Bill Peters - 17th Flames Coach

[cross16]

32 minutes ago, rickross said:

Exactly. I'm not hating on Peters, I'm sure he's a good coach. I'm just not sure why so many are convinced he's the right coach based off his NHL resume. We just went through this with GG, not sure why some are so eager to keep gambling with unproven coaches.

 

I think the point is resumes are overrated. Claude Julien, Randy Carlyle and Ron Wilson have good resumes too. Mike Sullivan didn't have a good resume before Pitts hired him, Peter Deboer didn't either when we went to New Jersey's. The whole unimpressive resume thing can work both ways. 

 

I like him because of the Canes games I've watched since he's been down there. I like him because hockey canda likes him and I like him because the buzz league wide Among opposing coaches was that the hurricanes are among the hardest teams to play because they are so prepared. That speaks to very good coaching. 

 

It may work, it may not by  Imo when it comes to coaching there is no way to say one way or another, we just don't know. People thought Boudreau was going to make the difference for the Wild and now they just got pummeled. It's a crap shoot so guy with the guy you are most confortable with. 

[JTech780]

I wonder if we could convince one of Dallas Eakins or Todd Nelson to join the coaching staff and run the PP. Both have run top notch PP's in the AHL the last few years.

[cross16]

1 minute ago, JTech780 said:

I wonder if we could convince one of Dallas Eakins or Todd Nelson to join the coaching staff and run the PP. Both have run top notch PP's in the AHL the last few years.

 

Yes please to Todd Nelson. I'm a big fan. He's turned down NHL jobs in the past because he wants to run a bench but maybe he will change his mind. He should be given another shot as an NHL head coach. 

 

Another name I like is Trevor Letowski. Having a good run in the OHL, has run some good power plays and was Team Canadas PP coach at the world juniors. Good up and coming coach who could pair well. I'd imagine Steve smith comes with Peter which I would like. 

 

[DirtyDeeds]

36 minutes ago, rickross said:

Exactly. I'm not hating on Peters, I'm sure he's a good coach. I'm just not sure why so many are convinced he's the right coach based off his NHL resume. We just went through this with GG, not sure why some are so eager to keep gambling with unproven coaches.

Because his teams have "very good possession stats" even as a non playoff coach.

 

There  are many examples of teams jumping on the possession stats bandwagon and not having success(playoff berths) Florida, Arizona, Carolina are just 3 examples of teams who are preaching and building teams around possession stats and having limited success. You could now add the Flames to this list too...

[DirtyDeeds]

35 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I am tired of hearing about Brouwer being the reason our whole team is out of whack. You of all people should fully understand that Brouwer is going to play somewhere no matter what. Brouwer did his job this season end of story. There is nothing wrong with having players such as Mangiapane further developing their skills as depth in the AHL.As a matter of success we could use more like him in the AHL.

Yes he did and the reason so many like to hate him is because he is overpaid. Not many would have trouble with his ice time or play if he was earning just 1 mil/year. The money however give many good reason to complain.. call it value or lack of value if you want..

[JTech780]

8 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Because his teams have "very good possession stats" even as a non playoff coach.

 

There  are many examples of teams jumping on the possession stats bandwagon and not having success(playoff berths) Florida, Arizona, Carolina are just 3 examples of teams who are preaching and building teams around possession stats and having limited success. You could now add the Flames to this list too...

 

The Bruins, Penguins, Lightning, Jets, Predators, and Blue Jackets all were in the top 10 in SAT% this year, yeah this possession stats stuff is useless and will never catch on.

[Carty]

57 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

On a regular basis, probably no one , but that isn't the point. If he is called up why aren't you putting him in a position to succeed instead of having Brouwer play top 6 and PP minutes.

 

The other factor is the irony of using Brouwer in the top 6 and for getting the time on the PP that he had...   

 

It just doesn't put the team in a position to succeed...

[JTech780]

6 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Yes he did and the reason so many like to hate him is because he is overpaid. Not many would have trouble with his ice time or play if he was earning just 1 mil/year. The money however give many good reason to complain.. call it value or lack of value if you want..

 

Yes he is overpaid, but he was also over played, Brouwer in a 4th line role is fine, not ideal at his salary, but he does a good enough job in that role, it's when he is playing top 6 and on the PP that I start to take issue.

[conundrumed]

Should probably also note that Brouwer was over-used due to having no one better, so that’s still an issue.

[kehatch]

Brouwer didn't do his job.  He was brought on to be a 20 goal / 40 point player who scores on the Power Play. He didn't come anywhere close to doing that job.  Sure he played up and down the line up and on all special teams. But he didn't do it well.  Zero PPGs. The worst PK stats (by any metric) of all the Flames forwards.  Ninth in even strength ice time and points but third in salary (among forwards).  Virtually every player on the team played much better when not with Brouwer.  

 

Back on topic, I get some of the concern about Peters.  He is relatively unproven and there are a LOT of similarities to GG.  Given the number of proven coaches available I understand why some wish Treliving went in a different direction.  But I think he is going to work.  He fits our roster and what Treliving is building better then the other coaches on the list, at least on paper. And as Cross says, being a veteran proven coach doesn't equal being risk free.  Treliving was taking a risk no matter who he hired.  

[DirtyDeeds]

18 minutes ago, kehatch said:

Brouwer didn't do his job.  He was brought on to be a 20 goal / 40 point player who scores on the Power Play. He didn't come anywhere close to doing that job.  Sure he played up and down the line up and on all special teams. But he didn't do it well.  Zero PPGs. The worst PK stats (by any metric) of all the Flames forwards.  Ninth in even strength ice time and points but third in salary (among forwards).  Virtually every player on the team played much better when not with Brouwer.  

 

Back on topic, I get some of the concern about Peters.  He is relatively unproven and there are a LOT of similarities to GG.  Given the number of proven coaches available I understand why some wish Treliving went in a different direction.  But I think he is going to work.  He fits our roster and what Treliving is building better then the other coaches on the list, at least on paper. And as Cross says, being a veteran proven coach doesn't equal being risk free.  Treliving was taking a risk no matter who he hired.  

Maybe you should reread the job description when he was signed:

Flames did need a RHS on PP but there was never the "scores on the PP" attached to his resume.

https://www.nhl.com/news/troy-brouwer-signs-contract-with-calgary-flames/c-281091976

[JTech780]

7 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Maybe you should reread the job description when he was signed:

Flames did need a RHS on PP but there was never the "scores on the PP" attached to his resume.

https://www.nhl.com/news/troy-brouwer-signs-contract-with-calgary-flames/c-281091976

 

Of the list of skills Brouwer brings according to this article, what has shown while with the Flames?

 

Punishing body checker, maybe, but not really. Playing well without the puck, nope. Scoring ability, absolutely not. Size, ok, sure he is still 6'3" 215lbs.

[DirtyDeeds]

53 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Of the list of skills Brouwer brings according to this article, what has shown while with the Flames?

 

Punishing body checker, maybe, but not really. Playing well without the puck, nope. Scoring ability, absolutely not. Size, ok, sure he is still 6'3" 215lbs.

Well he never lived up to his billing.  Kehatch's billing either.

We do know that the coaches GG played him because he was positionally and defensively sound. He was one of only a few RHS we could play on 1st PP and up the lineup because of his experience.

I don't expect much change under the new coach either.

[travel_dude]

45 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Well he never lived up to his billing.  Kehatch's billing either.

We do know that the coaches GG played him because he was positionally and defensively sound. He was one of only a few RHS we could play on 1st PP and up the lineup because of his experience.

I don't expect much change under the new coach either.

 

I'm not sure the reasons Gully was fired, but consistently trying something that doesn't work, while ignoring things that did work has to be one of them.

Perhaps there was another RHS that could have been used on the PP sooner.  Like Hamilton?  Even parking Stone in Brouwer's spot might have shown something.

Anyway, what I am getting at is that perhaps those scenarios are something that was part of the interview process.   

 

BTW, my "dislike" of Brouwer is not due to his salary.  He often didn't deserve to play that many minutes nor suit up the following game.   

[cccsberg]

4 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I am tired of hearing about Brouwer being the reason our whole team is out of whack. You of all people should fully understand that Brouwer is going to play somewhere no matter what. Brouwer did his job this season end of story. There is nothing wrong with having players such as Mangiapane further developing their skills as depth in the AHL.As a matter of success we could use more like him in the AHL.

Brouwer should not have been on the ice for the majority of the season.  He was paid as a Top6 guy.  Of course it put the team out of whack.  Not the only thing, but certainly a contributing factor.

[robrob74]

5 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I think the point is resumes are overrated. Claude Julien, Randy Carlyle and Ron Wilson have good resumes too. Mike Sullivan didn't have a good resume before Pitts hired him, Peter Deboer didn't either when we went to New Jersey's. The whole unimpressive resume thing can work both ways. 

 

I like him because of the Canes games I've watched since he's been down there. I like him because hockey canda likes him and I like him because the buzz league wide Among opposing coaches was that the hurricanes are among the hardest teams to play because they are so prepared. That speaks to very good coaching. 

 

It may work, it may not by  Imo when it comes to coaching there is no way to say one way or another, we just don't know. People thought Boudreau was going to make the difference for the Wild and now they just got pummeled. It's a crap shoot so guy with the guy you are most confortable with. 

 

 

Hockey Canada is where the failed coaches go to coach. 

 

A long time ago but we had a hockey Canada coach who sucked and didn’t last, but wasn’t it only one season? 

 

Hockey Canada is where the overlooked coaches go to coach.

[kehatch]

4 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

Maybe you should reread the job description when he was signed:

Flames did need a RHS on PP but there was never the "scores on the PP" attached to his resume.

https://www.nhl.com/news/troy-brouwer-signs-contract-with-calgary-flames/c-281091976

 

Well, if you have link to one article on nhl.com I guess that settles it

 

Brouwer put up about 20 goals a season before signing in Calgary, and about half of those were on the PP. He added the net front precense and RH shot that our PP was lacking before he was signed. Treliving spoke about him adding value there numerous times. Plus, over his two seasons in Calgary the coach kept trying to get him to work there. Clearly that is part of what Calgary was expecting from him. 

 

Regardless. The Flames didn't sign him to 4.5x4 to stink up speciality teams and spend most of his time on the fourth line 5 on 5. He most definitely has NOT been "doing his job" as was suggested. 

 

I do agree GG had limited options. But he did have options. I was at the game where he took (and lost) 3 consecutive face offs during a 5 on 3, and played darn near the full 2 minutes despite multiple chances to change. The entire arena was going wtf before we predictably were scored on. His defence? He asked Brouwer and he said he was good. 

[kehatch]

35 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

Hockey Canada is where the failed coaches go to coach. 

 

A long time ago but we had a hockey Canada coach who sucked and didn’t last, but wasn’t it only one season? 

 

Hockey Canada is where the overlooked coaches go to coach.

DeBoer, Babcock, Cooper, Gallant, Tippit, McLellan... 

[robrob74]

11 minutes ago, kehatch said:

DeBoer, Babcock, Cooper, Gallant, Tippit, McLellan... 

 

 

The olympics is one thing. The best coaches go to the olympics, but the worlds are another thing, when the failed coaches go every year. 

 

Sure you can point to those coaches who coach the best every 4 years. Is Peters one of those coaches that coaches in the olympics, when the best coaches are chosen to coach the best players in the world? 

 

Go ahead, pick and choose stats to help your arguments. The fact is Peters isn’t anymore successful than GG.

[kehatch]

4 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

The olympics is one thing. The best coaches go to the olympics, but the worlds are another thing, when the failed coaches go every year. 

 

Sure you can point to those coaches who coach the best every 4 years. Is Peters one of those coaches that coaches in the olympics, when the best coaches are chosen to coach the best players in the world? 

 

Go ahead, pick and choose stats to help your arguments. The fact is Peters isn’t anymore successful than GG.

 

Google is your friend. Most of those coaches didn't coach the Olympic teams.

[conundrumed]

It goes back to what cross is saying about resume.

Coaching paths to the NHL tend to follow similar paths be it via hockey Canada or ex-players whose smarts impressed coaches into convincing them to start in on coaching.

The mentorship programs are solid regardless and they cut their teeth virtually the same way.

After that it’s pretty much on the GM to solve a litany of problems.

Motivation isn’t so much on the coach, rather the GM and scouts. You get motivated players for your roster. And if players know the scouting crew is there, they are likely motivated superficially, so that can be an issue.

If character is an issue, it’s what the GM has assembled. It’s his job to address it with the group or the individual, and not worry about hurting feelings or have patience for excuses.

Has anyone here in any sport not have a coach or GM screaming in their face?

Did you get mad at yourself and get motivated, or did you get mad at them?

If you got mad at them, welcome to the bench or tradewire.

I think the biggest knock on coaches is player utilization even more than systems. Because if you have a strong enough roster, they’ll win in spite of you.

If your roster isn’t up to snuff, you really need to utilize what you have.

Playing the “right way” only gets you so far, as we’ve just proven this season.

There’s no recipe or one ingredient to make it taste good.

But I think I’m being Captain Obvious.

Coaching doesn’t make or break us if the rest of the recipe is off.

It is the easiest ingredient to change though...

[MAC331]

15 hours ago, kehatch said:

Brouwer didn't do his job.  He was brought on to be a 20 goal / 40 point player who scores on the Power Play. He didn't come anywhere close to doing that job.  Sure he played up and down the line up and on all special teams. But he didn't do it well.  Zero PPGs. The worst PK stats (by any metric) of all the Flames forwards.  Ninth in even strength ice time and points but third in salary (among forwards).  Virtually every player on the team played much better when not with Brouwer.  

 

Back on topic, I get some of the concern about Peters.  He is relatively unproven and there are a LOT of similarities to GG.  Given the number of proven coaches available I understand why some wish Treliving went in a different direction.  But I think he is going to work.  He fits our roster and what Treliving is building better then the other coaches on the list, at least on paper. And as Cross says, being a veteran proven coach doesn't equal being risk free.  Treliving was taking a risk no matter who he hired.  

I think Brouwer's use and results tells you how bad a shape this team was in this season.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It goes back to what cross is saying about resume.

Coaching paths to the NHL tend to follow similar paths be it via hockey Canada or ex-players whose smarts impressed coaches into convincing them to start in on coaching.

The mentorship programs are solid regardless and they cut their teeth virtually the same way.

After that it’s pretty much on the GM to solve a litany of problems.

Motivation isn’t so much on the coach, rather the GM and scouts. You get motivated players for your roster. And if players know the scouting crew is there, they are likely motivated superficially, so that can be an issue.

If character is an issue, it’s what the GM has assembled. It’s his job to address it with the group or the individual, and not worry about hurting feelings or have patience for excuses.

Has anyone here in any sport not have a coach or GM screaming in their face?

Did you get mad at yourself and get motivated, or did you get mad at them?

If you got mad at them, welcome to the bench or tradewire.

I think the biggest knock on coaches is player utilization even more than systems. Because if you have a strong enough roster, they’ll win in spite of you.

If your roster isn’t up to snuff, you really need to utilize what you have.

Playing the “right way” only gets you so far, as we’ve just proven this season.

There’s no recipe or one ingredient to make it taste good.

But I think I’m being Captain Obvious.

Coaching doesn’t make or break us if the rest of the recipe is off.

It is the easiest ingredient to change though...

Saw a good quote by Michael Jordan today that people should take into account with our team " talent will win you games however teamwork will win you Championships".

A Coach has to bring the players together and playing for each other, only then will they have their own identity and the consistency to go on the ice and execute it. Should BT hire Peters I see a GM that believes in what he wants to see executed as a style of play and GG wasn't quite that coach so hats off to BT for having the courage to make a change.

[JTech780]

One of my favorite stats that no one really talks about is takeaways. To me that stat shows that a player or team is working hard when they don't have the puck and they are pressuring hard to get the puck back. 

 

Carolina lead the league in takeaways last year with 887, the only teams to have 800 or more takeaways were Carolina and Vegas. Calgary had 679 takeaways.

 

I really hope this team going to be more relentless on the puck next season, and I think they will.

[cross16]

Just to show the importance of good goaltending on good coaching