Bill Peters - 17th Flames Coach

[Cowtownguy]

On 2019-05-10 at 4:28 PM, robrob74 said:

 

I honestly don’t think the Flames ever peaked. The first line peaked, but the rest of the team didn’t play along. Then the fourth line peaked in the second half but the first line died. The third line peaked without Neal and then died when he returned. If peaking means playing 2-3 weeks of team hockey then they peaked too early. But they didn’t play as a whole unit for a lot of the season. I think we were lucky to be in first by the end of the year, riding different lines that got hot at the right time in order to get us there.

 

 

Your post made me laugh because it may well be entirely true. Here we are busting our brains about what went wrong (players, coaches, injuries etc.), and it may well be a matter of the right things happening at the wrong time. But yeah, "go 4th line!"

[rickross]

What’s everyone expecting from BP in year 2? Will he be able match or exceed last years success (regular season)? Or have we already seen the best of the Flames under BP and we enter a period of regression? We’ve been hit or miss with the playoffs for years now, technically we’d be trending to miss the playoffs this year. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, rickross said:

What’s everyone expecting from BP in year 2? Will he be able match or exceed last years success (regular season)? Or have we already seen the best of the Flames under BP and we enter a period of regression? We’ve been hit or miss with the playoffs for years now, technically we’d be trending to miss the playoffs this year. 

 

Had we not been a top team in the league, regression would impact us.

Went from 97 to 77, where we had made the playoffs in an unlikely way with too many things pointing to returning to the norm.

Went from 77 to 94.

Then 94 to 84.

Then 84 to 107.

 

IF you consider a 10 point drop realistic (the odds people do), then we are still a playoff team.

 

We have seen growth of players over the last year.  Mangiapane and Andersson have taking big steps.  Tkachuk grew to being a superpest that could score.  Lindholm slotted in as a utility guy that had finish.  JH and Monahan increased their scoring.  Those are things that should continue.  Some letdown expected for Gio depending on his partner.

Backlund, Janko and Bennett had undershelming results, so those could rebound.  More chances at maintaining than regressing.  Nets is still iffy with Talbot as the backup, but Smith would have been even more iffy.  

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Had we not been a top team in the league, regression would impact us.

Went from 97 to 77, where we had made the playoffs in an unlikely way with too many things pointing to returning to the norm.

Went from 77 to 94.

Then 94 to 84.

Then 84 to 107.

 

IF you consider a 10 point drop realistic (the odds people do), then we are still a playoff team.

 

We have seen growth of players over the last year.  Mangiapane and Andersson have taking big steps.  Tkachuk grew to being a superpest that could score.  Lindholm slotted in as a utility guy that had finish.  JH and Monahan increased their scoring.  Those are things that should continue.  Some letdown expected for Gio depending on his partner.

Backlund, Janko and Bennett had undershelming results, so those could rebound.  More chances at maintaining than regressing.  Nets is still iffy with Talbot as the backup, but Smith would have been even more iffy.  

 

 

I think that even if the first line regresses we can still maintain a good pace. A lot of games that line was getting 9-12 point nights. So if they regress a bit and still get points on most nights, the hope is that the depth continues to grow this year. 

 

Like if the Ryan line continues its great play, which they ended the year with, that’s considerable depth scoring. We need Backlund’s line To get mor consistency. 

 

I like the idea of just keeping them together for the PP2 to stay consistent there. They’re used to playing together so run with it, get chemistry for it. 

 

My goal for the year year would be to grow the middle 6 and my desired points would be 100+. Get into the playoffs in a 4/5 spot? 

 

And as as I said a lot in this post, consistency .

[cross16]

The only thing that could be potentially worrisome next year is the injury bug. Flames have avoided one of those catastrophic style injuries, or just a slew of them, for a while so if we are talking regression and lumping that in there then that is a reasonable fear. I'm not really concerned about a team regressions because I don't think the what the Flames did last year was outside their norm. Sure they got some career years, but when you get career years out of your stars I don't think you worry, certainly not the likes of Johnny/Mony or Tkachuk. Could Gio or Lindholm regress? sure but then you have to account for younger guys like Valamaki, Andersson, Bennett etc that have the talent for their own career years to offset that. All in all, this is still a very good team.

 

That being said I think given the fact that they had a monster season and that other teams around them have gotten better I'm not expecting the same point totals, but I also don't really care. I will look at Peters more how he handles adjustments in the start of the season given how poorly they played in the playoffs and then how does he handle things down the stretch where even he admitted he'd do things differently. Obviously you need to get there first and I expect they will, but those 2 elements on what i'm looking for from Peters and I think the rest will take care of itself. 

[travel_dude]

The biggest change from last year is having Talbot take the backup role.

Rittich managed to solidify the net during Smith's struggles.

The big question is whether Talbot can be better than a .900 goalie this season.

Smith only came close because of facing a lot of teams outside the playoffs in the final month.

 

If we get a reasonable win% behind Talbot, we should be fine.

Rittich was one of the league's best goalies until he was injured.

 

[rocketdoctor]

23 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

Backlund, Janko and Bennett had undershelming results, so those could rebound.  More chances at maintaining than regressing.  Nets is still iffy with Talbot as the backup, but Smith would have been even more iffy.  

 

Sorry TD but cannot let this pass.  You seem to be on an anti Backlund roll for the past year.

 

It what way can you call his last year underwhelming?   And in need of a rebound?   The last four years have been pretty similar.

 

 

Points solid to previous years and yet less PP points and PP time and games

+/- improved drastically

FO% pretty much the same

 

I have not looked at all the new stats but in this snapshot I see no difference.

And yes playoffs he was not particulary good along with some notable others like Gio and Chucky but you have were questioning him long before the playoffs started.

 

We would be a lot weaker down the middle without him.  It is not just you by the way.  

I  just do not get the Backlund dislike.

 

 

 

[GM_3300]

14 minutes ago, rocketdoctor said:

 

Sorry TD but cannot let this pass.  You seem to be on an anti Backlund roll for the past year.

 

It what way can you call his last year underwhelming?   And in need of a rebound?   The last four years have been pretty similar.

 

 

Points solid to previous years and yet less PP points and PP time and games

+/- improved drastically

FO% pretty much the same

 

I have not looked at all the new stats but in this snapshot I see no difference.

And yes playoffs he was not particulary good along with some notable others like Gio and Chucky but you have were questioning him long before the playoffs started.

 

We would be a lot weaker down the middle without him.  It is not just you by the way.  

I  just do not get the Backlund dislike.

 

 

 

I think to much of the defensive emphasis for this team is placed on Backlund. Peter's favors a more complete player so everyone plays their part defensively. I really think if we want to shutdown players such as McKinnon you need Backlund and like minded line mates which is why Frolik works well with Backlund. You don't want Tkachuk to be part of line whose main focus is shutdown first and scoring second. if we are to max out our top 9 I would arrange them like this if frolic remains.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk

Bennett, Backlund, Frolik

Mangiapane,, Ryan, Lindholm

Lucic, Jankowski, ????????

[Cowtownguy]

53 minutes ago, rocketdoctor said:

 

Sorry TD but cannot let this pass.  You seem to be on an anti Backlund roll for the past year.

 

It what way can you call his last year underwhelming?   And in need of a rebound?   The last four years have been pretty similar.

 

 

Points solid to previous years and yet less PP points and PP time and games

+/- improved drastically

FO% pretty much the same

 

I have not looked at all the new stats but in this snapshot I see no difference.

And yes playoffs he was not particulary good along with some notable others like Gio and Chucky but you have were questioning him long before the playoffs started.

 

We would be a lot weaker down the middle without him.  It is not just you by the way.  

I  just do not get the Backlund dislike.

 

 

 

I would assume that it is difficult to dislike Backlund. You can count me in, however, among those who are disappointed with his overall development. I had very high hopes for him being more of an offensive star. I still think he has that skill set. The Flames have used him for his defensive forward/shut down skills, and it looks like this is how his career will end. I am a little disappointed by Bennett too. Like the guy, but I wanted and expected more from him.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, rocketdoctor said:

We would be a lot weaker down the middle without him.  It is not just you by the way.  

I  just do not get the Backlund dislike.

 

Not sure why you assume that I hate Backlund.  I'm not one to suggest trading him unless we get a better one in return.

If you look beyond the obvious, you will see he regressed in power play points and his FO% dropped.

You also need to dig below the surface with FO%.

He took only 1031 last year, while the previous two years he was over 1400.

 

My frustration with him is related to his performance in the playoffs, which was dismal to say the least.

 

[rocketdoctor]

49 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Not sure why you assume that I hate Backlund.  I'm not one to suggest trading him unless we get a better one in return.

If you look beyond the obvious, you will see he regressed in power play points and his FO% dropped.

You also need to dig below the surface with FO%.

He took only 1031 last year, while the previous two years he was over 1400.

 

My frustration with him is related to his performance in the playoffs, which was dismal to say the least.

 

 

Not saying you hate him 😃 just noticed that you rag on him a bit.

 

The flip side to less PP points is that he had more even strength points!   Positives in every story 😃

Did he play less time on the PP this season?

Regression of 0.44% on the FO!  It's a hard crowd!!

He probably had less FO this year as they used Ryan and quite correctly a lot more.

 

Agree with the playoff frustration.

Anyways my main point is that you could hardly call his year underwhelming compared to other years.

 

 

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, rocketdoctor said:

 

Sorry TD but cannot let this pass.  You seem to be on an anti Backlund roll for the past year.

 

It what way can you call his last year underwhelming?   And in need of a rebound?   The last four years have been pretty similar.

 

 

Points solid to previous years and yet less PP points and PP time and games

+/- improved drastically

FO% pretty much the same

 

I have not looked at all the new stats but in this snapshot I see no difference.

And yes playoffs he was not particulary good along with some notable others like Gio and Chucky but you have were questioning him long before the playoffs started.

 

We would be a lot weaker down the middle without him.  It is not just you by the way.  

I  just do not get the Backlund dislike.

 

 

 

 

On Backlund:

 

I also think that getting a few more PP points helps the ego and possibly other parts of his game. He nets a PP goal and maybe he’s got more confidence and rhythm in his game so he pots a few of those wide-open missed  opportunities last year.

 

i teally like Backs!

 

i think his stats, whether up or down are relative to his usage. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, rocketdoctor said:

 

Not saying you hate him 😃 just noticed that you rag on him a bit.

 

The flip side to less PP points is that he had more even strength points!   Positives in every story 😃

Did he play less time on the PP this season?

Regression of 0.44% on the FO!  It's a hard crowd!!

He probably had less FO this year as they used Ryan and quite correctly a lot more.

 

Agree with the playoff frustration.

Anyways my main point is that you could hardly call his year underwhelming compared to other years.

 

 

 

No more than people have ragged on Johnny and Monahan and Bennett.

Let's face it, you can consider it a win to equal a previous season if that was a good season.

A non-playoff season is not a good measure to equal.

I would be PO'd if Monahan equaled his points from 2017/18.

4/6 of our top 6 players improved by a fair margin.

 

Other than that, I was very frustrated with his playoffs.

He was not even close to being the same player.

 

You are right, we are a tough crowd.

Check out the "Burn it Down" thread if you think otherwise.   

[redfire11]

I hope to see a little more controlled problem solving sprinkled in with some imagination coming out of Bill Peters this up and coming season.

Start by changing their practice formats. ie. Super hard start and taper off at the end of the practice. Maybe learn to get a decent start to all our games.

[rickross]

12 hours ago, redfire11 said:

I hope to see a little more controlled problem solving sprinkled in with some imagination coming out of Bill Peters this up and coming season.

Start by changing their practice formats. ie. Super hard start and taper off at the end of the practice. Maybe learn to get a decent start to all our games.

Bill Peters is who I’m still waiting on...I’m not convinced he can take this current roster to that next level. We were a really good regular season team but a terrible playoff team. Peters had no answers for that level of play/intensity, so I’ll give him year 2 to adjust and prove me wrong. 

 

Treliving still has work to do for sure, I’m hoping he can further advance the team this season without trading away a ton of high picks or quality roster player. For now we can only stay tuned...

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, rickross said:

Bill Peters is who I’m still waiting on...I’m not convinced he can take this current roster to that next level. We were a really good regular season team but a terrible playoff team. Peters had no answers for that level of play/intensity, so I’ll give him year 2 to adjust and prove me wrong. 

 

Treliving still has work to do for sure, I’m hoping he can further advance the team this season without trading away a ton of high picks or quality roster player. For now we can only stay tuned...

 

I feel he didn’t tinker enough with the roster to get consistency throughout. It cost the team in the end. It was the same with GG. Their refusal to try different options ultimately cost them wins. 

 

I was considered too negative because I felt it wasn’t working to its full potential. I might not be fully right because the team didn’t skate for 75% of the playoffs. You can say it’s that reason, but I also think that right now if you shut down Gaudreau you shut the Flames down. 

 

We have the depth so i think it is on the coach.

[CheersMan]

44 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I feel he didn’t tinker enough with the roster to get consistency throughout. It cost the team in the end. It was the same with GG. Their refusal to try different options ultimately cost them wins. 

 

I was considered too negative because I felt it wasn’t working to its full potential. I might not be fully right because the team didn’t skate for 75% of the playoffs. You can say it’s that reason, but I also think that right now if you shut down Gaudreau you shut the Flames down. 

 

We have the depth so i think it is on the coach.

50 wins man. I think BP did his part.

[robrob74]

18 minutes ago, CheersMan said:

50 wins man. I think BP did his part.

 

And one win in the part of the season that matters the most. 

 

1 win 4 losses.

 

he did his part then too which I think actually started at the all star break. Or the whole season. He couldn’t get the middle part of the roster to work.

 

lets see how he does this year.

[rickross]

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

50 wins man. I think BP did his part.

This is why it’s hard to assess Peters. Complete success in the regular season, utter failure in the playoffs. Sure we “won” the West last year but it was all for nothing, same result as before...yet another early playoff exit. The team was not prepared for the playoffs because the coaches weren’t ready for the playoffs. We have no reason to trust Peters beyond the regular season at this time. I’m hoping he can adapt and prove to be the coach that can finally get this team to the next level

[travel_dude]

30 minutes ago, rickross said:

This is why it’s hard to assess Peters. Complete success in the regular season, utter failure in the playoffs. Sure we “won” the West last year but it was all for nothing, same result as before...yet another early playoff exit. The team was not prepared for the playoffs because the coaches weren’t ready for the playoffs. We have no reason to trust Peters beyond the regular season at this time. I’m hoping he can adapt and prove to be the coach that can finally get this team to the next level

 

I'm not sure what BP was supposed to do with Gio and Backlund.

As much as we can point to the top line being shut down, where was the net support?

Those two were consistent the entire season then went to sleep.

 

[rickross]

You have to wonder, if Neal returns to form this year and lots 20+....how much falls on Peters for potentially mismanaging Neal’s playtime/line mates and how responsibility falls on Neal? 

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, rickross said:

You have to wonder, if Neal returns to form this year and lots 20+....how much falls on Peters for potentially mismanaging Neal’s playtime/line mates and how responsibility falls on Neal? 

 

Probably 90 Neal BP 10.

If Neal gets 20 goals this year, it will come from playing top minutes and PP time.
I don't buy into the "no time to train" BS.

He played with no edge and did nothing when he didn;t have the puck.

And he managed to score very seldom when he had the puck in a danger area.

 

How do you gift a guy like that top minutes and players if he doesn;t use them.

On the Oilers, he's top 6.

And they have to figure out how to fit him with McD and Draisaitl or with Chaisson and Nuge.

Neither is ideal.

Too slow fo one, too defensively inept for another.

He might just be better off with Granlund and Nygard, if they can somehow manage to blend.

Or with retread Gagner.

[CheersMan]

5 minutes ago, rickross said:

You have to wonder, if Neal returns to form this year and lots 20+....how much falls on Peters for potentially mismanaging Neal’s playtime/line mates and how responsibility falls on Neal? 

Is Neil tapping those 20 goals into open nets directly off McLottery's stick or is he scoring 20 from the 3rd line? That would make a difference if has turned things around or not. 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, rickross said:

You have to wonder, if Neal returns to form this year and lots 20+....how much falls on Peters for potentially mismanaging Neal’s playtime/line mates and how responsibility falls on Neal? 

 

Neal will probably score 20 this year on the PP with McDavid just like Chiasson just did.

 

None of this should fall on Peter's shoulders because we don't have a McDavid to turn Neal into a 20-goal scorer.  There's little to nothing Peters could've done.  Neal's fails all falls on Neal himself. 

[travel_dude]

48 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Neal will probably score 20 this year on the PP with McDavid just like Chiasson just did.

 

None of this should fall on Peter's shoulders because we don't have a McDavid to turn Neal into a 20-goal scorer.  There's little to nothing Peters could've done.  Neal's fails all falls on Neal himself. 

 

Considering his skating is slow, I don;t know that he'll be able to play with McDavid.

The coach is saying that Kassian earned the spot to start the season, and figures he will use Neal with Nuge.

That would be akin to playing with Backlund without Tkachuk.

Good luck with that.

 

But Neal should be able to score a few on the PP.

Top unit that is.

That unit will score whether h's there or not.