[News] Flames name Kirk Muller as Associate Coach and Cail MacLean as assistant coach

[Icantwhisper]

Originally Posted by 868904

- Well he had Smith going gangbusters in the Colorado series;
- He turned Rittich into an "all star";
- He helped Talbot find his game again.

He's no Ian Clarke or Mitch Korn though but there's only two of those guys around.

Be interesting to see if Markstrom improves after leaving Clark in Vancouver or regresses, give it more than one year to evaluate.
Goalies don't develop in a vacuum, I'm not sure goalie coaches are given enough credit.

[calumniate]

It's Mullertime!

[Joborule]

So what is the actual point of an associate coach? How is their role different from an assistant?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Joborule

So what is the actual point of an associate coach? How is their role different from an assistant?

Associate coaches get paid more than assistants.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by getbak

Associate coaches get paid more than assistants.

I could be off on this, but it also seems like associate coaches will run the bench periodically at the behest of the head coach. This happens occasionally with assistants, but with the associate tag, I think it is implied that there is an intention to do it from time to time.

I also think it's a way for a team to appoint an heir to the head coach.

Part of me can't help but wonder if Sutter, after seeing all the flaws with the roster up close, doesn't intend of finishing his 3 year deal. He only came out of semi-retirement because he thought the Flames could win the Cup within the next 2 seasons, but I don't see how he can actually believe that now.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I don't think the old farmer is one to give up though.

[getbak]

Darryl talks about the expected roles for the coaching staff...

[FlamesAddiction]

Nice to see Sutter being trusted to manage the coaching staff. The Flames seem to have had a habit lately of head coaches not selecting their own staff.

Gelinas will probably be great in a player development role. The guy was a fitness freak when he was a player and always had great conditioning. He had the right mix of skill, work ethic, and attention to details, that it should benefit prospects and young players.

[Savvy27]

I really like listening to Sutter. For a guy who is famously difficult towards reporters, I find that he is actually pretty generous with his answers if he thinks the question is a good one. Like, Muller was reticent when asked similar questions yesterday about roles and things like that, but Sutter just goes ahead and lays it all out along with the reasoning for the plan they have.

It appears like Muller was brought in to be more of a personable coach for the players. Sutter seems to either recognize that the players are going to want a softer touch at times or that as a Head Coach he just doesn't have the time to develop those relationships fully. Then he talks about the value of MacLean who knows the propsects and young players and can be a good source of information for them.

Teams change every season so it may be nothing, but again we have a major decision maker from the team talking about roster changes that are to come.

[DazzlinDino]

Sutter brought in a guy who has worked as a head coach and worked under similar high profile coaches Hitchcock, and Claude Julien. Muller should be able to quickly pick up on Darryl Sutter's style and direction for the team. Brad brought in guys who lacked experience so this is a positive, results oriented change and should fit nicely with Darryl's plan. Obviously the Flames are in win now mode. Muller, an experienced guy can be a good addition, who can also be a buffer for the players.

I think the big thing with Sutter is rookies will make mistakes that can cost us win's, he is not going to give up on them but needs them learning quickly. The team doesn't make the playoffs by coaches/players leisurely learning on the fly. This is a bit of contrast in Brad's and Darryl's styles; We have seen now that coaches learning on the go really prolongs the goal when experience is lacking. Interesting to see if the Flames go with more size, or speed while adding a bit more skill.

If Sutter's goal is to win a cup he doesn't have a lot of time, it will be fun to see how quickly this unfolds.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Freeway

The Flames have also kept head amateur scout Tod Button around through several GM change-overs. There's probably a reason for that.

What would be the alternative to having a reason? They forgot he was there?

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I could be off on this, but it also seems like associate coaches will run the bench periodically at the behest of the head coach. This happens occasionally with assistants, but with the associate tag, I think it is implied that there is an intention to do it from time to time.

I also think it's a way for a team to appoint an heir to the head coach.

Part of me can't help but wonder if Sutter, after seeing all the flaws with the roster up close, doesn't intend of finishing his 3 year deal. He only came out of semi-retirement because he thought the Flames could win the Cup within the next 2 seasons, but I don't see how he can actually believe that now.

I don’t think there’s anyway that sutter is going to quit early.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I could be off on this, but it also seems like associate coaches will run the bench periodically at the behest of the head coach. This happens occasionally with assistants, but with the associate tag, I think it is implied that there is an intention to do it from time to time.

I also think it's a way for a team to appoint an heir to the head coach.

Part of me can't help but wonder if Sutter, after seeing all the flaws with the roster up close, doesn't intend of finishing his 3 year deal. He only came out of semi-retirement because he thought the Flames could win the Cup within the next 2 seasons, but I don't see how he can actually believe that now.

People are overthinking this. The "Associate" tag is nothing more than a recognition of seniority. It is precisely the same as how these terms function in academics. A first-time university professor will almost always start his career as an "Assistant Professor." After several years of experience and on the basis of tenure and publication can attain the tag "Associate Professor." This is accompanied by an increase in pay, but almost no other meaningful changes in the actual job. Senior professors will over time have all the adjectives removed to become full "Professors"; again, with an increase in pay, but again, almost no actual change in their job description.

I don't think there is any difference at all when it comes to NHL coaches. An "Associate Coach" is one who has gained enough NHL experience to warrant the title and the higher salary, but effectively functions on the same level of Assistant Coaches. The reason not every NHL team has an Associate Coach is because not everyone on the bench has the necessary experience. The reason Associate Coaches are the ones most commonly to fill in for Head Coaches in their absence, or will be promoted to the Head Coach position in a more permanent change is because they are next in the heirarchy.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Freeway

The Flames have also kept head amateur scout Tod Button around through several GM change-overs. There's probably a reason for that.

Well the Flames generally draft pretty well, especially recently, so yea it makes sense that they've kept the head amateur scout. They continue to have problems with goalies though. Numerous promising prospects that haven't turned into anything. NHL goalies that come here regress. It's a consistent issue with this team and I think it's fair to wonder why Sigalet is not only still here, but somehow got a promotion when the results have been not good.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

People are overthinking this. The "Associate" tag is nothing more than a recognition of seniority. It is precisely the same as how these terms function in academics. A first-time university professor will almost always start his career as an "Assistant Professor." After several years of experience and on the basis of tenure and publication can attain the tag "Associate Professor." This is accompanied by an increase in pay, but almost no other meaningful changes in the actual job. Senior professors will over time have all the adjectives removed to become full "Professors"; again, with an increase in pay, but again, almost no actual change in their job description.

I don't think there is any difference at all when it comes to NHL coaches. An "Associate Coach" is one who has gained enough NHL experience to warrant the title and the higher salary, but effectively functions on the same level of Assistant Coaches. The reason not every NHL team has an Associate Coach is because not everyone on the bench has the necessary experience. The reason Associate Coaches are the ones most commonly to fill in for Head Coaches in their absence, or will be promoted to the Head Coach position in a more permanent change is because they are next in the heirarchy.

When Darryl describes Muller's job, I feel as though he means to pass off a lot of the motivational and tactical chatting in game (ie, actually approaching and speaking with players in game about adjustments) to Muller and allow himself to focus on match-ups and game strategy.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by 868904

- Well he had Smith going gangbusters in the Colorado series;
- He turned Rittich into an "all star";
- He helped Talbot find his game again.

He's no Ian Clarke or Mitch Korn though but there's only two of those guys around.

Mostly not true

Smith was better as an Oilers and no he didn’t go gangbusters, he looked better because he was so bad before that and he allowed crucial goals when the team needed him

Talbot was also better as a Wild

And all other instances, the goalies got worse with him. The Flames knew this. They didn’t ‘promote’ him because it was working

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I could be off on this, but it also seems like associate coaches will run the bench periodically at the behest of the head coach. This happens occasionally with assistants, but with the associate tag, I think it is implied that there is an intention to do it from time to time.

I also think it's a way for a team to appoint an heir to the head coach.

Part of me can't help but wonder if Sutter, after seeing all the flaws with the roster up close, doesn't intend of finishing his 3 year deal. He only came out of semi-retirement because he thought the Flames could win the Cup within the next 2 seasons, but I don't see how he can actually believe that now.

Last time it only took him 1.25 seasons to get a non playoff team to the finals...

[DropIt]

Originally Posted by Stanley

I see we're still bitching and whining about Sigalet are we?

Man that's getting old...get over it.

Agreed.

Internet forum pretending they know a single thing about being an NHL goaltending coach.

Sigalet apparently is to blames that the likes of Mike Smith, Leland Irving, Kari Ramo, David Rittich, Joni Ortio, and Eddie Lack. Despite their vast successes elsewherr

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by DropIt

Agreed.

Internet forum pretending they know a single thing about being an NHL goaltending coach.

Sigalet apparently is to blames that the likes of Mike Smith, Leland Irving, Kari Ramo, David Rittich, Joni Ortio, and Eddie Lack. Despite their vast successes elsewherr

Well, that's actually the point.

[DropIt]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Well, that's actually the point.

Yeah those are quite the household names in the NHL these days... between Rittich, Ortio, Irving, and Ramo they have played a combined 4 games in the NHL after wearing a Flames jersey.. and all of those games have been played by Rittich.

What are the chances that the goalies aren't NHL caliber vs Sigalet being a poor goaltending coach?