2023/24 No Hope Flames Rumours & Speculation Thread

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by blankall

Sutter may have had the most restrictive system in the history of the NHL....possibly the NJD trap system under Lemaire was worse, possibly.

You should see ESPN predictions they may have forgotten Sutter was fired.

35 points for Kadri 55 for Huberdeau. I think Lindholm was 71.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by blankall

Sutter may have had the most restrictive system in the history of the NHL....possibly the NJD trap system under Lemaire was worse, possibly.

Not as offensively lifeless, since it was pretty aggressive. But I think he made players play the same no matter what the skill level. That's probably why it worked so well in 04. Low talent but big-time motors on all those guys.

I actually wonder if 2 yrs ago, The top line was SO good he couldn't bring himself to reign it in. Also explains Huberdeau's plummet more than anyone else. Basically an F1 car not allowed out of 2nd gear.

[gvitaly]

It's funny to see so many posters taking a dump on Sutter's system. We were actually 6th best in the league in expected goals for 5 on 5. We were also 4th best in expected goals against 5 on 5. Granted those numbers don't tell the entire story, but I blame the lackluster season on the PP, 3 on 3 play in OT, goaltending, and puck luck.

Sutter's system did seem pretty boring, but we would remember it differently if some of the posts we hit in the 3rd period actually went in. I still think we'll see an increase in production, mostly due to a better PP, and increased ice time for the top players.

[Niemo]

I don’t think Sutters system was wrong. It’s just the easy scapegoat. Sutter culture was wrong. I agree with the poster above. Remember that Sutters system still had one of the most dominant top lines in recent memory 2 years ago.

I may be more optimistic than most, but with bounce back seasons from our players and average puck luck - I can’t see us missing the playoffs.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

It's funny to see so many posters taking a dump on Sutter's system. We were actually 6th best in the league in expected goals for 5 on 5. We were also 4th best in expected goals against 5 on 5. Granted those numbers don't tell the entire story, but I blame the lackluster season on the PP, 3 on 3 play in OT, goaltending, and puck luck.

The weakness in those ‘expected goal’ numbers, as I understand it, is that they measure shot quality by the location from which the shot was taken, but not necessarily by the motion of the puck prior to the shot. As Steve Valiquette has so often pointed out, lateral passing across the ‘Royal Road’ greatly increases the difficulty of stopping a shot.

In the Flames games that I watched last year, I wasn't seeing a lot of that kind of movement, and when players (often Huberdeau) tried it, the intended recipients often weren't ready for the pass. The team seemed to press harder and harder, especially early in games, banging the puck straight at a goalie who was square to the shooter – and then they would press too hard, the other team would get the rebound, and they were off to the races for a 2-on-1 the other way.

I think that can be identified as a particular weakness of Sutter's system, and I think he was wrongheaded in his approach to it. He said (approximately) that he needed to generate a high shot volume from anywhere and everywhere to make up for the team's lack of game-breaking talent. That's precisely backwards. A game-breaking shooter may be able to score from low-percentage situations. For everyone else, it's important to create those high-percentage shots, and the single best way to do that is to put the puck where the goalie will have to move laterally to face it. Ovechkin can shoot the puck right through a goalie who is facing him squarely, but Joe Schmuckatelli can't.

In effect, the claim that the Flames had no game-breaking talent became a self-fulfilling prophecy, because nobody was encouraged to make the kind of plays that actually are likely to break a game open. And their failure to make those plays was taken as a reason to restrict their play even more.

[Sandman]

I keep saying it, but if I didn't know any better, I'd swear Sutter was purposely trying to sabotage the team to make Tre look bad. Coming up with his whole "higher shot volume to make up for a lack of scoring talent" scheme was pure horses**t. Gawd sake, we just aquired a 115-pt winger, and had other players coming off of career years.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Coming up with his whole "higher shot volume to make up for a lack of scoring talent" scheme was pure horses**t.

This.

In other news, here at Fighting Squirrel Medical Equipment, we don't have enough surgical-grade steel to fill all our orders for scalpels. But that's OK, because we have just imported several thousand tons of low-quality pig iron from somewhere or other in China. Our customers will just have to cut their patients open with five-pound hunks of rust, because, you know, quantity makes up for lack of quality.

[bdubbs]

Sutter's approach was definitely different last year. You have multiple players saying that they were playing 'not to lose' rather than playing to win last season. It's tough to have a winners mentality that way.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Its pretty much be stated here already, but the xGF is a pretty poor stat to judge the team on.

A lot of the pay per advanced stats that published some freebies showed how poorly the transition and puck movement was. Just shooting the puck doesn't make you dangerous or a possession heavy team.

Someone stated that the team was told to play along the walls which is a Sutter trait from his first stint here.

Earlier in the offseason someone also posted stats that it was pretty much the top line in 21/22 that carried the team and the rest of the team put up similar xGF and no production.

I don't know if his system was any different but he seemed to hammer down a lot harder on the team to keep them in line which goes back to sticking it to Treliving and the players be brought in.

Playing for whistles and clamoring about possession is as restrictive as it gets.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Sandman

I keep saying it, but if I didn't know any better, I'd swear Sutter was purposely trying to sabotage the team to make Tre look bad. Coming up with his whole "higher shot volume to make up for a lack of scoring talent" scheme was pure horses**t. Gawd sake, we just aquired a 115-pt winger, and had other players coming off of career years.

Not sure what his issue was, but now they are both gone.

In hindsight it was probably the best thing to happen to the franchise to move forward with a group more in tune with the league now and understanding that the team needs a youth movement and back to building through the draft.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

It's funny to see so many posters taking a dump on Sutter's system. We were actually 6th best in the league in expected goals for 5 on 5. We were also 4th best in expected goals against 5 on 5. Granted those numbers don't tell the entire story, but I blame the lackluster season on the PP, 3 on 3 play in OT, goaltending, and puck luck.

Sutter's system did seem pretty boring, but we would remember it differently if some of the posts we hit in the 3rd period actually went in. I still think we'll see an increase in production, mostly due to a better PP, and increased ice time for the top players.

Key word is "expected". The lack of actual scoring success, both 5v5 and on the PP, was due to draining all offensive creativity out of the players' game.

[GioforPM]

Totally non-scientific, but IMO a ton of possession resulting in outside shots that don't require goalie movement and are easily stopped could easily lead to Flames frustration (resulting in chance-taking and good opportunities against) as well as increasing the confidence of the opposing goalie. Not to mention Markstrom of Vladar going cold and then seeing a two on one - with high pressure of a game turning point.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Totally non-scientific, but IMO a ton of possession resulting in outside shots that don't require goalie movement and are easily stopped could easily lead to Flames frustration (resulting in chance-taking and good opportunities against) as well as increasing the confidence of the opposing goalie. Not to mention Markstrom of Vladar going cold and then seeing a two on one - with high pressure of a game turning point.

Glue gun hockey was a tonne of low danger shots as well. It is boring to watch

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Totally non-scientific, but IMO a ton of possession resulting in outside shots that don't require goalie movement and are easily stopped could easily lead to Flames frustration (resulting in chance-taking and good opportunities against) as well as increasing the confidence of the opposing goalie. Not to mention Markstrom of Vladar going cold and then seeing a two on one - with high pressure of a game turning point.

We just warmed up the other goalies so when our chances came they are already locked into the game and make the save thats why the shot volume doesn't matter. Easy outside saves are not even work for the goalie.

Our goalie was put to work having to make hard saves on the first few shots.

It's probably why Huska has stated that he wants our goalies to see the puck and feel it earlier this year.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

We just warmed up the other goalies so when our chances came they are already locked into the game and make the save thats why the shot volume doesn't matter. Easy outside saves are not even work for the goalie.

Our goalie was put to work having to make hard saves on the first few shots.

It's probably why Huska has stated that he wants our goalies to see the puck and feel it earlier this year.

The Flames offensive game was also incredibly predictable. Not a lot of close in lateral movement. Goalies could easily track the puck. They also lacked a lot of big heavy shooters at the point, yet would take many shots from the outside. How many times did we see the puck moved around the outside, then a not so wrist shot from around the end of the circle. The other teams would collapse in and let the Flames take those muffin shots. But yes, the Flames had all sorts of possession time on the outside....

[dustygoon]

Ranking the front offices across the league. Putting this in the good feels thread. At least we weren't last!

https://theathletic.com/4799749/2023.../?source=nhltw

EDIT: ok...i have no idea where to put this and now see it in another thread. I can't keep track of which thread is for good stuff and which one is for yelling at eachother.

[NegativeSpace]

I believe that the league was game-planning for the Sutter team better this last year as well.


The team did really well the prior year under Sutter offensively. It did not take much analysis to know that the Flames were focused on getting lots of shots from anywhere on the ice. I recall Huska at the start of last season talking about how the team believed that a shot on goal was one of the most important events in an offensive zone because it can result in goals, rebounds, and deflections. It makes sense in theory as it creates a potential positive event without as much risk of a negative event that a pass or deke can result in. So, I'm not blaming Sutter or Huska or whoever was responsible for that theory other than the inability to modify the approach in season when it wasn't working (and they may have tried without success).



I think teams were better prepared for the Flames to shoot from anywhere as opposed to look for passes or hold onto the puck to beat a player one-one-one. I think fans underestimate the value of pre-scouting. Other teams were willing to give up the long shot from the outside and focus on boxing out against rebounds and deflections, knowing that cross ice passes or dekes are unlikely from most Flames players.



I suspect that Huska's change of tune from last season under Sutter to now is because the internal dialogue was that they were too easy to defend against.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by NegativeSpace

I believe that the league was game-planning for the Sutter team better this last year as well.


The team did really well the prior year under Sutter offensively. It did not take much analysis to know that the Flames were focused on getting lots of shots from anywhere on the ice. I recall Huska at the start of last season talking about how the team believed that a shot on goal was one of the most important events in an offensive zone because it can result in goals, rebounds, and deflections. It makes sense in theory as it creates a potential positive event without as much risk of a negative event that a pass or deke can result in. So, I'm not blaming Sutter or Huska or whoever was responsible for that theory other than the inability to modify the approach in season when it wasn't working (and they may have tried without success).



I think teams were better prepared for the Flames to shoot from anywhere as opposed to look for passes or hold onto the puck to beat a player one-one-one. I think fans underestimate the value of pre-scouting. Other teams were willing to give up the long shot from the outside and focus on boxing out against rebounds and deflections, knowing that cross ice passes or dekes are unlikely from most Flames players.



I suspect that Huska's change of tune from last season under Sutter to now is because the internal dialogue was that they were too easy to defend against.

The top line really did their own thing last year which made it look like the team was not as offensively challenged, they played a different game.

Don't think it was teams learning to defend the plays, its easy to defend a team who is willing to just shoot without a pass being made right into the goalies crest. I believe the Flames led the league in the puck being frozen by the goalie off the first shot which is a telling sign.

I wonder if Huska was just relaying the coaches message, the shot is obviously important but just as important is the location, and how the shot is being created.

The league is too talented, the goalies are too good now to play a simpleton game.

[Jay Random]

Here's a thought that just crossed my mind:

Last season, a lot of teams played the Flames the same way that the 2014-15 Flames played their opponents: give up a lot of outside shots, wait for the puck, then move fast to get odd-man rushes. I don't think this is a coincidence.

At that time, hockey analytics were fashionable but primitive, and coaches were chasing good Corsi and Fenwick numbers without enough understanding of how those numbers converted into actual wins. They were focused on the wrong metric, and that gave them a weakness that Hartley was clever enough to exploit. I think Sutter, for different reasons based in his own assessment of his players, wound up focusing on the same metric, and his team got exploited the same way.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Here's a thought that just crossed my mind:

Last season, a lot of teams played the Flames the same way that the 2014-15 Flames played their opponents: give up a lot of outside shots, wait for the puck, then move fast to get odd-man rushes. I don't think this is a coincidence.

At that time, hockey analytics were fashionable but primitive, and coaches were chasing good Corsi and Fenwick numbers without enough understanding of how those numbers converted into actual wins. They were focused on the wrong metric, and that gave them a weakness that Hartley was clever enough to exploit. I think Sutter, for different reasons based in his own assessment of his players, wound up focusing on the same metric, and his team got exploited the same way.

I think the Corsi love was a Brad Treliving thing because he hired coaches based on those metrics its how Glue had us play, it's what Peters installed but he allowed his offensive players to transition and rush the puck without the ridiculous reload and go in as a unit concept.

When you think about it being as organized and just flubbing shots from the boards is dangerous when other teams know you won't be doing much else they don't have to chase just pack it in the middle and exploit the middle with speed up the ice.

Probably why we gave up so many rush plays, chances, 2 on 1's etc last season. Also why we probably chased so much because guys have to reload and once you are idle in hockey you are done and have to put in that extra effort to chase guys around to get the puck back.