Bill Peters - 17th Flames Coach

[TheFan99]

Play by Play guy from Carolina on Fan 960 said that "Hurricanes had the top 3 in team goals against" I didn't check the stat but, we should be better now with our defense? We left Smitty alone to many times. So, that's encouraging.

[travel_dude]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/960/pat-steinberg/chuck-kaiton-additions-flames-hall-fame-hurricanes-season/

 

Bill Peters talked about on the Big Show, around 12 minutes in.

Big trade talked about at around 17 minutes in.

[420since1974]

Thanks for the link TD.

[rickross]

I'm trying to embrace the Peters era with a positive outlook....but I'm gonna keep it 100, I'm not yet a believer...or is it "Bill-iever"?? I like the moves we've made, on paper this team should make the playoffs. Based off what he achieved or failed to achieve in Carolina in 4 years or even his recent 4th place finish at the Worlds...just don't have me convinced he's "The Guy". I know it's not the most fair assessment on a coach but his recent coaching history doesn't scream Stanley Cup. New players, I'm excited for...new head coach? Not so much! I'd be the happiest person if he proves me wrong!...I just can't seem to shake my doubts in him! Help!!!

[conundrumed]

12 minutes ago, rickross said:

I'm trying to embrace the Peters era with a positive outlook....but I'm gonna keep it 100, I'm not yet a believer...or is it "Bill-iever"?? I like the moves we've made, on paper this team should make the playoffs. Based off what he achieved or failed to achieve in Carolina in 4 years or even his recent 4th place finish at the Worlds...just don't have me convinced he's "The Guy". I know it's not the most fair assessment on a coach but his recent coaching history doesn't scream Stanley Cup. New players, I'm excited for...new head coach? Not so much! I'd be the happiest person if he proves me wrong!...I just can't seem to shake my doubts in him! Help!!!

That looks more 60-40 to me

[rickross]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

That looks more 60-40 to me

I don't know if I'm glass half full or empty..whatever it is I'm not drinking the juice yet. Right now all Bill Peters has done is say a lot if the right things. All new coaches talk this way. But at this point he's all talk. I was pretty patient with GG...won't be the same with Billy P!

[robrob74]

8 hours ago, rickross said:

I don't know if I'm glass half full or empty..whatever it is I'm not drinking the juice yet. Right now all Bill Peters has done is say a lot if the right things. All new coaches talk this way. But at this point he's all talk. I was pretty patient with GG...won't be the same with Billy P!

 

It really depends on what you’re drinking. Maybe you’ve only taken a few sips and in need of acquiring the taste. 

 

I didnt like GG. The team looked similar to Hartley’s team. Bonehead turnovers that cost us in the most untimely moments in a game. We had the puck more, but I was never excited about our chances when we took shots. Our chances never seemed high danger with GG. And when we did shoot we didn’t have anyone to pick up the garbage. So We stunk on offence.

[MAC331]

12 hours ago, rickross said:

I don't know if I'm glass half full or empty..whatever it is I'm not drinking the juice yet. Right now all Bill Peters has done is say a lot if the right things. All new coaches talk this way. But at this point he's all talk. I was pretty patient with GG...won't be the same with Billy P!

Great position to have considering he hasn't even started the season yet.

[MAC331]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

It really depends on what you’re drinking. Maybe you’ve only taken a few sips and in need of acquiring the taste. 

 

I didnt like GG. The team looked similar to Hartley’s team. Bonehead turnovers that cost us in the most untimely moments in a game. We had the puck more, but I was never excited about our chances when we took shots. Our chances never seemed high danger with GG. And when we did shoot we didn’t have anyone to pick up the garbage. So We stunk on offence.

Couple things about GG, as it proved out he wasn't a good head coach. He was brought in to implement a disciplined possession game which the team struggled with obviously. I believe more than GG got frustrated with the entire process leading to his dismissal. From what I am hearing the plan is not to abandon the disciplined possession game but enhance it with better players to implement it (ie winning more faceoffs for control), (faster puck movement with an effective forecheck)and ( better playmaking with better snipers for scoring). Peter's job IMO is to make better decisions both before and in game than what we saw from GG.

[travel_dude]

Just as an aside, the high possession part of the plan worked.

The Flames are one of the better teams in that respect.

Possession at the expense of scoring chances is not what's supposed to happen.

What I find amazing is that even with that high possession, the D-men still seemed to be ringing it off the boards on zone exits.

We had guys that were amazing at entering the zone and maintaining possession, but shots didn;t always materialize.

We didn;t seem to attack with speed, just slow it down.

The breakaways were single guys who didn;t score because they weren;t the snipers.

 

So, we had half a system.  Actually less, because the D-zone was a tire fire at times.

Fix the PP and we are instantly a better team.

Adjust the D-zone coverage a bit and we are a better team.

Adjust the transition game, so that 2 guys can break away.

 

 

[cccsberg]

6 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

It really depends on what you’re drinking. Maybe you’ve only taken a few sips and in need of acquiring the taste. 

 

I didnt like GG. The team looked similar to Hartley’s team. Bonehead turnovers that cost us in the most untimely moments in a game. We had the puck more, but I was never excited about our chances when we took shots. Our chances never seemed high danger with GG. And when we did shoot we didn’t have anyone to pick up the garbage. So We stunk on offence.

Interesting that you saw GG’s team similar to BH’s.  To me they were dramatically different.  GG was definitely focused on possession versus full attack mode under BH.  Also, in terms of attack BH focused on quick shots after cross-crease passes versus plodding, methodical shots under GG.  

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, cccsberg said:

Interesting that you saw GG’s team similar to BH’s.  To me they were dramatically different.  GG was definitely focused on possession versus full attack mode under BH.  Also, in terms of attack BH focused on quick shots after cross-crease passes versus plodding, methodical shots under GG.  

 

It was mostly the way goals are scored against the Flames. They were supposed to have one of the best defence groups in the league, but I get what you’re saying about style. So for me, it was the same vulnerability. We had the puck, but other teams just waited to attack.

[420since1974]

I have about the same luck in identifying potential in coaches, as I do with goalies.

In short, not much at all, LOL.

Both are voodoo to me.

 

I'm hoping that BP attempts to keep the possession stats close to or better than the last two seasons.

But, I'd like to see the D skate the puck out their own zone more often, and increase the number of stretch passes (Brodie has been so great at this on his backhand).

In general, a more aggressive approach by the team on both the fore-check and PK would please me as well.

I am unsure if some of these things necessarily have to be mutually exclusive to good possession stats.

[travel_dude]

45 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:

I have about the same luck in identifying potential in coaches, as I do with goalies.

In short, not much at all, LOL.

Both are voodoo to me.

 

I'm hoping that BP attempts to keep the possession stats close to or better than the last two seasons.

But, I'd like to see the D skate the puck out their own zone more often, and increase the number of stretch passes (Brodie has been so great at this on his backhand).

In general, a more aggressive approach by the team on both the fore-check and PK would please me as well.

I am unsure if some of these things necessarily have to be mutually exclusive to good possession stats.

 

I agree.

I didn't like the way we broke out 50% of the time.  It reminded me of the Hartley stretch pass, except it was to stationary forwards on the boards.

JH and Brodie had some of the best zone entries of the team.  IIRC, Backlund and one or two others were good as well.  Getting out of the zone was another story.

Bart was infamous for zero pressure zone exits that consisted of ringing it off the boards close to your ears.  Smith had an annoying habit of doing that as well.  No issue him doing that on the PK or when there were multiple forecheckers and few better options. 

[420since1974]

Hanifin is reportedly quite good at zone entries, so we may have up to a half dozen players that can do that fairly consistently.

 

Zone breakouts were definitely an issue last season.

I certainly don't mind having a goalie that can pass well, but last year it felt like all 5 skaters were usually stationary whenever Smith did so.

I don't know if that was GG's playbook, or that the skaters just had a lot of difficulty adjusting to a goalie that can accurately pass the puck.

Either way, I am cautiously optimistic that they can figure out this particular issue to begin this season.

[conundrumed]

There was a good statistical write up in the Athletic about clean zone exits by the opposition 5 v 5. The Flames were dead last, where, I believe, Carolina was 4th.

Meaning the Flames gave their opponents the most clean exits out of their D zone/game.

TBay was 1st, in that teams had the hardest time making clean exits out of their zone.

It relates to forechecking and how the opponents options get narrowed exiting their zone.

Because it's on a per game basis, the differences weren't huge. But between Carolina and the Flames, Carolina were forcing about 9 more turnovers per game than the Flames out of the opponents D zone alone.

That's kind of a big deal. And that is coaching.

 

For Athletic subscribers, the article is "How well does each team forecheck" by Ryan Stimson.

That we were 31st out of 31 makes perfect sense to me. It also shines a light that Peters gets the importance of this part of the game.

 

[conundrumed]

19 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:

Hanifin is reportedly quite good at zone entries, so we may have up to a half dozen players that can do that fairly consistently.

 

Zone breakouts were definitely an issue last season.

I certainly don't mind having a goalie that can pass well, but last year it felt like all 5 skaters were usually stationary whenever Smith did so.

I don't know if that was GG's playbook, or that the skaters just had a lot of difficulty adjusting to a goalie that can accurately pass the puck.

Either way, I am cautiously optimistic that they can figure out this particular issue to begin this season.

We love you 420, we can live with the bolded

 

There's something I've been holding back on.

Smith has to be one of the most frustrating goalies to be a dman for, EVER.

He really holds them hostage.

First off, we don't know what the Blockchain you're going to do with the puck. There's no set plays, you're going to do whatever Mike Smith feels like.

So if you turn it over, I guess I'm kinda Blockchained, because I'm not a mindreader.

Second.

If it's you and me when you stop the puck behind the net and it's slow, great.

When I'm chopping and 5 strides away from grabbing it...GET THE Blockchain OUT OF THE WAY.

How do you come behind the net, in stride, and look up ice? You've gotta look at your goalie, whose in no hurry to get the Blockchain out of your way.

Third.

You're a goalie. Pucks go in. Let it go and get ready to continue the game. Drama queen.

If you want to get angry, get angry at the guy that just scored and never give him another.

You're going to bark at your Blockchaining dmen for how erratic you are?

 

Sorry for all of the expletives mods.

I've held that rant in long enough.

Sorry.

 

[The_People1]

36 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

We love you 420, we can live with the bolded

 

There's something I've been holding back on.

Smith has to be one of the most frustrating goalies to be a dman for, EVER.

He really holds them hostage.

First off, we don't know what the Blockchain you're going to do with the puck. There's no set plays, you're going to do whatever Mike Smith feels like.

So if you turn it over, I guess I'm kinda Blockchained, because I'm not a mindreader.

Second.

If it's you and me when you stop the puck behind the net and it's slow, great.

When I'm chopping and 5 strides away from grabbing it...GET THE Blockchain OUT OF THE WAY.

How do you come behind the net, in stride, and look up ice? You've gotta look at your goalie, whose in no hurry to get the Blockchain out of your way.

Third.

You're a goalie. Pucks go in. Let it go and get ready to continue the game. Drama queen.

If you want to get angry, get angry at the guy that just scored and never give him another.

You're going to bark at your Blockchaining dmen for how erratic you are?

 

Sorry for all of the expletives mods.

I've held that rant in long enough.

Sorry.

 

 

Ya I can't say I'm a fan of Smith.  He too emotional.  As a leader, doesn't matter iff the score is 2-1 or 9-5, keep composer and play the next shift like it's 0-0.  

[420since1974]

59 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

We love you 420, we can live with the bolded

 

Sorry and thank you for the heads up.

I've just recently upgraded my Windows 10 OS.

Prior to the upgrade, all of the posts that I had viewed and posted on this forum since I joined were in Arial 14 point, non-bolded, non-italic.

 

NOW, what I see is all bolded, in italics.

When I click the "B", my posts appear to me to be non-bolded and non-italic.

Everyone else is obviously seeing something different from me.

It's my issue, so I will just have to get used to the bolded and italic look that I'm seeing.

[travel_dude]

14 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:

Sorry and thank you for the heads up.

I've just recently upgraded my Windows 10 OS.

Prior to the upgrade, all of the posts that I had viewed and posted on this forum since I joined were in Arial 14 point, non-bolded, non-italic.

 

NOW, what I see is all bolded, in italics.

When I click the "B", my posts appear to me to be non-bolded and non-italic.

Everyone else is obviously seeing something different from me.

It's my issue, so I will just have to get used to the bolded and italic look that I'm seeing.

 

 

This looks good now.

At least you are NOT SHOUTING AT US IN BOLD AND ITALICS.

[robrob74]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

This looks good now.

At least you are NOT SHOUTING AT US IN BOLD AND ITALICS.

 

I read faster when it is in italics, and I thought 420 just had that much more passion for the game. 

Actually, I read this forum 1st thing in the morning everyday so it takes awhile for my eyes to wake up and adjust. Plus it’s because I am getting older so it was refreshing to me.

 

[420since1974]

I have passion, but not enough to yell at anyone here, LMAO

Ya, my eyes are going with age too, though I'm still managing with just reading glasses.

[cross16]

19 hours ago, conundrumed said:

There was a good statistical write up in the Athletic about clean zone exits by the opposition 5 v 5. The Flames were dead last, where, I believe, Carolina was 4th.

Meaning the Flames gave their opponents the most clean exits out of their D zone/game.

TBay was 1st, in that teams had the hardest time making clean exits out of their zone.

It relates to forechecking and how the opponents options get narrowed exiting their zone.

Because it's on a per game basis, the differences weren't huge. But between Carolina and the Flames, Carolina were forcing about 9 more turnovers per game than the Flames out of the opponents D zone alone.

That's kind of a big deal. And that is coaching.

 

For Athletic subscribers, the article is "How well does each team forecheck" by Ryan Stimson.

That we were 31st out of 31 makes perfect sense to me. It also shines a light that Peters gets the importance of this part of the game.

 

 

I'll back you up on this, it was a really good article and I think highlighted something we all noticed lat year was that even those there we many pluses to Gulutzan's system, the Flames gave up the blueline far too easy last year and were not aggressive enough in the neutral zone. In Gulutzan's first season I thought they were a great netural zone team but for whatever reason the coaching staff felt the more conservativbe approach was better and made the switch last season. The reason I had high hopes for Gultuzan was I thought the Flames were fantastic in his first year in terms of their tactics and their execution and for whatever reason that i'll like never know they undid so much of it. 

 

This is also one of the reason i'm really excited about Peters, i've always been impressed with how the Canes play the neutral zone. They are fast and they don't wait for you, they dictate where THEY want you to go. It's pretty fun to watch so i'm looking forward to hopefully seeing the Flames play the same way. 

[phoenix66]

19 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Ya I can't say I'm a fan of Smith.  He too emotional.  As a leader, doesn't matter iff the score is 2-1 or 9-5, keep composer and play the next shift like it's 0-0.  

The you probably wont be too big of a fan of Neal then ..LOL

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

The you probably wont be too big of a fan of Neal then ..LOL

 

Tkachuk has passion.

JH has passion.

It's a little different than a goalie that gets bent out of shape after a goal.

I don't mind a "hate to lose" attitude, but the drama bothers me.  It lefts the other team know they are getting to them.

 

You always know when you are going to beat the LA Kings.  When Quick smashes his stick on his posts after letting in a goal.  He may dial it in, but most times he gets bent.