Darryl Sutter for Jack Adams

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Confirms more than you think.

Some feel the Flames ownership group stepped in and hired Sutter without Treliving involved. That it was a season saving desperation move.

Treliving still working already puts most of that to bed, but this does the rest.

Sutter saying over a year puts the discussion back to at least March of 2020 when Ward had the interim tag, and likely a few months before that as he said over a year which would put Sutter in conversation to fill in for Peters.

Since Peters was coming off a 1st in the West season it would seem odd to have your GM out of the loop in bringing in a new coach around that time.

From what Sutter said in this article, it could have been someone in ownership that was talking to him in 2020 too. We don't have enough information based on what is available to make these types of claims. You've made just as many assumptions here as someone who assumes that ownership went over Tre's head.

Now it is seemingly very unimportant anyways, not sure why it's worth arguing about. But it seems ridiculous to claim that these statements utterly disprove that notion, unless you have some sort of interest/agenda in disproving that notion.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

From what Sutter said in this article, it could have been someone in ownership that was talking to him in 2020 too. We don't have enough information based on what is available to make these types of claims. You've made just as many assumptions here as someone who assumes that ownership went over Tre's head.

Now it is seemingly very unimportant anyways, not sure why it's worth arguing about. But it seems ridiculous to claim that these statements utterly disprove that notion, unless you have some sort of interest/agenda in disproving that notion.

So the GM that just came off a 1st place conference finish and had to fire his coach because of something that happened in the Hawks system is being circumvented by team ownership after handling the Peters thing with class?

And I'm the one with the agenda?

Ok ...

And honestly sure it could have been an owner reaching out to Sutter for sure (past relationships etc). But it wasn't the step in over Treliving narrative that was being walked out when Sutter was hired.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

The article doesn't "confirm" this at all lol, but whatever. Seems like an unimportant thing to dwell on.

Interesting, Sutter throws a bit of shade Johnny and Chucky's way at the end of the article in terms of the team still missing "that kind of player", when the kind of player he was talking about was a strong attacking forward with dominant puck skills.

Weird take. It's pretty clear he's talking about the centre position, where Lindholm and Monahan and Backlund are not that kind of player. That would also be evidenced in his decision to play Dillon Dube at centre earlier in the year, when very few people outside of a handful ever considered that possibility.

If you compared our lineup to the last couple years' Tampa Bay, which is the Gold Standard, we have

- a Cirelli comparable in Elias Lindholm
- a Gourde comparable in Mikael Backlund
- a Kucherov comparable in Gaudreau
- a Killorn comparable in Tkachuk, probably more talented too
- a presumed Stamkos comparable in Monahan, though the former is much of more an impact player on the PP
- Blake Coleman
- a strong D core that moves the puck and clears the crease

we do not have

- a Point comparable. Period. No one in the organization at any level, really, is. Eichel might have been able to be that had we acquired him (while also being a lot closer to a Stamkos comparable on the PP... man...)

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Weird take. It's pretty clear he's talking about the centre position, where Lindholm and Monahan and Backlund are not that kind of player. That would also be evidenced in his decision to play Dillon Dube at centre earlier in the year, when very few people outside of a handful ever considered that possibility.

If you compared our lineup to the last couple years' Tampa Bay, which is the Gold Standard, we have

- a Cirelli comparable in Elias Lindholm
- a Gourde comparable in Mikael Backlund
- a Kucherov comparable in Gaudreau
- a Killorn comparable in Tkachuk, probably more talented too
- a presumed Stamkos comparable in Monahan, though the former is much of more an impact player on the PP
- Blake Coleman
- a strong D core that moves the puck and clears the crease

we do not have

- a Point comparable. Period. No one in the organization at any level, really, is. Eichel might have been able to be that had we acquired him (while also being a lot closer to a Stamkos comparable on the PP... man...)

Yeah I thought it could have been a subtle reference to Eichel too, but IMO Johnny and Tkachuk both fancy themselves just as good as that tier of player. Sutter is tamping that down.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Bingo

So the GM that just came off a 1st place conference finish and had to fire his coach because of something that happened in the Hawks system is being circumvented by team ownership after handling the Peters thing with class?

And I'm the one with the agenda?

Ok ...

And honestly sure it could have been an owner reaching out to Sutter for sure (past relationships etc). But it wasn't the step in over Treliving narrative that was being walked out when Sutter was hired.

You're the one making all the assumptions here... What agenda could I possibly have in merely pointing out that the article definitely does not confirm anything about that story?

Who says it was circumventing? The Peters thing happened quick, absolutely. In the aftermath of all of that, is it really so strange to believe that someone like Conroy, or one of the owners who Sutter has a relationship with, reached out on an unofficial basis to test the waters? Whether or not Treliving did it is not confirmed, that's all I am saying. And thus it cannot possibly counter the former narrative (which, incidentally, is also just a narrative with no real proof.)

If I was in that scenario, I would personally build a list of potential candidates I knew to then bring to the table to discuss onboarding. It may involving reaching out to some of them to understand where they're at. Doesn't mean they are actually offered the job.

Sutter says in the article that he was talking to the team in March 2020. That is it.
" I had talked to the Flames off and on for over a year, just to be able to watch them"

It's so vague it could literally mean that he was trading #### texts about our play with Conroy or something. Or maybe Murray Edwards was asking for an honest opinion or two. OR maybe Treliving was trying to lure him in. Who knows. Who actually cares. But saying this "confirms" it is dumb.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah if there's a line between superstar or generational player and star player both guys are on this side of it.

No shade in that.

They're not McDavid, McKinnon or Matthews.

oh.. I meant they aren't the strong attacking forward type.

Gaudreau is for sure in the same league as MacKinnon and Matthews. He just isn't mcjesus.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Weird take. It's pretty clear he's talking about the centre position, where Lindholm and Monahan and Backlund are not that kind of player. That would also be evidenced in his decision to play Dillon Dube at centre earlier in the year, when very few people outside of a handful ever considered that possibility.

If you compared our lineup to the last couple years' Tampa Bay, which is the Gold Standard, we have

- a Cirelli comparable in Elias Lindholm
- a Gourde comparable in Mikael Backlund
- a Kucherov comparable in Gaudreau
- a Killorn comparable in Tkachuk, probably more talented too
- a presumed Stamkos comparable in Monahan, though the former is much of more an impact player on the PP
- Blake Coleman
- a strong D core that moves the puck and clears the crease

we do not have

- a Point comparable. Period. No one in the organization at any level, really, is. Eichel might have been able to be that had we acquired him (while also being a lot closer to a Stamkos comparable on the PP... man...)

Eichel and Point are pretty different players.

I think Sutter really likes the Islanders’ team from last year, and it wouldn’t surprise me that he admires a Lou L/Trotz team.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Yeah I thought it could have been a subtle reference to Eichel too, but IMO Johnny and Tkachuk both fancy themselves just as good as that tier of player. Sutter is tamping that down.

No chance it was about Eichel, IMO. Sutter doesn't talk about players he doesn't have - just the facts about what he does have.

I think it was a simple statement that they don't have that elite play driver, the elite two-way C, like a Kopitar. If he was referencing anyone, far more likely he is referring to Kopitar, a player he had, than Eichel, a player he has never had.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

You're the one making all the assumptions here... What agenda could I possibly have in merely pointing out that the article definitely does not confirm anything about that story?

Who says it was circumventing? The Peters thing happened quick, absolutely. In the aftermath of all of that, is it really so strange to believe that someone like Conroy, or one of the owners who Sutter has a relationship with, reached out on an unofficial basis to test the waters? Whether or not Treliving did it is not confirmed, that's all I am saying. And thus it cannot possibly counter the former narrative (which, incidentally, is also just a narrative with no real proof.)

If I was in that scenario, I would personally build a list of potential candidates I knew to then bring to the table to discuss onboarding. It may involving reaching out to some of them to understand where they're at. Doesn't mean they are actually offered the job.

Sutter says in the article that he was talking to the team in March 2020. That is it.
" I had talked to the Flames off and on for over a year, just to be able to watch them"

It's so vague it could literally mean that he was trading #### texts about our play with Conroy or something. Or maybe Murray Edwards was asking for an honest opinion or two. OR maybe Treliving was trying to lure him in. Who knows. Who actually cares. But saying this "confirms" it is dumb.

No, you are the one making all the assumptions, and trying to get from the simple and straight-forward, to something that fits your narrative.

Re the second bold: a bag of assumptions (and reaches)

[sa226]

I was musing yesterday about how it would be nice to start getting some positive press out of market about a team that is not only winning, but winning the "right way" not by some crazy unsustainable measure.

The LeBrun piece and that TSN bit is nice to see.

Figures Sportsnet is nowhere to be seen.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Eichel and Point are pretty different players.

I think Sutter really likes the Islanders’ team from last year, and it wouldn’t surprise me that he admires a Lou L/Trotz team.

They're both elite centres, with truly high-end speed, who can take the puck from deep in their own zone right through the next 180 feet with their skillsets.

They have differences, but on the basic level of Darryl's analysis "we lack that type of player"... I think he's very generally referring to elite puck-carrying top line stars like McDavid, MacKinnon, Barzal, Eichel, Point, Aho, Barkov, Kuznetsov etc at the centre position. Which is a contrast to what we do have. Gaudreau is the closest thing to that calibre of playmaker but much like Marner, Panarin, Kane etc... he is ultimately a winger.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No, you are the one making all the assumptions, and trying to get from the simple and straight-forward, to something that fits your narrative.

Re the second bold: a bag of assumptions (and reaches)

Lol, did you read my post? Of course what you bolded were assumptions, it was clearly representative of how vague the text quoted was. It can only lead to assumptions. There's nothing there to "confirm" anything, and portraying it as confirmation of something is silly. For the record, I have yet to say it means anything in particular. Which I don't think it does. It is neither confirmation, nor is it evidence for, the made up narrative that some posters had over the circumstances of the Sutter hiring.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Lol, did you read my post? Of course what you bolded were assumptions, it was clearly representative of how vague the text quoted was. It can only lead to assumptions. There's nothing there to "confirm" anything, and portraying it as confirmation of something is silly. For the record, I have yet to say it means anything in particular. Which I don't think it does. It is neither confirmation, nor is it evidence for, the made up narrative that some posters had over the circumstances of the Sutter hiring.

The argument from many (not necessarily you) was that the owners reached in and hired the guy last March over Treliving's head.

If they were in conversation for over a year I would imagine Treliving was involved given;

a) he just came off a 1st place conference finish
b) they haven't fired him in two off seasons since

Not a lot of assumptions there in my mind.

And did you read my post? I even stated an owner could have reached out, but that's not circumventing your lame duck GM.

[Strange Brew]

I believe ownership had a very heavy hand in Sutter’s hiring. From when he was first contacted to when he came on board. I’m not seeing anything that really dispels that.

I also don’t believe that means Treliving was against it but I’m also sure he’s plenty smart enough to realize his own situation. That’s just kind of reality when you burn through so many coaches. It’s just not the same dynamic as when he hired Gulutzan or Peters.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I believe ownership had a very heavy hand in Sutter’s hiring. From when he was first contacted to when he came on board. I’m not seeing anything that really dispels that.

I also don’t believe that means Treliving was against it but I’m also sure he’s plenty smart enough to realize his own situation. That’s just kind of reality when you burn through so many coaches. It’s just not the same dynamic as when he hired Gulutzan or Peters.

From what I've heard over the years I think they're pretty involved in everything.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Bingo

From what I've heard over the years I think they're pretty involved in everything.

It’s more passive aggressive than “go talk to Sutter” though. It’s tight reins on budgets, etc.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

oh.. I meant they aren't the strong attacking forward type.

Gaudreau is for sure in the same league as MacKinnon and Matthews. He just isn't mcjesus.

Gaudreau is not in the same tier as Mackinnon or Matthews. Skillwise he might be, but his size stops him from taking over a game the same way Mackinnon or to a lesser extent, Matthews can.

[Knightslayer]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Gaudreau is not in the same tier as Mackinnon or Matthews. Skillwise he might be, but his size stops him from taking over a game the same way Mackinnon or to a lesser extent, Matthews can.

I see him as being in the same tier as Mathews. Definitely not Mackinnon.

Mathews to me wouldn't be in the conversation for top 5 player if he wasn't in Toronto. He has a lethal shot but otherwise doesn't take a game over. I think Gaudreau is also a great player but sometimes lacks consistency the same way Mathews does.

[Jore]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Gaudreau is not in the same tier as Mackinnon or Matthews. Skillwise he might be, but his size stops him from taking over a game the same way Mackinnon or to a lesser extent, Matthews can.

His position also stops him from taking over games like those players. Sutter mentions in the article that the game is now about playing from below, having centres drive up the ice from deep in their own zone, attacking the middle and backing guys off. Flames don't have anyone who can do that.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Jore

His position also stops him from taking over games like those players. Sutter mentions in the article that the game is now about playing from below, having centres drive up the ice from deep in their own zone, attacking the middle and backing guys off. Flames don't have anyone who can do that.

Conikita McDorov tho