Lets Talk About the flames Style of Play - Gully v Peters

[Northendzone]

Perhaps this horse has already been beaten, but I was wondering if some of you folks who really watch the Flames can summarize how different Peters "system" is compared to what Gully had the boys doing.

In watching some of the Flames game last night, I just really enjoyed how they were playing.

[Resolute 14]

The biggest difference is pace. Especially on the breakout. Under Gulutzan, the other team's defence could read War and Peace before we gained the red line. Under Peters, we're a hell of a lot faster, and that gives the other team fits.

[blender]

Another big difference, and I think it has a lot to do with pace, is the Flames tend to own the middle of the ice in the d zone and the attack zone. I recall watching the Golden Knights last season using their team speed up the middle, and watching Gully's Flames circling on the perimeter. Complete change this season IMO.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Defensively they stand up players much earlier, especially on the PK at the blue line. Their PK once in the defensive zone is also very aggressive with basically a triangle of 3, with the 4th player actively skating out to the puck. This isn’t really a systems thing but the forwards are much more committed to backchecking this year.

Offensively the huge difference is the number of cross-ice passes. The puck carrier is always looking for the seam pass and the open guy is always trying to get open across the ice. Especially on the PP, they use rim passes a ton to settle things down. Overall though, there is simply less structure on offence which has probably helped players like Gaudreau.

Beyond playing styles, they are obviously a great 3rd period team. I don’t think it’s just leadership and determination though; Peters routinely sits 3 forwards for the 3rd (not necessarily all on the same line) and then mixes the lines. Similar with mixing up defensive pairings later in games.

[Looch City]

#### Gully.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm over Gulutzan. He seems like a nice guy but was just one of those bad organizational decisions that cost us a couple years of Johnny Gaudreau's contract and two of Gio's good years. Fortunately the GM atoned for his mistake.

[TheScorpion]

On the surface, Gulutzan and Peters have gotten similar results everywhere but the scoresheet and the win column, which speaks to Gulutzan's biggest failings: his teams went through the "right" motions but lacked the intensity to convert. Gully had to resort to ridiculous theatrics in an attempt to give his team any form of killer instinct. It never worked. With Peters, the Flames have had that ability since day one, and it's been very refreshing.

[Sainters7]

Gully hockey was so freaking boring. I was watching 76-77 games a year even in the non-playoff years and Gully hockey finally killed that, Flames games were so boring. The pace they play with under Peters is 100% different, this is the most exciting Flames team in probably 3 decades.

[4X4]

Gulutzan has the demeanour of a boy scout leader. That's not a bad thing in life, to be chill and not a hardass, but it does not befit a head coach. The stick throw was so lame, I bet the guys were trying not to laugh.

Also, those d-d passes made me want to punch the TV.

Peters on the other hand, just oozes leadership. It's like he removed a bunch of the overly technical rules, and told the guys that they can be creative, within the confines of his system. That alone is probably what sparks the guys. The coach trusts them, so they trust the coach. Plus, if they get stupid with a bad penalty or something, they get stapled to the bench for the rest of the game. They see and feel the reward and the punishment on an ongoing basis.

I like Bill Peters and I like his scowl when he takes notes during the game. You just know someone's gonna get a talking to.

[Huntingwhale]

Gulutzan's system blows and Peters' system is awesome.

One system catered to statisticians in the hope it would generate wins. The other caters to the players actual skill and abilities.

One system makes it seem like if you want to win, you have to play a certain way. The other system has the team believing in themselves no matter the score.

One system was boring as hell to watch. The other leaves you shaking your head at some of the skilled plays.

One system had a coach that was timid and seemed like he was in over his head. The other system employs a true leader and leaves no doubt who the true boss is.

One system leads to being a bubble team. The other gets your 2nd overall.

[Toonage]

No more square peg / round hole.

No more forcing players into spots they shouldn't be or just playing someone somewhere because they fit an arbitrary criteria despite lacking talent.

But most importantly, there is now responsibility & accountability.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Gully has red hair, uses gel it seems. Peters, grey hair, at best combs it forward.

[Otto-matic]

I think also Peters has a big presence in the locker room. I remember back in 17 when they clinched and dropped that video and Gully said something along the lines of "I don't come in here often" in the locker room.

[AltaGuy]

One of the only good things about Hartley's system was the D pinching - and Gully took that away. It meant we seldom had sustained pressure enough to generate offence out of D-zone breakdowns of the opponents.

Now, under Peters, our D are even more active in the O-zone than under Hartley - we actively seek to ring it around the boards to the far side many times a game, because even if there is a puck battle on the far wall, our D will usually win it because of the forward momentum.

Gully's systems sought to protect the puck in the corners and win those "50/50" battles. We weren't good at it, and our D never activated. So we sustained pressure very rarely in the O-zone. Now we often sustain pressure in the opposition's end because we activate the D. We used to let the opposition move up ice easily all the time.

We're also less "disciplined" about line changes under Peters. Under Gully, we would seek to dump it in, or even actively leave the O-zone even when we had possession, in order to get in a "disciplined" line change. It drove me nuts, and the opposition would just march up ice, all while thanking us for the puck back.

Another big O-zone change was that we didn't ever go East-West under Gully. It's a cause of turnovers and odd-man rushes, so it doesn't fit with his philosophies. However, goals are generated by breaking down defensive coverage, and an East-West game, properly managed, generates way more offence. So it's a trade-off, but one that has benefited us.

Under Gully we tried to play "mistake-free" hockey. Now we try to be better than the other team, and for the most part our systems are less complicated, more fluid, and gives the opposition fits rather than trying to simply minimize our mistakes .

[EldrickOnIce]

I say we let sleeping dog lie under the bridge

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Otto-matic

I think also Peters has a big presence in the locker room. I remember back in 17 when they clinched and dropped that video and Gully said something along the lines of "I don't come in here often" in the locker room.

Oh I remember that, something like he doesn't talk the players after the game but the day after. Couldn't figure out if that's true and just an NHL thing.

[Locke]

Gulutzan hockey was ideal for people who watched the Brent Sutter era and just couldnt withstand the constant onslaught of excitement.

[DeluxeMoustache]

One thing that drove me nuts with Gulutzan was how Smith’s puckhandling killed pace and effectiveness of breakouts. Smith holding the puck behind the net, Gio going to the left corner and Hamilton to the right. They would both wait and Smith would decide which guy he would pass it to, after which the Flames would plod up ice as a 5 man unit. Meanwhile the other team had time to set up their defensive structure, so the Flames basically too often started their rush 5 on 5.
Much quicker transition with Peters, active D and resulting creation of odd man situations, which gives skilled players more opportunity to operate.

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

Oh I remember that, something like he doesn't talk the players after the game but the day after. Couldn't figure out if that's true and just an NHL thing.

This is not uncommon by the way. There are many head coaches that don't address the team after games.

[Ryan Coke]

Greater activation of the D is the biggest change. Along with that, he holds forwards who don’t cover for a pinching D accountable, as opposed to blaming the D for taking a risk.

More aggressive forecheck.

Faster transition.

System and structure on the PK and PP.

Strong leadership and accountability.