Glen Gulutzan-16th Flames Coach

[Cowtownguy]

1 minute ago, DirtyDeeds said:

He left Chaisson on the first line way too much and way too long last season. He kept trying Brouwer with Bennett far to long when clearly they had no chemistry. There are more example but these are just 2.

I can see giving them a chance to gel. It seemed as though he was forcing it with those two matches. Chiasson was absolutely terrible with J and M. I am not sure why he did not see earlier that this would never work.

[AlbertaBoy12]

10 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

He left Chaisson on the first line way too much and way too long last season. He kept trying Brouwer with Bennett far to long when clearly they had no chemistry. There are more example but these are just 2.

Are you kidding me? Who exactly was he supposed to try in those spots? how many times is he supposed to shake up the lines? are we going to give him crap for grossman to?

 

For the record chiasson didnt get off on poor play neither did brouwer, if they got off on poor play we wouldnt have seen any changes, and we dont know what happened behind closed doors.

[DirtyDeeds]

1 minute ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Are you kidding me? Who exactly was he supposed to try in those spots? how many times is he supposed to shake up the lines? are we going to give him crap for grossman to?

 

For the record chiasson didnt get off on poor play neither did brouwer, if they got off on poor play we wouldnt have seen any changes, and we dont know what happened behind closed doors.

You know GG started the season with the stubborn idea that he wanted to just rotate lines and D pairings. He got this idea and theory from Willy from his time in Vancouver..

 

Lazy mans coaching style when you don't need/want to think of matchups.. Run with 4 lines at all costs and hope it wears them down by end of the game...

 

It cost us as much as the poor goaltending and poor 5v5 play to start the season. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

12 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

You know GG started the season with the stubborn idea that he wanted to just rotate lines and D pairings. He got this idea and theory from Willy from his time in Vancouver..

 

Lazy mans coaching style when you don't need/want to think of matchups.. Run with 4 lines at all costs and hope it wears them down by end of the game...

 

It cost us as much as the poor goaltending and poor 5v5 play to start the season. 

Well thats defiantly your opinion but alot of people around the league have talked very highly of willy, and his coaching. I dont necessarily agree with rolling 4 lines, I would have liked to see our top 4(especially this coming season) out there way more then this past one. But I think the net result is still  a good season.

[DirtyDeeds]

1 minute ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Well thats defiantly your opinion but alot of people around the league have talked very highly of willy, and his coaching. I dont necessarily agree with rolling 4 lines, I would have liked to see our top 4(especially this coming season) out there way more then this past one. But I think the net result is still  a good season.

He(Willy) was fired. He was told to change and because he didn't change much he got the boot. He refused to play his prospects and relied on his vets more than the powers wanted.

 

It is not just my lone opinion.. We saw 1st hand how rolling 4 lines or rolling 3 so called "even sets" of D can be almost useless.

[phoenix66]

6 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

He(Willy) was fired. He was told to change and because he didn't change much he got the boot. He refused to play his prospects and relied on his vets more than the powers wanted.

 

It is not just my lone opinion.. We saw 1st hand how rolling 4 lines or rolling 3 so called "even sets" of D can be almost useless.

 This is the key .."so called"....  it was no secret if you wanted to have success against Calgary , you needed to keep your best players away from Gio/Hamilton--  get your best D against Johnnys line ands to a degree, Backlunds line

All our 4th line was going to do was create disruption 

In terms of D?  good luck trying to figure out a matchup now

 

 

i don't think it's coincidence that once he lost GG and Sullivan Willie was basically useless ..makes me wonder who was making who look good. Willie used to work for GG remember. Vancouver's last playoff was when all 3 were there together.

 

It also comes down to personnel..  Sullivan has shown what happens when you deploy the system with the horses to run it.. 2 straight cups.. he also didnt have the D we have now, but he was able to run it despite that fact because of the system 

GG, got the team into the system , determined what pieces don't fit. and BT is going out to get them for him . for what he had, he got some good results . Now he has more to work with 

 

 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:

He(Willy) was fired. He was told to change and because he didn't change much he got the boot. He refused to play his prospects and relied on his vets more than the powers wanted.

 

It is not just my lone opinion.. We saw 1st hand how rolling 4 lines or rolling 3 so called "even sets" of D can be almost useless.

I think it comes down to having the talent to do certain things on the ice. Then the pressure comes to just win and it seem ideals go out the window.

[rickross]

Jury is still out on GG but one coach I wouldn't mind adding is Dave Tippett.. He plays a responsible 2 way game, I'd prefer him over Cameron although I doubt he'd take anything less than HC position. I don't like how the Flames have already been touted as a top D in the league...it's almost a jinx for our D to underperform! Hamonic will be under the microscope so I hope he's able to deliver under pressure. With so many RHS D men we should see a more balanced PP and offensive zone presence. We shall see, I'm still not convinced we have the right coaching staff to maximize our D core , here's hoping they prove me wrong. 

[JustAFlamer]

yeah, i am hoping for more next season as well.  and not just from the players, but from the coaching staff as well.

 

i understand, system & structure is fine.  Is vast improvement. 

However the inflexibility and stuborness on certain things drove me as nuts as the inability to change up/juggle significantly

(which really showed in playoffs where even the ducks were changing things up when up 3-0 in series, but best we could do was swap a couple 4th liners)

 

really really hoping was simply case of limited resources and options, and familiarity building between staff and players last year as opposed to anything we can expect moving forward throughout season and (knock on wood) playoffs next year.  Playoffs is where it really sticks out.

[JTech780]

For me this coaching staff is the least of my worries going into the season.

 

GG showed to be a very good coach, finishing 6th in coach of the year voting. This team was effective at limiting scoring shots and high danger scoring chances. A lot of this teams struggles comes down to inconsistent goaltending, an area that I think has been greatly improved. 

 

Cameron ran a top 10 PP.

[rickross]

1 minute ago, JTech780 said:

For me this catching staff is the least of my worries going into the season.

 

GG showed to be a very good coach, finishing 6th in coach of the year voting. This team was effective at limiting scoring shots and high danger scoring chances. A lot of this teams struggles comes down to inconsistent goaltending, an area that I think has been greatly improved. 

 

Cameron ran a top 10 PP.

I think the question is if GG is the coach that we can win it all with. I think GG did a good job in his 1st year but I'm really reserving judgement for how he handles his 2nd year, especially with such a stout defence. My knocks against him are few but the ones that stood out was the unpreparedness of the team at the start of the season and in the playoffs the team just seemed to become unhinged. Not that uncommon for a coach in his 1st year with a fairly young team but I'll be watching how consistent the team plays game after game. 

[JTech780]

3 minutes ago, rickross said:

I think the question is if GG is the coach that we can win it all with. I think GG did a good job in his 1st year but I'm really reserving judgement for how he handles his 2nd year, especially with such a stout defence. My knocks against him are few but the ones that stood out was the unpreparedness of the team at the start of the season and in the playoffs the team just seemed to become unhinged. Not that uncommon for a coach in his 1st year with a fairly young team but I'll be watching how consistent the team plays game after game. 

 

The start of the season struggles are pretty easily explained, by not having Monahan, Giordano and Backlund for most of training camp.

 

I thought the team battled well in the playoffs, but they couldn't get a timely save from Elliott.

[cross16]

I'm not worried about the coaching staff necessarily, but I will put some pressure on them. 5 on 5 scoring was a weakness for them last year. IMO it's the biggest reason they lost to Anaheim and it was easily their biggest Achilles heel last year. No team in the league relied more on their PP than the Flames last year and while I think they will have a good one again, its VERY difficult to replicate that type of success (over 30% for much of the season) so you need more scoring 5 on 5. 

 

I think the Flames do a poor job of creating chances. They are one of the betters teams, via Corsi, of controlling the puck one of the top teams in terms of shots for, but are near the bottom in terms of scoring chances and high danger chances. They are also at the bottom in terms of the avg distance away from the net their shots are from. Long story short, they take a lot of low quality shots but generate few chances. I think this is a system issue because the Flames in the offensive zone spend too much time cycling the puck around and trying to pass to create perfect shots and they lack a consistent slot area presence. I think this year the coaching staff has to get them to drive the net more, get more consistent presence in the slot, and adjust things so it is not so possession based and rather is more about how to create the most quality scoring chances. 

[cross16]

Normally don't like Kent Wilson but this is a good read. Especially if anyone wants to question Gulutzan's line matching or deployment strategy. 

 

 

[travel_dude]

19 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Normally don't like Kent Wilson but this is a good read. Especially if anyone wants to question Gulutzan's line matching or deployment strategy. 

 

 

A couple of things that I took from it:

1) Bart's positive impact may only ever be the eye test, since the numbers do not back it up

2) Brouwer was not a good match with Bennett

3) Can't just roll 4 lines at will and expect to win; need to match defenders and forwards as a unit

 

I do give GG some credit in recognizing what was not working at times.  We have moved on from two players that had less than ideal numbers.  Having a true top 4 helps in putting out 5 man units.  I would like to see him take a hard look at PP and PK, even though they did a lot better to end the season.  And, I believe you also talked about 5v5 play needing to do more than just pass around the puck.  Can't remember the last time I saw a one-timer from the circle.       

[MAC331]

44 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Normally don't like Kent Wilson but this is a good read. Especially if anyone wants to question Gulutzan's line matching or deployment strategy. 

 

 

I found that very interesting. I have already changed my mind about putting Brouwer with Backlund and Frolik regardless of the money he is making. I would still like to see Tkachuk playing with Bennett and Lazar so I would put Versteeg with Backlund and Frolik.

[MAC331]

23 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

A couple of things that I took from it:

1) Bart's positive impact may only ever be the eye test, since the numbers do not back it up

2) Brouwer was not a good match with Bennett

3) Can't just roll 4 lines at will and expect to win; need to match defenders and forwards as a unit

 

I do give GG some credit in recognizing what was not working at times.  We have moved on from two players that had less than ideal numbers.  Having a true top 4 helps in putting out 5 man units.  I would like to see him take a hard look at PP and PK, even though they did a lot better to end the season.  And, I believe you also talked about 5v5 play needing to do more than just pass around the puck.  Can't remember the last time I saw a one-timer from the circle.       

I forget which analyst it was descripting SJS approach in the offensive zone being like a funnel from the points in towards the goal with the defensemen doing most of the shooting and the 3 forward strategically zoning the front of the net. We have the defensemen to do this and had some success in 2015 with this approach, time to do it again. More shooting and less fancy dancing with the puck by our forwards. Quality shots and quality rebounds = GOALS

[rickross]

6 hours ago, cross16 said:

I'm not worried about the coaching staff necessarily, but I will put some pressure on them. 5 on 5 scoring was a weakness for them last year. IMO it's the biggest reason they lost to Anaheim and it was easily their biggest Achilles heel last year. No team in the league relied more on their PP than the Flames last year and while I think they will have a good one again, its VERY difficult to replicate that type of success (over 30% for much of the season) so you need more scoring 5 on 5. 

 

I think the Flames do a poor job of creating chances. They are one of the betters teams, via Corsi, of controlling the puck one of the top teams in terms of shots for, but are near the bottom in terms of scoring chances and high danger chances. They are also at the bottom in terms of the avg distance away from the net their shots are from. Long story short, they take a lot of low quality shots but generate few chances. I think this is a system issue because the Flames in the offensive zone spend too much time cycling the puck around and trying to pass to create perfect shots and they lack a consistent slot area presence. I think this year the coaching staff has to get them to drive the net more, get more consistent presence in the slot, and adjust things so it is not so possession based and rather is more about how to create the most quality scoring chances. 

Truth. I noticed the exact same thing, the Flames are relatively ineffective when it comes to high scoring chances. They were a relatively predictable team in the O-zone, relied heavily on low percentage shots from the point too often. At times they did display some nice puck movement but more often then not they overpassed, over thought and forced a lot of telegraphed plays. 

[MAC331]

13 hours ago, cross16 said:

Normally don't like Kent Wilson but this is a good read. Especially if anyone wants to question Gulutzan's line matching or deployment strategy. 

 

 

This article explains a lot of situations which make good sense. Although I know he is correct about Brouwer I cringe at the thought of 4.5M to play on our 4th line. I hope he comes in with a great attitude if that is where he ends up. I think using Versteeg on LW (which he likes apparently) with Backlund and Frolik should give us very experienced line to play against the opposition's best and still provide scoring.

[travel_dude]

6 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

This article explains a lot of situations which make good sense. Although I know he is correct about Brouwer I cringe at the thought of 4.5M to play on our 4th line. I hope he comes in with a great attitude if that is where he ends up. I think using Versteeg on LW (which he likes apparently) with Backlund and Frolik should give us very experienced line to play against the opposition's best and still provide scoring.

 

And the biggest trap we can fall into is playing a guy making 4.5m higher in the depth chart than he deserves or seems to be capable of.

Maybe we just bite the bullet and buy out Stajan when the next window opens to save dollars on the 4th line.  GIve Brouwer some younger players.

Sacrifice a decent center to save money to pay Brouwer to play on the 4th.  Yikes.  

 

There's always a chance Brouwer can rebound, but he should have adjusted to the team by March. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

Just now, travel_dude said:

 

There's always a chance Brouwer can rebound, but he should have adjusted to the team by March. 

You never know the first season with a team can be rough. Im not saying I disagree with you but heres hoping he bounces back into next season, maybe the pressure of the contract got to him or who knows. 

[MAC331]

27 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

You never know the first season with a team can be rough. Im not saying I disagree with you but heres hoping he bounces back into next season, maybe the pressure of the contract got to him or who knows. 

I see one saving possibility and that is playing with Backlund and Frolik, they should all be able to be on the same page with their collective experience. This would be my preference. In taking the Kent Wilson article into account as a team we need to fine tune GG's system and get all our lines creating better quality shots and scoring opportunities. Let's not take away the good things Brouwer does and he can be effective with a presence in front of the net.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I see one saving possibility and that is playing with Backlund and Frolik, they should all be able to be on the same page with their collective experience. This would be my preference. In taking the Kent Wilson article into account as a team we need to fine tune GG's system and get all our lines creating better quality shots and scoring opportunities. Let's not take away the good things Brouwer does and he can be effective with a presence in front of the net.

Well GG did end up simplify things last season because the team was struggling maybe he goes a bit deeper this season and we see those things happen if we dont im not sure the flames have more success. But id like to think he will go deeper and things will be good.

[cross16]

There is alot of evidence to suggest Brouwer had a down year and should bounce back. He is litterally down in just about every cateogry you can think of, not just raw numbers like goals and assists, but he dropped in almost everything else. Shooting percentage was up, but shots were way down, Individual corsi and Fenwick were down a lot and his impact on his line mates was way down. While he wasn't a very good possession player in St Louis, he also wasn't an anchor so while I still think the deal was and is terrible, he definetly had a down year.

 

Sticking Brouwer on the 4th line to start makes no sense to me. Sure if he winds up back there fine but like it or not he is here and isn't going anywhere as his contract is not trade able so you might as well try to maximize which is why i favor him with Frolik and Backlund to start. He can control he middle of the ice in the O-zone and those two are so good at driving possession that i'm not sure even Brouwer can drag them down. 

[MAC331]

12 minutes ago, cross16 said:

There is alot of evidence to suggest Brouwer had a down year and should bounce back. He is litterally down in just about every cateogry you can think of, not just raw numbers like goals and assists, but he dropped in almost everything else. Shooting percentage was up, but shots were way down, Individual corsi and Fenwick were down a lot and his impact on his line mates was way down. While he wasn't a very good possession player in St Louis, he also wasn't an anchor so while I still think the deal was and is terrible, he definetly had a down year.

 

Sticking Brouwer on the 4th line to start makes no sense to me. Sure if he winds up back there fine but like it or not he is here and isn't going anywhere as his contract is not trade able so you might as well try to maximize which is why i favor him with Frolik and Backlund to start. He can control he middle of the ice in the O-zone and those two are so good at driving possession that i'm not sure even Brouwer can drag them down. 

I tend to agree with you.