Reaction to coaching hire

[N-E-B]

Optimistic about it. I have yet to read one compelling argument that would make me feel any different.

Can we make a "Whining about Peters" thread and keep all whining about him in there? I've read too much of that crap the last two years. It's exhausting to read. At least if it's all in there those of us who don't think the sky is falling don't have to click it and you guys can all be angry together.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

A lot more positive/wait and see than I thought it would be based on conversations over the last few days. Appears he won some people over?

I was probably between 'a little nervous' and 'wait and see' before today's interviews.

Now I'm between 'wait and see' and 'cautiously optimistic'. So he won me over to some extent. Nothing will fully win me over besides actual wins though.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Voted ‘hate it’.

Actions speak louder than words, and I wanted a coach that has shown he can win, not a coach who can talk about what it takes to win (despite his record suggesting otherwise).

These press conferences are all the same. Hell, Gulutzan talked about speed and a fast transition when he was hired, and we all know how that turned out.

Less talking about what you will do... just go out and do it.

I understand that people are sceptical about Peters on the basis of his record, and that they are unimpressed by rhetoric and anecdotes, but I find it bewildering how some do not see a substantial difference between Peters' introduction and Gulutzan's two years ago.

[nik-]

Wait and see shouldn't even be an option. That's an action in response to a reaction, not a reaction. It's too easy an out.

[troutman]

Unless there are big roster changes, "don't think it matters".

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by nik-

Wait and see shouldn't even be an option. That's an action in response to a reaction, not a reaction. It's too easy an out.

It is a valid reaction for those that have the humility to admit they just don't know enough.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

It is a valid reaction for those that have the humility to admit they just don't know enough.

No, it's a response to a reaction of not knowing enough.

Maybe the option should have been "I don't know enough to have a response".

[Locke]

I was always going to be a little wait and see.

I did the same thing to Gulutzan. I gave him the benefit of the doubt until he could no longer hold it. Then things are clear and I wanted him gone.

I have a lot of faith in Treliving, I think hes a hard-working and intelligent GM, but I am concerned that he has prioritized his 'puck-possession/stats-based' ideologies above the realities of the game.

Peters seems to be a blend of both old school hockey where you have to work and fight for success and the new school where just shooting from anywhere and holding on to the puck is good enough.

I want Bill Peters to succeed, I want him to win everything there is to win with the Flames, that would be awesome.

Can he do it? Well....we wait and see.

If this is just another 'shiny new toy' hire and we waste a couple more seasons of our core then I will be gravely disappointed and be calling for Peters' head just as Gulutzan's.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

A lot more positive/wait and see than I thought it would be based on conversations over the last few days. Appears he won some people over?

Probably some of that yeah. But I think a lot of people take a wait and see approach, that's the reasonable reaction to a coach we don't really know.

Some of the most vocal posters against the move posted multiple posts per page in a 50+ page thread. The high volume posting of a very vocal subsection of the fanbase probably made it appear that their opinion was shared a large percentage of the fanbase when that didn't necessarily have to be the case.

[Resolute 14]

The reality is, and regardless of how many very valid excuses he has, Peters is a coach with zero NHL success in four seasons. And he has to hit the ground running, because we just don't have enough slack on the rope for another adjustment year. However, he talks a good game, and he mostly seems to understand what Gulutzan did wrong, so that is all to the good. I voted cautiously optimistic.

The most encouraging thing is that he seems to have a better understanding of this team's players, strengths and weaknesses after one press conference than Gulutzan did after two years.

[The Fonz]

Much of why I voted ‘Hate it’, is due to who else was available, and admittedly not even considered by Treliving. It makes me sick to my stomach that we hired a relative unknown, when Alain Vigneault is available and we didn’t even reach out.

If Vigneault was not unemployed at the moment, my vote would have been ‘Nervous’ or ‘Wait and see’.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I understand that people are sceptical about Peters on the basis of his record, and that they are unimpressed by rhetoric and anecdotes, but I find it bewildering how some do not see a substantial difference between Peters' introduction and Gulutzan's two years ago.

I actually preferred Gully's demeanor in his introduction. IMO Peters came across as arrogant, somewhat of a blow-hard and a bit too confident for someone who has nothing to show with four years of head coaching experience.

"Sometimes, Nik Lidstrom thinks i'm smarter than babcock. Thats how good I am. And this one time, when I Babcock's assistant 7 years ago, we almost went past the second round!!!!!"

NSFW!

Beware the strong man - its entirely plausible he's just peddling snake-oil (trump, chavez, etc).

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Much of why I voted ‘Hate it’, is due to who else was available, and admittedly not even considered by Treliving. It makes me sick to my stomach that we hired a relative unknown, when Alain Vigneault is available and we didn’t even reach out.

Peters is not a "relative unknown" in hockey circles.

[flambers]

I would pick "Taking a wait and see approach" for any coach the Flames hired.

However, so far from what I heard.

I like the hire.....

I am really interested to see who he hires as the assistant coaches....

[nik-]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Much of why I voted ‘Hate it’, is due to who else was available, and admittedly not even considered by Treliving. It makes me sick to my stomach that we hired a relative unknown, when Alain Vigneault is available and we didn’t even reach out.

If Vigneault was not unemployed at the moment, my vote would have been ‘Nervous’ or ‘Wait and see’.

This is a lot of it for me, combined with where we are as a team. If this was two years ago and he was hiring Peters instead of Gulatzan I would be a lot more on board with this. Completely focused on one guy regardless of proven success after two failed years? It's not good. I'm pretty disappointed in Treliving.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Peters is not a "relative unknown" in hockey circles.

That's irrelevant to a thread and poll asking about the opinions of individual fans.

[FLAMESRULE]

I've gone from really not liking it to cautiously optimistic. This was mainly being ignorant to Bill Peters and his time spent in CAR. Did a bit of reading up on him and thinking he may end up being a GG clone.

His interview on 960 this morning where he rattled off detailed strategy, structure ideas, thoughts on the Flames roster, etc. was eye opening. I know its been said numerous times, but that was very impressive. He clearly knows hockey, has a vision already on what he sees the Flames being, and just needs time to put the details in place.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I actually preferred Gully's demeanor in his introduction.

[PsYcNeT]

Needs to have a "distressingly underwhelmed" option.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

...Beware the strong man - its entirely plausible he's just peddling snake-oil (trump, chavez, etc).

Unlike the insufferable, vacuous blowhard Donald Trump, Bill Peters clearly knows what he is talking about. What a terrible comparison.