[News] Darryl Sutter out as Head Coach. Maloney presser at 11:30 AM MT

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

To the lawyers on here: Hard to imagine Murr pays out Sutter's contract without an attempt to negotiate a termination/settlement.

What kind of misconduct clauses might be in a coach's contract that could cover what happened here? Seems realistic that we have a pattern of players complaining/saying they won't play/asking for trades, etc which is damaging to the business. Sounds like some cause.

Just Cause is EXTREMELY difficult, and not going to be the case here.
I have not seen Darryl's contract, but you would need something so ridiculously specific to have this as Just Cause.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

With all the muck being thrown around about Sutter, who made the call to extend his contract?

Darryl just won the Jack Adams trophy but now it seems it was the players playing in spite of Darryl rather than for him. Hartley also won the Jack Adams and we saw how that turned out.

The guy on the right made the call

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

My stats were from Natural Stat Trick ... not just pulled off the top of my head.

So no ... I'd say he was given looks and it didn't happen here. Should he have been given a longer look? I would say so. Were certain players death to anyone that played with them (Neal)? Absolutely.

Which is why I said both sides.

But When you play 500 minutes with Mikael Backlund in three seasons and don't get much done it's hard to avoid the mirror.

Can’t tell if serious

Quick calculation

Say a guy plays 16 minutes a night x 82 games x 3 years. That’s 3900 minutes

Spreading 500 minutes out over 3 seasons, on W, not his natural position, and knowing there was time sprinkled in there with guys like Joakim Nordstrom… that’s your long look? I don’t think that’s a reason to look in the mirror. It’s validation that he didn’t have regular linemates 80 percent of the time

We agree it didn’t happen here

We agree he is doing more in Florida

We may disagree on if the team handled him well enough
That’s enough

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Can’t tell if serious

Quick calculation

Say a guy plays 16 minutes a night x 82 games x 3 years. That’s 3900 minutes

Spreading 500 minutes out over 3 seasons, on W, not his natural position, and knowing there was time sprinkled in there with guys like Joakim Nordstrom… that’s your long look?


We agree it didn’t happen here

We agree he is doing more in Florida

We may disagree on if the team handled him well enough
That’s enough

If you rank the players he played with in three years Backlund is at the top. Not stiffs. Tkachuk is 4th.

But for sure that's only 15-20% of his ice time. I know what you're saying.

One season in particular they gave him multiple looks in Frolik's place but the line didn't produce.

I liked his game and pushed back against CPers that were dumping on him, and I think they were too impatient. But he wasn't getting it done whenever they gave him a look with good players.

Those are the opportunities you need to run with. He didn't.

And by saying that I'd say he played well for the most part to my recognition, but wasn't productive.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I read that comment too.

Dan Carcillo is an opinionated blowhard. Not saying his rating of Sutter is made up, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was embellished.

I'd be interested to see if there are more reviews of Sutter. Surely there are some positive ones - he basically made guys like Trevor Lewis multi-millionaires.

That’s the only written review on Sutter’s profile on the app

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Darryl just won the Jack Adams trophy but now it seems it was the players playing in spite of Darryl rather than for him. Hartley also won the Jack Adams and we saw how that turned out.

The guy on the right made the call

That seems to be the crux of everything that has blown up with the Flames. Was it Edwards who was responsible for the extension? Was he responsible for the initial hiring? Is that ultimately why Treliving quit?

The organization just seems like a mess.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

To the lawyers on here: Hard to imagine Murr pays out Sutter's contract without an attempt to negotiate a termination/settlement.

What kind of misconduct clauses might be in a coach's contract that could cover what happened here? Seems realistic that we have a pattern of players complaining/saying they won't play/asking for trades, etc which is damaging to the business. Sounds like some cause.

It could be in Sutter's best interest to accept a negotiated payout as well. Getting a lump sum payout now could be worth more than having to wait 2 years for the full amount, plus it would give him an opportunity to work for another club, even if just in a consultants role or something.

Hard to say really. Sutter has made a lot of money in his career and might not care about waiting 2 years for the full amount, but maybe he would prefer to have a wad of cash right now to invest in other things.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

That seems to be the crux of everything that has blown up with the Flames. Was it Edwards who was responsible for the extension? Was he responsible for the initial hiring? Is that ultimately why Treliving quit?

The organization just seems like a mess.

I guess you can hope that if it was Edwards that did the extension, and he lost Treliving despite wanting him back and then had to let Sutter go ... that maybe he's learned to stay out of it?

Probably wishful thinking from people that know the man in the oil industry though.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Bennett was trashed here by plenty. I always felt he was a good player that was misused by the organization. He's a bull in a china shop type of player and the Flames simply didn't understand that he needed to play with skilled players to get the best of him. He was a terrible match for Gulutzan's perimeter system and buried him in the bottom six while Peters/Ward gave him brief opportunities in the top 6 but lacked the patience to let chemistry develop. Darryl being by far the sharpest of the coaches knew quickly that Bennett was special but he was in the picture too late.

Thing is, Bennett was played with players who were supposed to be skilled. They just didn't pan out just like him: Jankowski, Neal, Jagr, etc. and when he was here he seemed to refuse to do things that would give you trust to play him in all situations and at centre - his tunnel vision was cited a lot.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

That seems to be the crux of everything that has blown up with the Flames. Was it Edwards who was responsible for the extension? Was he responsible for the initial hiring? Is that ultimately why Treliving quit?

The organization just seems like a mess.

I am kind of jumping to conclusions here, but from the way some of the media reported it, it sounds like ownership offered Treliving and Sutter the same extensions at the same time and they assumed both would accept, but only Sutter did. If they knew that Treliving wouldn't accept his, they may not have offered Sutter an extension at the same time. If that is the case, it was a huge and expensive miscalculation.

I honestly couldn't see Treliving giving Sutter an expensive extension if he already had his mind made up to leave. I would think, or at least hope, that he would have left the decision up to the next GM. That would have been the proper thing to do, and while I am critical of some of the ways Treliving has handled things, I don't think he would do anything improper. If it was Treliving that gave him the extension, it would be an example of why it isn't wise to let a GM without future commitment continue making long term decisions for a club.

Then again, maybe Treliving pulled a Gaudreau on the owners and made it sound like he was going to stay, only to pull the rug out later. I doubt it, but it is possible. It does sound like they were caught a little off guard by his decision though.

[TheScorpion]

T-15 minutes until Rick Bell's, er, "column" gets posted in this thread ...

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Thing is, Bennett was played with players who were supposed to be skilled. They just didn't pan out just like him: Jankowski, Neal, Jagr, etc. and when he was here he seemed to refuse to do things that would give you trust to play him in all situations and at centre - his tunnel vision was cited a lot.

Like all 18 year olds, he had developing and maturing to do

But again, 2019-20? Top 5 ES combos

Bennett-Janko-Rieder (13 pct)
Bennett-Ryan-Looch
Bennett-Dube-Lucic
Bennett-Mang-Ryan
Bennett-Quine-Ryan (7 pct)

Alan Quine shows up before either Backlund or Tkachuk

That is a full wasted year of development of the highest ever pick in the history of the org

Remember how after a strong playoff, he was moved to the 4th line the next season?

Bennett didn’t refuse to do things. He asked out because he needed a place to give him an opportunity. He got his wish, and it worked out

I don’t know why we need to keep defending the Flames with the false narrative that their side of the street is clean in developing this guy properly

Maybe they just ####ed it up

Some of us said it at the time. It has played out pretty much exactly as expected.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

T-15 minutes until Rick Bell's, er, "column" gets posted in this thread ...

This one?
https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colum...-gimme-a-break

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

- And yet at the same time, they are really just kids..............who will do stupid kid things, lots and need wrangling and shown how to be adults.

Sure seems like someone who is petty, and is negative all the time and who ignores directives from the GM is the right person to “show kids how to be adults”.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by AC

The Sports Aux posted above is the creation of former Flame prospect Josh Healey.

Good idea for an app, allowing players to review coaches, agents, etc.

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

From their website:

Once verified, Players and Coaches have the ability to anonymously leave ratings and reviews.

Yeah.. not so much

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

To the lawyers on here: Hard to imagine Murr pays out Sutter's contract without an attempt to negotiate a termination/settlement.

What kind of misconduct clauses might be in a coach's contract that could cover what happened here? Seems realistic that we have a pattern of players complaining/saying they won't play/asking for trades, etc which is damaging to the business. Sounds like some cause.

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

Just Cause is EXTREMELY difficult, and not going to be the case here.
I have not seen Darryl's contract, but you would need something so ridiculously specific to have this as Just Cause.

IANAL, although with some 40 years in senior corporate management I do have some experience. IANKK is quite correct - establishing suitable "cause" in almost any environment is extraordinarily difficult (unless, of course it's the NHL and you are the Sharks and the target is Evander Kane....just saying).

The usual item is a "morals" clause and that's been successfully invoked on numerous celebrities. But in the more mundane world of employment...employers just pay. (Otherwise there is a sh*twhack of documentation and written warning(s) required and even that is often not enough.) Sometimes it's a negotiated amount, a reduction on the full value of the contract or Notice Period as the case might be, but the employer pretty much always pays.

DS might be happy to take a $1M discount on his $8M due, unless the contract specified a lesser amount for early termination, just so he gets his cash now. But he likely doesn't have to do so.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

This one?
https://calgarysun.com/opinion/colum...-gimme-a-break

Lol

Wow, that’s a masterclass in being horribly cringeworthy


*** Bonus points to taxbuster for making Scorp’s T-15 prognostication accurate !

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And people on here were constantly complaining that the team had no talented players. And those same posters continue to make the same complaints, every year.

And then when the players leave, they complain about how stupid the organization is for letting them go.

Canadian fans are too impatient, and too critical - if the team doesn't win the cup, then it isn't good enough and changes need to be made. That results in too much turnover, and too many coaching changes. And that is a big factor in why we haven't seen a Canadian team hoist the cup in 30 years.

And when Bennett would produce in the playoffs, even that was twisted with shade into "We lost because Sam Bennett was our best player" rather than "Bennett should have gotten more minutes" or "Bennett deserves more opportunity"

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It could be in Sutter's best interest to accept a negotiated payout as well. Getting a lump sum payout now could be worth more than having to wait 2 years for the full amount, plus it would give him an opportunity to work for another club, even if just in a consultants role or something.

Hard to say really. Sutter has made a lot of money in his career and might not care about waiting 2 years for the full amount, but maybe he would prefer to have a wad of cash right now to invest in other things.

Unless he has a very risky investment strategy, there is little he can do with a smaller amount over such a short period of time, as opposed to taking the full amount over two years, to make the decrease worth it, UNLESS you are talking a very small decrease, but then the benefit to Sutter is the same as the detriment to CSEC, so no incentive to them to do so.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

And when Bennett would produce in the playoffs, even that was twisted with shade into "We lost because Sam Bennett was our best player" rather than "Bennett should have gotten more minutes" or "Bennett deserves more opportunity"

The bold isn’t shade at Bennett.. it was shade at the rest of the team