Is Bob Hartley the right coach for this team?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You are probably right. Brent's style would be very effective for this team, although Ibelieve Hartley is a better choice because of his effectiveness as a motivator. I always get the impression that his players will walk through walls for him, and this is a skill that I don't think B Sutter ever really possessed.

I can't really judge that because I'm so far from the team, but, I know Hartley had an incredible time trying to motivate last year's flames team--perhaps even failing worse than Brent--until a couple of trades. After the trades, the team began to do what they are doing now, compete based on drive and team play, while being underskilled and undersized compared to their competition, a stark contrast to their woeful team game of the months/years preceding.

[dammage79]

The answer IMO to the Ops question is yes. The proof is shown in the effort and cohesiveness displayed by the players. And I mean interviews like Backlund saying this is the closest the team has ever been since he has been there.

Hartley is showing he is the right guy for the job.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by dammage79

The answer IMO to the Ops question is yes. The proof is shown in the effort and cohesiveness displayed by the players. And I mean interviews like Backlund saying this is the closest the team has ever been since he has been there.

Hartley is showing he is the right guy for the job.

Totally missed that - really awesome to hear the team is getting close that way.

[Falclore]

Hartley is a great choice for this team. Has them playing as a complete unit and working hard. I heard on the radio today that the longest serving Flames coach since Bob Johnson in the 80s (who was with CGY for 5-6 years) is only 3 years. I think that is a huge sign showing the lack of consistency with this organization over that last 2 decades. Let's have some patience and vision!

[Hells Bells]

I'm not sure anymore.

The fact that he's starting MacDonald again vs. the Habs is a terrible coaching decision IMO. What happened to win and you're win? I guess losses are fine as long as your name isn't Ramo.

Personally, I think Ramo looked better vs. WSH than Mac has in either game. MacDonald is a brutal goalie and decisions like this make me wonder if the Flames may be secretly trying to tank this season.

[OzSome]

Originally Posted by Hells Bells

I'm not sure anymore.

The fact that he's starting MacDonald again vs. the Habs is a terrible coaching decision IMO. What happened to win and you're win? I guess losses are fine as long as your name isn't Ramo.

Personally, I think Ramo looked better vs. WSH than Mac has in either game. MacDonald is a brutal goalie and decisions like this make me wonder if the Flames may be secretly trying to tank this season.

There is nothing wrong with trying to win and giving MacDonald a reward for playing well the last two games. Based from what I've seen so far, he is rewarding the player for their good plays. Ramo played ok against Washington but I still think he is still trying to adjust to NHL. Having watch the game from the bench right now might help him analyze the NHL players. Besides Hartley wants to cover his butt too. If he lose 3 or 5 games in a row, Calgarians will demand him fired right away.

[Hells Bells]

Originally Posted by OzSome

There is nothing wrong with trying to win and giving MacDonald a reward for playing well the last two games. Based from what I've seen so far, he is rewarding the player for their good plays. Ramo played ok against Washington but I still think he is still trying to adjust to NHL. Having watch the game from the bench right now might help him analyze the NHL players. Besides Hartley wants to cover his butt too. If he lose 3 or 5 games in a row, Calgarians will demand him fired right away.

I understand what you're saying but I don't think MacDonald played very good against Vancouver or Columbus. It's my opinion that if Ramo had played like Mac last game, Hartley would not go back to Ramo like he is with Joey Mac.

I'm not saying Hartley isn't the right coach, I just really have to question this decision.

Why go with Ramo in the 1st game if you have such little faith in him? Why not start Ramo vs. the team that traded his rights last year? It seems like the perfect opportunity to test Ramo's confidence.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Hartley gets a pass for last year. No proper training camp, new to the players, franchise player on a contract year with everyone looking over their shoulder or waiting for a shoe to drop.

This year so far the team effort and tempo has been very good.

The glaring weak moments have been boneheaded turnovers by veterans.

As for Ramo, the smaller rink may be a factor and his lateral movement may need some focus. MacDonald has been prone to rebound control issues but is a very hard working goalie and by all accounts well liked. The glaring rebound up the center that ended up in a goal was a very hard shot outside on the far pad and players shoot there for a reason. When the goalie is fully extended he can't necessarily soften that rebound.

Butler and O'Brien have not been great but have been on for two GA and two GF. Not hurting the team too bad. I definitely like the bottom pairing of Butler O'Brien better than a top pairing of Butler Bouw. Each of those two need a partner with grit.

Having seen the Flames outshooting Van 30-16 pretty deep in to the last game, and the preference for possession, I am surprised that the naysayers aren't at least in favour of a couple of months of wait and see.

Good marks for Hartley so far. If the team clamps down on the boneheaded cough ups, he really does not have a lot of problems. If this continues, the next step is seeing how the team responds once other teams take notice of the effort to date and have scouted this incarnation of the Flames.

Man, I love how watchable the first few games have been.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Hells Bells

The fact that he's starting MacDonald again vs. the Habs is a terrible coaching decision IMO. What happened to win and you're win? I guess losses are fine as long as your name isn't Ramo.

Personally I feel both Ramo and MacDonald have been average/mediocre in the games they have played so I don't really care that Hartley is going with MacDonald although there doesn't seem to be a clear reason or pattern to support MacDonald getting three straight starts despite losing his last game.

I will say though that Hartley seems to be one of those coaches that always likes to have a player or two in his doghouse. From his comments about Ramo after the first start it was pretty evident he wasn't happy despite the fact that MacDonald hasn't been much better but it's pretty clear we won't see Ramo again until MacDonald really stinks things up. We saw Blair Jones get banished last season for still unknown reasons. He didn't seem keen to play Sven at all until after the trade deadline. It's pretty obvious he's not a Horak fan as he went from being a regular under Brent to permanent AHL under Hartley. I just want to see players get a fair chance and Hartley seems to me like one of those guys that gets overly personal in some of his decisions.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Hells Bells

The fact that he's starting MacDonald again vs. the Habs is a terrible coaching decision IMO. What happened to win and you're win? I guess losses are fine as long as your name isn't Ramo.

Last I checked, MacDonald is the only goalie of the two with a W.

[Poe969]

Ben Street on the first line........I kinda like that he's showing if you work hard, you'll get a chance on the top line. I just wonder why the heck Glencross is still there.

[OzSome]

Originally Posted by Hells Bells

I understand what you're saying but I don't think MacDonald played very good against Vancouver or Columbus. It's my opinion that if Ramo had played like Mac last game, Hartley would not go back to Ramo like he is with Joey Mac.

I'm not saying Hartley isn't the right coach, I just really have to question this decision.

Why go with Ramo in the 1st game if you have such little faith in him? Why not start Ramo vs. the team that traded his rights last year? It seems like the perfect opportunity to test Ramo's confidence.

Tonight's game is their 4th game of the season so I don't get why playing MacDonald over Ramo at this point is such a big deal. Long season and I am sure Ramo will have equal or more games played at the end of the season over Joey Mac.

I agree none of these goalies played spectacular but I thought Joey Mac are more consistent than the two. He could have 2 wins already if it wasn't for Glencross, Big Ern and even Wideman's(OT) mistakes.

I guess not having favorites between the two goalies help me think Hartley is right in his decision to play MacDonald vs the Habs.

[CaptainCrunch]

I like the fact that Hartley has really made this team work hard and there's some offensive flash to the game plan. By all accounts he's an outstanding teaching coach for young players.

I mean in theory if you follow what should have been the Edmonton model is that when you have the young kids you bring in a teaching coach, like a Tom Renney who's actually a very good coach who was saddled with a badly built team. Then when your ready to take that next step you bring in the a$$ kicker high demand coach.

I would say that Hartley gets a pass this year and next, but that's going to be his shelf live.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by OzSome

There is nothing wrong with trying to win and giving MacDonald a reward for playing well the last two games. Based from what I've seen so far, he is rewarding the player for their good plays. Ramo played ok against Washington but I still think he is still trying to adjust to NHL. Having watch the game from the bench right now might help him analyze the NHL players. Besides Hartley wants to cover his butt too. If he lose 3 or 5 games in a row, Calgarians will demand him fired right away.

I feel like Ramo would adjust a lot faster if he was playing.

MacDonald played alright the last two games but Ramo was just as good and has more potential down the road, so I don't see why he's keeping him on the bench.

[Rerun]

I'm in a bit of a quandary. My heart wants the Flames to win but my head wants them to lose (more losses means a higher draft choice in 2014). With MacDonald playing more games than Ramo, I think we have a better chance at either drafting Reinhardt or Ekblad next June.

[Stay Golden]

Even though racking up more losses might be good for the after the season draft picture, truth of the matter is most paying Flames fans want to go to a game and see them win.
So being in a rebuild win at home and lose on the road, would be a win win situation.
Regardless of how some fans feel about our 2014 drafting position i enjoy it when the Flames win rather than lose.
The coaches have a tough task this season.

[Rerun]

Think of this as a chess game. Sometimes you have to sacrifice in order to win in the end. Strategy is the key to success. Lose now in order to win big in the future.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Think of this as a chess game. Sometimes you have to sacrifice in order to win in the end. Strategy is the key to success. Lose now in order to win big in the future.

It's not chess, it's hockey. The Flames are already sacrificing their attempts to "win now" in favor of a rebuild. So far though, the Flames drafting is already showing dividends.

Wouldn't you agree that the Flames already sacrificed their cash cow in Iginla and it was the correct strategy to trade him? The Flames need to get these young guys winning sooner than later IMO, that breeds success much more effectively than tanking does.

The Flames won't suck enough to draft Reinhart or Ekblad.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

It's not chess, it's hockey. The Flames are already sacrificing their attempts to "win now" in favor of a rebuild. So far though, the Flames drafting is already showing dividends.

Wouldn't you agree that the Flames already sacrificed their cash cow in Iginla and it was the correct strategy to trade him? The Flames need to get these young guys winning sooner than later IMO, that breeds success much more effectively than tanking does.

The Flames won't suck enough to draft Reinhart or Ekblad.

Chess and hockey are both games of strategy.

The Flames should have "sacrificed" Iginla three years ago (and frankly, to me it wasn't much of a sacrifice) and it was definitely the right decision to trade him (too bad it didn't happen sooner).

As far as winning, you can still lose and win at the same time. If the young guys are playing well, learning, and losing through no fault of their own... its a win as far as I'm concerned. The game wins will come eventually... I predict that this team will be a cup contender in 3 to 4 years and will remain one for years to come.... especially if we have the opportunity to draft a top 3 player in the next couple of drafts.

Strategy. Sacrifice a few meaningless pawns in order to capture the throne later on down the road (and keep it for years to come).

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by FAN

Last I checked, MacDonald is the only goalie of the two with a W.

Without the epic choke in Washington game, Ramo would be holding a W too on a plate!