Glen Gulutzan-16th Flames Coach

[The_People1]

A coach has two main jobs,

 

1. Establish the team's X's and O's.

 

I really like our X's and O's.  We have dominated puck possession and we need to play this way to win.  We just lack finish.

 

2. Squeeze the most out of each player.

 

This is the only area I will say GG is average because he has some under achievers on the team and he can't get them going. 

 

GG does have certain players playing well like Gaudreau, Monahan, Ferland, Backlund, etc. Yet, Bennett struggled, Brouwer, Stajan, Lazar, etc aren't productive (but that's more BT's fault). Basically we've gotten very little production out of our bottom 6.  GG needs to figure it out soon, or BT needs to fix the roster fast.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

A coach has two main jobs,

 

1. Establish the team's X's and O's.

 

I really like our X's and O's.  We have dominated puck possession and we need to play this way to win.  We just lack finish.

 

2. Squeeze the most out of each player.

 

This is the only area I will say GG is average because he has some under achievers on the team and he can't get them going. 

 

GG does have certain players playing well like Gaudreau, Monahan, Ferland, Backlund, etc. Yet, Bennett struggled, Brouwer, Stajan, Lazar, etc aren't productive (but that's more BT's fault). Basically we've gotten very little production out of our bottom 6.  GG needs to figure it out soon, or BT needs to fix the roster fast.

 

The X's and O's are a bit of an issue because they are stiffling offence.  Call it lack of finish or lack of overall plan when you have possession.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

The X's and O's are a bit of an issue because they are stiffling offence.  Call it lack of finish or lack of overall plan when you have possession.

 

Or is it stifling creativity? We do have a few skilled guys on the team that have creativity.

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Or is it stifling creativity? We do have a few skilled guys on the team that have creativity.

 

It's both.  We have guys that can fly, but we don't see it because of the way breakouts are structured.  We have guys that can shoot, but they aren't able to be set up to use it.  The PP is a perfect example.  No big shot that creates rebounds.  Brodie doesn't have it.  JH should be setting up cross-crease passes for easy tap ins, but we use that forward as a screen.  When they use Janko on the point, he gets the shot gets through, but he's on his off-wing and the passes are in his feet or he has to retrieve it.   

 

Brodie and Johnny perform the exact same function as a QB.  It doesn't work.  Would rather have a slow D-man with a heavy shot than Brodie's infuriating skating back and forth.  Excess of LHS, so why not put a 4th F on the point that is a LW.  Example is JH-Monahan-Ferland-Janko-Stone.

Or just go with the 2D; JH-Monahan-Ferland-Gio-Stone.  2nd unit is Bennett-Backlund-Tkachuk-Brodie-Hamilton. 

[robrob74]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's both.  We have guys that can fly, but we don't see it because of the way breakouts are structured.  We have guys that can shoot, but they aren't able to be set up to use it.  The PP is a perfect example.  No big shot that creates rebounds.  Brodie doesn't have it.  JH should be setting up cross-crease passes for easy tap ins, but we use that forward as a screen.  When they use Janko on the point, he gets the shot gets through, but he's on his off-wing and the passes are in his feet or he has to retrieve it.   

 

Brodie and Johnny perform the exact same function as a QB.  It doesn't work.  Would rather have a slow D-man with a heavy shot than Brodie's infuriating skating back and forth.  Excess of LHS, so why not put a 4th F on the point that is a LW.  Example is JH-Monahan-Ferland-Janko-Stone.

Or just go with the 2D; JH-Monahan-Ferland-Gio-Stone.  2nd unit is Bennett-Backlund-Tkachuk-Brodie-Hamilton. 

 

I think you’re right. 

I listen a lot on the radio, so I can only visualize what Loubardias is saying and his partner. To me, it sounds a lot less possessive of the puck than advanced stats say. 

 

Plus, even last nights game, Smith kept us in, even though it sounds like he let in a few squeakers... 

 

I like your ideas. I feel like Bennett should be on the PP as well. We expect offence and confidence, but don’t have him on the ice during the best offensive times in a game.

[MAC331]

20 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think you’re right. 

I listen a lot on the radio, so I can only visualize what Loubardias is saying and his partner. To me, it sounds a lot less possessive of the puck than advanced stats say. 

 

Plus, even last nights game, Smith kept us in, even though it sounds like he let in a few squeakers... 

 

I like your ideas. I feel like Bennett should be on the PP as well. We expect offence and confidence, but don’t have him on the ice during the best offensive times in a game.

I feel for these Goalies with all this equipment on, they feel like they have certain pucks and know they are somewhere under them then they trickle in. On the winning goal you almost got the feeling the ref wanted to blow it down but didn't fast enough. Groaner

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I feel for these Goalies with all this equipment on, they feel like they have certain pucks and know they are somewhere under them then they trickle in. On the winning goal you almost got the feeling the ref wanted to blow it down but didn't fast enough. Groaner

 

They seem to be changing the way a goal is called.  Puck had intent on crossing the line.  It's still moving, so unless it's the end of the period or the net is off, trickling pucks will be counted.  The puck is alive.

 

Not a great goal, but it wasn't called off, so it's always going to count.  The ref can say anything about intent to blow when he talks to the war room. 

[robrob74]

15 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I feel for these Goalies with all this equipment on, they feel like they have certain pucks and know they are somewhere under them then they trickle in. On the winning goal you almost got the feeling the ref wanted to blow it down but didn't fast enough. Groaner

 

Crappy! 

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I feel for these Goalies with all this equipment on, they feel like they have certain pucks and know they are somewhere under them then they trickle in. On the winning goal you almost got the feeling the ref wanted to blow it down but didn't fast enough. Groaner

C'mon. The goalies these days have untra light equipment. That's why they can be so mobile.

I gather you never saw a game where the 'keepers wore leather pads filled with horsehair. Before a game each pad weighed more than the total of the equipment they wear now. As the game went on the pads became waterlogged thus even heavier. Gloves were modified baseball mitts.

That's why you never saw the butterfly style in the day.

[MAC331]

12 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

C'mon. The goalies these days have untra light equipment. That's why they can be so mobile.

I gather you never saw a game where the 'keepers wore leather pads filled with horsehair. Before a game each pad weighed more than the total of the equipment they wear now. As the game went on the pads became waterlogged thus even heavier. Gloves were modified baseball mitts.

That's why you never saw the butterfly style in the day.

Gawd you are old LOL

[Carty]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Gawd you are old LOL

 

Mentioned it before, but when I was a kid I started out with deer hair / horse hair filled leather pads...   Sometimes they would get little splits from a combination of getting wet, drying out and taking shots...   If you didn't do something quick, a small spit became a bigger split...   Duck tape made a pretty good band-aid...

 

If I remember correctly, synthetic leather and high density foam didn't really catch on until the 90's...

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

The X's and O's are a bit of an issue because they are stiffling offence.  Call it lack of finish or lack of overall plan when you have possession.

 

The X's and O's have been good for team defense.  There are break downs but it happens to all teams.  

 

No system is both great for O and also great for D.  There's always pros and cons.  Give and take.  Unless you want to say our system doesn't fit our players.  That could be debated.  The system that we deploy is a good one, all said.

[Cowtownguy]

Supposedly, GG preaches possession which is fashionable right now. I don't think that any coach suggests turning over the puck as a way to win. Is possession an actual style of play, or the result of play?

[Flyerfan52]

4 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Gawd you are old LOL

Yes I am.

I hope you get to do that

[redfire11]

3 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

Supposedly, GG preaches possession which is fashionable right now. I don't think that any coach suggests turning over the puck as a way to win. Is possession an actual style of play, or the result of play?

You want to see a successful possession game watch an old game with the Russian 5. Fetisov, Kasatonov,Markov,Larionov,Krutov.

Their style on play was 30 years ahead of the time.

[Cowtownguy]

6 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

You want to see a successful possession game watch an old game with the Russian 5. Fetisov, Kasatonov,Markov,Larionov,Krutov.

Their style on play was 30 years ahead of the time.

Yes, that was a possession game. I don't think GG is preaching that though. It looks like North American hockey to me, unless they are really not doing what he suggests. 

[stubblejumper1]

5 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

Supposedly, GG preaches possession which is fashionable right now. I don't think that any coach suggests turning over the puck as a way to win. Is possession an actual style of play, or the result of play?

 

Obviously, having the puck more = good.  But at some point you have to get the puck to the net and then put it in the net.  I think you are right, possession is more the result of good play.  I don’t think it is really a style/system. 

 

I am curious to know if high possession numbers were always part of winning teams.  Probably.  It just wasn’t tracked.  Possession is a new catch phrase like fake news, organic food or craft beer.  

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

Supposedly, GG preaches possession which is fashionable right now. I don't think that any coach suggests turning over the puck as a way to win. Is possession an actual style of play, or the result of play?

 

If you look at the SCF winners and for the most part, perennial playoff contenders, they tend to have good possession stats. By itself, it's not successful.  It's the best way to play 3v3 OT.  You can;t just have that as your only bag of tricks.  You can hang onto the puck all night, but you have to shoot it to score.  Once you shoot it, you are giving up the puck.  Our PP has great possession, but very little to show for it.

[Cowtownguy]

13 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

If you look at the SCF winners and for the most part, perennial playoff contenders, they tend to have good possession stats. By itself, it's not successful.  It's the best way to play 3v3 OT.  You can;t just have that as your only bag of tricks.  You can hang onto the puck all night, but you have to shoot it to score.  Once you shoot it, you are giving up the puck.  Our PP has great possession, but very little to show for it.

That is what I meant. When you have solid break outs and enter the zone effectively, chances are turnovers will be reduced. That means solid passing and skating. When you play well, you usually have solid possession. In itself though, it is not enough. We seem to lack intensity and the ability to score.

[DirtyDeeds]

On 12/15/2017 at 2:41 PM, Flyerfan52 said:

C'mon. The goalies these days have untra light equipment. That's why they can be so mobile.

I gather you never saw a game where the 'keepers wore leather pads filled with horsehair. Before a game each pad weighed more than the total of the equipment they wear now. As the game went on the pads became waterlogged thus even heavier. Gloves were modified baseball mitts.

That's why you never saw the butterfly style in the day.

 

On 12/15/2017 at 2:54 PM, MAC331 said:

Gawd you are old LOL

Ahhh yes the good "Old Days" when real men played goal with not so much for padding...

 

I remember it well, coming from that generation who had to walk 5+ miles to school in a blizzard every day, uphill..both ways.....

[tmac70]

They only thing I want for Christmas is the firing of Gully.

[MAC331]

9 hours ago, tmac70 said:

They only thing I want for Christmas is the firing of Gully.

So last night's loss was his fault ?

[tmac70]

57 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

So last night's loss was his fault ?

The total implementation and vision of play comes from who? PP is designed by who? The 5 V 5 play PK is from who? When was the last time we got a greasy goal? We have lost the last 2 games based on greasy goals and crashing the net. See I have never been a believer of puck luck or good breaks. You have a practice where you hit the cross bar, what happened the last few games, well Blockchain me we hit the cross bar cause that's how they were prepared. We don't get greasy goals cause they don't practice it, what a Blockchaining revelation we can't defend well in those situations cause that's how they were prepare. Luck favors those best prepared, we are not.

 

So yes the person's in charge of preparing this club for play are the coaches. The players are playing the way they have been prepared.

[redfire11]

If a replacement is to be made for our coaching staff this is the time to do it. After tonight's game in Van we are at home for the next 10 days (holidays included).

[DirtyDeeds]

I am usually as critical as anyone about GG. The way I see it he fails to prepare the team properly. This is especially so at the start of  seasons.

 

He has some good points. but at other times he leaves me bewildered. Let me give an example.

 

He came here as a D system first willing to coach a possession game. His last position being an assistant for the Canucks. This year he complains he has to teach his system all over again. Well dohh.. young team learning a new system should be ongoing.

 

Another thing that really bothers me is he does not go into the dressing room after the game. Does not want to talk to the guys in anger.. Well why the hell not??? Still fresh in your mind.. are the guys egos that frail you can't call them out now and then???

 

In the end, the times he has been able to motivate the team, are when he shows some emotion.. He rarely shows that emotion however...

 

I am not quite ready to give up on GG. He has some good points but those are overshadowed by his difficulties. Difficulties being mostly motivating the team on a consistent basis.