Glen Gulutzan-16th Flames Coach

[cross16]

16 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I think great teams are great because there is a great player who holds everyone accountable. Sakic, yzerman, and so on... but they still need a great coach to put it all together.

 

we don’t have that demanding of excellence player to push them through. I think that could be what Mac is referring to when he talks about maturity. 

 

Theres a time in someone’s career where winning is all that matters. What are we willing to do to win? Who’s asking the easy but hard questions. 

 

Hartley is a hard Hash Rate because he has high expectations. Those who tune him out don’t have very high expectations.

 

I'm not sure this is true personally. It's hard to win with a bad coach sure, but if you've got the right players I don't thikn you need to be a great coach to win.

 

I point to Babcock in this situation, or even Carlyle. 2 coaches that managed to win cups but both have not exactly the greatest track records ever since. Fair to call them great? or were they good/average coaches who had the right players and right group in place? I point to the later personally. 

 

Hartley has high expectations but he is also a very poor communicator and he is very stubborn, more stubborn that Gulutzan even. I think players tune him out for that reason, not because they can't meet his expectations. 

[Cowtownguy]

Apparently, GG had another tantrum during practice. I wonder if it will have any impact. 

[cross16]

2 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Apparently, GG had another tantrum during practice. I wonder if it will have any impact. 

 

I'd recommend watching the video.

 

"Tantrum" is extremely misleading.... that's the media trying to get some clicks. he's actually really calm. 

[Cowtownguy]

11 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I'd recommend watching the video.

 

"Tantrum" is extremely misleading.... that's the media trying to get some clicks. he's actually really calm. 

I admit that I didn't watch the video (computer issue). I will give it a shot again.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Sure you practise to improve aspects of your game. What is so over whelming ? or should you be saying "over coming" the aspects they have mastered yet ? You have consistently tried to compare this team to the top teams which IMO has set you up for the opinions you have about them.

Coaches should put out the best roster that gives them the best chance to win, I agree. I see a team that lacks depth and especially experienced depth that would better the effort on most nights.

Going back to the old style of coaching or managing only works in small doses these days. Let's not forget that this is a team that has at least 3 high level players that are still breaking in more or less in Tkachuk, Bennett and Jankowski. You are getting various results this season which holds a team back. We need these players in their positions to be further advanced.

I wouldn't ever say GG is doing everything right but he certainly isn't doing everything wrong either. I would actually say in the last month we are seeing the team play their best hockey but they still won't win every game. There will be some change this offseason so we will see what BT decides regarding GG.

 

Would depth actually make the team give more effort? They do try, but I wouldn’t say they’re consistently trying. When the team is “going” they can compete. But it’s the lack of consistency, which the best teams have that separates us, plus some depth. 

 

I get what you’re saying. I think it’s both, depth and consistency. If the talent isn’t there yet, then it’s effort I am not seeing enough of. Lately though, it has been moral victories and not actual wins. So that’s where we are beginning to see lack of depth.

 

i am skeptical that we have it coming through the system though. 

[MAC331]

14 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Would depth actually make the team give more effort? They do try, but I wouldn’t say they’re consistently trying. When the team is “going” they can compete. But it’s the lack of consistency, which the best teams have that separates us, plus some depth. 

 

I get what you’re saying. I think it’s both, depth and consistency. If the talent isn’t there yet, then it’s effort I am not seeing enough of. Lately though, it has been moral victories and not actual wins. So that’s where we are beginning to see lack of depth.

 

i am skeptical that we have it coming through the system though. 

I think you get those inconsistencies when you have a young core needing to being the driving part of the machine. Just as an example if we do run similar systems of play, they have mature quality players that dictate to the others how they have to play. I just think we have not had a particularly good mix of players and talents playing together both in our forward group or the defense. Parts of each seem to work where the other parts look dysfunctional mostly for a lot of reasons.

I wouldn't disagree that BT need to make a few key moves to rid us of some players but I would keep most of what we have for at least another season. Back up the farm along with this as a plan but advance the ones that are ready like Andersson and Wotherspoon, You take a long hard look at where Mangiapane, Klimchuk, Foo, Shinkaruk and Poirier as a fit or not for next season. We will have some like Valimaki and Dube coming in that will add quality players to the farm. My advise for BT would be to do what is deemed essential for this team to be better next season.

[stubblejumper1]

8 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Sure you practise to improve aspects of your game. What is so over whelming ? or should you be saying "over coming" the aspects they have mastered yet ? You have consistently tried to compare this team to the top teams which IMO has set you up for the opinions you have about them.

Coaches should put out the best roster that gives them the best chance to win, I agree. I see a team that lacks depth and especially experienced depth that would better the effort on most nights.

Going back to the old style of coaching or managing only works in small doses these days. Let's not forget that this is a team that has at least 3 high level players that are still breaking in more or less in Tkachuk, Bennett and Jankowski. You are getting various results this season which holds a team back. We need these players in their positions to be further advanced.

I wouldn't ever say GG is doing everything right but he certainly isn't doing everything wrong either. I would actually say in the last month we are seeing the team play their best hockey but they still won't win every game. There will be some change this offseason so we will see what BT decides regarding GG.

 

Call me jaded by the Flames underperformance this season, but I don't think  Bennett and Jankowski can be considered high level players.  Personally, I would call them a third liner and a borderline NHLer. 

 

Bennett is three years into his NHL career and hasn't been able to consistently contribute.  Jankowski was drafted five years ago and is struggling to perform at the NHL level.  With more patience they may top out as second/third line players.  

 

Just two more examples of Flames coming up a day late and a dollar short at the draft table. 

 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, stubblejumper1 said:

 

Call me jaded by the Flames underperformance this season, but I don't think  Bennett and Jankowski can be considered high level players.  Personally, I would call them a third liner and a borderline NHLer. 

 

Bennett is three years into his NHL career and hasn't been able to consistently contribute.  Jankowski was drafted five years ago and is struggling to perform at the NHL level.  With more patience they may top out as second/third line players.  

 

Just two more examples of Flames coming up a day late and a dollar short at the draft table. 

 

Totally disagree with your analogy here as the reasons for their under performances has been well documented a million times on here. Forgive me if I don't go into it again.

[rickross]

14 hours ago, MAC331 said:

You make it all sound so easy. Practise = Perfection. Every player in the world wishes for this formula, just doesn't happen. Levels of performance becomes the track record for individuals and teams. Should the problems persist then yes you need to make changes.

I didn't make anything sound easy, just used simple logic and common sense. Think about it..not every player applies themselves and commits themselves to aim for perfection. What seperates the elite players in the game is that there is no difference in their level of compete and intensity between practice and in game. It's a big part of why it "just doesn't happen" with every player in the world. I'm fine with players missing shots and hitting crossbars now and then...some players do go through spells of bad luck. The problem is this has become a league leading trend for the Flames, Mike Smith has pretty much masked the rest of the Flames struggles this year. 

 

Also let's just be real, these are professional hockey players getting paid millions of dollars and they can't even hit the damn net? It's becoming more imperative for the Flames as an organization to become legit contenders, with the arena stalemate...a deep playoff run does a lot of good for their revenues. I'd love for GG to prove me wrong but I think we may have already seen the Flames peak under his tutelage. 

[cccsberg]

21 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I'm not sure this is true personally. It's hard to win with a bad coach sure, but if you've got the right players I don't thikn you need to be a great coach to win.

 

I point to Babcock in this situation, or even Carlyle. 2 coaches that managed to win cups but both have not exactly the greatest track records ever since. Fair to call them great? or were they good/average coaches who had the right players and right group in place? I point to the later personally. 

 

Hartley has high expectations but he is also a very poor communicator and he is very stubborn, more stubborn that Gulutzan even. I think players tune him out for that reason, not because they can't meet his expectations. 

Like what you're saying, but not so sure BH was a terrible communicator.  I always loved his interviews as he had a way of making a poignant point without it being personal, and added a lot of humour into the mix which kept it interesting.  

[cccsberg]

13 hours ago, stubblejumper1 said:

 

Call me jaded by the Flames underperformance this season, but I don't think  Bennett and Jankowski can be considered high level players.  Personally, I would call them a third liner and a borderline NHLer. 

 

Bennett is three years into his NHL career and hasn't been able to consistently contribute.  Jankowski was drafted five years ago and is struggling to perform at the NHL level.  With more patience they may top out as second/third line players.  

 

Just two more examples of Flames coming up a day late and a dollar short at the draft table. 

 

Can't agree, both clearly good NHLers with SB getting a chance up the line-up and doing well there too.  Consistency has been an issue which isn't surprising since they are still young.  

[JTech780]

10 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Like what you're saying, but not so sure BH was a terrible communicator.  I always loved his interviews as he had a way of making a poignant point without it being personal, and added a lot of humour into the mix which kept it interesting.  

 

The Hartley we saw in the media and the Hartley the players got to deal with in the dressing room were two different people. I have heard and read in multiple interviews from players that played for Hartley and the words "mind games" have come up several times, a few players are quoted as saying that everything with Hartley is a mind game and that you never know where you stand with him. That is not the mark of an effective communicator.

[MAC331]

8 hours ago, rickross said:

I didn't make anything sound easy, just used simple logic and common sense. Think about it..not every player applies themselves and commits themselves to aim for perfection. What seperates the elite players in the game is that there is no difference in their level of compete and intensity between practice and in game. It's a big part of why it "just doesn't happen" with every player in the world. I'm fine with players missing shots and hitting crossbars now and then...some players do go through spells of bad luck. The problem is this has become a league leading trend for the Flames, Mike Smith has pretty much masked the rest of the Flames struggles this year. 

 

Also let's just be real, these are professional hockey players getting paid millions of dollars and they can't even hit the damn net? It's becoming more imperative for the Flames as an organization to become legit contenders, with the arena stalemate...a deep playoff run does a lot of good for their revenues. I'd love for GG to prove me wrong but I think we may have already seen the Flames peak under his tutelage. 

I will disagree that this team has peaked at all or are even ready too. Money aside I agree with your analysis about elite players however their will always be the ones you have to poke and prod to perform. Winning teams have players that play for each other. but I'm not even sure that is our situation.

I get as frustrated as anyone when our shooters can't hit the net but it happens.

The arena deal will look after itself or it won't and I don't it is effecting play on the ice.

[MAC331]

28 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Like what you're saying, but not so sure BH was a terrible communicator.  I always loved his interviews as he had a way of making a poignant point without it being personal, and added a lot of humour into the mix which kept it interesting.  

Hartley, Hartley, Hartley is this ever going to end ? He had an easy job in the early part of this rebuild because the expectations were not high. It is easy to coach when the expectations are low, we are seeing it in LV. The bonds together under the "we'll show them" motto and away they go. Whoops sorry BH used "earned never given" to motivate his players while here. Stretch passes and blocked shots is no long term method toward a winning system.

Now we have a coach brought in to implement systems that actually takes some discipline to execute and some not all have had troubles adapting. Sure blame the coaching that is easy to do but throw some of the other varibles into the mix when the discussions turns to inconsistencies.

[stubblejumper1]

21 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Totally disagree with your analogy here as the reasons for their under performances has been well documented a million times on here. Forgive me if I don't go into it again.

 

I disagree that the reasons have been given.  

 

People have given opinions, but nobody knows why Sam Bennett isn't performing like a 4th overall pick.  People have given opinions, but nobody knows why Jankowski isn't performing like the best player from the 2012 draft (that was what Feaster called him).

 

The Flames coaching/management (who are well compensated to make these decisions) do not feel these two guys have earned more icetime with better linemates.  Maybe those are good/bad/indifferent decisions, but putting those two players in better situations may simply result in more of the same.  It definitely doesn't guarantee success.

 

At some point you have to grab life by the horns. 

[robrob74]

Not that I would really want it to happen, but, I’d love to see what would happen if Gaudreau got injured. If that happened, Would Monahan still be a 30 goal scorer? 

Would Backlund’s line have to bear the brunt of the offence? 

 

I think Monahan could still score, but at what rate? 

[CheersMan]

12 hours ago, cccsberg said:

Like what you're saying, but not so sure BH was a terrible communicator.  I always loved his interviews as he had a way of making a poignant point without it being personal, and added a lot of humour into the mix which kept it interesting.  

 

BH was a fantastic communicator, you seen it, I seen it.  He hurt a few feelings along the way, particularly players on the tail end of their careers, some poster here refer to that as “poor communicator”.  I wonder if the same posters here would call GG a “poor communicator” if he put Brower in the press box indefinitely?  BT has won one playoff game in two years since firing BH.  Ooops! 

Everyone is on the hot seat at seasons end.  I remember BB saying, “give me 5 years, I need 5 years to turn this around”.  I’m thinking its been 5 years and we are still on the outside looking in.

 

27 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

Not that I would really want it to happen, but, I’d love to see what would happen if Gaudreau got injured. If that happened, Would Monahan still be a 30 goal scorer? 

Would Backlund’s line have to bear the brunt of the offence? 

 

I think Monahan could still score, but at what rate? 

 

There is no arguing that the two players compliment one another.  Hate to see if either one went down.

[Khrox]

9 hours ago, robrob74 said:

Not that I would really want it to happen, but, I’d love to see what would happen if Gaudreau got injured. If that happened, Would Monahan still be a 30 goal scorer? 

Would Backlund’s line have to bear the brunt of the offence? 

 

I think Monahan could still score, but at what rate? 

Honestly, I still say he would score at a pretty close pace. Yes Gaudreau assists a LOT of Monahan's goals, at the same time his rookie year was without Gaudreau and he still scored 22. I'd say he could still push that 25-30 with him, but I feel like his assist count would take a total beating.

[tmac70]

22 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Hartley, Hartley, Hartley is this ever going to end ? He had an easy job in the early part of this rebuild because the expectations were not high. It is easy to coach when the expectations are low, we are seeing it in LV. The bonds together under the "we'll show them" motto and away they go. Whoops sorry BH used "earned never given" to motivate his players while here. Stretch passes and blocked shots is no long term method toward a winning system.

Now we have a coach brought in to implement systems that actually takes some discipline to execute and some not all have had troubles adapting. Sure blame the coaching that is easy to do but throw some of the other varibles into the mix when the discussions turns to inconsistencies.

 

 Nobody is advocating BH comes back but he is a comparable. Your one who always rants about facts, fact is Hartley had a better record with way less a roster. Is this all Gullly`s fault nope.  However,  if the class after 2 years still can`t do simple math by your instruction, than either your incapable or you have 23 guys that are Which than means our GM, scouts and player personal also need to be removed. When you look at the variable`s I would say the scale`s are balanced more towards GG being insufficient than the rest.

 

As for systems are they really better, we still dump chase and lose battles, we still use the long pass cause its the only way we play with speed, our PK is average, our PP is horrific, we give up way to many quality chances and we  are 1 and done or miss the net and the play goes the other way did I miss any thing. Also I am pretty sure all the teams that made it to the conference finals all blocked shots to get there, cause that is what it takes.

[Cowtownguy]

27 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

 

 Nobody is advocating BH comes back but he is a comparable. Your one who always rants about facts, fact is Hartley had a better record with way less a roster. Is this all Gullly`s fault nope.  However,  if the class after 2 years still can`t do simple math by your instruction, than either your incapable or you have 23 guys that are Which than means our GM, scouts and player personal also need to be removed. When you look at the variable`s I would say the scale`s are balanced more towards GG being insufficient than the rest.

 

As for systems are they really better, we still dump chase and lose battles, we still use the long pass cause its the only way we play with speed, our PK is average, our PP is horrific, we give up way to many quality chances and we  are 1 and done or miss the net and the play goes the other way did I miss any thing. Also I am pretty sure all the teams that made it to the conference finals all blocked shots to get there, cause that is what it takes.

It is inevitable that we would compare Hartley with Gulutzan as he is a reference point of sorts. I am not convinced that GG has outperformed a coach who was fired and had a weaker roster. 

 

11 hours ago, CheersMan said:

 

BH was a fantastic communicator, you seen it, I seen it.  He hurt a few feelings along the way, particularly players on the tail end of their careers, some poster here refer to that as “poor communicator”.  I wonder if the same posters here would call GG a “poor communicator” if he put Brower in the press box indefinitely?  BT has won one playoff game in two years since firing BH.  Ooops! 

Everyone is on the hot seat at seasons end.  I remember BB saying, “give me 5 years, I need 5 years to turn this around”.  I’m thinking its been 5 years and we are still on the outside looking in.

I have harped about this a few times and I am glad to see that you are raising it as well. I am also not advocating that we return to Feaster, but he suggested that the rebuild would take five years and Burke said that there are ways of speeding it up. In reality, Burke argued that it would be done in under five years. It seemed like we had direction during the Sutter era and then the wheels fell off. 

[cross16]

On 2018-03-14 at 8:13 AM, cccsberg said:

Like what you're saying, but not so sure BH was a terrible communicator.  I always loved his interviews as he had a way of making a poignant point without it being personal, and added a lot of humour into the mix which kept it interesting.  

 

He was a fantastic interview no doubt, but communicating with the media and you're players are two different things. He has a reputation for being an extremely poor communicator with his players. 

[MAC331]

33 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

 

 Nobody is advocating BH comes back but he is a comparable. Your one who always rants about facts, fact is Hartley had a better record with way less a roster. Is this all Gullly`s fault nope.  However,  if the class after 2 years still can`t do simple math by your instruction, than either your incapable or you have 23 guys that are Which than means our GM, scouts and player personal also need to be removed. When you look at the variable`s I would say the scale`s are balanced more towards GG being insufficient than the rest.

 

As for systems are they really better, we still dump chase and lose battles, we still use the long pass cause its the only way we play with speed, our PK is average, our PP is horrific, we give up way to many quality chances and we  are 1 and done or miss the net and the play goes the other way did I miss any thing. Also I am pretty sure all the teams that made it to the conference finals all blocked shots to get there, cause that is what it takes.

I wasn't either and no I never rant about facts you must have me confused with someone else. I get it your a blame the coach guy, you have made this quite clear. As for myself I recognize their are issues and have said they need to work through them. I have even tried to point out what they could be. Yes I do recognize in hockey that you still need to block shots and use the stretch pass but you also have to control as much of the play as possible. I have said more than once this team as aspects of their game to work on and they are not ready to win yet.

[Cowtownguy]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

He was a fantastic interview no doubt, but communicating with the media and you're players are two different things. He has a reputation for being an extremely poor communicator with his players. 

I don't think that we can assess whether he is a good communicator or not. Now that he is gone, a few players have piped up about how he was not particularly nice to them. When the cat's away.... Just because he was harsh on some players does not mean that he was unable to get his message out to most of them. 

 

Hartley was old school. Iron Mike would call players up at 5:00am and tell them to immediately arrive at a bag skate or they would not be playing for a while. Pat Burns was known to call players into his office and then destroy such office while ranting at them. Hartley was cruel with some players at times. GG is trying to be sweetness and light with the odd stick being thrown into the stands to show that he means business. He is unable to get the players to start a game with intensity or end a period with intensity. I doubt many players struggle to understand what their coaches want from them. They just obeyed when the coach was able to generate fear among them.

[MAC331]

5 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

It is inevitable that we would compare Hartley with Gulutzan as he is a reference point of sorts. I am not convinced that GG has outperformed a coach who was fired and had a weaker roster. 

 

I have harped about this a few times and I am glad to see that you are raising it as well. I am also not advocating that we return to Feaster, but he suggested that the rebuild would take five years and Burke said that there are ways of speeding it up. In reality, Burke argued that it would be done in under five years. It seemed like we had direction during the Sutter era and then the wheels fell off. 

You are entitled to feel any way you want about this team however we are an average talented team in the middle of the pack competing for a playoff spot. Sutter and Hartley all dealt with their team under various circumstances and had their own way of doing it. Right or wrong BT and BB wanted this team to play a different style of hockey and brought in GG to implement it. Fans still want instant results and instant success every year, sorry but that just doesn't happen. There has been progress but some will always be focused on negatives, its in their nature. This is a team situation that can be worked through in time.

[MAC331]

6 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I don't think that we can assess whether he is a good communicator or not. Now that he is gone, a few players have piped up about how he was not particularly nice to them. When the cat's away.... Just because he was harsh on some players does not mean that he was unable to get his message out to most of them. 

 

Hartley was old school. Iron Mike would call players up at 5:00am and tell them to immediately arrive at a bag skate or they would not be playing for a while. Pat Burns was known to call players into his office and then destroy such office while ranting at them. Hartley was cruel with some players at times. GG is trying to be sweetness and light with the odd stick being thrown into the stands to show that he means business. He is unable to get the players to start a game with intensity or end a period with intensity. I doubt many players struggle to understand what their coaches want from them. They just obeyed when the coach was able to generate fear among them.

Are you serious, this is how you think coaches should still coach today. LOL

How players start or finish games is part of how they should execute what is being taught to them. Blaming GG for poor play by the players themselves is so incorrect as an interpretation of player responsibility. If they can't execute we have the wrong players not the wrong coach.