Reaction to coaching hire

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I agree there were larger issues, and unfortunately a lot were strategy related.

I don’t see the issue as looking at the monitor, I see it as prioritization of limited time.

You and others are still only guessing about the head coach's time management on the basis of his behaviour behind the bench, and only during very brief snapshots of time.

I do agree with the folks that think the head coach should use the time immediately after goals to address the team, being decisive and in control.

Give a guy crap if you need to, reinforce the plan for the next play. Take a quick look if you need to, but ignoring the team and watching TV is not in my mind coaching.

I think this is key. Each of us has a view in our own minds about what makes a good coach—what he should be doing, and when he should be doing it. This is what is going on here. People see the coach looking at the monitor and think it looks bad, but with no idea whatsoever about how much that single action affects the teams or the outcome of a game. I will repeat what I have said all along—I find it incredibly unlikely that it matters one way or another, and this single characteristic would not have made ANY difference to Gulutzan's ability to succeed.

Definitely Gelinas can radio down and advise to challenge if required, they could get a couple if eyes on it and gain consensus pretty quickly. Most goals don’t require a challenge.

Especially in light of the fact that the team was recognized as mentally fragile, and victimized far too often by a quick second goal, I think the best use of the coach’s time is focused on the next 30 seconds, not the previous...

This is the only case that I think posters can make, and they may be right with this particular group. But this is hardly a given. We simply have no idea whether or not this action by the coach had any detrimental affect on the team, and no way to measure whether a different approach to the monitors would have yielded better results. I remain doubtful.

[Jay Random]

I sympathize with your view, Cali. At this point, though, I'm rather afraid that the very first time Bill Peters gets caught on camera looking at a monitor instead of putting on a show for the TV audience, CP will break out the torches and pitchforks yet again. Because obviously, you know, any coach who ever uses his iPad deserves to be fired just like that other guy.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I sympathize with your view, Cali. At this point, though, I'm rather afraid that the very first time Bill Peters gets caught on camera looking at a monitor instead of putting on a show for the TV audience, CP will break out the torches and pitchforks yet again. Because obviously, you know, any coach who ever uses his iPad deserves to be fired just like that other guy.

That's cool. I'll just say this. Anyone that rants and screams at Peters looking at a monitor after a goal is going on my ignore list. I don't have time for that. I might be reading threads with only a few posts that actually show up for me, but I'd rather that than go insane reading that stuff.

[nik-]

Peters. Floor monitor

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You know what all this reminds me of?

I remember when people ridiculed Roger Neilson for using video of games in his coaching. I also remember when the same sort of people ridiculed Bob Johnson for writing things down in notebooks in between plays. Those people assumed that a coach should always be able to get all the information he needs in real time, from one angle (viewing at ice level from behind the bench), and retain it perfectly in memory, and that any coach who can't do that is a fool and a laughingstock. In other words, those people were idiots.

There are many things Glen Gulutzan did wrong, and some that he deserves to be mocked for. Watching the iPad isn't one of them.

I don't remember anyone ridiculing Bob Johnson personally.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You and others are still only guessing about the head coach's time management on the basis of his behaviour behind the bench, and only during very brief snapshots of time.

See, I am taking about time management specifically of these discrete chunks of only ~30 seconds. I am not taking about big picture time management.

If the available time is spent watching replays, instead of engaging with the team, it is a lost opportunity to refocus the team. Or, you know, to coach.

Time is of the essence for video review if it is actionable. Usually it is not. And he should trust his video staff enough to let them review and advise him

You disagree and that is fine.

* I don’t think it was his greatest fault, and won’t have any pitchforks for Peters if he looks at the monitor from time to time.

[Eric Vail]

Personally, I don't care much about whether the Flames have hired a posession coach or not, or whether he is a players' coach or a hard ass, or if he is good with the power play or penalty killing or whatever. I just want to see them win. There were two coaches available with very impressive winning records in Sutter and AV. The Flames went with a guy who has never won a round of the playoffs after 4 years.

I am disappointed in their decision. He may turn into a guy like Bob Johnson and take the team to new levels of success. However, usually it turns out like when they hired Hay or Gilbert or GG.

I'm hoping I am wrong, but Flames history suggests this will be a poor hire.

[Computerjungle]

Originally Posted by Eric Vail

Personally, I don't care much about whether the Flames have hired a posession coach or not, or whether he is a players' coach or a hard ass, or if he is good with the power play or penalty killing or whatever. I just want to see them win. There were two coaches available with very impressive winning records in Sutter and AV. The Flames went with a guy who has never won a round of the playoffs after 4 years.

I am disappointed in their decision. He may turn into a guy like Bob Johnson and take the team to new levels of success. However, usually it turns out like when they hired Hay or Gilbert or GG.

I'm hoping I am wrong, but Flames history suggests this will be a poor hire.

maybe its the all the beer ive been drinking, and when i drink i become optimistic. But Bill peters has never lost a playoff series as a head coach.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Computerjungle

maybe its the all the beer ive been drinking, and when i drink i become optimistic. But Bill peters has never lost a playoff series as a head coach.

Undefeated Peters

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Computerjungle

maybe its the all the beer ive been drinking, and when i drink i become optimistic. But Bill peters has never lost a playoff series as a head coach.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Undefeated Peters

So if they make the playoffs next season and lose in the first round, we all know who to blame...

[Hackey]

All I know is I like the hire more after hearing him speak a few times. I really have no idea how it will translate on the ice but I'm cautiously optimistic. Hopefully Treliving can make some roster tweaks to actually give him a better chance to be successful. Scoring depth still worries me as does tending a bit.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don't remember anyone ridiculing Bob Johnson personally.

They sure did. They thought the notebook thing was weird.

On the monitors, sure an assistant can do most of the reviewing, but then it's gotta be a fast decision, and who gets the heat if it's wrong? The head coach. So if I'm head coach, I'm looking at it.

People who think GG didn't talk to players on the bench only watched TV. NHL TV directing is all the same. Show the coach after a goal (which is when they have to check the monitor) in hope that he is swearing or making a face. Unless it's a powerplay goal - then show the player making the skate of shame back to the bench.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Eric Vail

Personally, I don't care much about whether the Flames have hired a posession coach or not, or whether he is a players' coach or a hard ass, or if he is good with the power play or penalty killing or whatever. I just want to see them win. There were two coaches available with very impressive winning records in Sutter and AV. The Flames went with a guy who has never won a round of the playoffs after 4 years.

I am disappointed in their decision. He may turn into a guy like Bob Johnson and take the team to new levels of success. However, usually it turns out like when they hired Hay or Gilbert or GG.

I'm hoping I am wrong, but Flames history suggests this will be a poor hire.

Those two guys were available in that they don't currently have a position. Do you know that they were available to the Flames?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They sure did. They thought the notebook thing was weird.

On the monitors, sure an assistant can do most of the reviewing, but then it's gotta be a fast decision, and who gets the heat if it's wrong? The head coach. So if I'm head coach, I'm looking at it.

People who think GG didn't talk to players on the bench only watched TV. NHL TV directing is all the same. Show the coach after a goal (which is when they have to check the monitor) in hope that he is swearing or making a face. Unless it's a powerplay goal - then show the player making the skate of shame back to the bench.

We don't really know what he was doing, but 2 goals against in 2 minutes 22 times suggests maybe not enough of the right things.

[Reign of Fire]

Voted "hate it" mostly the way Treliving handled the whole situation. First I think he only fired Glen because Peters was available and second he was focused on getting his buddy. He didnt bother interviewing anyone else. So hope for everyone sake it works out,otherwise it's another wasted year or two because GM is too narrow focused. And don't feed fans the bull#### about process, if the process is to sign your buddy, without giving anyone else a chance. Hopefully this doesn't turn out as bad as when Sutter hired his brother.

[Geeoff]

Personally, I think Darryl is done coaching. Also, Vigneault could easily wait out his current contract

[Bleeding Red]

From where I sit it really doesn't matter who the hire is so long as there are still remnants of the last coaching team around. Peters and his assistants could be great, but the same tired eyes on the video screen could kibosh their preparation, while the same tired philosophy/mantra with the goalies just stagnates them. (Can anyone tell me what Gelinas role is exactly? player relations? Good ol'days insights??)

I really feel that keeping Sigalet was a mistake. He has not taken any of the last 6-8 goalies in our system to any level, but has been the one constant while they sucked. Shouldn't a good goalie coach recognize that Smith wasn't ready to come back and told his head coach that? Did Elliott, playing for a contract, and Hillier, playing out the string, simply ignore him? Has any of the last, seemingly endless stream of goalies credited Sigalet with anything (pushed me to be better; taught me to let go; told me to not step on the lines and talk to all 3 of my goal posts)?

Sigalet sticks around much longer and we will have flashes of Trefilov and Muzzatti as Gilles and Parsons get left on the heap.

[Geeoff]

I think Sigalet must have incriminating photos of Ken King or something lol

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I think Sigalet must have incriminating photos of Ken King or something lol

We all have the same incriminating photos.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

That's cool. I'll just say this. Anyone that rants and screams at Peters looking at a monitor after a goal is going on my ignore list. I don't have time for that. I might be reading threads with only a few posts that actually show up for me, but I'd rather that than go insane reading that stuff.

Amen.
The fact that most coaches look at the monitor right after a goal to see what happened seems to be overlooked.