That was some insanely pisspoor defence by some of our best prospects.
Also, Schneider isn't very good.
He's an 18 year old goal tender thrown into a playoff race in the AHL. I'd cut him some major slack before saying that after watching a highlight package.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
He's an 18 year old goal tender thrown into a playoff race in the AHL. I'd cut him some major slack before saying that after watching a highlight package.
Yup. Schneider has had some excellent games as well. I am pleased with what I have seen from the kid; he's still a longshot IMO but he's shown why the Flames offered him a contract.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Alberta_Beef For This Useful Post:
He is very good relative to his age group peers. That same game he had some excellent saves that aren't on the highlights. Of course he has things to work on, he's about four to seven years removed from any real conversation of NHL while the guy across from him in that game was drafted five years ago... By us... And is only now ready to be a third stringer, and is still considered a top goalie prospect.
Writing off the Ortios and Markstroms is absurd based on mediocre NHL stints as 23-24 year olds. Well calling an 18YO tender facing AHL shots "not very good" is even worse loss of perspective.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
Last edited by GranteedEV; 04-13-2016 at 10:48 AM.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to GranteedEV For This Useful Post:
Give him a another season. He's done a good job developing the players regardless of how the team has played. Majority of the AHL call ups looked solid when adjusting to the NHL.
I think he may have improved a bit since he first started, but I still don't really like what I see. It's pretty hard to tell.
Both Treliving and Hartley have high praise for Huska. Both have gone on record saying they've been really impressed with how ready the kids are when they come up. Bot crediting Huska for his good work.
I don't think Huska gets fired. He's got them ready to fit into the big teams system whenever they get the call up.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to dammage79 For This Useful Post:
why would they fire Huska? Player development is the most important factor when it comes to the AHL affiliates. Having a really successful team there and winning a Calder Cup is just a bonus, but really, it's all about readying your prospects for the NHL. And from what I can see, most callups have looked ready and well-prepared, which is exactly what Huska is paid for.
The Following User Says Thank You to devo22 For This Useful Post:
I think he may have improved a bit since he first started, but I still don't really like what I see. It's pretty hard to tell.
No, people focus too much on the results of the AHL team. The players looked pretty much all looked great during their respective call ups. The AHL team is all about the long game. While a long playoff run would be nice, I don't think there's any correlation between being on a good AHL team and having success at the NHL level. As long as the players keep progressing, Huska is probably safe as an AHL coach with the Flames. If he ever wants a shot in the NHL however, some team success would go a long, long way.
When St. John won the Calder I think we only got a couple of players graduating to full time NHL out of it. We had some promising prospects there but looking at it Chris Clark, Steve Begin and Steve Montador were the only ones who amounted to much. So yeah winning a championship is cool but it doesn't mean a whole lot.
I think he may have improved a bit since he first started, but I still don't really like what I see. It's pretty hard to tell.
I don't know how much he can be faulted for the team's relatively poor performance. I'm not sure how much leeway he is given in terms of running the team. He has to hand out roughly equal minutes to everyone and play a lot of younger players. The goaltending was also a mess much of the season which isn't his fault.
I don't see any big reason to let him go. The players the Flames call up seem to be ok. The goal of the farm team isn't to win championships. It's to develop players for the big club.
The Following User Says Thank You to madmike For This Useful Post:
why would they fire Huska? Player development is the most important factor when it comes to the AHL affiliates. Having a really successful team there and winning a Calder Cup is just a bonus, but really, it's all about readying your prospects for the NHL. And from what I can see, most callups have looked ready and well-prepared, which is exactly what Huska is paid for.
Many reasons:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury18
That was probably me and I haven't changed my stance. Bluntly, Huska is not the correct guy to coach this team. He was not ready to be an AHL coach last year and I don't believe he's a correct fit for the culture we are building and expectations we have. He's more suited to the WHL. Adirondack had a number of issues last season which never saw correction (alot of it covered in this thread: http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=146429). He never got control of the penalty issue, penalty kill was hot for a stretch and horrid most of the year. Huska preached to the media about discipline, but we never saw results from the players, which is his job to get. Huska also appeared to blame the "ebbs and flows" of the league, rather then work towards correction of a problem. He made alot of excuses which by January got really old. He looked to have lost the room a couple of times during the season as well. When you heard from players (which was rare) not many praised Huska or even spoke of him. They would speak of Tousi or Gillies or player leaders in the room and never the coach. By comparison, most at least had something to say about Ward, good or bad. The players didn't have the drive to play for him that they did for Ward. Again, for good or bad reasons. Sometimes hating the coach motivates you. Huska didn't seem to draw any feelings from his players.
Honestly, I'm disappointed that the Flames didn't try to get Todd Nelson when he became available. I would have liked to see a strong, successful AHL coach run our Stockton team. There are far better coaches out there, I really wish the Flames would retain one and put Huska in a position more at his level. Perhaps leaving him in Adirondack to coach the ECHL and get more experience. We need a more engaged and experienced coach for Stockton and the AHL team then Huska. We need a guy who can help these prospects to the next level and ensure our development system is one of the best in the AHL. Huska is not that guy.
He may improve, there is always that possibility. The Calgary Flames brought him and his staff up after the season ended to shadow Hartley, so I think that the parent club noticed some issues too and trying to offer him some help.
I think though, based on what I've seen, this is his style of coaching and it's not a fit for what we need to develop prospects. It works okay for kids and at the CHL level, but it doesn't work for AHL level prospects who you need to lean into them a little more and correct the mistakes with a little more urgency then kids at the CHL level. When maybe 60% of the kids on a CHL will probably not move onto a higher level of hockey, you don't correct mistakes the same way. With the Flames having a number of quality picks in recent years and some stronger prospects, I think we need to ensure our AHL system has a coach that is developing them correctly and maybe not learning with the kids. I'm a believer in everyone needs to start somewhere to learn, but I'm not sure being head coach of an AHL team with no experience and a really strong crop of prospects to work with is the smart way to do it. ECHL Coach, maybe even assistant AHL coach for a few years while we put someone who has the experience and ability to teach Huska the correct way to coach in the AHL is the way to go.
It was obvious Huska was riding his goalies to get any success. He called out Ortio to step up and play and carry the team right before his injury. That comment did sit well with me. The rest of his team is playing like crap and he can't get them to respond so he calls out Ortio to hold them up. Weak move. And then when Ortio went down, he moved right on the Thiessen to do the same thing. While not getting any of his forwards or defence to respond in the same manner. It was that sequence of events that really made me question him.
I don't think he needs a year. I think we give him until December/January and if the same issues and excuses that plagued the last season are still showing, we remove him from the position and find someone who has the experience to take over.
We cannot have a weak coach leading our prospects. We just can't. We need someone to do what Hartley is doing with the Flames and someone who can properly develop prospects. I didn't see any prospect development from Huska last season.
Most of the problems of which Drury18 speaks are still valid IMO
On the Calgary Herald today, Huska was asked what the greatest problem with the team was this year (in regards to missing the playoffs). He answered "traffic" as the main reason for their problems. Is "traffic" in Adirondack (prior to Stockton) the reason nearly every player regressed offensively during Huska's first year as coach?
This isn't exactly the type of answer that I would be looking for. Their divisional rivals have the same problem, and they don't blame their problems on this type of factor. Making the playoffs is more important for a team that played fewer games as it is. I think Huska is a smart guy, but a lot of his answers really have to make you wonder.
Last edited by 1qqaaz; 04-14-2016 at 05:24 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 1qqaaz For This Useful Post:
Huska's done an excellent job of developing prospects. Few more wins would've been nice but he had a very young roster and no stability in net all season.
Every prospect that has come up to the Flames has looked ready. That's his job, he's doing it.
People can post long rants, pretend they're in the room and claim Huska lost the room but all sounds like BS when players are still playing hard and have good showings when they're called up.
He will have some more experience and hopefully a healthy Gillies next year.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Da_Chief For This Useful Post:
On the Calgary Herald today, Huska was asked what the greatest problem with the team was this year (in regards to missing the playoffs). He answered "traffic" as the main reason for their problems. Is "traffic" in Adirondack (prior to Stockton) the reason nearly every player regressed offensively during Huska's first year as coach?
This isn't exactly the type of answer that I would be looking for. Their divisional rivals have the same problem, and they don't blame their problems on this type of factor. Making the playoffs is more important for a team that played fewer games as it is. I think Huska is a smart guy, but a lot of his answers really have to make you wonder.
I've been in locker rooms and interviewing coaches for over a decade now as an accredited media member in various levels of hockey, not just some guy with a podcast sitting on the sidelines making observations, and Huska's responses are some of the poorest I've seen from a coach. Even the few words from Sutter at least made more sense then Huska.
I've talked to a lot of coaches and a lot of management and so many answers from Huska like "Ebbs and Flows" and "Traffic" just read off as excuses from a coach that doesn't have answers. They don't make any sense and it's like he wants to create his own buzz words so his excuses sound like they actually mean something.
Huska also isn't the only coach in the AHL who is under instructions from his AHL team how to play, who to play, how much to play them. The Grand Rapids Griffins play closely under the watch of the Detroit Red Wings. They have a fantastic AHL system and something to aspire to be. They have coaches who were adaptable and managed to coach the team despite what's thrown at them. Texas is another good example. Close proximity to the home team and playing the Stars system. They even argueably have a weaker prospect base and yet year after year, they are a top team in the AHL. They have a coach who adapts. Stockton needs a coach who can better adapt to the system and coach the kids. He's not doing that right now.
Last edited by Drury18; 04-14-2016 at 09:34 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Drury18 For This Useful Post:
People give praise to Huska because some players have been NHL ready. But I would argue the players who the Flames NEED to be NHL ready have not been. Winning a Stanley Cup isn't going to be on the backs of Grant, Sieloff, Hathaway, Nakladal and Hamilton. A championship and dynasty needs guys like Ortio, Gillies, Poirer, Klimchuck, and Kylington to reach their potential.
I also believe the playoffs are EXTREMELY important now that Stockton is playing a shortened schedule. These guys need to get in the habit of playing 82 games. Sure they look good in their brief call-ups, but keep in mind they don't play very often. Those extra playoff games are important in their development.
I too am on board with firing Huska.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MarkGio For This Useful Post:
I've been in locker rooms and interviewing coaches for over a decade now as an accredited media member in various levels of hockey, not just some guy with a podcast sitting on the sidelines making observations, and Huska's responses are some of the poorest I've seen from a coach. Even the few words from Sutter at least made more sense then Huska.
I've talked to a lot of coaches and a lot of management and so many answers from Huska like "Ebbs and Flows" and "Traffic" just read off as excuses from a coach that doesn't have answers. They don't make any sense and it's like he wants to create his own buzz words so his excuses sound like they actually mean something.
Huska also isn't the only coach in the AHL who is under instructions from his AHL team how to play, who to play, how much to play them. The Grand Rapids Griffins play closely under the watch of the Detroit Red Wings. They have a fantastic AHL system and something to aspire to be. They have coaches who were adaptable and managed to coach the team despite what's thrown at them. Texas is another good example. Close proximity to the home team and playing the Stars system. They even argueably have a weaker prospect base and yet year after year, they are a top team in the AHL. They have a coach who adapts. Stockton needs a coach who can better adapt to the system and coach the kids. He's not doing that right now.
I really agree with everything you said. I also have issues with the way he constructs his lines, I don't think he is being told how much to play guys since he seems to play veterans more than youngsters. I think these kids need to play to develop to their potential and when players like Bill Arnold and Morgan Klimchuk saddled with 3rd line minutes all season long, it makes little sense to me. I understand the Flames want the players to play the roles they will be recalled for, but Arnold & Klimchuk can play a checking role with more minutes give them defensive zone starts and PK time still, but also give them some offensive opportunities to grow that part of their games as well. He also seems unable or unwilling to juggle lines, especially on the PP.
