The trials and tribulations of Glen Gulutzan

[timbit]

IMO, the rebuild is not done and some key pieces are far from fully reaching their potential.

Bennett , Mark Jankowski, and some other not so clearly defined NHL prospects at forward

Parsons, Gillies, Rittich, in Goal

Andersson, Fox, Valimaki, Kylington, Kulak, Hamilton, on D.


With some realistic hopefulness, all or most of the above are close (1 to 3 seasons) to being legitimate NHL contributors.

They hold moderate to considerable value as Flame improvements ( replacements), allowing Flames to trade active Flame players or trading these young assets to ameliorate the Flames specific needs. ( primary ,secondary and tertiary offense for starters).

IMO, the Flames are two to four seasons away from being legitimately done with their rebuild.

Smith and potentially Giordano being the only major cogs that will be on their downside or done.

That is how the bottom 6 will legitimately improve , as well as the bottom 4 D and goaltending....leading to a legitimate and sustainable contender.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I'm really surprised to read this, Bingo.

Moving 2x1sts, 4x2nd, a 3rd and a 5th on 3 defenders in three years it not in any way addressing the structural issues plaguing the organization. It's like buying bandaids for internal bleeding.

The team has spent through the nose just to look respectable. This hasn't addressed in any way the structural failings of the club and in fact has made them worse.

You can't fix the laundry list in one season, and you certainly can't fix it by trading away draft picks for developed roster players. The Lazar trade should be an outright scandal right now for a team that looks like it might not make the dance this year.

In consecutive deadlines they've moved out draft picks for warm bodies. This is largely the same strategy employed by a long list of Flames general managers up to this point, Treliving just happens to be better at making trades and we don't yet have the benefit of hindsight to judge how truly awful or remarkable these trades are.

Like I said in another post, the team has 4 playoff round wins in 29 years. Moving a ####load of draft picks in consecutive seasons for basically 0 ROI in terms of success is an abject failure.

Well first off I hope they don't see 29 years as something they need to make up for as that sounds Vancouver-ish.

They spent assets to build what looks like a very good top six, and a very good top four blueline.

Other assets went to find a goaltender that can carry the mail until their goalie prospects are ready.

The issue now is the bottom half of the forward group primarily. Since they have a second core of blueliners coming along I see that as the natural progression piece of assets to gain balance.

Centers and blueliners always have more value than wingers, and the Flames are missing wingers.

It's not a baby with the bath water thing. It's a progression.

[shadowlord]

Originally Posted by Buff

I'd rather have Joel Quenneville.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by timbit

IMO, the rebuild is not done and some key pieces are far from fully reaching their potential.

Bennett , Mark Jankowski, and some other not so clearly defined NHL prospects at forward

Parsons, Gillies, Rittich, in Goal

Andersson, Fox, Valimaki, Kylington, Kulak, Hamilton, on D.


With some realistic hopefulness, all or most of the above are close (1 to 3 seasons) to being legitimate NHL contributors.

They hold moderate to considerable value as Flame improvements ( replacements), allowing Flames to trade active Flame players or trading these young assets to ameliorate the Flames specific needs. ( primary ,secondary and tertiary offense for starters).

IMO, the Flames are two to four seasons away from being legitimately done with their rebuild.

Smith and potentially Giordano being the only major cogs that will be on their downside or done.

That is how the bottom 6 will legitimately improve , as well as the bottom 4 D and goaltending....leading to a legitimate and sustainable contender.

I think you are likely right on most of this.

The part that worries me is that organizationally for as long as I can remember our development at the ahl level has been well below average in the nhl. We don’t have the internal assets to really upgrade forwards from within and we are very thin in terms of trade chips.

I have always been worried about the development of talent within this org and I guess we will see if they can get better at it and help us reach the next level.

If Bennett and janko can take over as the second line pair and let backlund frolik go down to third line and have ferland tkachuk and someone you sign or trade for step in on the other side we will be fine.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Granted, but he's had a lot of success in the regular season before, so this isn't a big surprise.

He's notorious for getting the most out of his lineup. He's a perfect hybrid of a player's coach and a task master. His style is an uptempo attacking style which works well with a young quick lineup. It's the perfect tactics for the roster he has, and he's maximized the talent he was given, which wasn't great to begin the year.

Or he’s just a coach who has inherited a great team that was built for the new NHL unlike our team that’s built for the old NHL. Gallant doesn’t have a great NHL track record of success. He’s only made the playoffs once and was bounced out in the 1st round.

McPhee is the real genius behind the curtains. He chose players specifically who could play fast, react fast and defend fast. The Flames are built the opposite, we’re slow, lack skill and play with a lot of edge that in turn leads to a lot of penalties.

Our PK isn’t good enough to allow so many good teams PP opportunities to hurt us. But we do and we’ve done it 2 years in a row by leading the league in penalties. Could you guys imagine how many less goals we’d allow if we took less penalties? We’d have more wins that’s for sure.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Or he’s just a coach who has inherited a great team that was built for the new NHL unlike our team that’s built for the old NHL. Gallant doesn’t have a great NHL track record of success. He’s only made the playoffs once and was bounced out in the 1st round.

McPhee is the real genius behind the curtains. He chose players specifically who could play fast, react fast and defend fast. The Flames are built the opposite, we’re slow, lack skill and play with a lot of edge that in turn leads to a lot of penalties.

Our PK isn’t good enough to allow so many good teams PP opportunities to hurt us. But we do and we’ve done it 2 years in a row by leading the league in penalties. Could you guys imagine how many less goals we’d allow if we took less penalties? We’d have more wins that’s for sure.

Can you imagine how many fewer PP goals against if we didn’t put Brouwer out there?


The PK isn’t good so your solution isn’t to fix it but to instead just “take less penalties” that’s only solving part of the problem, because penalties happen and you have to be able to reasonably kill them off

[Beninho]

Biggest problem with the team is they have incomplete lines. They have a 2nd/3rd liner playing on the top line, a 3rd liner on the second line in Frolik, a 3rd line that should be a 4th line and a 4th line that should be in the AHL. Defense has been fine but not at all the difference maker the Flames were relying upon, and the trade for Hamonic has done nothing for the team.

At least they found a goalie but a hell of a lot more work needs to get done, and if you are going to trade picks get a ####ing forward not another Dman.

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by saXon

Definitely a lot of rationale in this post.

Cmon bruhhh gimme a break I did say I hadn't woken up yet

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That's pretty much me.

I cringed under Hartley because the system relied so much on getting dominated that you almost felt "dirty" after every win, and those wins largely came in one season.

I like puck possession teams, and I like a team that generally outplays the opposition and we've been seeing that in the last 14 months.

However the special teams have been a mess, and he's ultimately the guy that can put a stop to that if a Dave Cameron isn't getting it done. Bad luck happens but not swapping sides for shooters or including Hamilton was insane.

I don't like his fourth line usage ... terrible times of the game. The third pairing used to be the same, but they improved the third pairing so it's less of an issue.

I really don't understand dressing Glass last night.

The big thing now though is culture, leadership and fragility.

The only way to fix those things is to move out your core, or add a leader. The leader can't be a fourth line player so it may have to come from a coaching change, and I get that.

But I'm with you; loser organizations hire and fire GMs and coaches too frequently.

Bingo...i agree with all of this except two things:

1) I also like puck possession teams, but it's not enough and for the flames i honestly believe they're doing puck possession wrong. This team needs to be able to transition faster, activate the defense more on the rush (not just in the offensive zone) and cut down the number of d-to-d passes. I said it as early as the preseason and many times so far this season - the flames play slow! So many times when you watch the flames play, puck possession starts with the puck passed back and fourth between the defensemen, by which time the other team is fully is a defensive posture and for the flames, no one is saying hard because they've slowed the play down too much.

I can't fully explain it yet, but I believe this type of puck possession the flames execute creates advanced stats that overstate the flames probability of winning. For example, it results in less quality scoring chances off the rush, less odd man rushes...but it allows for better shot generation. The system generates "high danger opportunities" but they're not all created equally and I'll take a high danger opportunity on the rush over a high danger shot off the cycle any day.

2) I honestly believe the backend isn't being used to it's full potential given the system. We have some of the best mobile defensemen in the league, but how often do you see them try going end to end, rush the puck beyond the center line, or even activate themselves creatively on the cycle. There is something wrong when you're spending this much cap space of the backend, but are not willing yo utilize them to their fullest.

---

Is this roster a top 5? No - it's not Boston, or penguin, or Nashville or Tampa or capitals.

But it's probably in that 6-12 range. We're not getting results. The team is underperforming in a big way.

[automaton 3]

^Agree and well put. I don't think the Flames are that slow as a group.

I do think the system they are playing is slow, with the east-west passing and attacking as a 5 man group.

Flames have some very good skaters on defence, and that strength is not being utilized in my opinion.

[EldrickOnIce]

^ a team with a roster that includes Glass, Stewart, Stajan and Hathaway - and 2 goalies with 22 combined NHL games is not in the 6-12 range in the NHL.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Biggest problem with the team is they have incomplete lines. They have a 2nd/3rd liner playing on the top line, a 3rd liner on the second line in Frolik, a 3rd line that should be a 4th line and a 4th line that should be in the AHL. Defense has been fine but not at all the difference maker the Flames were relying upon, and the trade for Hamonic has done nothing for the team.

At least they found a goalie but a hell of a lot more work needs to get done, and if you are going to trade picks get a ####ing forward not another Dman.

I think everyone agrees the makeup of this team is not ideal. But it's really exacerbated by GG's insane usage of players like Bouwmeester, last night Glass, and in general the 4th line.

There is always a "secret sauce" combo of matching the right coach with the right team. I think what makes a great coach is they are able to adapt themselves to be effective with a larger variety of team makeups.

Gulutzan on the other hand is insanely rigid and stubborn. The idea that there is only one way to win (see R/L d pairings, or playing off side on the PP) is asinine.

I expect an NHL coach to be able to make the most of what he has on the roster. Decisions like Brouwers usage, Glass or Bartowski in the lineup, 4th line after every goal, are just example of Gulutzan refusal to change. He coaches in a vacuum where external factors don't matter.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by jemjey

I don't agree that we need to provide "quality analysis" to "prove" or infer that GG is not a good coach. You can't really "prove" a subjective opinion, you can only provide the rationale behind it, which is what I believe many posters have done.

We can just look at his results and observe that in his time here he has not been objectively good. I am of the opinion that he is not a good coach, specifically, not for this team at this time. That opinion is simply based on his record with us and personal observation. .

You are saying that you don't need to prove that GG is not a good coach while also saying that one can state he "objectively" not been good.

If the second half the statement is to be true, you must do the first part.

Otherwise you can't say that. You can say that subjectively he hasn't been good. Personal observation by its very nature is subjective.

And by no means am I saying someone can't feel that way. They can. Let's just understand that both sides of the arguments are valid and there is no objective way to prove which is right.

[bax]

The Flames have played below expectations this year no doubt about it, but with that being said I don't hate the system GG has put in place. I just don't think our team as it currently stands is built to play that way.

In an ideal world I think we need an extra line that can play that 3M style. Two lines that can provide offense while simultaneously shutting down other top players. In a perfect world John Tavares is brainwashed into signing with the Flames and we roll with:

Tkachuk - Tavares
Gaudreau - Monahan
Frolik - Backlund

as our forward pairs moving forward. Obviously, this a pipe dream but I think Gulutzan's system would find some serious success this way. As of right now, our scoring line and our checking line just aren't fit to play this system without favorable match ups. Just my two cents.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Infinit47

I think everyone agrees the makeup of this team is not ideal. But it's really exacerbated by GG's insane usage of players like Bouwmeester, last night Glass, and in general the 4th line.

There is always a "secret sauce" combo of matching the right coach with the right team. I think what makes a great coach is they are able to adapt themselves to be effective with a larger variety of team makeups.

Gulutzan on the other hand is insanely rigid and stubborn. The idea that there is only one way to win (see R/L d pairings, or playing off side on the PP) is asinine.

I expect an NHL coach to be able to make the most of what he has on the roster. Decisions like Brouwers usage, Glass or Bartowski in the lineup, 4th line after every goal, are just example of Gulutzan refusal to change. He coaches in a vacuum where external factors don't matter.

That is insane .

I didn't want Glass in last night, and I thought Lazar didn't deserve a scratch (I thought Hathaway did). I think he puts Bart in every month just to make sure he can be ready if called upon. You can't sit a guy 100% of the time and expect anything good if he's called in due to injury.

"4th line after every goal" is a myth.

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You are saying that you don't need to prove that GG is not a good coach while also saying that one can state he "objectively" not been good.

If the second half the statement is to be true, you must do the first part.

Otherwise you can't say that. You can say that subjectively he hasn't been good. Personal observation by its very nature is subjective.

And by no means am I saying someone can't feel that way. They can. Let's just understand that both sides of the arguments are valid and there is no objective way to prove which is right.

Allow me to clarify, I was trying to state that, because these are our subjective opinions, we don't need to "prove" they are true, simply provide the reasoning behind those opinions. I think we are in agreement on this point. No subjective opinion can be "proven right", however they can vary in the strength of the rationale behind them.

For the second part, I should have been more specific. I was referring to his win-loss record during his tenure here, which I still believe is objectively "not good". In other words, I have the subjective opinion that he is not a good coach, which is supported by the observation of his record, which I think we can agree is not good, whether you are a GG supporter or not.

Hope that clears it up a bit.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by bax

The Flames have played below expectations this year no doubt about it, but with that being said I don't hate the system GG has put in place. I just don't think our team as it currently stands is built to play that way.

In an ideal world I think we need an extra line that can play that 3M style. Two lines that can provide offense while simultaneously shutting down other top players. In a perfect world John Tavares is brainwashed into signing with the Flames and we roll with:

Tkachuk - Tavares
Gaudreau - Monahan
Frolik - Backlund

as our forward pairs moving forward. Obviously, this a pipe dream but I think Gulutzan's system would find some serious success this way. As of right now, our scoring line and our checking line just aren't fit to play this system without favorable match ups. Just my two cents.

The problem is that he shouldn’t have been hired if his system couldn’t be adapted to the personnel available to him. If we have to trade players or make sweeping changes to personnel in order to fit the system why not hire a different coach who has a different system more suited to the personnel.

Systems need to adapt and change and too often it seems that GG is unwilling to make the changes that would benefit the team


It just feels like a don’t blame the system, blame everything else, type approach

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well first off I hope they don't see 29 years as something they need to make up for as that sounds Vancouver-ish.

They spent assets to build what looks like a very good top six, and a very good top four blueline.

Other assets went to find a goaltender that can carry the mail until their goalie prospects are ready.

The issue now is the bottom half of the forward group primarily. Since they have a second core of blueliners coming along I see that as the natural progression piece of assets to gain balance.

Centers and blueliners always have more value than wingers, and the Flames are missing wingers.

It's not a baby with the bath water thing. It's a progression.

What is the point of trading for an all-star goalie if that guy is going to help you barely scrape into the playoffs because the rest of the roster is full of holes?

Sounds like textbook example of bad pro-scouting to go all in on a roster with essentially no pedigree of success up to that point.

Why do you need a goalie to carry the mail at all at this point unless you're trying to make the playoffs and win-now? They didn't pay a premium to acquire smith and have arizona retain salary so that the young prospects would know what it feels like to play with a great goalie behind them, they did it with the expectation this would be a 100 point team and a playoff challenger. It's not like Rasmus and Kylington are in the lineup right now and Smith is there to help make up for it. Smith is making up for TJ Brodie and Mark Stone. He's making up for Troy Brouwer and Garnet Hathaway.

If the Flames defensive prospects are so great why would you put roadblocks in front of them of established NHL guys all under contract for the next 3+ years if you were trying to slowly progress into a winner instead of going all in? If the idea is to then trade those valuable defensive prospects for forward help, is the insinuation that the forward help will also be in the form of an ELC prospect, or are we suggesting the Flames will trade valuable ELC prospects who are NHL ready for existing, established NHL scorers under contract in the 3-7 million range? If that's the case, how does the team compete under the salary cap with so many mid-to-high contracts?

The trade of Jones for Johansen sure looks great, except the predators added 5 million dollars in salary for a year before having to re-sign johansen to 8 per. How do the Flames fit that into their cap structure if it comes to dealing Fox for some top player?

Look at the Ducks. The only way they have been able to stay competitive over the years has been an abundance of ELC contracts surrounding their premium paid core group. How do the Flames add a 6 million dollar winger if they are paying Stone 3.6 to play on the bottom line. "Oh, well, they trade him and promote a defender from their stable of great defensive prospects." Well, I was under the impression they just traded a defender for scoring help.

Standing pat is standing pat. Trading draft picks consistently for roster players is actually making the organizational problems WORSE.

A progression is continually building on something, not trying to jump start it on a yearly basis with short term gain long term pain moves. To me, that sounds like the opposite of progression and sounds more like undercutting.

We're 12 years into the cap era, this should be obvious by now. You don't need to go back 29 years to see the organizational failings; the oilers have more playoff round wins since the lockout than the Flames do. The Arizona Coyotes have 1 more playoff series win than the Flames do and they've made the playoffs just 3 times in the last 12 years. The islanders have won as many playoff rounds as the flames since the cap era began.

Since the cap was instituted the Flames have just 4 more post season games played than the freakin' oilers. The oilers have 7 more playoff wins than Calgary during that time. Some goof will say "but the pronger run", well, remove the flames 2004 run from their history and see just how abjectly terrible that makes the organization look.

Since the lockout began, the flames are 23rd in the whole league in Playoff wins and 22nd in playoff games played.

At what point do the owners of this team look at their leadership and decide "maybe trading draft picks every single year is a bad idea"? When do Flames fans start to realize that maybe the koolaid is clouding their judgement on just where this franchise is and how it operates?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

We're 12 years into the cap era, this should be obvious by now. You don't need to go back 29 years to see the organizational failings; the oilers have more playoff round wins since the lockout than the Flames do. The Arizona Coyotes have 1 more playoff series win than the Flames do and they've made the playoffs just 3 times in the last 12 years. The islanders have won as many playoff rounds as the flames since the cap era began.

Since the cap was instituted the Flames have just 4 more post season games played than the freakin' oilers. The oilers have 7 more playoff wins than Calgary during that time. Some goof will say "but the pronger run", well, remove the flames 2004 run from their history and see just how abjectly terrible that makes the organization look.

Since the lockout began, the flames are 23rd in the whole league in Playoff wins and 22nd in playoff games played.

At what point do the owners of this team look at their leadership and decide "maybe trading draft picks every single year is a bad idea"? When do Flames fans start to realize that maybe the koolaid is clouding their judgement on just where this franchise is and how it operates?

Do you really think Treliving or Burke give a rat's ass about the missteps of Button, Sutter and Feaster?

Let it go man.

You're going Canuck on me.

If you don't like the plan that's fine, but it makes pretty good sense to me.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Do you really think Treliving or Burke give a rat's ass about the missteps of Button, Sutter and Feaster?

Let it go man.

You're going Canuck on me.

If you don't like the plan that's fine, but it makes pretty good sense to me.

can you respond to my points about team building without trying to paint me as a lunatic fan of another team (that has vastly superior playoff success as compares to the flames over the last decade)?