Bill Peters - 17th Flames Coach

[rickross]

How much did BP’s lack of playoff experience impact the Flames performance? Would the Flames have been better prepared to match the intensity and speed of the Avs? Or does playoff experience carry no bearing for a coach?

[JTech780]

1 minute ago, rickross said:

How much did BP’s lack of playoff experience impact the Flames performance? Would the Flames have been better prepared to match the intensity and speed of the Avs? Or does playoff experience carry no bearing for a coach?

 

I think it did have some impact for sure. Where I see it having an impact is in lineup decisions, matchups and adjustments in game and between game to the systems. 

 

I think the players not being ready to compete at playoff level intensity is on the players, not on the coach. 

 

I think we as fans put too much stock into the coaches ability to motivate players or think that that should be their job. Once upon a time, that is what the coach did, but I don't think that's the job of the coach anymore, or at least not as big a portion of his job. I think that falls on the players themselves and the leadership core of the team.

[Thebrewcrew]

6 minutes ago, rickross said:

How much did BP’s lack of playoff experience impact the Flames performance? Would the Flames have been better prepared to match the intensity and speed of the Avs? Or does playoff experience carry no bearing for a coach?

Everyone in the organization needs to look at themselves in the mirror after this loss.

 

Players- clearly weren’t good enough 

 

Peters- which changed could/should he have implemented. 

 

Treliving- did he do everything he possible could at the deadline to help his team?

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Everyone in the organization needs to look at themselves in the mirror after this loss.

 

Players- clearly weren’t good enough 

 

Peters- which changed could/should he have implemented. 

 

Treliving- did he do everything he possible could at the deadline to help his team?

 

I think it was a learning experience all around.

 

First time the players went into the playoffs as #1 seed and heavy favorites. 

 

First time BP in playoffs.

 

First time BT was a buyer going into the playoffs.

[phoenix66]

2 hours ago, rickross said:

How much did BP’s lack of playoff experience impact the Flames performance? Would the Flames have been better prepared to match the intensity and speed of the Avs? Or does playoff experience carry no bearing for a coach?

 

It absolutely plays a factor .. this was his first taste of NHL head coach 

I heard an interesting quote from Babcock yesterday .. to the effect of " we didn't keep the puck on our sticks in the offensive zone enough.. the game is a lot easier with the puck on your stick"....  sound familiar?

 

He absolutely learns from this too

Next year I'd like to see more adjusting to test out combinations when games are in hand 

I think the coach and all players got too caught up in admiring the personal goals

[cross16]

I agree with Peeps that everyone in this organization should learn something, as you would expect when you have a disappointing loss. For Peters not only was it the first time in the playoffs it was the first time he had a team reach a very high level of expectations and put themselves on the contender map so there's more than 1 lesson there for Peters. I've been pretty vocal, and I stand by it, that I thought Peters got very out coached in the playoffs so I think there will be a lot of reflection he can do. 

 

Unfortunately what I thought was Peters success in the first half, became his downfall in the 2nd. I liked that Peters was so open minded with line combos, he coached in game and made adjustments, and he wasn't afraid to make big decisions (scratch Frolik, start Rittich etc etc). Down the stretch though he channeled some Gulutzan, and seemed to take the mentality of let's just stick with it and it will turn around. No changes to the top line, fewer in game adjustments, and very few lineups changes or big decisions until it was too late. Kind of allowed complacency to creep into the team a bit. 

 

I still like him and I think he is a very good coach but he's got quite the job ahead of him. I thought they did a very poor job game planing for Colorado and when you combine that with the performance of the team it's going to take a lot for Peters to keep the buy in going through the off-season and not have any players second guess the plan. 

 

I will also always make this clear that I am a guy that thinks the impact of coaching is overrated by most fans. So while I have questions for Peters and don't think he did a very good job the majority of the blame should always reside with the players. This is a players game and players need to execute and they didn't. 

 

 

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

I think it did have some impact for sure. Where I see it having an impact is in lineup decisions, matchups and adjustments in game and between game to the systems. 

 

I think the players not being ready to compete at playoff level intensity is on the players, not on the coach. 

 

I think we as fans put too much stock into the coaches ability to motivate players or think that that should be their job. Once upon a time, that is what the coach did, but I don't think that's the job of the coach anymore, or at least not as big a portion of his job. I think that falls on the players themselves and the leadership core of the team.

 

GG seemed to have a hard time imbedding the system and if Peters’ system isn’t far off, then would it not be hard to make changes to it for this team? 

 

I feel like this isn’t necessarily a very smart group. They’re easily taken off the game off the systems. 

Maybe we’ve almost got what it takes and like some say it’s gonna take another Top6 player with speed and pace.

[phoenix66]

5 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

GG seemed to have a hard time imbedding the system and if Peters’ system isn’t far off, then would it not be hard to make changes to it for this team? 

 

I feel like this isn’t necessarily a very smart group. They’re easily taken off the game off the systems. 

Maybe we’ve almost got what it takes and like some say it’s gonna take another Top6 player with speed and pace.

Agreed .. but expectations are a mental thing we have never had to deal with ..not since 2006

 

a tale of 2 years :

2015 - 4 game sweep at Anaheim..  we were "so close"  pinned the whole thing on Elliot , a bounce here ,a bounce there .. a whole different series .. we had nothing to lose , we were the 8th seed .. aside from Goaltending , so many great things were said about that team ..people thought were on the edge of being a contender 

 

2019- 5 games against Colorado-- dismal failure , trade everybody..but it was same thing (except no blame to the goalie for once)

 

Mentally , players buy into expectation too .. they "expected "  to pour it on in 3rd periods.. to hold leads.. to get the 4th line to do the job when the 1st line doesn't. This happened all year long , why would it change now ? Its human nature , they took it for granted just like we all did 

Now they've lived it ..thats experience

 

 

how many times over the season did Peters make the comment to the effect of "players don't listen when they're winning ".. won a lot of games this year not playing at our best .

Think they'll listen next year?  probably ..cuz now he has a carrot 

[cross16]

9 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

GG seemed to have a hard time imbedding the system and if Peters’ system isn’t far off, then would it not be hard to make changes to it for this team? 

 

I feel like this isn’t necessarily a very smart group. They’re easily taken off the game off the systems. 

Maybe we’ve almost got what it takes and like some say it’s gonna take another Top6 player with speed and pace.

 

This is very strange analysis. 

 

Gulutzan didn't have a problem embedding the system, the Flames actually executed it pretty well. The problem under Gulutzan was two fold, 1 - the system was not ideal from an offensive perspective and 2 - he struggled to get the culture moving in the right direction and get players to buy into the team. That's not a system issue.

 

The Flames this year are in the top 10 in just about every category you can think of on both the offensive and defensive side of the puck and the analysis from just about every opponent was how well the Flames played in terms of their structure and how hard they were to play against. Not to mention the Flames made several adjustments to their system mid season and it took just fine. 

 

I think one of the biggest challenges for both teams and the fans is going to be to avoid the sample size bias. Sure the playoffs sucked, but let's not fall into the trap of letting 4 games in a week cloud the analysis of the entire season. This was a team that executed at a high level for most of the season. 

[phoenix66]

38 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Gulutzan didn't have a problem embedding the system, the Flames actually executed it pretty well. The problem under Gulutzan was two fold, 1 - the system was not ideal from an offensive perspective and 2 - he struggled to get the culture moving in the right direction and get players to buy into the team. That's not a system issue.

 

 

I would half agree..  I found him lacking in using the right players in those spots ..and a pure refusal to deviate 

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

This is very strange analysis. 

 

Gulutzan didn't have a problem embedding the system, the Flames actually executed it pretty well. The problem under Gulutzan was two fold, 1 - the system was not ideal from an offensive perspective and 2 - he struggled to get the culture moving in the right direction and get players to buy into the team. That's not a system issue.

 

The Flames this year are in the top 10 in just about every category you can think of on both the offensive and defensive side of the puck and the analysis from just about every opponent was how well the Flames played in terms of their structure and how hard they were to play against. Not to mention the Flames made several adjustments to their system mid season and it took just fine. 

 

I think one of the biggest challenges for both teams and the fans is going to be to avoid the sample size bias. Sure the playoffs sucked, but let's not fall into the trap of letting 4 games in a week cloud the analysis of the entire season. This was a team that executed at a high level for most of the season. 

Peters I believe will step back and analyze the season along with what he could have done better. He implemented lots here and I agree an exciting style of play. Obviously there were a few players that perhaps what he feels are perfect fits but now he and BT need to address what improvements are required.

[JTech780]

One area that the coaching staff really needs to address is the special teams. We had the 18th PP and the 19th PK, that's not good enough in either category for a contending team.

 

The PP in particular drove me crazy, from the bump back play to being far too stationary in the offensive zone, there is a lot of work to be done.

 

If you look at teams like Tampa or even Colorado, the puck is constantly on the move and so are the players. Our PP I way to stationary and doesn't open anything up in the middle of the ice, everything they do is on the outside of the ice.

 

With our ability to win faceoffs, we should have been a much better PK team, I think some of it comes from poor goaltending at times. I would also suggest that we are again way too stationary, need to push the pressure and make the other team have to make high end skill plays to beat you.

 

5v5 we were amongst the best teams in the league, so I don't see much of a need to change that aspect, but our special teams need to improve a lot if we want to continue to be a contending team.

 

The importance of special teams ramps up considerably in the playoffs as well.

[robrob74]

35 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

One area that the coaching staff really needs to address is the special teams. We had the 18th PP and the 19th PK, that's not good enough in either category for a contending team.

 

The PP in particular drove me crazy, from the bump back play to being far too stationary in the offensive zone, there is a lot of work to be done.

 

If you look at teams like Tampa or even Colorado, the puck is constantly on the move and so are the players. Our PP I way to stationary and doesn't open anything up in the middle of the ice, everything they do is on the outside of the ice.

 

With our ability to win faceoffs, we should have been a much better PK team, I think some of it comes from poor goaltending at times. I would also suggest that we are again way too stationary, need to push the pressure and make the other team have to make high end skill plays to beat you.

 

5v5 we were amongst the best teams in the league, so I don't see much of a need to change that aspect, but our special teams need to improve a lot if we want to continue to be a contending team.

 

The importance of special teams ramps up considerably in the playoffs as well.

 

I think 5vs5 we could be better. Considering we have the puck more often than the other teams, could we look at the % that was get scored on in comparison to % of time we have the puck? It helped us out score the other teams during the regular season, but the mistakes we make get magnified when scoring dries up in tighter games or the playoffs.

[MAC331]

30 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think 5vs5 we could be better. Considering we have the puck more often than the other teams, could we look at the % that was get scored on in comparison to % of time we have the puck? It helped us out score the other teams during the regular season, but the mistakes we make get magnified when scoring dries up in tighter games or the playoffs.

In the early going when we were having all the success everyone was hustling both ways, even Gaudreau and Monahan. The passing was sharp and crisp with a fast accurate pace. We seemed to take that game into the AS break and after that we started playing slower, over passing the puck, Monahan started slumping so Gaudreau tried to feed him and forgot Lindholm was part of their line. Way to much experimenting with lines for to long didn't pan out IMO. Anyways I hope Peters gets a quicker handle on things for next year.

[sak22]

8 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Agreed .. but expectations are a mental thing we have never had to deal with ..not since 2006

 

a tale of 2 years :

2015 - 4 game sweep at Anaheim..  we were "so close"  pinned the whole thing on Elliot , a bounce here ,a bounce there .. a whole different series .. we had nothing to lose , we were the 8th seed .. aside from Goaltending , so many great things were said about that team ..people thought were on the edge of being a contender 

 

2019- 5 games against Colorado-- dismal failure , trade everybody..but it was same thing (except no blame to the goalie for once)

 

Mentally , players buy into expectation too .. they "expected "  to pour it on in 3rd periods.. to hold leads.. to get the 4th line to do the job when the 1st line doesn't. This happened all year long , why would it change now ? Its human nature , they took it for granted just like we all did 

Now they've lived it ..thats experience

 

 

how many times over the season did Peters make the comment to the effect of "players don't listen when they're winning ".. won a lot of games this year not playing at our best .

Think they'll listen next year?  probably ..cuz now he has a carrot 

I do think we got a lot of false expectations out of that 2017 series.  I do think Elliott became the scapegoat because of his play, but we took advantage of a good PP and a shaky at times Gibson, and I don't think the Ducks were playing their best.  The Flames did a lot of bad things that series, and only one took the heat.  But there was still a large roster turnover in those 2 years, were talking a 12 player difference, with 3 defensemen and 5 forwards that haven't played post season.  Its why I don't like when people say that '15 and '17 should've been learning experiences and no excuses this time, all 3 were 3 different teams, the learning can be a long time like Detroit and Washington had shown.

 

I'm interested in what Peters learns from this, I'd like to see more line juggling at times when things go cold.  Post-break the #1 went cold but the team still won, I'd like to see Johnny and Monahan split to start next season, at least see what other options you can get because I think you can always go back to it.

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I do think we got a lot of false expectations out of that 2017 series.  I do think Elliott became the scapegoat because of his play, but we took advantage of a good PP and a shaky at times Gibson, and I don't think the Ducks were playing their best.  The Flames did a lot of bad things that series, and only one took the heat.  But there was still a large roster turnover in those 2 years, were talking a 12 player difference, with 3 defensemen and 5 forwards that haven't played post season.  Its why I don't like when people say that '15 and '17 should've been learning experiences and no excuses this time, all 3 were 3 different teams, the learning can be a long time like Detroit and Washington had shown.

 

I'm interested in what Peters learns from this, I'd like to see more line juggling at times when things go cold.  Post-break the #1 went cold but the team still won, I'd like to see Johnny and Monahan split to start next season, at least see what other options you can get because I think you can always go back to it.

Keep in mind I'm not talking about the expectations coming out , I mean the expectations going in 

The road team plays with house money .. always .. they are expected to lose.. keep it tight and make a series of it,. you win .. 

We haven't been in this position since 2006 .. and even then it was a bit of a mirage .. 2004 , we caught fire.. but realistically we were not a good team .. correction , we were an amazing TEAM but not cup caliber .. that year we were on the good side of will winning over talent 

 

This team needed adversity .. we got it , just not until the playoffs ..would have been nice if they had adapted to it in game 2.. but they didnt until maybe game 4.. too late 

But this is where continuity comes in .. only 4  players remain from that Anaheim series.. the more that return next year, the greater the chance you build off this and don't waste a year acclimating  ..Chicago and LA Both maintained the same core .. just revolved the extra pieces 

[travel_dude]

7 hours ago, JTech780 said:

One area that the coaching staff really needs to address is the special teams. We had the 18th PP and the 19th PK, that's not good enough in either category for a contending team.

 

The PP in particular drove me crazy, from the bump back play to being far too stationary in the offensive zone, there is a lot of work to be done.

 

If you look at teams like Tampa or even Colorado, the puck is constantly on the move and so are the players. Our PP I way to stationary and doesn't open anything up in the middle of the ice, everything they do is on the outside of the ice.

 

With our ability to win faceoffs, we should have been a much better PK team, I think some of it comes from poor goaltending at times. I would also suggest that we are again way too stationary, need to push the pressure and make the other team have to make high end skill plays to beat you.

 

5v5 we were amongst the best teams in the league, so I don't see much of a need to change that aspect, but our special teams need to improve a lot if we want to continue to be a contending team.

 

The importance of special teams ramps up considerably in the playoffs as well.

 

At the start of the season and for a few stretches, we had a deadly PP and really good PK.

Something happened.

We make some changes to personnel, but they don't last.

All it took to shut us down was to pressure the guys with the puck.
You do that with a team that's stationary, and you don't win many battles.

 

What frustrated me was using guys with little offense on the 2nd unit.

That and not making changes to the top unit when they stagnated.

They figured out the JH to Gio to JH to Gio to Lindholm play.

They realized tha Brodie would never shoot and that Backlund could easily be stripped. 

 

[JTech780]

Listening to Peters press conference from yesterday there were a couple things I found interesting.

 

First I found it interesting that he mentioned that he would handle the last couple of games of the regular season differently. My guess is that he wouldn't have sat guys and pushed to ramp up the pace of the game to get them ready to play playoff hockey. I think they let their guard down, and it's hard to flick that switch back once you've relaxed.

 

Secondly he said that he would like to add more speed to his team, size is great, but the game is getting quicker and he wants to be able to keep up to the pace of the game, especially in the playoffs.

 

Edit: Thirdly he talked about Lindholm potentially playing center next year, depending on the make up of the team next year. He mentioned that for Lindholm to play center they need wingers for him to play with.

[MAC331]

7 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Listening to Peters press conference from yesterday there were a couple things I found interesting.

 

First I found it interesting that he mentioned that he would handle the last couple of games of the regular season differently. My guess is that he wouldn't have sat guys and pushed to ramp up the pace of the game to get them ready to play playoff hockey. I think they let their guard down, and it's hard to flick that switch back once you've relaxed.

 

Secondly he said that he would like to add more speed to his team, size is great, but the game is getting quicker and he wants to be able to keep up to the pace of the game, especially in the playoffs.

Should prove to be an interesting offseason for sure. The addition of speed will be essential and our team in particular will need to always compliment Monahan and Tkachuk with top notch skaters. Just going by Peter's use and treatment of Neal and Frolik I believe BT will find a way to move them. Jankowski is another C that likely doesn't fit as a Peter's type player going forward. On the size question I believe it is a matter of a good balance, ideally I prefer 6' tall, 195lbs+ that can skate have talent and aren't afraid to hit people.

[phoenix66]

15 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Should prove to be an interesting offseason for sure. The addition of speed will be essential and our team in particular will need to always compliment Monahan and Tkachuk with top notch skaters. Just going by Peter's use and treatment of Neal and Frolik I believe BT will find a way to move them. Jankowski is another C that likely doesn't fit as a Peter's type player going forward. On the size question I believe it is a matter of a good balance, ideally I prefer 6' tall, 195lbs+ that can skate have talent and aren't afraid to hit people.

Heard this idea today .... If Boston wins tonight , VERY possible Nazim Kadri has played his last game for the leafs 

Granted, hes a grenade.. makes bonehead snaps.. but , he'd be deadly in red 

He could easily be the box checking 2nd line center we need 

 

I remember Tkachuk's last suspension .. BT was right there with him , you know there were talks had about " Be you.. just stop doing stupid things "

No reason a fresh start and a good talk cant make him well worth the risk..

TO needs a Puck Moving dman .. Brodie for Kadri anyone ?

[MAC331]

1 minute ago, phoenix66 said:

Heard this idea today .... If Boston wins tonight , VERY possible Nazim Kadri has played his last game for the leafs 

Granted, hes a grenade.. makes bonehead snaps.. but , he'd be deadly in red 

He could easily be the box checking 2nd line center we need 

 

I remember Tkachuk's last suspension .. BT was right there with him , you know there were talks had about " Be you.. just stop doing stupid things "

No reason a fresh start and a good talk cant make him well worth the risk..

TO needs a Puck Moving dman .. Brodie for Kadri anyone ?

Kadri is a punk and definitely not worth weighing in as a 2nd line C, no thanks from me. If I were BT I would be shooting higher if dealing with TOR for Nylander or Kapanen as better fits for our needs. Marleau has one more season so they can likely find a way to keep Nylander but I would definitely be after Kapanen RW. I would offer up our 2019-1st for Kapanen.

[phoenix66]

2 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Kadri is a punk and definitely not worth weighing in as a 2nd line C, no thanks from me. If I were BT I would be shooting higher if dealing with TOR for Nylander or Kapanen as better fits for our needs. Marleau has one more season so they can likely find a way to keep Nylander but I would definitely be after Kapanen RW. I would offer up our 2019-1st for Kapanen.

I dunno .. he checks a lot of boxes. 

Scores - back to back 30+ goal seasons prior to JTs arrival

Defensively responsible 

playmaker 

Truculence in spades 

Locked in at $4.5M for 3 more seasons 

 

We are still way too soft .. if Toronto loses tonight , Its as a direct result of them also being way too soft 

Right now NYlander is taking Kadri's spot and they miss Kadri.. i think you could steal him while the city and team are still ticked at him 

He's prone to meltdowns yes, but recall he also did it in defense of a teammate.. just needs to learn to punch them in the face , not cross check them  

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, JTech780 said:

Listening to Peters press conference from yesterday there were a couple things I found interesting.

 

First I found it interesting that he mentioned that he would handle the last couple of games of the regular season differently. My guess is that he wouldn't have sat guys and pushed to ramp up the pace of the game to get them ready to play playoff hockey. I think they let their guard down, and it's hard to flick that switch back once you've relaxed.

 

Secondly he said that he would like to add more speed to his team, size is great, but the game is getting quicker and he wants to be able to keep up to the pace of the game, especially in the playoffs.

 

Edit: Thirdly he talked about Lindholm potentially playing center next year, depending on the make up of the team next year. He mentioned that for Lindholm to play center they need wingers for him to play with.

 

Funny how some players figured they needed to be meaner and the coach thinks they needed to be faster.

 

What was the plan for the last few games of the season?  Rest players but keep the lines mostly intact?

Whatever it was didn't exactly work.  There was no 2nd look for lines, so he kept them together to the bitter end.

The top line stagnated at the end.  

 

I'm all for speed, since we looked slower than tree sap.

Skating is part of it, but the movement with the puck was painful at times to watch.

 

If the thought is to use Lindholm at C, then where does that put Backlund?  3rd line C?  Off the team?

That's an expensive 3rd line C to have.

 

Personally, I hope that BP and BT are on the same page.  Neal should have been a top 6 player, but the only options were RW with Monahan or Backlund.  Neither of those worked in limited use.  Especially not with Backlund.  Never really got to see an extended look at Neal with Monahan, even when the top line struggled to end the season.  Really, the only player able to put up any points on that line was Johnny.  

[JTech780]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Funny how some players figured they needed to be meaner and the coach thinks they needed to be faster.

 

What was the plan for the last few games of the season?  Rest players but keep the lines mostly intact?

Whatever it was didn't exactly work.  There was no 2nd look for lines, so he kept them together to the bitter end.

The top line stagnated at the end.  

 

I'm all for speed, since we looked slower than tree sap.

Skating is part of it, but the movement with the puck was painful at times to watch.

 

If the thought is to use Lindholm at C, then where does that put Backlund?  3rd line C?  Off the team?

That's an expensive 3rd line C to have.

 

Personally, I hope that BP and BT are on the same page.  Neal should have been a top 6 player, but the only options were RW with Monahan or Backlund.  Neither of those worked in limited use.  Especially not with Backlund.  Never really got to see an extended look at Neal with Monahan, even when the top line struggled to end the season.  Really, the only player able to put up any points on that line was Johnny.  

 

He did say that his best lineup was the Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm and Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik, that's the lineup that worked best for him and that's why stuck with it.

 

Neal got to go out with Gaudreau and Monahan after every PK, and it rarely resulted in anything. Neal was a complete non factor when played with those two.

 

I think Backlund is best suited as a 3rd line center and played with defensive wingers. I like the idea of trying Lindholm as the 2nd line center. Lots of teams spend way more than we do down the middle. Our center depth is not very good at the moment.

[MAC331]

19 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

He did say that his best lineup was the Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm and Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik, that's the lineup that worked best for him and that's why stuck with it.

 

Neal got to go out with Gaudreau and Monahan after every PK, and it rarely resulted in anything. Neal was a complete non factor when played with those two.

 

I think Backlund is best suited as a 3rd line center and played with defensive wingers. I like the idea of trying Lindholm as the 2nd line center. Lots of teams spend way more than we do down the middle. Our center depth is not very good at the moment.

I believe it best that BT find a deal for Neal and move on. I like the idea of using Lindholm as a 2nd line C and moving Backlund down to 3rd line. I disagree that his wingers need to be defensive in nature but solid overall players like you and I have mentioned Dzingel and Connelly. They would be a good sized line with speed and also scoring ability for 20 each. I would think BT should be able to get these two on contracts between 2.5 to 3.5M.

I really wonder if TOR will move Nylander with all that has gone on with him. I would love to see a line of Monahan, Lindholm, Nylander.