Glen Gulutzan-16th Flames Coach

[Fins&FIre15]

The thing that keeps bothering me the most is how often we hear "Our team needed a better effort" or "We have to clean up areas of our game".

 

Not sure if that falls on the coach or players, but under Hartley we were one of the hardest, best forechecking teams in the league. I'm not saying I prefer Hartley as a coach, but I just wonder where that drive and effort went.

 

The turnovers have to stop, that's on the players. If it doesn't cool down soon we should really look at moving some of our D for players who are less likely to do so.

[travel_dude]

37 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I am not so sure it was as ugly as you like to make out either for one game. I don't like what is going on with Tkachuk on that line this year and it wouldn't bother me at all to have a primary chequing line that involved Frolik, Backland and Brouwer.

I really could careless what the repercussions are if Versteeg was gone and we could get on with other players.

 

For all his warts, Versteeg is one of the few players that can play up and down the lineup.  I'm not his biggest fan this year, and a lot of time he looks lazy out there.  A lot of times he's a knob on the PP.  But, he's still better than Freddie and has more impact than Stajan or Lazar.

 

Going from the 3M line to a line with 2M and Brouwer would be a huge downgrade.  He's looked good on some of the PK's because he doesn't have to skate up the ice.  That doesn't translate to a checking winger.  You said yourself that you hate to see players acting like goalies, which Brouwer does on his 5v3 PK work.  It can be very effective.

 

I easily see Bennett as a better defensive winger than Brouwer.  

[MAC331]

54 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

For all his warts, Versteeg is one of the few players that can play up and down the lineup.  I'm not his biggest fan this year, and a lot of time he looks lazy out there.  A lot of times he's a knob on the PP.  But, he's still better than Freddie and has more impact than Stajan or Lazar.

 

Going from the 3M line to a line with 2M and Brouwer would be a huge downgrade.  He's looked good on some of the PK's because he doesn't have to skate up the ice.  That doesn't translate to a checking winger.  You said yourself that you hate to see players acting like goalies, which Brouwer does on his 5v3 PK work.  It can be very effective.

 

I easily see Bennett as a better defensive winger than Brouwer.  

Brouwer has been a premier checking winger his entire career so don't give me the BS he couldn't handle playing with Frolik and Backlund. Why would we even want Bennett to become a defensive forward limiting him, are we not trying to achieve a set up that maximizes his talent. I see putting him with Backlund and Frolik as more of the same mistreatment.

[cccsberg]

6 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Who said anything about putting Bennett with Gaudreau? That could be an option but it's not like it's the only one.

 

And how is it that our top two lines are working so well? Frolik has 1 5 on 5 goal this season, Tkachuk has 3. In the last 6 games basically all of the offence from this team has come from either the top line or the PP and on the season the Flames are still a bottom 10 team 5 on 5 in terms of goals for. Sorry, I don't agree at all the top 6 is working and can't be tinkered with, this teams needs more offence. I get the 2nd line has great analytics but their production is only OK so I don't agree with the notion that you can't mess with the 3M line. 

 

I"m not saying you have to give Bennett first line time, obviously that line is working but what about Benentt with Backlund and Frolik? What about Tkachuk - Backs - Bennett? What about some PP time? What about some double shifting of Gaureau or double shift Bennett on that top line with Ferland once in a while. There are plenty of options you can do and it doesn't require breaking up the top line. 

 

I get the past is the past but the frustration comes more from the lack of opportunities the Flmaes have given Bennett int he past as opposed to right now. Michael Ferland was gifted a role on the top line, Bennett never was. He had great success with Backs- Frolik and then was taken off the line and Tkachuk was gifted that spot. Talented player, with little PP time given. It is what it is, but the Flames have blown several chances to give Bennett more of an opportunity which is what started my original thought. Seems to me there is no plan in place to help develop Bennett and that's upsetting because if they did they would have a better team IMO

Cross, you're completely ignoring my point.  If Bennett is elevated, someone else is dropped down.  You mention Tkachuk, and if Bennett stayed with Backlund then Tkachuk would have been bottom6 last year and probably not as far advanced as he is.  So as far as development goes, why isn't Jankowski with Backs, or Gaudreau?  Wouldn't he likely be further advanced?  Why isn't Brouwer with Gaudreau, wouldn't he be further ahead?  The focus on Bennett implies that he is something special, and the only thing special so far is his high draft pedigree.  His play on the ice has not proved special, with any partners.  He is in a good situation right now so let's see how he does.  If he still flounders it'll be telling that perhaps he is what he is.

[DirtyDeeds]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

For all his warts, Versteeg is one of the few players that can play up and down the lineup.  I'm not his biggest fan this year, and a lot of time he looks lazy out there.  A lot of times he's a knob on the PP.  But, he's still better than Freddie and has more impact than Stajan or Lazar.

 

Going from the 3M line to a line with 2M and Brouwer would be a huge downgrade.  He's looked good on some of the PK's because he doesn't have to skate up the ice.  That doesn't translate to a checking winger.  You said yourself that you hate to see players acting like goalies, which Brouwer does on his 5v3 PK work.  It can be very effective.

 

I easily see Bennett as a better defensive winger than Brouwer.  

Maybe too small a sample but our pp went 0 for 3 without Versteeg.  To make it worse we did not even register 1 shot for those 3 pp's.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

The thing that keeps bothering me the most is how often we hear "Our team needed a better effort" or "We have to clean up areas of our game".

 

Not sure if that falls on the coach or players, but under Hartley we were one of the hardest, best forechecking teams in the league. I'm not saying I prefer Hartley as a coach, but I just wonder where that drive and effort went.

 

The turnovers have to stop, that's on the players. If it doesn't cool down soon we should really look at moving some of our D for players who are less likely to do so.

Were we really one of the best fore checking teams back then ? I don't know maybe Stajan, Bouma and Jones were faster and harder on the puck than this group. Ferland has a renewed focus and isn't running all over hitting everything in site. Who else do we have as a checking force on today's team ? Our 4th line isVersteeg, Lazar/Stajan/Hamilton and Brouwer none of which are heavy hitters. If you want that style from part of your

team then we need to change some horses.

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Maybe too small a sample but our pp went 0 for 3 without Versteeg.  To make it worse we did not even register 1 shot for those 3 pp's.

Not that I like hearing that a team's play suffers first game back from a road trip however I have heard enough ex-players say it does and our all round effort wasn't great last night.

[cccsberg]

5 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Spot on.  Alluded to this int the Lines and Pairings thread.  Is good possession a winning strategy?  Only if it's combined with good defense and scoring enough.  What is the benefit of turning Tkachuk into a defensive player, when scoring is also required.  

 

I also think the idea of power vs power only gets you so far.  Monahan versus Matthews.  Yeah, we shut down his line.  Then again, his line shut down ours.  Our only consistent scoring line.  Last change should be an advantage.  

 

Leave the top line the way it is.  It's working better than any other year.  Johnny is actually playing a lot better without the puck.  Ferland can create turnovers.  Great.  Fix the 3rd line.  A struggling Bennett shuts down an effective Janko and/or Jagr.  Give those guys a consistent 100 foot player; Tkachuk or Frolik.

The one thing I agree with is trying Tkachuk as the LW with Jankowski and Jagr.  That would put Bennett up with Backlund, where he has done well previously.  It would be his last chance....

[cccsberg]

17 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Brouwer has been a premier checking winger his entire career so don't give me the BS he couldn't handle playing with Frolik and Backlund. Why would we even want Bennett to become a defensive forward limiting him, are we not trying to achieve a set up that maximizes his talent. I see putting him with Backlund and Frolik as more of the same mistreatment.

Putting Bennett with Backlund and Frolik is "more of the same mistreatment"?  You're thinking is totally screwed....  Last year that line WAS our top line and scored quite well, with Tkachuk.  This Bennett love is getting old, like he's some sort of diva or something.  The kid tries hard but isn't getting the job done.  Period.  Stop making excuses for him.  This is a team game and if he is unable to contribute he should be dumped.  

[phoenix66]

4 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

The one thing I agree with is trying Tkachuk as the LW with Jankowski and Jagr.  That would put Bennett up with Backlund, where he has done well previously.  It would be his last chance....

They were actually talking about that on the Fan today .. could be a win win ..Tkachuk could spark that line, and Bennett could be back to the only place hes ever been productive.

What Im interested in seeing is if they pair Hathaway back with Jankowski while hes up .. they already have chemistry , Jagt likely out for at least another game anyway so that RW is open .. then it becomes a question of where to play Jagr if Hathaway sticks.. could be the start of a much more effective 4th line 

[MAC331]

16 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Putting Bennett with Backlund and Frolik is "more of the same mistreatment"?  You're thinking is totally screwed....  Last year that line WAS our top line and scored quite well, with Tkachuk.  This Bennett love is getting old, like he's some sort of diva or something.  The kid tries hard but isn't getting the job done.  Period.  Stop making excuses for him.  This is a team game and if he is unable to contribute he should be dumped.  

Who is making excuses for him not me. I said leave him alone where he is now on LW. You are the one writing entire books about the situation.

[conundrumed]

1. Rittich backup, waive Lack.

2. Maybe Hathaway deserved to be on the team from the outset...just like Jankowski.

Before I have to listen to, "but we need scoring, not Hathaway".

Brouwer's 5 assists, Bennett's 4 pts, Stajan's 0 pts,

Hathaway's only got to get a mm off of the ground to meet that bar.

[conundrumed]

Bennett-Jankowski-Hathaway

[tmac70]

6 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I did , that doesn't sound like me. I get that you don't like this coach or how the team is not the same team from a few years back. Maybe you need to catch up.

I could provide the dialogue but glad your over it. So in your divine wisdom enlighten us how GG has moved us leaps and bounds ahead of our competitors. Hey you like his coaching great, I do not see the advantage he brings. Babcock, Green, Gallant, Quenville, Yeo they make a difference behind the bench, can`t say that about GG. The sad fact is with out Smith not sure how anyone's opinion of GG would be any different.

 

Curious how does this team play

 

 

[tmac70]

6 hours ago, MAC331 said:

So you want a different brand of hockey altogether which explains why you find fault and complain consistently about this team.

 So yes I would like to would most gladly love to view more consistent form of hockey, Especially having 95% of the same roster, same coach an his divine systems,( they must be a secret cause nobody understand or has seen them). Oh but wait we all wanted better goal tending we got spectacular goal tending this year. I believe you mentioned we are 4 points out of 1st in our division that`s spectacular, We are also 4 points out of 27th as well.

[MAC331]

14 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

I could provide the dialogue but glad your over it. So in your divine wisdom enlighten us how GG has moved us leaps and bounds ahead of our competitors. Hey you like his coaching great, I do not see the advantage he brings. Babcock, Green, Gallant, Quenville, Yeo they make a difference behind the bench, can`t say that about GG. The sad fact is with out Smith not sure how anyone's opinion of GG would be any different.

 

Curious how does this team play

 

 

Honest assessment is this team plays soft because that is the type of players we have currently. I think GG is doing fine with what he has, but I don't think he even like what he has been handed by BT. This is why you hear him mentioning the lack of compete from this group. You seem to believe the coach can turn a magic switch to pump motivation into them and all would be good, sorry doesn't work that way.

I don't think you and I are far off wanting the same from the players but I don't think it is the coaching. Systems are system as players you are suppose to execute them. This team needs to get some aggressive players on the ice.

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

 So yes I would like to would most gladly love to view more consistent form of hockey, Especially having 95% of the same roster, same coach an his divine systems,( they must be a secret cause nobody understand or has seen them). Oh but wait we all wanted better goal tending we got spectacular goal tending this year. I believe you mentioned we are 4 points out of 1st in our division that`s spectacular, We are also 4 points out of 27th as well.

No I said we are only 4 wins behind teams with the most wins. I'm not even sure what your last statement means.

Anyways keep complaining until we start playing some better hockey, we certainly haven't seen the best yet.

[robrob74]

7 hours ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

The thing that keeps bothering me the most is how often we hear "Our team needed a better effort" or "We have to clean up areas of our game".

 

Not sure if that falls on the coach or players, but under Hartley we were one of the hardest, best forechecking teams in the league. I'm not saying I prefer Hartley as a coach, but I just wonder where that drive and effort went.

 

The turnovers have to stop, that's on the players. If it doesn't cool down soon we should really look at moving some of our D for players who are less likely to do so.

 

I remember being extremely frustrated with Hartleys teams. They were extremely hemmed in to start games for the first period and then they’d counter attack a lot. As exciting as comebacks and stretch passes were, and the freedom of the D to pinch was, we still got outplayed a lot. I remember being frustrated often, but still happy with the efforts because of the talent level and youth. 

[MAC331]

16 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

For all his warts, Versteeg is one of the few players that can play up and down the lineup.  I'm not his biggest fan this year, and a lot of time he looks lazy out there.  A lot of times he's a knob on the PP.  But, he's still better than Freddie and has more impact than Stajan or Lazar.

 

Going from the 3M line to a line with 2M and Brouwer would be a huge downgrade.  He's looked good on some of the PK's because he doesn't have to skate up the ice.  That doesn't translate to a checking winger.  You said yourself that you hate to see players acting like goalies, which Brouwer does on his 5v3 PK work.  It can be very effective.

 

I easily see Bennett as a better defensive winger than Brouwer.  

I have to admit if they moved Tkachuk off the 3M line Versteeg would be the better player to move up. I wouldn't mid seeing a line of Bennett, Jankowski and Tkachuk on RW.

Now all BT has to do is get rid of Jagr and Brouwer.

[Fins&FIre15]

20 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Were we really one of the best fore checking teams back then ? I don't know maybe Stajan, Bouma and Jones were faster and harder on the puck than this group. Ferland has a renewed focus and isn't running all over hitting everything in site. Who else do we have as a checking force on today's team ? Our 4th line isVersteeg, Lazar/Stajan/Hamilton and Brouwer none of which are heavy hitters. If you want that style from part of your

team then we need to change some horses.

 

At the time (due to us not being good for a while), I think we were surprising teams on how fast we got on them, so I would argue one of the best (again, at that time). I also think its pretty obvious at this point that we indeed need to change some horses.

 

Look at Anaheim, I think they swung a heck of a deal today, and with the return of their big players, that is going to be a very deep forward group.

 

I think what got lost in my post is the effort, it just isn't there from over half of the roster and is increasingly frustrating to watch, then we have our coach repeat the same drivel (I'm a GG supporter btw) about how we need to fix things. I really want to see this team take off, but I don't know if this current group can do it if they don't want to show up.

 

14 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I remember being extremely frustrated with Hartleys teams. They were extremely hemmed in to start games for the first period and then they’d counter attack a lot. As exciting as comebacks and stretch passes were, and the freedom of the D to pinch was, we still got outplayed a lot. I remember being frustrated often, but still happy with the efforts because of the talent level and youth. 

 

Thanks for reminding me, I did actually forget about Hartleys defense systems for a second. You are definitely right about it though, bottom feeders would look like Stanley Cup contenders the way we use to run around in our own zone.

 

The point I failed to make was just the effort from our players between the two coaches, hartley rarely had to tell the media that we got out battled. Like you said, the losses were frustrating, but as a fan I didn't have to question if my team was leaving it all on the ice after a game, like I feel I do now.

 

Maybe thats just heightened expectations, but I still want to believe this group can accomplish something special, we keep getting outclassed by the better teams in the league though and we need to hit that next step if were going to contend. (Sorry, that sentence is worded horribly).

[MAC331]

20 minutes ago, Fins&FIre15 said:

 

At the time (due to us not being good for a while), I think we were surprising teams on how fast we got on them, so I would argue one of the best (again, at that time). I also think its pretty obvious at this point that we indeed need to change some horses.

 

Look at Anaheim, I think they swung a heck of a deal today, and with the return of their big players, that is going to be a very deep forward group.

 

I think what got lost in my post is the effort, it just isn't there from over half of the roster and is increasingly frustrating to watch, then we have our coach repeat the same drivel (I'm a GG supporter btw) about how we need to fix things. I really want to see this team take off, but I don't know if this current group can do it if they don't want to show up.

 

 

Thanks for reminding me, I did actually forget about Hartleys defense systems for a second. You are definitely right about it though, bottom feeders would look like Stanley Cup contenders the way we use to run around in our own zone.

 

The point I failed to make was just the effort from our players between the two coaches, hartley rarely had to tell the media that we got out battled. Like you said, the losses were frustrating, but as a fan I didn't have to question if my team was leaving it all on the ice after a game, like I feel I do now.

 

Maybe thats just heightened expectations, but I still want to believe this group can accomplish something special, we keep getting outclassed by the better teams in the league though and we need to hit that next step if were going to contend. (Sorry, that sentence is worded horribly).

Who is it you don't think is showing up ? I can tell you my disappointments for this season so far are Versteeg ad Hamilton from a pure lack of effort. Brouwer seems to have accepted where he is at on this team and has played well. I would say some of our lack of success has been more from Backlund's line being average and fumbling with a 3rd line that is breaking in a rookie C, a newly placed Bennett and an out of shape Jagr. This does not make for a well oiled machine yet and maybe ever will this season.

[Thebrewcrew]

I know there's lots of people out there fed up with Gulutzan. He's only our coach because ownership went frugal when BT went through the interview process. We had an opportunity to have a very good coach in both Boudreau and Yeo yet we didn't offer enough. You can say what you want about how our arena situation might have scared candidates away but don't think for a second Bourdreau wouldn't have loved to take the job and stick it in Anaheim's face... Heck even Yeo took a position as Associate Coach with the Blues instead of coming here. 

 

Trotz is in the last year of his deal with WSH and I'd be surprised if he is brought back. I'd be very interested in him, but once again I can't see ownership stepping up and paying him. Quenneville's leash may be getting shorter in Chicago especially if they miss the playoffs.

 

This is an ownership issue as much as anything, Look at TOR they badly wanted Babcock to guide them through the rebuild and they had to pay for it. High end coaches don't come cheap.

[rickross]

7 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I know there's lots of people out there fed up with Gulutzan. He's only our coach because ownership went frugal when BT went through the interview process. We had an opportunity to have a very good coach in both Boudreau and Yeo yet we didn't offer enough. You can say what you want about how our arena situation might have scared candidates away but don't think for a second Bourdreau wouldn't have loved to take the job and stick it in Anaheim's face... Heck even Yeo took a position as Associate Coach with the Blues instead of coming here. 

 

Trotz is in the last year of his deal with WSH and I'd be surprised if he is brought back. I'd be very interested in him, but once again I can't see ownership stepping up and paying him. Quenneville's leash may be getting shorter in Chicago especially if they miss the playoffs.

 

This is an ownership issue as much as anything, Look at TOR they badly wanted Babcock to guide them through the rebuild and they had to pay for it. High end coaches don't come cheap.

Consistently inconsistent is what the Flames have been. My problem with GG is that he's failed to develop and instill a strong identity in the Flames. Sure we've improved statistically in some categories but WHO is this team? With Gulutzan it's been a guessing game of which team shows up on any given day. Seriously, consider where this team would be without Mike Smith this season. This team depends on J.Gaudreau for 50% of its offence. Some of the onus falls on the players of course but a good coach should evoke their players to heighten their game.  Even Bob Hartley got career years out of his players and successfully instilled a "hardest working team" identity. 

 

There are some really good things GG has done with this team , overall possession and PP for example have improved. I can't blame him for the lack of quality goaltending we've had but he is responsible for the play in front of the net. I think we may have already seen this team reach its ceiling under GG. He's not a bad coach but in reality the Flames have capped out as no more than a slightly above average team at best

[travel_dude]

I am yet to understand what identity the coach has instilled in this team.  Strong possession team that gives up 40 shots?  Hard hitting team that shies away from hits?

Mobile defense that can't get back or can't even get the puck out of the zone?

 

The corsi looks good even when we lose.  The goals scored on us are usually gaffes that lead to it or another team that know where to shoot on Smith.  The PP goes from dreadful to redhot to dreadful.  The PK is 2nd worst in the league.  

 

We have good players that are not playing like they should be.  Our defense looks fragile most nights.  

 

[MAC331]

10 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I know there's lots of people out there fed up with Gulutzan. He's only our coach because ownership went frugal when BT went through the interview process. We had an opportunity to have a very good coach in both Boudreau and Yeo yet we didn't offer enough. You can say what you want about how our arena situation might have scared candidates away but don't think for a second Bourdreau wouldn't have loved to take the job and stick it in Anaheim's face... Heck even Yeo took a position as Associate Coach with the Blues instead of coming here. 

 

Trotz is in the last year of his deal with WSH and I'd be surprised if he is brought back. I'd be very interested in him, but once again I can't see ownership stepping up and paying him. Quenneville's leash may be getting shorter in Chicago especially if they miss the playoffs.

 

This is an ownership issue as much as anything, Look at TOR they badly wanted Babcock to guide them through the rebuild and they had to pay for it. High end coaches don't come cheap.

Now you are just making things up you know nothing about.