Glen Gulutzan-16th Flames Coach

[Thebrewcrew]

GG may be on to something for tonight's game.

 

Start Rittich to get the entire lineup to be engaged and not sit back to let Smith save the day.

 

Recall Lomberg to add some excitement and emotion. Between him, Tkachuk and Hathaway we can really tick the Oil off.

 

Also I wonder if the 3rd period from the last meeting gives us any confidence, yeah we lost but we gave the Oilers quite a scare.

[MAC331]

38 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

GG may be on to something for tonight's game.

 

Start Rittich to get the entire lineup to be engaged and not sit back to let Smith save the day.

 

Recall Lomberg to add some excitement and emotion. Between him, Tkachuk and Hathaway we can really tick the Oil off.

 

Also I wonder if the 3rd period from the last meeting gives us any confidence, yeah we lost but we gave the Oilers quite a scare.

We just need to beat the Oilers so we know we can. They have kind of had our number.

[Thebrewcrew]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

We just need to beat the Oilers so we know we can. They have kind of had our number.

Yeah for sure. Looking at the last 6 meetings, we've been really bad in 5 of them. The 2-1 SO loss up in EDM last year was the only game we played remotely well in

[The_People1]

The refs gift wrapped that game for us when they stole the goal from Strome in OT.  No way that wasn't a good goal.

 

Still, we find a way to lose to the Oilers.

 

Brodie cannot handle McDavid.  Makes me cringe every time Brodie is on the ice against McDavid and they dump it into Brodie's corner every time.  They cycle Brodie's side on purpose.  I hope GG can make future adjustments.

[MAC331]

16 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

The refs gift wrapped that game for us when they stole the goal from Strome in OT.  No way that wasn't a good goal.

 

Still, we find a way to lose to the Oilers.

 

Brodie cannot handle McDavid.  Makes me cringe every time Brodie is on the ice against McDavid and they dump it into Brodie's corner every time.  They cycle Brodie's side on purpose.  I hope GG can make future adjustments.

These interference calls are becoming automatic if his movement is impeded back to where the shot is coming from and in that case McDavid did just that. My concern is what will the playoffs be like when we see all kinds of havoc around the creases. Can't win with these judgement calls.

[The_People1]

21 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

These interference calls are becoming automatic if his movement is impeded back to where the shot is coming from and in that case McDavid did just that. My concern is what will the playoffs be like when we see all kinds of havoc around the creases. Can't win with these judgement calls.

 

No way man, McDavid was following through on a deke/shot. 

 

In comparison, when you take a shot and your follow through cuts someone in the eye and blinds them for life, it's not a penalty.  So why if you make a move to score that you cant even Nick the goalie and your team is not allowed to score on the rebound?

[travel_dude]

49 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

The refs gift wrapped that game for us when they stole the goal from Strome in OT.  No way that wasn't a good goal.

 

Still, we find a way to lose to the Oilers.

 

Brodie cannot handle McDavid.  Makes me cringe every time Brodie is on the ice against McDavid and they dump it into Brodie's corner every time.  They cycle Brodie's side on purpose.  I hope GG can make future adjustments.

 

Don't agree with your take on the goal/no goal.  You skate into the crease and bump the goalie so he can't twist back in time to make a save, and you can't claim it's a goal.  

 

Agreed on Brodie.  He has wheels but has no clue what to do with McD.  In OT, I don't understand the fixation on using Brodie.  He can't make a shot to save his life most games.  Hamilton is 10x better in that type of situation.  He's smart enough to only go deep when it's a 2-1 with a trailer.  He's strong enoug to contain a fast player.    

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

 

Don't agree with your take on the goal/no goal.  You skate into the crease and bump the goalie so he can't twist back in time to make a save, and you can't claim it's a goal.  

 

Agreed on Brodie.  He has wheels but has no clue what to do with McD.  In OT, I don't understand the fixation on using Brodie.  He can't make a shot to save his life most games.  Hamilton is 10x better in that type of situation.  He's smart enough to only go deep when it's a 2-1 with a trailer.  He's strong enoug to contain a fast player.    

 

So had McDavid scored, would his goal be disallowed because he skated into the crease and bumped the goalie?

[MAC331]

46 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

No way man, McDavid was following through on a deke/shot. 

 

In comparison, when you take a shot and your follow through cuts someone in the eye and blinds them for life, it's not a penalty.  So why if you make a move to score that you cant even Nick the goalie and your team is not allowed to score on the rebound?

I think the key word is becoming "impeded" the goalie's ability to get back into the play even if only a fraction of a second. The whole world has become anal surround the "essence" of the rules.

[travel_dude]

51 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

So had McDavid scored, would his goal be disallowed because he skated into the crease and bumped the goalie?

 

Good question.  It all comes down to the ability for the goalie to make a save after the infraction.  You're not supposed to take the puck into the crease and bump the goalie.  You can go after the puck once it's in the crease.

[The_People1]

19 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think the key word is becoming "impeded" the goalie's ability to get back into the play even if only a fraction of a second. The whole world has become anal surround the "essence" of the rules.

 

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Good question.  It all comes down to the ability for the goalie to make a save after the infraction.  You're not supposed to take the puck into the crease and bump the goalie.  You can go after the puck once it's in the crease.

 

There is such a thing called incidental contact though.  Rittich was, or may have been, trying to impede McDavid as much as McDavid was trying to move around Rittich.  Bumps happen.  When a guy has the puck and deking to score, then he should be able to bump the goalie with a reasonable amount of force in trying to get around him.

 

Anyways, it's a ridiculous no goal and it sets a bad precedence moving forward.

[DHT]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

So had McDavid scored, would his goal be disallowed because he skated into the crease and bumped the goalie?

If McDavid did scored on that drive, then it would've been a good goal because he carried the puck into the net. However, he didn't scored on that drive, his teammate scored. McDavid accidental contact with Rittich was the result of him driving to the net, but because of his contact, Rittich was off balance for a half second and that is enough to impeded him from making a save. Rittich may not able to save that goal even if he wasn't bumped, however, this is not what we are questioning. I thought that was a good call even if it was against us.

[DHT]

42 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Of course Rittish will try to impede McDavid from go around him, that is his job. Hell, didn't Thomas punched Sedin when Boston and Vancouver was going against each other for the Stanley cup?

 

There is such a thing called incidental contact though.  Rittich was, or may have been, trying to impede McDavid as much as McDavid was trying to move around Rittich.  Bumps happen.  When a guy has the puck and deking to score, then he should be able to bump the goalie with a reasonable amount of force in trying to get around him.

 

Anyways, it's a ridiculous no goal and it sets a bad precedence moving forward.

 

[Cowtownguy]

I did not know what to make of GG when he became the coach of the team. I thought that I would give him until February of last year before making any conclusions about him. At this point, I would like to see us look for another coach after this year barring some unforeseen development. The team is better this year from a personnel point of view, and yet we are struggling as much or more as last year. Our goaltending is far better and consistent. In fact, we have two decent goalies for the first time in a long time. We have three, if not four, solid defencemen with one having a difficult time. We have Johnny, Chucky, Monahan, Bennett (our highest pick ever), and Janko, and yet often seem unable to score when it counts. The PK and the PP have struggled all year with not much hope in sight. We often seem to lose puck battles, and we do not push back hard enough when we are down.

 

I don't think that GG is an NHL coach at this point. Maybe he never will be. He makes some unusual lineups and does not seem to be able to make adjustments fast enough between games let alone within games. I don't see him growing with the club either. Bennett and Brodie do not seem to be developing very quickly, if at all. In fact, let's be frank, Brodie does not even look like an NHL player anymore while he was once considered a possible Norris candidate. I don't understand his admiration and trust for Brouwer. 

 

I could be wrong. Maybe this team just does not have enough chemistry, skill, or motivation. It seems to me, however, that Treliving could find a bunch of great talent to fill holes and it is not going to make much of a difference with the way this team plays. In my opinion, Treliving could snag McDavid, Tavares, Seguin, Boeser and put them with Johnny and we would still have one of the worst PPs in the league. We have structural issues and I think that the players are limited in their success. We are where we are despite GG, not because of GG.

 

Say what you will of Hartley. He inherited a team that was very young and immature. He had questionable goaltending too. He was successful at getting the most of the players he had even if that meant using a few gimmicks or two. It sounds like he was hard to deal with, but he managed to build up some chemistry. I think that GG cannot get the most out of players. And the system is not that complex. We are not talking about 1970s US football where a QB has to memorize dozens of plays here. The PP is driving me nuts. When you practice the same thing hundreds of times, and it does not translate into much success in games dozens of times, is it not time to rethink the strategy? If we were to abandon all structure to the PP and just let the boys do whatever they want to, would we have any less success? I don't think so. If no coaching is as effective as this coaching, what does that say?

 

I don't like to rag on coaches. They are always the ones to be blamed and fired when the players are usually the responsible ones. Something is not working on this team, and at this point, it sure looks like the systems we have in place. Dude is already toast if we miss the playoffs. I think he should be toast even if we do.

[redfire11]

18 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

 so. If no coaching is as effective as this coaching, what does that say?

 

I think you said it all right there

[The_Tribal Chief]

We could Probably Get a Curler That could coach Better

[MAC331]

13 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I did not know what to make of GG when he became the coach of the team. I thought that I would give him until February of last year before making any conclusions about him. At this point, I would like to see us look for another coach after this year barring some unforeseen development. The team is better this year from a personnel point of view, and yet we are struggling as much or more as last year. Our goaltending is far better and consistent. In fact, we have two decent goalies for the first time in a long time. We have three, if not four, solid defencemen with one having a difficult time. We have Johnny, Chucky, Monahan, Bennett (our highest pick ever), and Janko, and yet often seem unable to score when it counts. The PK and the PP have struggled all year with not much hope in sight. We often seem to lose puck battles, and we do not push back hard enough when we are down.

 

I don't think that GG is an NHL coach at this point. Maybe he never will be. He makes some unusual lineups and does not seem to be able to make adjustments fast enough between games let alone within games. I don't see him growing with the club either. Bennett and Brodie do not seem to be developing very quickly, if at all. In fact, let's be frank, Brodie does not even look like an NHL player anymore while he was once considered a possible Norris candidate. I don't understand his admiration and trust for Brouwer. 

 

I could be wrong. Maybe this team just does not have enough chemistry, skill, or motivation. It seems to me, however, that Treliving could find a bunch of great talent to fill holes and it is not going to make much of a difference with the way this team plays. In my opinion, Treliving could snag McDavid, Tavares, Seguin, Boeser and put them with Johnny and we would still have one of the worst PPs in the league. We have structural issues and I think that the players are limited in their success. We are where we are despite GG, not because of GG.

 

Say what you will of Hartley. He inherited a team that was very young and immature. He had questionable goaltending too. He was successful at getting the most of the players he had even if that meant using a few gimmicks or two. It sounds like he was hard to deal with, but he managed to build up some chemistry. I think that GG cannot get the most out of players. And the system is not that complex. We are not talking about 1970s US football where a QB has to memorize dozens of plays here. The PP is driving me nuts. When you practice the same thing hundreds of times, and it does not translate into much success in games dozens of times, is it not time to rethink the strategy? If we were to abandon all structure to the PP and just let the boys do whatever they want to, would we have any less success? I don't think so. If no coaching is as effective as this coaching, what does that say?

 

I don't like to rag on coaches. They are always the ones to be blamed and fired when the players are usually the responsible ones. Something is not working on this team, and at this point, it sure looks like the systems we have in place. Dude is already toast if we miss the playoffs. I think he should be toast even if we do.

You may get your wish after the season but let's remember everyone involved has a role to play. Personally I would start with management and specifically BT with some of the decisions he has made. No GM is perfect but Brouwer has been a misfit that as caused other undesirable situations to take place. Bringing in Versteeg and Jagr thinking we could win a SC this season was wrong thinking IMO and again caused bad situations for line formations. These are things the Coach has to ultimately deal with when handed them by the GM. GG's stubbornness is what will get him fired along with his indecisiveness. All of this effects the players but ultimately it is the players that must execute and the effort seems to come and go in spots.

[Cowtownguy]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

You may get your wish after the season but let's remember everyone involved has a role to play. Personally I would start with management and specifically BT with some of the decisions he has made. No GM is perfect but Brouwer has been a misfit that as caused other undesirable situations to take place. Bringing in Versteeg and Jagr thinking we could win a SC this season was wrong thinking IMO and again caused bad situations for line formations. These are things the Coach has to ultimately deal with when handed them by the GM. GG's stubbornness is what will get him fired along with his indecisiveness. All of this effects the players but ultimately it is the players that must execute and the effort seems to come and go in spots.

I agree that ice hockey is a fluid sport where every decision affects everyone. BT has made a few poor moves. I thought that the Brouwer acquisition was actually an intelligent move that just did not pay out. Jagr was a risk. I do think that Versteeg will improve as he heals. You don't go from being that impactful to that bad without it being an injury. You could see his timing was way off especially in terms of being in the right place at the right time. He has been a solid player since his time in Lethbridge. He will be better.

 

GG is a new coach and there are bound to be errors as he develops as a coach. I don't mind the screw ups actually. I don't think he has the right people to delegate to, and he is not adjusting anywhere near fast enough. Some of the best coaches that I have watched read the game and can change up between lines within the play. GG cannot even do that from one game to the next. There is no way he has success in the playoffs with that mind set. I think he sticks to his guns so rigidly, not because he is so confident with his logic, but because he is not sure of what to do. I suspect that he misses a lot of what happens out there. Great coaches like Quinn, Babcock, Quenville etc. are like Neo from the Matrix. They read the code with simplicity while GG isn't even aware that the Matrix exists. Yeah, I know, weird analogy.

 

In the end, you cannot blame a guy for not doing what he is incapable of doing. I will never have the ability to be a great volleyball player no matter how much you pay me. GG is an AHL coach who needs to take the next step to the NHL, and only time will tell if he can do so.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, Cowtownguy said:

I agree that ice hockey is a fluid sport where every decision affects everyone. BT has made a few poor moves. I thought that the Brouwer acquisition was actually an intelligent move that just did not pay out. Jagr was a risk. I do think that Versteeg will improve as he heals. You don't go from being that impactful to that bad without it being an injury. You could see his timing was way off especially in terms of being in the right place at the right time. He has been a solid player since his time in Lethbridge. He will be better.

 

GG is a new coach and there are bound to be errors as he develops as a coach. I don't mind the screw ups actually. I don't think he has the right people to delegate to, and he is not adjusting anywhere near fast enough. Some of the best coaches that I have watched read the game and can change up between lines within the play. GG cannot even do that from one game to the next. There is no way he has success in the playoffs with that mind set. I think he sticks to his guns so rigidly, not because he is so confident with his logic, but because he is not sure of what to do. I suspect that he misses a lot of what happens out there. Great coaches like Quinn, Babcock, Quenville etc. are like Neo from the Matrix. They read the code with simplicity while GG isn't even aware that the Matrix exists. Yeah, I know, weird analogy.

 

In the end, you cannot blame a guy for not doing what he is incapable of doing. I will never have the ability to be a great volleyball player no matter how much you pay me. GG is an AHL coach who needs to take the next step to the NHL, and only time will tell if he can do so.

The coaching debates can go around in circles for all kinds of reasons. This isn't GG's first go at being a HC and he has been around long enough that a stint in the AHL won't matter much. If he is a casualty after the season so be it. In the NHL you are either good enough or not. The coaches you have mentioned earned their way and didn't have great teams all along either, you need to take that into account. I see GG much like a Hitchcock, he has his systems and ways regardless of the team make up. He has winning record teams but never gets the gold ring.

[Thebrewcrew]

Listening to Gultzan post game gave me a laugh. He mentions it's better to have the perfect record after 2 broken now than in playoff time... well Glen, how did game 3 against Anaheim go.... yeah

[Cowtownguy]

If GG had to keep doing stand up comedy until someone laughed, how many times would he use the same joke until he realized it was just not funny (i.e. working)?

[robrob74]

Is the team thinking too much about systems and possession that they’re lacking or more so suppressing other parts of their game? 

 

Does it suppress some skill or effort? 

 

I feel like it’s possibly making them robotic which then possibly minimizes passion? I dunno. 

 

The brain farts happened under Hartley too, therefore that part of coaching isn’t 100% on GG.

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, robrob74 said:

Is the team thinking too much about systems and possession that they’re lacking or more so suppressing other parts of their game? 

 

Does it suppress some skill or effort? 

 

I feel like it’s possibly making them robotic which then possibly minimizes passion? I dunno. 

 

The brain farts happened under Hartley too, therefore that part of coaching isn’t 100% on GG.

 

The team worries too much about losing that they freak out when the other team scores.  A late tying goal should be expected if you can;t be up by 2.

That worry creeps in as the game goes on, so they shut down some of the offense, and roll 4 lines to keep it fresh.  What usually happens is we get hemmed in for a longer amount of time and can;t change.  The clock gets eaten up and we have little breathing room for more offense.  

 

Dump the puck when you have piossession so you can change all 5 players.  Next shift becomes a tire fire of trying to clear the puck.  Goal waiting to happen.  Whether fresh or not, that line should not be out for next faceoff.  Happened in this game, happened in the Buffalo game with Brouwer playing the entire 1:30 before they scored.

 

The coach either is not paying attention to what is going on (momentum) or lets the players that just played make the decision.  Are you fresh?  OK then go ahead.

[MAC331]

We should see a determined team on Thursday one would think.

[travel_dude]

Regarless of the way they come out next game, they have to do something with the PP.  You have to have more than one option for scoring goals.  Johnny isn't going to gain the zone every time, nor will his passing options be available exactly the same.  Last year we managed a much better PP to end the season.  Same people, except for Versteeg.  We have tried the 4F 1D top unit for 99% of the season with very sketchy results.  The only time we were doing well was when Monahan was scoring on money shots.  Last year, we had two different looks on the PP and the 2nd unit became the defacto top unit, even though playing 2nd in rotation.  If one didn't work, the other usually did.

 

I didn't understand the last change before the tying goal.  You are trying to keep a lead and you dump the puck to get off.  You change every single player.  All of a sudden, you have to defend a likely EN push by the other team.  Wouldn't it have been a good time to send a player like Ferland in and just change up the other forwards?  Try to keep the play deep to prevent the push?

 

I also don't understand why Gully hangs onto timeouts like that.  From the 5 minute left point onward, the VGK had started to really push.  There was at least one opportunity to take a time out before the tying goal.  After that goal, there was a perrfect reason to take the timeout and devise a way to keep the game in check and set up for OT.  

 

I'll give Vegas the smarts for rolling their lines.  They know how to do it, because they have no true #1 line, just a top 20 goal scorer or two.  Everyone except Monahan was was struggling to win faceoffs last night.  Don't know what you can do about that other than try some other option.  

 

Bottom line is this coach needs to figure out line matching.  Last change should give you the best chance to win the matchup.  Since we don't have that luxury on the road, yet still have a better record, it seems like we have it backwards.