Francis: Treliving filled with disappointment, anger after team's collapse

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And again, there is a huge difference between lacking emotion and controlling it by refusing to act recklessly upon it.

I will take the calculated, cold decision-maker over the knee-jerk reactionary every time.

How about calculated, cold non-decision-maker like we've watched all year?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

And again, there is a huge difference between lacking emotion and controlling it by refusing to act recklessly upon it.

I will take the calculated, cold decision-maker over the knee-jerk reactionary every time.

Even if that calculated, cold decision-maker routinely and repeatedly makes the wrong decisions?

Even if you need to get your players fired up because you're down in the 3rd period and need some magic? Some inspiration?

"No....keep doing what we've been doing. Over and over again if necessary. Trust the System. Love The System. The Glorious System shall deliver goals and thus victory!"

Until it doesnt. Which happened a lot.

[nik-]

I like even-keeled. Even when the result is horrible.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Don't get me wrong, here: I believe that this team struggles with harnessing and using their emotion on the ice, and I think this is what Treliving is getting at—that the emotions the players already experience can be used to help them win more often and consistently.

What I take issue with is this idea that some players are "okay with losing."

No accomplished athlete is OK with losing but some hate losing a lot more than others. That's indisputable IMO.

If Treliving is in fact saying tha players need help in channeling their emotions, then the head coach is obviously toast. But I think he may be insinuating they need some different types of players. Or maybe both.

But if we start trading talent for grit and competitiveness, we're in trouble.

[activeStick]

“You can also make mistakes by saying, ‘Everything is wrong and let’s stick a stick of dynamite in this.’ The first instinct is we have to blow the whole thing up. I don’t think we’re in that mode.”

Treliving clearly reads CP!

This offseason is going to be quite interesting. Player movements and potentially new coaching staff...

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Well, glad to hear that he knows there is a problem with this team. Now the question becomes does he think it is a coaching issue or a player issue? Attitude reflect leadership. Leadership is on the coaching and the players but to me the identity of the team comes from the coach and you need your player leaders to buy in. Even Sutter said it to Gulutzan around the 2004. Can't quite remember the quote but it is roughly "I didn't do anything once the players bought in". The key there is the players bought in. Pretty obvious to me the Flames this year didi not buy in.

Identity: Gulutzan asked because he doesn't know what it is. This is very telling. You can be the smartest guy on the block with X and O's but if you can't lead the troops they wont go to battle. Not everyone can lead; Treliving missed the boat when he hired GG; He had the right idea with possession play but you need a task master, a master motivator with experience who can make guys believe.

Sutter a hard nosed coach, Gerard Gallant a players coach take different approaches Both have that "us verses the the world mentality" both coach to win. Too many times GG experimented with players or situations that were not working instead of just going with the obvious and getting on with the wins. I am on board that we need an experienced coach who has had proven results.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Don't get me wrong, here: I believe that this team struggles with harnessing and using their emotion on the ice, and I think this is what Treliving is getting at—that the emotions the players already experience can be used to help them win more often and consistently.

What I take issue with is this idea that some players are "okay with losing."

Well, he said "emotional level." Which suggests it isn't high enough, rather than that it isn't harnessed in the right way.

I don't think players are okay with losing. I do think a lot of players - especially skilled players - think the only way they can contribute to winning is to score. Which is why they only sporadically exert as much energy without the puck and on the backcheck as they do when they have the puck.

But for teams to become really successful, their star players have to learn to care as much about their play without the puck as they care about scoring. Some players get this from day one. Some don't when they start in the league, but eventually they get it. Some never do.

The most famous instance of a player needing to learn to play the right way was Steve Yzerman. When Scotty Bowman came onboard as the coach of the Red Wings, he told Yzerman that despite his elite offensive production, he would have to change his game if the Wings wanted to take the next step. Yzerman balked. Bowman came close to trading him. Very close. Then Yzerman buckled down and the rest is history.

Something similar has to happen with the Flames core if they're to take the next step. Gaudreau, Monahan, Hamilton have to learn what it takes to win consistently in the NHL. They have to learn that the team will never take the next step if they remain one-dimensional players.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Great post Cliff and I agree.
I maintain the Flames have too many guys that are only good at either offense (Hamilton, Gaudreau, Monahan) or defense (Hamonic, Stajan, Kulak, Stone, Frolik) and not enough that are good at both (Tkachuk, Gio, Backlund).

[Galakanokis]

Originally Posted by Psytic

I think the players bought in but its a terrible and boring system that does not cater to the teams strengths at all. It would be just like the Flames to trade off good players to support the system ala GG 1.0 rather than implementing a system that fits the team. When are they going to learn?

I like a lot of the Flames players but there is little doubt that changes need to be made. The make up of the team is just not right. Now, I will also say I would make or would have made the same moves even if the Flames went on a run. I like the roster to a degree but you always look to improve not just make a trade for the sake of a trade.

Flames don't make a big trade unless it is a pretty significant piece coming back.

[Galakanokis]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Identity: Gulutzan asked because he doesn't know what it is. This is very telling. You can be the smartest guy on the block with X and O's but if you can't lead the troops they wont go to battle. Not everyone can lead; Treliving missed the boat when he hired GG; He had the right idea with possession play but you need a task master, a master motivator with experience who can make guys believe.

Sutter a hard nosed coach, Gerard Gallant a players coach take different approaches Both have that "us verses the the world mentality" both coach to win. Too many times GG experimented with players or situations that were not working instead of just going with the obvious and getting on with the wins. I am on board that we need an experienced coach who has had proven results.

The team identity is of a soft, easy to play against, throw pucks at the net possession team. They rarely make the other team work in the offensive zone, passes are slow and deliberate with no quick shots or one timers. Teams know what the Flames will do so they let them cycle, keep the puck to the outside and keep the goalie square with clear lanes. Flames are easy to play against. Throw all the fancy stats in the world at it it will not change the fact that the flames are easy to play against. And it is not just this last month or two it has been all year.

I actually think certain players have done as well as they have despite the coaching and would prove to be even better under a more emotionally involved coach that caters to speed and puck movement. Who that coach is I have no idea but I whole heartedly believe it is not Gulutzan.

[heep223]

Feeling my deep disappointment turning into indifference over the last month has been terrifying as a hardcore fan. I’ve never experienced this with this team before...not even 07-11 rivals this.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Are they though?

Its funny how much results drive the narrative from the media, the fans, the opposition when the true story is they're riding a very hot goaltender.

They routinely get out shot and out chanced but win with their goaltender in the spot light.

He's part of the team so it counts, but I'm not so sure anything changed beyond the guy with the fluffy leg pads getting it done.

This and zero pressure...and I mean zero

they don't even have fans/media, everyone takes them lightly. They are getting praised for "playing well" for half a season despite being in 30th place.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Great post Cliff and I agree.
I maintain the Flames have too many guys that are only good at either offense (Hamilton, Gaudreau, Monahan) or defense (Hamonic, Stajan, Kulak, Stone, Frolik) and not enough that are good at both (Tkachuk, Gio, Backlund).

Which is really saying the players are not good enough. It's also not like the Flames are overloaded in one dimension vs. another.

So how do you trade Johnny Gaudreau for a more complete version of Gaudreau, with same scoring ability and more all around game? Good luck.

You hope a new coach drives improvement in these guys.

You draft and develop new talent.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Well, not surprised (but still happy) to hear that Treliving is 'angry' about this season. He should be. Every person in this organization should be, as are us fans (more or less).

It was such a disappointing season after the much hyped "100 point team" statements thrown around at the start of it. That's good that people are angry. Now time to calm down, talk a breather, and make some changes.

As for emotion and 'hate to lose' - there isn't a single person on this forum that can tell who does and who doesn't hate to lose. The only person I can definitively say 'hates to lose' is probably Tkachuk, and only because I remember him specifically stating to the media something like: "we have to figure out if we want to be a playoff team or we don't". Nobody enjoys losing. NOBODY. It is just that not everyone rises to the occasion to gather themselves and give that much more.

At any rate, I have always felt that the leader of a team is always the coach. The never quit '04 team was led not by Iginla, but by Sutter. The 'surprise' team a few seasons ago was led by Hartley, not Giordano. Those two teams had no quit in them and would just find a way to get the job done.

If Treliving really believes that this team needs more emotion, it has to start at the coaching position, then work down. If everything regarding Hartley was indeed true, and he was simply 'too hard' and the players - mostly the vets - disliked playing for him, then this makes everything really interesting. Gulutzan was a 'player's coach' that players enjoyed playing for by all accounts. Treliving listened to the players and replaced a 'too abrasive' coach with what they wanted - more of a player's coach. I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall when these same vets have their meetings with Treliving.

The first batch of players I would look to trade were the ones that didn't want to play for Hartley, but then didn't seem to play as hard under Gulutzan - whomever they might be (and nobody knows). To have Gulutzan call out his vets during that stick-throwing incident was really telling for me.

Also, good on Treliving to show class. Regardless of what he thinks right now, or who he holds responsible right now, you don't go to the media with it. I think he was very careful not to throw Hartley under the bus when he made the change. I think he will do the same with Gulutzan. I cringed when Feaster threw Modin under the bus (broken down Modin), or when he threw Darryl Sutter under the bus (with Ken King) in a Flames' season ticket holder event.

You never throw anyone under the bus that left an organization. You can call out someone in the media that is under contract - that's fine, but can be a slippery slope. Once you start throwing people under the bus that you are going to trade or fire, suddenly you become a classless franchise that has trouble attracting top talent.

This off-season is going to be very intriguing, with a tonne of rumors and speculation. This is going to be interesting. As far as what Treliving spoke about - I think he showed both a healthy amount of emotion but did it in a respectable manner. No surprises, but I am strangely relieved to hear that he is angry.

[crapshoot]

Yeah, I understand that Treliving can not, and should not, throw the coach under the bus publicly at this point for a lot of reasons, but it pisses me off that he suggested that Gulutzan is a good coach and that the coaching is just one of all the things they need to look at in the offseason. No Brad, he is not a good coach and he was not a good hire in the first place! You could have said nothing at all about Gulutzans coaching ability instead of messing with your fanbase like that.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Goodlad

How a franchise treats players/coaches impacts whether other people want to be part of the organization. Running an outgoing coach into the ground isn't a good way to kick off the search for a new coach.

It's true. You don't wanna pull a Tallon. Who'll be inclined to work for you then?

[Pointman]

Darryl Sutter's interview when he was hired as Flames' head coach:

"This is not a short-term deal for me," Sutter said. "I want the identity of the Calgary Flames back to where it was -- this is a tough town, a tough place to play. Just to restore that is really important."

http://www.vindy.com/news/2002/dec/2...ames-debut-is/

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Darryl Sutter's interview when he was hired as Flames' head coach:

"This is not a short-term deal for me," Sutter said. "I want the identity of the Calgary Flames back to where it was -- this is a tough town, a tough place to play. Just to restore that is really important."

http://www.vindy.com/news/2002/dec/2...ames-debut-is/

I was a season ticket holder then, I feel old!

[Northendzone]

I was thinking last night about how Chicago won against st. louis with 8 seconds to go. i'd have to think it is because Chicago still has some guys who really hate losing. at this point I could not see the flames being able to dig deep like that.

but who knows - tonights game is important for the jets as they could still finish ahead of the preds. given the flames have dropped some stinkers, it will be interesting to see if they play with passion or.......

[rhino]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Identity: Gulutzan asked because he doesn't know what it is. This is very telling. You can be the smartest guy on the block with X and O's but if you can't lead the troops they wont go to battle. Not everyone can lead; Treliving missed the boat when he hired GG; He had the right idea with possession play but you need a task master, a master motivator with experience who can make guys believe.

Sutter a hard nosed coach, Gerard Gallant a players coach take different approaches Both have that "us verses the the world mentality" both coach to win. Too many times GG experimented with players or situations that were not working instead of just going with the obvious and getting on with the wins. I am on board that we need an experienced coach who has had proven results.

Not to sure why you think GG experimented too much.... if anything he stuck with things that did not work. Brodie has been less effective since moving him, keeping Brouwer on the PP and not using Matt earlier when he was clearly a better option.