Darryl Sutter new head coach

[jjgallow]

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

I personally think this debate about how players should just "shut up and play" or "they get paid" is missing the point. Like it or not in pro sports today players have a ton of pull. I mean you can laugh about Huberdeau signing up for 8 years to play with Sutter but he also knows damn well that Sutter, even if he was doing a good job, ain't gonna be there through his contract. It's a players game and has been for quite a while. 

 

Good coaches adapt to the environment they are in, the game/changes to the game and to their players. They don't force players into their way and this is a message Sutter clearly hasn't' learned and it's costing him. 

 

I am still not totally convinced Sutter is the issue, especially with the extremely high # of coaches blamed here already, and we saw how great things went for LA when they dumped him.  Brief blip of success followed by a whole new level of pain.   I expect very similar here.

 

But.....  nobody should be silenced.  It's not good business.    Where I find this most noticeable is the NHL fines against players who are critical of league policies and decisions.   Players should be able to voice their opinion when they put their life at risk in those games, no matter how much they are paid to do it.  Silencing things like safety concerns should pretty much be illegal, for instance.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I am still not totally convinced Sutter is the issue, especially with the extremely high # of coaches blamed here already, and we saw how great things went for LA when they dumped him.  Brief blip of success followed by a whole new level of pain.   I expect very similar here.

 

But.....  nobody should be silenced.  It's not good business.    Where I find this most noticeable is the NHL fines against players who are critical of league policies and decisions.   Players should be able to voice their opinion when they put their life at risk in those games, no matter how much they are paid to do it.  Silencing things like safety concerns should pretty much be illegal, for instance.

 

I only half blame Sutter.  The Flames were let down by bad goaltending and the lack of timely goals this season.

 

If you break it all down, we needed just 6 saves from Markstrom this season and we would have been 6-points better in the standings.  He's allowed maybe 30 totally bad goals this season (and that's being nice already).  6-goals against could've turned those 1-goal Losses into OTL... or OTL into Wins... that's the difference.  The rest of the team could've kept playing the same way and we are playoff bound.

 

And scoring... we lead the league with 15 OTL this season.  The chances were there.  Just had to bury them.  I don't think we are "so bad in OT" but just rather, there's no finish.  We generally play smart OT and control a fair amount of possession but when it comes to the finish, it's totally lacking.  You can blame Sutter for OT choices of lines and combinations but at the end of the day, we have to score on opportunities and the players didn't do it.

 

Overall, Sutter didn't maximize the lineup, yes, but at the same time, it was a good enough job to get into the playoffs.  The players have to take half the blame for their execution.

[cross16]

I don't blame Sutter either. The Flames are going to miss the playoffs due to goaltending, that's just a simple fact at this point. Making the playoffs with bottom 5 goaltending in the league is incredibly challenging, even bottom 10. The only other 2 teams in that scenario are LA (who should be noted have one of the best teams save % in the league since the deadline) and Seattle (who are only 6 points ahead of the Flames). 

 

I also think it's rarely so binary as blame the coach. The coach is really just one of the factors and while sure the Flames go through coaches a little more than avg it's not really due to blame. 

Sutter - stepped down on his own accord

Playfair - Always thought this one was curious. Came as a surprise to many. 

Keenan - his firing was actually a surprise. I think most thought that was a team let down by injuries' not coaching. 

Brent - I mean bad coach but I think we all saw the roster at the time and knew it was bad. He also chose to step away.

Hartley - Similar to Sutter. Wasn't fired because he was at fault, fired because they knew (and IMO this was obvious) he wasn't going to take that team forward. Again, was pretty obvious the roster needed to be upgraded. 

Gulutzan - Blamed but probably deserved it. Think he was just not suited to a head coach role

Peters - Fired for racist comments

Ward - just a bad hire and one that I personally believe had a lot to due to COVID and the fact that Sutter turned them down initially. 

 

This doesn't have to be a question of blame, IMO It's a question of what are you trying to accomplish with this team. If the goal is to just keep the bottom from failing out then sure keep Sutter. I think your at risk of losing Lindholm and probably Trelving so need to have a plan to navigate that. 

If the goal is to try and maximize what you have here then IMO Sutter isn't the guy. As with hiring any coach (because predicting coaching success if a complete fools errand) that comes with the risk that you hire the wrong guy and you do take a step backwards. 

 

I'm ready to roll that dice, especially given it's looking like the Flames might have someone in Mitch Love so give him a chance before someone else does.  If the bottom falls out so be it. 

 

I should add, there is an option here where Sutter stays and they do maximize the talent but he'd have to change quite a bit. Listen to the players, challenge his own philosphical beliefs on how his team plays, dump the high volume approach, ride his top guys etc. If he is willing to do that he could stay and this group could have success with him. It's an option. 

 

Jon Cooper did this after the Lightning got swept by Columbus, other (even famous) coaches have too. Can Sutter? Does he want to?

[tmac70]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don't blame Sutter either. The Flames are going to miss the playoffs due to goaltending, that's just a simple fact at this point. Making the playoffs with bottom 5 goaltending in the league is incredibly challenging, even bottom 10. The only other 2 teams in that scenario are LA (who should be noted have one of the best teams save % in the league since the deadline) and Seattle (who are only 6 points ahead of the Flames). 

 

I also think it's rarely so binary as blame the coach. The coach is really just one of the factors and while sure the Flames go through coaches a little more than avg it's not really due to blame. 

Sutter - stepped down on his own accord

Playfair - Always thought this one was curious. Came as a surprise to many. 

Keenan - his firing was actually a surprise. I think most thought that was a team let down by injuries' not coaching. 

Brent - I mean bad coach but I think we all saw the roster at the time and knew it was bad. He also chose to step away.

Hartley - Similar to Sutter. Wasn't fired because he was at fault, fired because they knew (and IMO this was obvious) he wasn't going to take that team forward. Again, was pretty obvious the roster needed to be upgraded. 

Gulutzan - Blamed but probably deserved it. Think he was just not suited to a head coach role

Peters - Fired for racist comments

Ward - just a bad hire and one that I personally believe had a lot to due to COVID and the fact that Sutter turned them down initially. 

 

This doesn't have to be a question of blame, IMO It's a question of what are you trying to accomplish with this team. If the goal is to just keep the bottom from failing out then sure keep Sutter. I think your at risk of losing Lindholm and probably Trelving so need to have a plan to navigate that. 

If the goal is to try and maximize what you have here then IMO Sutter isn't the guy. As with hiring any coach (because predicting coaching success if a complete fools errand) that comes with the risk that you hire the wrong guy and you do take a step backwards. 

 

I'm ready to roll that dice, especially given it's looking like the Flames might have someone in Mitch Love so give him a chance before someone else does.  If the bottom falls out so be it. 

 

I should add, there is an option here where Sutter stays and they do maximize the talent but he'd have to change quite a bit. Listen to the players, challenge his own philosphical beliefs on how his team plays, dump the high volume approach, ride his top guys etc. If he is willing to do that he could stay and this group could have success with him. It's an option. 

 

Jon Cooper did this after the Lightning got swept by Columbus, other (even famous) coaches have too. Can Sutter? Does he want to?

This is well put. I am not on anyone's specific side on this as you stated you can't just slump this off on Sutter.  Sutter is what he is and it's not like it wasn't public knowledge. I agree Sutter needs to change his ways 100%, but there also has to be some form of accountability from the players too. Frankly, I know too many individuals like Sutter he isn't going to change he can't. His beliefs and tactics are to embedded with success which makes it worse. You force someone to change to suit others when they are not willing to do the same, its best to part ways. From what I have been hearing he has cut to deep past the point of return. 

 

 I agree I do think Mitch Love is a very good consideration with a caveat.   For me, it's not the lack of experience its the interference from above that would be a concern. You're now putting him into a situation that was controlled and changed by the players, plus we know there is interference from above, which has created friction in the front office with Sutter from all accounts as he will not comply. 

 

In a few weeks, this will be unraveled at the seams. From all accounts and information, I don't see how Sutter survives this. However, IMHO the ones who did the pissing and moaning about not wanting to play, management and GM best be having a long conversation about commitment and attitude moving forward. The problem is and always has been the culture, this new development just shows it is still not corrected. 

[travel_dude]

I don't think it even comes down to blame.  A coach should not get a free pass in a season like this.  His ways may have been known, but it's also up to him to get the best out of players.  He probably should fall on the sword.  The reason why I think this is because he can't change.  If the players could broker Lucic and Lewis and Toffoli to bring their suggestions to the coach, that might do something, but I think it just makes the room toxic.  He might use suggestions for 1/2 a game, then revert.    

 

Here is a small list of the things I think Sutter has ownership for:

 

If you want Huberdeau to not be a rush player and focus on D, then you don't get to call him out for not scoring. 

If you suggest that a player doesn't need to play on his strong side, you better accept the results. 

If you are aware of the goaltending issues but just keep going back to the well, don't blame scoring.

If you make a joke about a player or trash him individually, then the team is going to react.

 

I'm probably more on the side of firing the coach, since I think with better coaching this year, we would be in a playoff spot.  Maybe Huberdeau would still have a down season, but I doubt he would have been as frustrated.  If you have a hot goalie, you don't keep going back to the guy who is losing games more than double his winning.  That was the early part of the season.  10 games in a row in the most critical stretch and you barely get 500 hockey out of a goalie.  Make the switch because it's a B2B.  Trust in the goalie is key, but not if the starter is not winning.    

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don't blame Sutter either. The Flames are going to miss the playoffs due to goaltending, that's just a simple fact at this point. Making the playoffs with bottom 5 goaltending in the league is incredibly challenging, even bottom 10. The only other 2 teams in that scenario are LA (who should be noted have one of the best teams save % in the league since the deadline) and Seattle (who are only 6 points ahead of the Flames). 

 

I also think it's rarely so binary as blame the coach. The coach is really just one of the factors and while sure the Flames go through coaches a little more than avg it's not really due to blame. 

Sutter - stepped down on his own accord

Playfair - Always thought this one was curious. Came as a surprise to many. 

Keenan - his firing was actually a surprise. I think most thought that was a team let down by injuries' not coaching. 

Brent - I mean bad coach but I think we all saw the roster at the time and knew it was bad. He also chose to step away.

Hartley - Similar to Sutter. Wasn't fired because he was at fault, fired because they knew (and IMO this was obvious) he wasn't going to take that team forward. Again, was pretty obvious the roster needed to be upgraded. 

Gulutzan - Blamed but probably deserved it. Think he was just not suited to a head coach role

Peters - Fired for racist comments

Ward - just a bad hire and one that I personally believe had a lot to due to COVID and the fact that Sutter turned them down initially. 

 

This doesn't have to be a question of blame, IMO It's a question of what are you trying to accomplish with this team. If the goal is to just keep the bottom from failing out then sure keep Sutter. I think your at risk of losing Lindholm and probably Trelving so need to have a plan to navigate that. 

If the goal is to try and maximize what you have here then IMO Sutter isn't the guy. As with hiring any coach (because predicting coaching success if a complete fools errand) that comes with the risk that you hire the wrong guy and you do take a step backwards. 

 

I'm ready to roll that dice, especially given it's looking like the Flames might have someone in Mitch Love so give him a chance before someone else does.  If the bottom falls out so be it. 

 

I should add, there is an option here where Sutter stays and they do maximize the talent but he'd have to change quite a bit. Listen to the players, challenge his own philosphical beliefs on how his team plays, dump the high volume approach, ride his top guys etc. If he is willing to do that he could stay and this group could have success with him. It's an option. 

 

Jon Cooper did this after the Lightning got swept by Columbus, other (even famous) coaches have too. Can Sutter? Does he want to?

but you have a coach who constantly put Markstrom in when the other goalie was clearly rolling and the team playing better in front of him. A coach who doesn't do very many changes to his game plan. 
 

if he starts Vladar 3-4 times this year while he was feeling it and the team was feeling it in front of him, that's the season. If he continued to play Vladar instead of keep trying to get Markstrom going, this team would be in a better spot. But he sat Vladar and made him cold. 
 

you could say they gave him a shot to take the net but that was well after the fact and time he should've had more starts, if Sutter played his goalies the way he thinks he normally coaches, Vladar would Have been in more. 
 

but his coaching, continued to play players who didn't deserve playing and sat or demoted players who didn't deserve to be sat or demoted.

[cross16]

44 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

but you have a coach who constantly put Markstrom in when the other goalie was clearly rolling and the team playing better in front of him. A coach who doesn't do very many changes to his game plan. 
 

if he starts Vladar 3-4 times this year while he was feeling it and the team was feeling it in front of him, that's the season. If he continued to play Vladar instead of keep trying to get Markstrom going, this team would be in a better spot. But he sat Vladar and made him cold. 
 

you could say they gave him a shot to take the net but that was well after the fact and time he should've had more starts, if Sutter played his goalies the way he thinks he normally coaches, Vladar would Have been in more. 
 

but his coaching, continued to play players who didn't deserve playing and sat or demoted players who didn't deserve to be sat or demoted.

 

I don't agree with this, Vladar was never really rolling. He could have a good game or 2 but he would always follow it up with a stinker. Funny enough Markstrom has been the better goalie than Vladar in almost every statistically category this season. According to Moneypuck Vladar is one of the worst goalies in the league this year. 

 

He has not been near as good as fans make him out to be. I completely understand why Sutter kept trying to go back to Markstrom. 

[cross16]

2 hours ago, tmac70 said:

This is well put. I am not on anyone's specific side on this as you stated you can't just slump this off on Sutter.  Sutter is what he is and it's not like it wasn't public knowledge. I agree Sutter needs to change his ways 100%, but there also has to be some form of accountability from the players too. Frankly, I know too many individuals like Sutter he isn't going to change he can't. His beliefs and tactics are to embedded with success which makes it worse. You force someone to change to suit others when they are not willing to do the same, its best to part ways. From what I have been hearing he has cut to deep past the point of return. 

 

 I agree I do think Mitch Love is a very good consideration with a caveat.   For me, it's not the lack of experience its the interference from above that would be a concern. You're now putting him into a situation that was controlled and changed by the players, plus we know there is interference from above, which has created friction in the front office with Sutter from all accounts as he will not comply. 

 

In a few weeks, this will be unraveled at the seams. From all accounts and information, I don't see how Sutter survives this. However, IMHO the ones who did the pissing and moaning about not wanting to play, management and GM best be having a long conversation about commitment and attitude moving forward. The problem is and always has been the culture, this new development just shows it is still not corrected. 

 

Source? because nowhere have I heard this at all. 

[tmac70]

43 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Source? because nowhere have I heard this at all. 

Kadri isn’t the first person to suggest there’s an issue in Calgary. Recently, NHL agent Allan Walsh seemed to throw the coaching staff under the bus when defending his client Jonathan Huberdeau. Huberdeau has struggled this season, especially when compared to his previous campaign in Florida. He’s among a couple of players rumored to be disappointed with the system and style of play the Flames employ. Rumors of friction between the coach and the forward have been out there for a while.

The loss to the Kings only made things worse. Boomer from the Flames Barn Burner Podcast added, “this goes beyond that (Elliotte’s report). What I’m hearing is that there’s some players that have basically said “I’m not coming back if this guy is behind the bench. I’m f-----g done.” 

[tmac70]

1 minute ago, tmac70 said:

Kadri isn’t the first person to suggest there’s an issue in Calgary. Recently, NHL agent Allan Walsh seemed to throw the coaching staff under the bus when defending his client Jonathan Huberdeau. Huberdeau has struggled this season, especially when compared to his previous campaign in Florida. He’s among a couple of players rumored to be disappointed with the system and style of play the Flames employ. Rumors of friction between the coach and the forward have been out there for a while.

The loss to the Kings only made things worse. Boomer from the Flames Barn Burner Podcast added, “this goes beyond that (Elliotte’s report). What I’m hearing is that there’s some players that have basically said “I’m not coming back if this guy is behind the bench. I’m f-----g done.” 

Also, everyone favorite Francis made very vague comments about the major turmoils in the room, but couldn't go into details as of yet. Stated that in the next few weeks things we come forth that will have huge impacts on the organization. Lanny is at the games as a spiritual advisor as well. If comments from the players such as this are being made than Trevling best be having some serious conversations with individuals in the room. This room may be lost far deeper than just the coach.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't agree with this, Vladar was never really rolling. He could have a good game or 2 but he would always follow it up with a stinker. Funny enough Markstrom has been the better goalie than Vladar in almost every statistically category this season. According to Moneypuck Vladar is one of the worst goalies in the league this year. 

 

He has not been near as good as fans make him out to be. I completely understand why Sutter kept trying to go back to Markstrom. 

 

What RobRob was talking about was the stretch of 13 games without a regulation loss, from November 29th to January 27th.  During that time Markstrom played 17 games.  5-8-3 record.  Maybe not stealing the net, but should maybe have played more?  

[tmac70]

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

What RobRob was talking about was the stretch of 13 games without a regulation loss, from November 29th to January 27th.  During that time Markstrom played 17 games.  5-8-3 record.  Maybe not stealing the net, but should maybe have played more?  

 

I'm aware and it doesn't change my answer. If you look at that stretch they were basically identical in terms of play. 

 

I've said this all year, Vladar hasn't' been that great. Sutter tired to give him a run and he didn't take advantage so he went back to the guy who was a Vezina finalist last year. 

 

Perfectly logical IMO and no reason for me to believe the results would have been any different had he played Vladar. Can speculate and second guess for sure but I see no reason to think the Flames win more games if Vladar played more. 

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, tmac70 said:

Kadri isn’t the first person to suggest there’s an issue in Calgary. Recently, NHL agent Allan Walsh seemed to throw the coaching staff under the bus when defending his client Jonathan Huberdeau. Huberdeau has struggled this season, especially when compared to his previous campaign in Florida. He’s among a couple of players rumored to be disappointed with the system and style of play the Flames employ. Rumors of friction between the coach and the forward have been out there for a while.

The loss to the Kings only made things worse. Boomer from the Flames Barn Burner Podcast added, “this goes beyond that (Elliotte’s report). What I’m hearing is that there’s some players that have basically said “I’m not coming back if this guy is behind the bench. I’m f-----g done.” 

 

There is a massive leap being made here if the conclusions from this is the guys don't want to play anymore. 

 

also doesn't match with what we're seeing on the ice. 

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I'm aware and it doesn't change my answer. If you look at that stretch they were basically identical in terms of play. 

 

I've said this all year, Vladar hasn't' been that great. Sutter tired to give him a run and he didn't take advantage so he went back to the guy who was a Vezina finalist last year. 

 

Perfectly logical IMO and no reason for me to believe the results would have been any different had he played Vladar. Can speculate and second guess for sure but I see no reason to think the Flames win more games if Vladar played more. 

 

 

You are doing the exact same thing.

You speculate that the results wouldn't have been any different.

Win/loss showed one guy winning and the other not so much.

Were there any standout performances by either since March 1st?

TOR loss, MIN win.  Maybe the Ottawa game?

Harder to tell with Vladar, played 4 periods, gave up 3 in total.

 

Some agree some don't.

[tmac70]

30 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

There is a massive leap being made here if the conclusions from this is the guys don't want to play anymore. 

 

also doesn't match with what we're seeing on the ice. 

As it's been said where there is smoke there is fire. Could these be harsh words of frustration maybe, we all know Sutter isn't offering group hugs for sympathy either.  I get it's speculative but if this is the room environment with some players then it's just not the coach that needs to be reviewed. Kadri has a past as well too, he isn't free from controversy. Hubie I can see this being a HUGE change for him, the pressure the hard feelings the system is totally different here than in FLA.  On the other hand you have Toffoli making comments that DS is the best coach he ever had, Blake Coleman making comments that guys have to look in the mirror, and Anderson siding with the ice times and healthy scratching of players, this is a conflicted mess right now. I must also subject I do agree that Sutter needs to be more open to communications and different human interactions, respect is earned not given that's a two-way street.  However, if there are players unhappy and want a change what does that say about their ability to rise to the challenge? So other clubs and GM's are going to be lining up at the door to scoop you up with that attitude. If you want out do like MT and JG did, play your way out, seemed to work in their favor.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't agree with this, Vladar was never really rolling. He could have a good game or 2 but he would always follow it up with a stinker. Funny enough Markstrom has been the better goalie than Vladar in almost every statistically category this season. According to Moneypuck Vladar is one of the worst goalies in the league this year. 

 

He has not been near as good as fans make him out to be. I completely understand why Sutter kept trying to go back to Markstrom. 

Up until when. His numbers were way better than Markstrom's for awhile and then his play dropped, after not being used that often.

[travel_dude]

The Vegas game had to be the weirdest finish I have seen before.

Inside 3 minutes we pull the goalie with the 4th line on the ice.

Toffoli comes on as the extra man.

Unit plays almost a minute.

 

I can't explain it.

[cross16]

16 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

You are doing the exact same thing.

You speculate that the results wouldn't have been any different.

Win/loss showed one guy winning and the other not so much.

Were there any standout performances by either since March 1st?

TOR loss, MIN win.  Maybe the Ottawa game?

Harder to tell with Vladar, played 4 periods, gave up 3 in total.

 

Some agree some don't.

 

Not really. The statistical performance of both goalies was almost identical so what grounds are there to believe that if Vladar had played more they would have won more? I'm not speculating i'm looking at the results and the performance. I made the same point at the time, Vladar didn't play well enough to warrant a big run of games. 

 

Agree to disagree I jsut don't understand blaming a coach when there is information right in front of us that suggests he made the right call. I'm far from Sutter's biggest fan and he's very open to criticism this year I just don't think the management of goalies is one of them. 

 

15 hours ago, robrob74 said:

Up until when. His numbers were way better than Markstrom's for awhile and then his play dropped, after not being used that often.

 

"way" is a stretch. 

From the start of the season until end of November Markstrom played 70% of the games. 

Markstrom had a 0.899 Save % and a 3.03 GAA

Vladar 0.913 and a 2.69 GAA. Better but that's not a large difference especially when you factor competition. 

From end of Nov to start of Feb they basically split the game 17 to 13. 

Markstrom 0.898 and a 2.170 GAA. Vladar .903 and a 2.74

 

Vladar's play dropped off when he received more games, not after. 

[cross16]

17 hours ago, tmac70 said:

As it's been said where there is smoke there is fire. Could these be harsh words of frustration maybe, we all know Sutter isn't offering group hugs for sympathy either.  I get it's speculative but if this is the room environment with some players then it's just not the coach that needs to be reviewed. Kadri has a past as well too, he isn't free from controversy. Hubie I can see this being a HUGE change for him, the pressure the hard feelings the system is totally different here than in FLA.  On the other hand you have Toffoli making comments that DS is the best coach he ever had, Blake Coleman making comments that guys have to look in the mirror, and Anderson siding with the ice times and healthy scratching of players, this is a conflicted mess right now. I must also subject I do agree that Sutter needs to be more open to communications and different human interactions, respect is earned not given that's a two-way street.  However, if there are players unhappy and want a change what does that say about their ability to rise to the challenge? So other clubs and GM's are going to be lining up at the door to scoop you up with that attitude. If you want out do like MT and JG did, play your way out, seemed to work in their favor.

 

I don't think anyone is disputing the need for the players to play better, I'm certainly not. There are a long list of things to be concerned about with this club and organization in the past 12 months and the coach is only one of them, and he's not even at the top of it IMO.

 

I don't think the players have quit that's my point. Are some done playing for the coach probably, but I'm not sure that means they've quit. I still see a team that is working out there. Quite frankly I still see a team trying to do too much 

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Not really. The statistical performance of both goalies was almost identical so what grounds are there to believe that if Vladar had played more they would have won more? I'm not speculating i'm looking at the results and the performance. I made the same point at the time, Vladar didn't play well enough to warrant a big run of games. 

 

Agree to disagree I jsut don't understand blaming a coach when there is information right in front of us that suggests he made the right call. I'm far from Sutter's biggest fan and he's very open to criticism this year I just don't think the management of goalies is one of them. 

 

I don't dispute the falling off of his game.  That was easy to see.

And yes, the goal against and SA% back that up, especially later.

But the more obvious thing is wins.

Vladar would win even letting in more than 1 or 2.

Markstrom would win less letting in less than 3.

There's no obvious reason for this, just speculation.

Did the team play more offense because they felt Vladar would stop the next one?

Did the team try to shut down too early with Markstrom?

 

I would hope that a coach look at many sources of information, not just the counting stats.

If it's saying that a Vezna goalie will bounce back after a bad game, then maybe that was wrong.

This is not a Sutter thing, there is more to the decision than the head coach.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think anyone is disputing the need for the players to play better, I'm certainly not. There are a long list of things to be concerned about with this club and organization in the past 12 months and the coach is only one of them, and he's not even at the top of it IMO.

 

I don't think the players have quit that's my point. Are some done playing for the coach probably, but I'm not sure that means they've quit. I still see a team that is working out there. Quite frankly I still see a team trying to do too much 

 

Even if they can't stand the coach, I don't see it on the ice.  These guys are pros.  Frustration no doubt.  Score a goal only to see one scored against.  Take 40 shots and nothing goes in.  The team all make mistakes, so I don't think they were sitting there blaming Kadri or Pelletier or Markstrom.   I don't even think they sit there ragging on the coach.  They might voice an opinion, and they perhaps should.

[tmac70]

48 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think anyone is disputing the need for the players to play better, I'm certainly not. There are a long list of things to be concerned about with this club and organization in the past 12 months and the coach is only one of them, and he's not even at the top of it IMO.

 

I don't think the players have quit that's my point. Are some done playing for the coach probably, but I'm not sure that means they've quit. I still see a team that is working out there. Quite frankly I still see a team trying to do too much 

Oh, I agree with you that the season just seems to be out of one hole and into another. Are the players frustrated for sure, at this level of professionalism nobody likes losing. Plus what you articulated is accurate I feel that the responsibility falls across the whole not just coaching.  There needs to be a deep dive into all aspects of this organization top to bottom.  The quitting point to me is a fractional outburst in the heat of the moment. 

 

Look Sutter has made comments that I get are salty and borderline offensive but that isn't new with him. Would I be surprised if he gets let go nope. However, be careful what you wish for is my point. You have a roster built or working towards a Sutter system to now go 180-degree its just another vortex of a dark hole for 3-5 years.  As many want the high-flying run-and-gun style, that means 2/3 of the roster has to change. Trevling had a vision for this and it failed miserably that's why we have Looch. The point is to pick a Fing direction. We have no direction, a poor culture, and still to this day no identity. When your mandate is " Just get in" you know your trouble. 

 

 

[Heartbreaker]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Not really. The statistical performance of both goalies was almost identical so what grounds are there to believe that if Vladar had played more they would have won more? I'm not speculating i'm looking at the results and the performance. I made the same point at the time, Vladar didn't play well enough to warrant a big run of games. 

 

Agree to disagree I jsut don't understand blaming a coach when there is information right in front of us that suggests he made the right call. I'm far from Sutter's biggest fan and he's very open to criticism this year I just don't think the management of goalies is one of them. 

 

 

"way" is a stretch. 

From the start of the season until end of November Markstrom played 70% of the games. 

Markstrom had a 0.899 Save % and a 3.03 GAA

Vladar 0.913 and a 2.69 GAA. Better but that's not a large difference especially when you factor competition. 

From end of Nov to start of Feb they basically split the game 17 to 13. 

Markstrom 0.898 and a 2.170 GAA. Vladar .903 and a 2.74

 

Vladar's play dropped off when he received more games, not after. 

 

Yeah, you're right about the goaltending stats, and I do recall thinking that at the time. The statistical anomaly that I can't explain comes from the other end. I can't figure out why during that stretch, Vladar was able to tie a team record for games in a row with points, but had very similar stats to Markstrom, who was struggling mightily. Why could they generate so much more offense when it was 80, but not duplicate that when it was 25?

 

This whole season feels like a broken string of Christmas lights. You know what I mean? The whole string goes out of one of the bulbs is burnt out, and that's an easy fix. You go through them one by one, and find the problem. The Flames are a string of Christmas lights with two bulbs burnt out.

 

Love.

[zima]

I have been saying since the beginning of the season that we should have given Wolf a shot but since it is me it is dumb but dumb or not I would have loved to see how he faired in the bigs I would bet we would be in the playoffs for sure. We out shot almost every team by 10 or more shots and we were shooting at a 40 shot per most games how can you lose so many games with that out put and don't put it on D that's not fair.