[PGT] Leafs 2 Flames 1

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I think the one thing we all agree on most: Treliving is absolutely dead wrong. The answer is not in the room. And if he really believes it is then he is lost.

I would think, due to COVID (i.e. really tough to trade with an US located team) and lack of cap space the Flames have very few options

in my view they are a borderline team... meaning they are 50/50 to make the playoffs. However I don't view them as a contender.

Flames weakness continues to be the group of forwards....

[Bingo]

If they have the money and a candidate they like ... by all means fire Geoff Ward. I'm honestly not a fan.

But I think we'd see soon after that either they hired a "bad" coach again, or that the roster itself isn't good enough.

I think both the coaching and the roster needs a change.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Igottago

The players aren't/haven't been good enough and should shoulder plenty of blame. But have any of the coaching hires looked like a serious attempt to get to the next level and contend for a Stanley Cup? No. Trying to develop coaches or finding a diamond in the rough isn't a good strategy for a team entering the peak part of its rebuild. So regardless of the players and roster not being good enough, the entire philosophy behind the coaches hires has been wrong, at least in my eyes. To me the fact that guys like Gaudreau, Monahan and Gio can't get it done in the playoffs doesn't absolve Treliving of not finding a coach that can actually help them overcome that.

I dont know about that.

Worked pretty well for the Lightning and the Avs recently. Keefe has the Leafs contending after coaching the Marlies and getting developed.

Montreal is going that route as of yesterday. Mike Sullivan came out of the abyss of failed coaches to win a cup with the Pens.

There is no sure fire way to go about it or every team would do so.

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If they have the money and a candidate they like ... by all means fire Geoff Ward. I'm honestly not a fan.

But I think we'd see soon after that either they hired a "bad" coach again, or that the roster itself isn't good enough.

I think both the coaching and the roster needs a change.

Ok, but one hypothesis is much easier to test first.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If they have the money and a candidate they like ... by all means fire Geoff Ward. I'm honestly not a fan.

But I think we'd see soon after that either they hired a "bad" coach again, or that the roster itself isn't good enough.

I think both the coaching and the roster needs a change.

This situation is really going to depend on ownerships patience.

Personally, I don't see a coaching firing without the management group getting axed as well.

If/when the Flames get a new coach I'm pretty confident we see a new GM.

And that begs the question about trades. Who's going to make them? Is there going to be a lock down on player movement while ownership decides what they're going to do?

Do we really want an outgoing GM to be making deals with the assets the Flames have.

Another question is timing. Timing of what you're putting on the ice of the new arena. What do they want to do with that? Do you rebuild now and hopefully get the new group up to speed in time for the arena to pull in as much ticket sales as possible?


The the Flames issues are a bigger can of worms than just the on ice product.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The biggest thing to me, is it also helps you identify who the real problems you need to move are.

Treliving was given a mulligan this offseason and he failed to use it.

To me the way he should have proceeded was clear.

1) Bring in a proven, elite coach (Boudreau)

2) Let this core play out the 20-21 season since it's likely hard to make substantial changes mid-pandemic (kind of proven since no real trades happened this offseason)

3) Depending on how the season goes assess who needs to stay or who should go with Boudreau as the long term coach for this team

Honestly I still don't think we know at this point if the problem is coaching, or if its Monahan, or Gaudreau, or Gio, or Tkachuk, or a combination of multiple things. But bringing in a proven coach with a history of getting the most out of his teams (in the regular season at least) would have provided more clarity into what changes the team really needed to make to this roster.

Especially with the goaltender position solidified.

See,,,this i dont get.

You want the team to do well in playoffs right? And you want an experienced coach to do that......have you seen Boudreaus playoff record? It aint pretty.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

Ok, but one hypothesis is much easier to test first.

That hypothesis has been tried....3 times now.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That hypothesis has been tried....3 times now.

But not with a proven head coach who has had success in the NHL

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That hypothesis has been tried....3 times now.

Meh, only partially. It's like saying you've tried changing the oil but you never actually used fresh oil or a new filter.

But i agree that the problem is both in the coaching and the players. It's actually throughout the organization. There's a culture of "this is the way it is"

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I dont know about that.

Worked pretty well for the Lightning and the Avs recently. Keefe has the Leafs contending after coaching the Marlies and getting developed.

Montreal is going that route as of yesterday. Mike Sullivan came out of the abyss of failed coaches to win a cup with the Pens.

There is no sure fire way to go about it or every team would do so.

You're right, there is no sure fire way. The Flames could have found the next great coach in the minor ranks or one that no one knew about. They haven't.
They've tried the no track record coach strategy several times in a row, without good results. At some point you would think they'd want someone who's executed at the NHL level before. And when I see this roster, I see a team with few leaders, so I've always thought the team needed a strong leader behind the bench. Usually that comes with a proven veteran coach.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

Ok, but one hypothesis is much easier to test first.

For a fan, sure it is. These things are actually a hell of a lot more complicated in the real world.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

But not with a proven head coach who has had success in the NHL

When you say success...do you mean regular season...playoffs....both?

Cause that is a very small group and even smaller of who would be available.

Gallant as an example...yeah he went to the finals in that 1st year with Vegas but beyond that his playoff record is abysmal. Same with Boudreau.

I suppose Julien could be considered but he literally just got fired because his club couldnt beat Ottawa and was replaced by an assistant with no NHL HC experience, the exact same scenario we are at here.

So Im honestly not sure who would satisfy the masses that would be much different than what we have now...a guy who hasnt even really had the chance to be good or bad.

I get if a Quennville or Laviolette was sitting there and willing to move to Calgary...great, sign me up.

Beyond that though...really not sure who that guy would be.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by transplant99

When you say success...do you mean regular season...playoffs....both?

Cause that is a very small group and even smaller of who would be available.

Gallant as an example...yeah he went to the finals in that 1st year with Vegas but beyond that his playoff record is abysmal. Same with Boudreau.

I suppose Julien could be considered but he literally just got fired because his club couldnt beat Ottawa and was replaced by an assistant with no NHL HC experience, the exact same scenario we are at here.

So Im honestly not sure who would satisfy the masses that would be much different than what we have now...a guy who hasnt even really had the chance to be good or bad.

I get if a Quennville or Laviolette was sitting there and willing to move to Calgary...great, sign me up.

Beyond that though...really not sure who that guy would be.

For this franchise any of their achievements would be major highlights. I'll take what they've done over what the team we support has done. Coaches are hired to be fired, so the fact that other teams have moved on from them means nothing. They've shown they can get teams to win. We don't expect to hire a coach who wins the Stanley Cup every season. Just bring in someone who can get the most from this team, and perhaps that results in some pretty good runs. That is the hope.

[browntrout]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

But not with a proven head coach who has had success in the NHL

I have been a fan of this team for 45 years now and can honestly say, it does matter who the coach is, this team finds ways to lose especially in the playoff, at this point it has to be some kind of psychological problem. After the 89 cup victory, ( which if not for Vernon OT heroics against Vancouver in that game 7) they seem to panic and choke in the playoffs. Since that 89 Cup victory they have gotten to the 2nd round of the playoff twice, that's pathetic, that's right the 2nd round of the playoffs in 32 years!! So for all those who think a new coach will solve our problems, hey let's fire our coach and see what happens, because for sure this, it will be different, right

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by transplant99

When you say success...do you mean regular season...playoffs....both?

Cause that is a very small group and even smaller of who would be available.

Gallant as an example...yeah he went to the finals in that 1st year with Vegas but beyond that his playoff record is abysmal. Same with Boudreau.

I suppose Julien could be considered but he literally just got fired because his club couldnt beat Ottawa and was replaced by an assistant with no NHL HC experience, the exact same scenario we are at here.

So Im honestly not sure who would satisfy the masses that would be much different than what we have now...a guy who hasnt even really had the chance to be good or bad.

I get if a Quennville or Laviolette was sitting there and willing to move to Calgary...great, sign me up.

Beyond that though...really not sure who that guy would be.

Boudreau took good to elite teams and had them playing like good to elite teams for multiple years, in multiple stops around the NHL.

If the Flames are a good to elite team, I see no reason why Boudreau wouldn't be able to do the same thing if hired in Calgary.

I don't think the Flames are an elite team, but they should be better than what we've been seeing, a lot better IMO.

As for his lack of playoff success, I don't really care. I'd take 10 straight years of 100+ points in the regular season with no playoff success before the crap that's unfolding before our eyes as we speak.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Boudreau took good to elite teams and had them playing like good to elite teams for multiple years, in multiple stops around the NHL.

If the Flames are a good to elite team, I see no reason why Boudreau wouldn't be able to do the same thing if hired in Calgary.

I don't think the Flames are an elite team, but they should be better than what we've been seeing, a lot better IMO.

As for his lack of playoff success, I don't really care. I'd take 10 straight years of 100+ points in the regular season with no playoff success before the crap that's unfolding before our eyes as we speak.

If this organization could get to the point where they were icing a 100 point team annually that was having difficulty advancing in the playoffs that is what I call a very good problem to have because there's a lot of randomness in the playoffs that will eventually go your way. You are what you are in the regular season and in this case you would be a very good team.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Boudreau took good to elite teams and had them playing like good to elite teams for multiple years, in multiple stops around the NHL.

If the Flames are a good to elite team, I see no reason why Boudreau wouldn't be able to do the same thing if hired in Calgary.

I don't think the Flames are an elite team, but they should be better than what we've been seeing, a lot better IMO.

As for his lack of playoff success, I don't really care. I'd take 10 straight years of 100+ points in the regular season with no playoff success before the crap that's unfolding before our eyes as we speak.

And there is the disconnect i guess.

He inherited good teams...i thought this team needs a good coach to make them that? Is that not what these pages of discussion are all based on?

This is not a "great" team...i think that much is obvious.

So change the coach and.........hope?

Like Bingo said...they have a guy in mind and dont care about paying a bunch of guys to not coach any more, then by all means make the switch, but really doubtful the results are any different.

I dont know...IMO (and im pretty much on an island here i think) the personnel has proven repeatedly they cannot get it done and i dont believe the second coming of Scotty Bowman combined with Al Arbour makes any big difference.

I think what we see is what we get until at least the off-season no matter what happens behind the bench.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is pretty amazing how their fortunes turned with the discovery of a goalie who showed up to play most nights. Very eerily similar to what happened in St Louis the year they won the Cup.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Well if that were all it took, we would be planning a parade right now

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Well if that were all it took, we would be planning a parade right now

It is clearly not the cure-all for every team, but then again, neither is a new coach.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by transplant99

And there is the disconnect i guess.

He inherited good teams...i thought this team needs a good coach to make them that? Is that not what these pages of discussion are all based on?

This is not a "great" team...i think that much is obvious.

So change the coach and.........hope?

Like Bingo said...they have a guy in mind and dont care about paying a bunch of guys to not coach any more, then by all means make the switch, but really doubtful the results are any different.

I dont know...IMO (and im pretty much on an island here i think) the personnel has proven repeatedly they cannot get it done and i dont believe the second coming of Scotty Bowman combined with Al Arbour makes any big difference.

I think what we see is what we get until at least the off-season no matter what happens behind the bench.

I am out of thanks, but you are definitely not alone in this. I do not like the way they are playing hockey right now, and a big part of that is the coach. I would welcome a big change to the core group of players, but then I also think that present circumstances are really working against any of this happening.

The Flames owners are in a bad spot, which puts the team and the management ing a bad spot: The new building is on the way and it is going to cost a fortune. The pandemic has shrunken revenues to almost nothing, and the road back to normalcy is long and uncertain. Right now, I think the team is in survival-mode: staying afloat until things settle is the priority, and this likely means also staying the course.

It is frustrating and I don't see any way out of it but through time.