there are a historic level of great coaches out of work. I suppose, those guys don't want to come here, which seems like quite the trend across the league at the moment.

"Admiral given the situation", man, this team led the conference last year, it's a Canadian market, it's frustrating.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They’re not commonly used at all, especially at certain times when posters are hollering for them (a tie game, a goal after their first shot, etc.). It’s most commonly used to rest players after an icing at the end of the game, when ahead by one.

Last game, when the Knights scored, they had their best players on the ice. Calgary didn’t have its top line on (at least not the one most people would throw out for an extra man goal). So a timeout would have rested the Vegas players whereas the Calgary guys were already rested.

Then why no timeout in the Tampa game to rest the top 6 unit with less than a minute left when down by a goal? Instead Ward sent out the second unit.

The guy was a powerplay specialist before this. It's not unreasonable to be skeptical of his game management.

[DeluxeMoustache]

The (failure to take a) timeout situation vs Tampa is the one time that the people who shout about it are actually right.

In that case, the top line had just scored to get the game within one, then just spent a good shift in control, and Johnny was asking for it, a few times on the way to the bench.

Throwing out Lucic, Bennett etc. rather than taking a time out worked about as well as everyone but Ward thought it would

But let’s not confuse the one time it would have helped with the other multitude of situations where it wouldn’t

We even had some folks here saying in hindsight that they should have taken a timeout after they tied it up. Who would do that?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

The (failure to take a) timeout situation vs Tampa is the one time that the people who shout about it are actually right.

In that case, the top line had just scored to get the game within one, then just spent a good shift in control, and Johnny was asking for it, a few times on the way to the bench.

Throwing out Lucic, Bennett etc. rather than taking a time out worked about as well as everyone but Ward thought it would

But let’s not confuse the one time it would have helped with the other multitude of situations where it wouldn’t

We even had some folks here saying in hindsight that they should have taken a timeout after they tied it up. Who would do that?

Agreed. I’m not saying he’s perfect, and I bet if you asked, he had an explanation for the TB example. But people tend to scrutinize everything here way too much.

I also notice that when the Flames have played well from the start “they were ready to play”. When they don’t it was Ward’s fault (or Peters or GGs).

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Agreed. I’m not saying he’s perfect, and I bet if you asked, he had an explanation for the TB example. But people tend to scrutinize everything here way too much.

I also notice that when the Flames have played well from the start “they were ready to play”. When they don’t it was Ward’s fault (or Peters or GGs).

I'm sure he has an explanation for every decision he makes.

The issue is the Flames are trying to contend, and can't afford to have a coach learning on the job. This isn't a rebuilding team where the coaching mistakes don't matter. Every mistake is rightfully analyzed as the Flames have outwardly stated their goal is to try to win now.

They could have even brought in an experienced head coach to be associate to Ward and help him along. It's been done before, but alas it costs money and right or wrong there is a perception the Flames are not willing to spend big on coaching.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I see no issue analyzing actual mistakes / questionable decisions, but here you have a lot of people who start shouting about any little thing they can think of, after a game basically lost on a late, unlucky, and unrepeatable bounce

[-TC-]

If I see a thread (or anything) titled 'worst *insert subject here* ever', I assume it was written by a 12-year old.

This lived up to expectations...

Is Ward perfect? No. Is he doing his job? Yes.

The players need to learn to show up every game.

[theg69]

In hindsight, I was pissed off over the result and posted a little too hastily.

The fact that the thread has garnered 4 pages of discussion does indicate that there certainly is debate as to whether or not the coach is doing his job.

The timeout issue admittedly is overblown but there have been a few instances where it made logical sense (don't even get me started on the Lightning game).

The whole goaltending issue that irritated me started just before the all-star game - Talbot won 3 in a row - then Rittich started the Ottawa game. Then, they started him again after the all-star game - effectively icing the second star of the week.

I feel at such a critical juncture in the season, you should ride the hot hand.

I agree that he is still learning at his position, but we are not at the point in our development curve to waste another year letting a career AHL coach try to "learn" to coach in the NHL.

I am also perplexed at his infatuation with the Hamonic-Hanifin pairing as well - Hanifin has played his best with Andersson - Hamonic should never be relied on as a top-4 option when he comes back from injury.

Overall, I am sorry I started this thread - but not sorry for discussing why this coach is not the best coach for this team given the options out there right now.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by theg69

In hindsight, I was pissed off over the result and posted a little too hastily.

The fact that the thread has garnered 4 pages of discussion does indicate that there certainly is debate as to whether or not the coach is doing his job.

The timeout issue admittedly is overblown but there have been a few instances where it made logical sense (don't even get me started on the Lightning game).

The whole goaltending issue that irritated me started just before the all-star game - Talbot won 3 in a row - then Rittich started the Ottawa game. Then, they started him again after the all-star game - effectively icing the second star of the week.

I feel at such a critical juncture in the season, you should ride the hot hand.

I agree that he is still learning at his position, but we are not at the point in our development curve to waste another year letting a career AHL coach try to "learn" to coach in the NHL.

I am also perplexed at his infatuation with the Hamonic-Hanifin pairing as well - Hanifin has played his best with Andersson - Hamonic should never be relied on as a top-4 option when he comes back from injury.

Overall, I am sorry I started this thread - but not sorry for discussing why this coach is not the best coach for this team given the options out there right now.

Ah.. You don't say.

I'm glad you have the self awareness to recognize that and admit it. But the overall knee jerk reactiveness on the board that so often comes out in hyperbole is a tad bit embarrassing and I wish people would stop and gather some rational thought before come here and making threads and blowing up other threads with tirades.

We actually need to stop this stuff after every loss because I think it kills productive/meaningful conversation. There will be more losses to come. Some that will happen in ####y fashion. If each of us can prepare a little better for the possibility of it, then maybe we'll serve up less ATL worthy content to rival fans.

[Press Level]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

And then fired him after traded Savard for peanut


That GM deserved to be shot!

And then he hired Darryl Sutter, who he was himself replaced by at the end of the season. The whole organization was a s... show back in those days. People forget how bad it was.


Yes, Ward is not a top tier head coach, but it's not like the Flames had planned on hiring him mid-season either. That was a situation that was out of their control. I fully expect that there will be a proper head coach search at the end of the season.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Press Level

And then he hired Darryl Sutter, who he was himself replaced by at the end of the season. The whole organization was a s... show back in those days. People forget how bad it was.


Yes, Ward is not a top tier head coach, but it's not like the Flames had planned on hiring him mid-season either. That was a situation that was out of their control. I fully expect that there will be a proper head coach search at the end of the season.

My belief is that that search started fairly soon after Peters was fired, and it is ongoing. That one of the top-tier coaches presently on the market has not been snatched up by the Flames is most likely not for lack of interest. Rather, I suspect it has mostly to do with the fact that the coaches themselves are waiting until the off-season to consider their options. Two of them have publicly stated as much already.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Press Level

And then he hired Darryl Sutter, who he was himself replaced by at the end of the season. The whole organization was a s... show back in those days. People forget how bad it was.


Yes, Ward is not a top tier head coach, but it's not like the Flames had planned on hiring him mid-season either. That was a situation that was out of their control. I fully expect that there will be a proper head coach search at the end of the season.

I think the problem for many people, or at least my problem, is the apparent unwillingness of the team to look for a coach mid season. It really does appear like Trelieving is using this as a free shot at "picking" a coach. It's either that or the Flames were happy to roll the dice on the season to save money.

There are, and have been for some time, coaches out there who are without a doubt more accomplished than Ward.

Allowing a decision to be made for you, i.e "I guess Ward is the interim head coach now" is a telltale sign of weak leadership.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

On starting Rittich, Talbot started 3 games in a row, and last game, though he won, he didn’t look quite as solid. You have to play Rittich at some point no matter how many Talbot wins in a row. One out of four starts seems pretty reasonable to me, especially since you probably need both guys going for the POs.

The other thing is that neither goalie is a clear cut starter, so there's no reason that anyone should be getting upset about it. Both have proven they can play well for 3-5 starts, but seem to decline if the team rides them. This is the life of having two 1B goalies. The sooner the team adapts predictable deployment plan like the Islanders and a few other teams have done in the past, the better for everyone.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I see no issue analyzing actual mistakes / questionable decisions, but here you have a lot of people who start shouting about any little thing they can think of, after a game basically lost on a late, unlucky, and unrepeatable bounce

It does appear that way. Here's my frustration. Since the trade deadline, the flames are 5-2-1. That's solid, and if they can keep that up, we'll all be happy to see them punch their ticket to the post season.

However, let's look at these games more closely.
Det (4-2W) : Solid win and game (albeit, against a terrible opponent, but that's immaterial).
Bos (5-2W) Solid win and game. Reason for a lot of optimism by flames fans. "maybe they've turned the corner" moment.
Nsh (4-2 OTL) Big game as far as the standings. Give up the first goal (last min of the first period), and give up game tying goal with 0.1S.
Tby (4-3 L) Get down 3-0, only must 6 shots in the 3rd period.
Fla (3-0 W) Solid win against a team that's spiralling down the toilet.
Cbj (3-2 OTL) Craptastic start, get down 2-0 but manage to comeback to salvage the point.
Arz (3-2 W) Give up goal ~1min into the game, but manage to win back the game almost immediately. Important game in the standings to a lesser opponent, but credit them for getting it done.
Vegas (5-3 L) Down early, and down 3-0 by 25 min mark of the game. Muster a comeback only to sit on their heels immediately after scoring, give up an unlucky goal in regulation.

Outside the Boston game, they've lost to the teams that are just better, and beat the teams that frankly they should. They continue to have poor starts, and end up chasing the games early. This isn't an improved team, playing that much better. It's the same issues that have dogged them all year, except that they've been slightly more resilient in managing to pick up points against lesser opposition (something they were failing to do earlier).

I've been cynical and harsh, but it's because this team keeps showing me that they are a "just get in" team again this year. They aren't peaking at the right time or anything. They are still a highly average team that really has no chance against a half decent team that they are sure to face in round 1.

I'm just frustrated. Another year being a fan of this franchise, another year where they haven't progressed in any real capacity. I should just be happy to get to see the sea of red a couple times in April, but there really isn't any point of thinking I'm cheering for a strong franchise who plan and execute for more.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

On starting Rittich, Talbot started 3 games in a row, and last game, though he won, he didn’t look quite as solid. You have to play Rittich at some point no matter how many Talbot wins in a row. One out of four starts seems pretty reasonable to me, especially since you probably need both guys going for the POs.

Nashville: Rinne is playing at the Rittich level since the All Star game.. Sarros 16 starts Rinne 7 starts

Flames Rittich 12 starts Talbot 10 starts.

Play Talbot until he has a couple of games where he is the clear reason for a loss .... like Rittich was last night