I hope Gulutzen turns out to be great but that analysis is thin.
What "analysis"? I am simply pointing out that by the most rudimentary of metrics Gulutzen is undeniably a much better coach than Greg Gilbert. Do you think based on their record of coaching that they are in any way comparable?
Quote:
I think it's fair to be underwhelmed by his track record...
Sure, but that is clearly not what I responded to. I specifically made the point that it is ludicrous to draw a direct comparison between Gilbert and Gulutzen. That is all.
Quote:
...but clearly if he's the guy, he's not being hired based on the winning percentages of teams he has coached.
As an aside, how is this in any way "clear"? I will agree based on Treliving's comments and what we know about his personality that this hiring is almost certainly based on much more than merely winning percentages; Hartley was not fired because of a poor winning percentage. But I would expect that results in both of Gulutzen's past head coaching instalments are part of this process. I do not view his winning percentages as great, but I also think it is not right to characterise them as poor. If anything, they look to me to be above average.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Once I heard the Flames were going off the board I was ready to be underwhelmed. I trust Treliving and this is a huge hire for him. I have no doubt all the background work was done and they feel this is the guy.
Funny I had the exact opposite reaction
I really didn't want an older retread. So much talk about the Flames and luck, lack of possession, shooting percentage, unsustainability.
Really wanted a guy to come in and coach the team in a new light using the talent they had and letting it rest on that. If the team isn't ready, it isn't ready, but they wouldn't play a rope a dope stale game to get by.
Going of the board meant refreshing and cutting edge instead of walking in a known name that would just do more of the same.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
A little perspective about hiring a guy with a less than stellar record in his first HC stint. Pete Deboer was a highly sought, progressive type coach when he got his first gig with the Panthers. 3 seasons of .492 winning % and 0 playoffs. Since then he's gotten 2 more chances and made the finals 2 of the last 5 seasons. And yes Marty Brodeur blah blah blah but he did take a team that hadn't done any better than the 2nd round to the finals that has had essentially the same core players for the last few seasons (Jones notwithstanding). Be interesting to see what Gulutzan has learned and what he can do in his 2nd opportunity.
__________________
"Illusions Michael, tricks are something a wh*re does for money ....... or cocaine"
Yeah but Deboer is also on his 3rd job because he seems to start off well in his first season only to regress every season after. Maybe things will be different in San Jose but so far the pattern is intact.
So many strong opinions on perspective coaches. I wanted Boudreau but I'll be honest, I can't even put a face to most of these names and I'm a hardcore fan. Not sure how anyone can be dead set against anyone who isn't a retread.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Fire of the Phoenix For This Useful Post:
I don't think it's fair to judge Gulutzan on his lack of NHL success. That was an extremely mediocre Dallas team and a historically bad Canucks team. Mike Babcock must be bad too because the Leafs were bad.
Personally I would be pleased with this hire. Not blown away, but pleased. Even the big name coaches we missed out on we're nobodies at some point.
So it seems that Gulutzan's teams were undisciplined (negative penalty differentials), have nothing significant in the possession department (CF), and gave up better goal scoring opportunities than they got (xGA).
Not sure I want this guy. While not terrible in any category except lockout season xGA and 2012 penalty differential, there was nothing that stood out positively either.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
Last edited by GranteedEV; 06-14-2016 at 04:19 PM.
I got caught up in all the Reierden hype yesterday so from that end I am a tad disappointed, but I'm not upset at all with Gulutzan. its a 50/50 coin flip any coach is going to work out. Get the coach and this team a goalie and I think the coaches job gets pretty easy. K.I.S.S and reap the rewards.
I'm still not convinced it is Gulutzen for sure. Even in that posted audio of Kuzma where he said "bet on it".. it's a personal hunch he has based on the chain of interviews, and what HE feels is a good fit with BT
I still kinda think it's going to be someone that probably hasn't even been rumored yet - kinda like how Treliving wasn't even mentioned until the day before he was hired.
So it seems that Gulutzan's teams were undisciplined (negative penalty differentials), have nothing significant in the possession department (CF), and gave up better goal scoring opportunities than they got (xGA).
Not sure I want this guy. While not terrible in any category except lockout season xGA and 2012 penalty differential, there was nothing that stood out positively either.
Yes. Because all of that has everything to do with the coach. You do understand that there was a fairly significant roster turnover in Dallas following the lockout shortened season, right?
In: Tyler Seguin, Valeri Nichushkin, Alex Chaisson, Rich Peverley
Out: Derek Roy, Jaromir Jagr, Michael Ryder, Loui Eriksson, Brendan Morrow
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Just curious to see why Brad thinks he's "the" guy.
Canucks have looked like a dumpster fire under his, Torts and Desjardins watch. Not exactly blown out of the water by the prospect of takings on someone coming from a group producing all that mediocre hockey. Then again they haven't had much to work with there. The track record prior to that isn't great. But really, what do we know about coaching in the end...
Can't be worse than the Ducks' decision.
this is not entirely true. In Torts' final year they were off to a pretty good start until he had that meltdown against the Flames and completely lost the room. In 2014-15 he had the Canucks PK 2nd best in the league, last year it took a step back but with Edler out 30 games and Bartkowski replacing Bieksa on the backend while Sutter only playing 20 games total a declining PK is isn't overly shocking.
Gulutzan also had a good amount of success in the ECHL and AHL, as Treliving pointed out he thought it was important to have guys that helped build programs.
so lets not pretend that he has done nothing to warrant another opportunity just because he is stuck on a club with a meddling ownership group with a win now mandate on a team that should be rebuilding.
Yes. Because all of that has everything to do with the coach. You do understand that there was a fairly significant roster turnover in Dallas following the lockout shortened season, right?
I understand, but coaches still influence the style their team plays. See Babcock, or Carlyle, or Quenneville, or Bylsma, or Sutter, or Boudreau, or Roy. A coaching change can bring a huge change from one year to the next.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
It's lonely over here at the Kevin Dineen campaign rally.
Why has any one joined a "campaign rally" in the first place? None of us really has a very good read at all on who would distinguishes himself as the best available candidate.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I really didn't want an older retread. So much talk about the Flames and luck, lack of possession, shooting percentage, unsustainability.
Really wanted a guy to come in and coach the team in a new light using the talent they had and letting it rest on that. If the team isn't ready, it isn't ready, but they wouldn't play a rope a dope stale game to get by.
Going of the board meant refreshing and cutting edge instead of walking in a known name that would just do more of the same.
I don't agree that a retread is more of the same. I wanted Boudreau when Hartley was fired. He was a monster possession coach and has coached some great regular season teams. After that I hoped Sutter would somehow opt to leave LA for Calgary. Again another older known coach but a possession monster. I was okay with a relatively new guy but knew I would likely not have heard much so wouldn't be too excited. If we were going to go brand new Green and Leeman were names I was intrigued by but only because of the hype.
I think the one thing I have mentioned about Gulutzan is he is coming from a losing program. He was a good coach in the ECHL and AHL but didn't make the playoffs with Dallas. His teams in Vancouver have picked top 6 2 of his 3 years
with the other year losing in the first round where his team was out coached by the guy we fired. Now Willie owns that but Gulutzan was part of it.
At the end of the day Treliving has earned my respect and I trust he has the guy he feels is right. GG sounds like a players coach and that will be a nice change from Bob who was known to be really tough on players. I am just not overly stoked we are getting an assistant from a bottom 3 team in the league as our coach for the next 5+ years.
