The Sutter Impact

[kehatch]

The Flames made a few moves this summer.  Giordano is out while Zadarov and Coleman are in.  There were also some tweaks to the depth positions, including brining on a new BU goalie.  However, beyond losing Giordano the core is pretty much intact (so far).  The big impact (IMO) is having Sutter for a full season.  Out of interest, I took a quick look at the remaining players to see the splits pre and post Sutter arrival last season.  

 

• Increase in Ice Time: Ritchie, Lucic, Backlund, Hanafin, and Tanev saw their ice time go up.  Ritchie went from having 3 GP to being a roster regular. 
• Decrease in Ice Time:  Tkachuk, Lindholm, Monahan, Mangiapane, Gaudreau,  Valamaki, and Andersson all saw a drop in ice time.  Lindholm and Tkachuk lost almost 3 minutes a night.  
• Power Play Time: Hanafin got a big bump in PP time.  Andersson, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Monahan, and Tkachuk all saw a drop in PP time.  
• Penalty Kill Time: Monahan got some PK time under Sutter.  There were a few other shifts, but nothing substantial. 
• Offensive Production: Hanafin, Ritchie, Dube, and Tkachuk saw some offensive uptick under Sutter.  Andersson, Valamaki, and Monahan saw their production go down.  

 

Tough to tell if any of these trends continue over a full season.  Seeing Sutter increase the role of some of the bangers and vets is no surprise.  Neither is seeing the drop in time for some of the younger guys.  But I did find a few things interesting:

 

• He seemed to really like Hanafin.  
• The decrease to ice time to the top forwards is more a reflection of Sutter running 4 lines and messing with the PP time. For example, Lindholm lost almost 3 minutes in ice time, but he still led the forwards in ice time under Sutter and didn't see a big impact to his ES time.  The impact to Tkachuk was real though as he saw a reduction in EV time, and he dropped relative to the other forwards.  
• Monahan saw a bit of a decrease in ice time, but that was likely due to his injury as well as the general drop in top forward time.  Sutter seemed to trust him giving him more defensive responsibility.  That, and the injury, likely contributed to his offense dropping under Sutter. 

[The_Tribal Chief]

I Also Noticed Closer to The End that Johnny Gaudreau Started to get More of a Point Production when he Started to Play the system the way Darryl wanted it played now that could of been just goals cause of who he is or cause of the new Systems Causing more Space for him aswell only time will tell on that Aswell Kehatch And Welcome Back KeHatch We Missed ya Last Season

[420since1974]

Barring any trades or UFA signings, it would not surprise me if Sutter went with the following 23 man roster to begin the season:

 

Gaudreau (LW) – Lindholm (C/RW) – Tkachuk (LW/RW)

Mangiapane (LW/RW) – Monahan (C) – Coleman (LW/RW)

Dube (LW/RW) – Backlund (C) – Pitlick (RW)

Lucic (LW) – Lewis (C/RW) – Ritchie (RW)

Ruzicka (C/RW) - Gawdin (C/RW) = both could fill in at C or RW on the 4th line.

 

Hanifin (LD) – Andersson (RD)

Valimaki (LD) – Tanev (RD)

Kylington (LD) – Zadorov (LD/RD)

Welinski (RD)

I feel that Welinski will be the 7^th D as Mackey is exempt from waivers.

 

Markstrom

Vladar

[jjgallow]

The last time we had Sutter over a full season...

 

We started a rebuild

 

I like Sutter as a coach.  But, just sayin lol

[The_Tribal Chief]

Sutter Has Already Flat Out Said he Didnt Come here For a Rebuild

[rickross]

You can’t consider the Sutter impact without the negatives. He’s not for every player, his coaching methods can do good for some players while harming others. Offensive players who thrive off of goal scoring and play making might have to mute their instincts to fit into his system. It’s not exactly ideal. 
 

He could be impacting the types of players we acquire via free agency or draft. We could have had some deals fall through because the player(s) refused to play for a coach like Sutter? Who knows, Sutter success always comes with a price

[kehatch]

47 minutes ago, rickross said:

You can’t consider the Sutter impact without the negatives. He’s not for every player, his coaching methods can do good for some players while harming others. Offensive players who thrive off of goal scoring and play making might have to mute their instincts to fit into his system. It’s not exactly ideal. 
 

He could be impacting the types of players we acquire via free agency or draft. We could have had some deals fall through because the player(s) refused to play for a coach like Sutter? Who knows, Sutter success always comes with a price

 

That is true for every coach, but I agree with you.  I am trying to see what players are (so far) having a positive effect under Sutter, and which ones a negative effect. 

 

Based on half of a season, I am worried about Tkachuk and Valamaki under Sutter but I think Monahan and Hanafin will do well (for example).  I am also curious to see the impact on the prospects. Sutter has the reputation of relying on Veterans, but he has done well coaching rookies as well.  Toffoli, Muzzin, Forbort, Pearson, etc in LA.  Phaneuf, Gio, Regher, etc in Calgary.  I think Pelletier (for example) could do very well under Sutter, and as early as this season.  

[travel_dude]

18 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

That is true for every coach, but I agree with you.  I am trying to see what players are (so far) having a positive effect under Sutter, and which ones a negative effect. 

 

Based on half of a season, I am worried about Tkachuk and Valamaki under Sutter but I think Monahan and Hanafin will do well (for example).  I am also curious to see the impact on the prospects. Sutter has the reputation of relying on Veterans, but he has done well coaching rookies as well.  Toffoli, Muzzin, Forbort, Pearson, etc in LA.  Phaneuf, Gio, Regher, etc in Calgary.  I think Pelletier (for example) could do very well under Sutter, and as early as this season.  

 

It's possble that Ruzicka could thrive under Sutter, though I can't really tell with the limited play.

Gaudreau seems to straddle the line between what Sutter wants and what he needs to see.

Tkachuk needs to play more for the team to be accepted.

I get he does a lot as a team player, but there are times when he is selfish.

Ras and Hanifin are Sutter players because of their work ethic.

Coleman is a Sutter type.

Valimaki suffers because he skates effortlessly and looks at time disengaged.

I don't think it's a fair assessment.

[kehatch]

On paper Tkachuk is a Sutter guy.  Good defensively, physical, gets into the tough spaces, plays either wing.  But I don't know how well Sutter gets on with the 'instigator' types.  Look at Dustin Brown in LA.  16-min / 30-point guy under Sutter, but a 19-min / 55-point guy under everyone else.  

 

I still think Tkachuk can do well under Sutter.  He finished the season on a terror and he has all of the right tools.  Tkachuk has the capacity to have an Iginla level impact due to his full skill set.  But between the drop in ice time, some of the rumors, its going to be interesting to see how things work out.  

[The_Tribal Chief]

it all depends how stubborn tkachuk want to be or if he wans to buy in fully

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

18 hours ago, kehatch said:

The Flames made a few moves this summer.  Giordano is out while Zadarov and Coleman are in.  There were also some tweaks to the depth positions, including brining on a new BU goalie.  However, beyond losing Giordano the core is pretty much intact (so far).  The big impact (IMO) is having Sutter for a full season.  Out of interest, I took a quick look at the remaining players to see the splits pre and post Sutter arrival last season.  

 

• Increase in Ice Time: Ritchie, Lucic, Backlund, Hanafin, and Tanev saw their ice time go up.  Ritchie went from having 3 GP to being a roster regular. 
• Decrease in Ice Time:  Tkachuk, Lindholm, Monahan, Mangiapane, Gaudreau,  Valamaki, and Andersson all saw a drop in ice time.  Lindholm and Tkachuk lost almost 3 minutes a night.  
• Power Play Time: Hanafin got a big bump in PP time.  Andersson, Gaudreau, Lindholm, Monahan, and Tkachuk all saw a drop in PP time.  
• Penalty Kill Time: Monahan got some PK time under Sutter.  There were a few other shifts, but nothing substantial. 
• Offensive Production: Hanafin, Ritchie, Dube, and Tkachuk saw some offensive uptick under Sutter.  Andersson, Valamaki, and Monahan saw their production go down.  

 

Tough to tell if any of these trends continue over a full season.  Seeing Sutter increase the role of some of the bangers and vets is no surprise.  Neither is seeing the drop in time for some of the younger guys.  But I did find a few things interesting:

 

• He seemed to really like Hanafin.  
• The decrease to ice time to the top forwards is more a reflection of Sutter running 4 lines and messing with the PP time. For example, Lindholm lost almost 3 minutes in ice time, but he still led the forwards in ice time under Sutter and didn't see a big impact to his ES time.  The impact to Tkachuk was real though as he saw a reduction in EV time, and he dropped relative to the other forwards.  
• Monahan saw a bit of a decrease in ice time, but that was likely due to his injury as well as the general drop in top forward time.  Sutter seemed to trust him giving him more defensive responsibility.  That, and the injury, likely contributed to his offense dropping under Sutter. 

I see the ice time changes as more of a line balancing factor. Sure theres going to be differences inbetween lines 1-4 but the more you can even out the playing minutes the less chance of overworking key players thus less risk of injury or burnout. I'm hoping this carries over somewhat with the goaltending, sure Markstroms going to get the lions share but herrs hoping Vladers play along with favorable division standings near the end of the season lets Markstrom get some pre-playoff rest.  The changes in special teams time would reflect this also.

[jjgallow]

16 hours ago, The_Snowbear said:

Sutter Has Already Flat Out Said he Didnt Come here For a Rebuild

 

He said that the first time too

[The_Tribal Chief]

Your Choice to doubt his words im just stating what was said

[conundrumed]

I believe regardless of all else, the Flames will be better under Sutter. The NHL was an aberration last year and a half to the point where I really wish that I didn't bother with it.

There are no kid gloves with Sutter. I get the argument that he's not here for a rebuild. I think what he's here for is to see what this team actually is if they'd show any sign of consistency every game. I know he'll accomplish that one way or the other.

I think the Sutter hire is the last, end of the rope hiring. Mgmt believes it's a good roster, but it needs a constant kick in the aphids.

Sutter is the kick. If it's more of the same, I believe it will be a full on rebuild.

I trust Sutter won't let happen what we've all been seeing.

He saw a better roster than the product on the ice, or why would he bother?

So I have to have faith in that.

I just hope Ruzicka can be our 4C rather than Gawdin. I don't see NHL upside in Gawdin, just too slow.

I also believe Dube will be attached at the hip with Mony, and Mangia will be Backlund's LW for more balance.

The bottom 6 should be fairly improved for chipping in.

D is D. You don't need the class of the NHL D when you drill into the fwds the right way to play responsible hockey.

Many call it boring, I disagree. Play the right way, be accountable or have a seat.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I just hope Ruzicka can be our 4C rather than Gawdin. I don't see NHL upside in Gawdin, just too slow.

I also believe Dube will be attached at the hip with Mony, and Mangia will be Backlund's LW for more balance.

The bottom 6 should be fairly improved for chipping in.

D is D. You don't need the class of the NHL D when you drill into the fwds the right way to play responsible hockey.

Many call it boring, I disagree. Play the right way, be accountable or have a seat.

 

Ruzicka is more of a Sutter type.  Has an edge to him and can score.

Gawdin is the poor man's Backlund, which would look slow because he thinks defense first.

Between the two, Ruzicka is the keeper.

 

Dube struggled to deliver according to Sutter standards.

Taking one of the few goal scorers and force him to play prevent, where his only scoring comes from transition, sounds like a backwards move.

I get the balance, but Dube has not met Sutter's expectations for a top 6 player yet.

 

The part about the D that I see is that it's unfinished.

They have a 6/7 guy in Kylington and a guy that needs to play a bit more in all situations that is waiver exempt.

Missing a RD.

If that's Stone, then meh.

Meets the lower expectations, but adds no offense.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I believe regardless of all else, the Flames will be better under Sutter. The NHL was an aberration last year and a half to the point where I really wish that I didn't bother with it.

There are no kid gloves with Sutter. I get the argument that he's not here for a rebuild. I think what he's here for is to see what this team actually is if they'd show any sign of consistency every game. I know he'll accomplish that one way or the other.

I think the Sutter hire is the last, end of the rope hiring. Mgmt believes it's a good roster, but it needs a constant kick in the aphids.

Sutter is the kick. If it's more of the same, I believe it will be a full on rebuild.

I trust Sutter won't let happen what we've all been seeing.

He saw a better roster than the product on the ice, or why would he bother?

So I have to have faith in that.

I just hope Ruzicka can be our 4C rather than Gawdin. I don't see NHL upside in Gawdin, just too slow.

I also believe Dube will be attached at the hip with Mony, and Mangia will be Backlund's LW for more balance.

The bottom 6 should be fairly improved for chipping in.

D is D. You don't need the class of the NHL D when you drill into the fwds the right way to play responsible hockey.

Many call it boring, I disagree. Play the right way, be accountable or have a seat.

 

I like Sutter.

 

I was actually one of the very few who defended him when he was turfed from Calgary and the pitchforks were out.   I didn't defend his moves as a GM, but, ultimately, upper management / ownership made the mistake of taking a elite coach and trying to turn him into a GM.

 

Sutter excels at what I like to think of as "real hockey".    The current NHL inhibits him a little bit, but I think his methods are very relevant in any era.

 

So, I've made my opinions clear, no coach can help this team at this point.   But, if any coach could prove me wrong, yeah it would be Sutter.    I don't expect him to make a lick of difference, but when that happens I'm not going to blame him.   I'm going to blame GM for what Sutter has been given to work with.

 

The interesting part will be when we give up on this core (which is inevitable), and Sutter is left with a decision.    He will need to revisit his intentions to be part of a rebuild.

 

I personally believe that he could be exceptionally suited to being a rebuild coach, because he is the type of coach that can "make players".   He would need to change some things, like his unwillingness to let young guys play.   But that's relatively easy when the whole team is young.   If he wanted to be that guy, I think he could be and I think he would excel at it.   It would be his decision.

 

Many people have pointed out to me that rebuilds commonly fail.   They are right.   That's why it's important to do them well.   I think Sutter could be that fit.    Outside of that, I have to say I miss Bob Hartley.  He was an excellent rebuild coach and personally I think that whatever players had an issue with him, should have been immediately shipped off no matter who they were.     He allowed young players to develop and thrive, and we haven't seen that style since he's left.    I could name a lot of coaches who would suck at a rebuild.   Hartley, and Sutter, if they decided to commit to it, I think would both excel.

 

[conundrumed]

35 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Ruzicka is more of a Sutter type.  Has an edge to him and can score.

Gawdin is the poor man's Backlund, which would look slow because he thinks defense first.

Between the two, Ruzicka is the keeper.

 

Dube struggled to deliver according to Sutter standards.

Taking one of the few goal scorers and force him to play prevent, where his only scoring comes from transition, sounds like a backwards move.

I get the balance, but Dube has not met Sutter's expectations for a top 6 player yet.

 

The part about the D that I see is that it's unfinished.

They have a 6/7 guy in Kylington and a guy that needs to play a bit more in all situations that is waiver exempt.

Missing a RD.

If that's Stone, then meh.

Meets the lower expectations, but adds no offense.

Of all of our roster, I believe Dube will be taking a big step. He just turned 23 and I have little doubt that he'll be good.

In the trade proposals, I don't like seeing the Mangia OR Dube part. I would say Mangia to trade, quite a bit before Dube.

Dube is almost untouchable for me. I see a lot in his game that will translate and he's high IQ, which this team lacks.

He'll improve on his 11/11/22pts in 51 games last year. By a lot I'm thinking.

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Of all of our roster, I believe Dube will be taking a big step. He just turned 23 and I have little doubt that he'll be good.

In the trade proposals, I don't like seeing the Mangia OR Dube part. I would say Mangia to trade, quite a bit before Dube.

Dube is almost untouchable for me. I see a lot in his game that will translate and he's high IQ, which this team lacks.

He'll improve on his 11/11/22pts in 51 games last year. By a lot I'm thinking.

 

I think that both should be off the trade list.

Dube is where Mangiapane was maybe last year.

Mangiapane is on the cusp of a breakout, I'm talking 50 points.

We struggled to score, so limiting him to a defensive role limits that IMHO.

I want to see Dube play LW and play on a line of responsible players.

It worked with Tkachuk to round out his game and it worked for Mangiapane.

 

The concern I have for Sutter is that he plays Lucic on the 3rd line again.

Lucic-Backlund-Pitlick is fine for forechecking, and maybe some limited offense, but I see it as a bit risky.

Play Lucic with a similar skill type and let him loose.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I like Sutter.

 

I was actually one of the very few who defended him when he was turfed from Calgary and the pitchforks were out.   I didn't defend his moves as a GM, but, ultimately, upper management / ownership made the mistake of taking a elite coach and trying to turn him into a GM.

 

Sutter excels at what I like to think of as "real hockey".    The current NHL inhibits him a little bit, but I think his methods are very relevant in any era.

 

So, I've made my opinions clear, no coach can help this team at this point.   But, if any coach could prove me wrong, yeah it would be Sutter.    I don't expect him to make a lick of difference, but when that happens I'm not going to blame him.   I'm going to blame GM for what Sutter has been given to work with.

 

The interesting part will be when we give up on this core (which is inevitable), and Sutter is left with a decision.    He will need to revisit his intentions to be part of a rebuild.

 

I personally believe that he could be exceptionally suited to being a rebuild coach, because he is the type of coach that can "make players".   He would need to change some things, like his unwillingness to let young guys play.   But that's relatively easy when the whole team is young.   If he wanted to be that guy, I think he could be and I think he would excel at it.   It would be his decision.

 

Many people have pointed out to me that rebuilds commonly fail.   They are right.   That's why it's important to do them well.   I think Sutter could be that fit.    Outside of that, I have to say I miss Bob Hartley.  He was an excellent rebuild coach and personally I think that whatever players had an issue with him, should have been immediately shipped off no matter who they were.     He allowed young players to develop and thrive, and we haven't seen that style since he's left.    I could name a lot of coaches who would suck at a rebuild.   Hartley, and Sutter, if they decided to commit to it, I think would both excel.

 

 

when you say do them well or do them right, they will say there’s no right way. 
 

but I think Calgary has definitely shown how it shouldn’t be done, more than once! 
 

Hartley embraced the rebuild, then once he made the playoffs it changed everything and sealed his fate. They were basically like Ottawa was last year. Once they made the playoffs their mindset changed and cockiness sunk in. It’s odd when losers are cocky. They have this idea that they’re never out until they’re actually out and then say they’re  underachievers and next year will be better or we thought it was going to be easier… the nhl is not easy nor should any player think it will be, no matter what team you play. And it’s been their crux as they seem to have troubles getting up for the lowly dance partners. That’s a lack of killer instinct.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Of all of our roster, I believe Dube will be taking a big step. He just turned 23 and I have little doubt that he'll be good.

In the trade proposals, I don't like seeing the Mangia OR Dube part. I would say Mangia to trade, quite a bit before Dube.

Dube is almost untouchable for me. I see a lot in his game that will translate and he's high IQ, which this team lacks.

He'll improve on his 11/11/22pts in 51 games last year. By a lot I'm thinking.

i think the only thing wrong with Dube was they gifted him a top line spot too early. He thought he was “there, that he made it.” He is a player. I think if they kept him with Bennett we would have had a whole different team last year.  But we would have had to trade Bennett anyway. But they could’ve told them to earn their ice and play like they did in the playoffs…

 

 

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think that both should be off the trade list.

Dube is where Mangiapane was maybe last year.

Mangiapane is on the cusp of a breakout, I'm talking 50 points.

We struggled to score, so limiting him to a defensive role limits that IMHO.

I want to see Dube play LW and play on a line of responsible players.

It worked with Tkachuk to round out his game and it worked for Mangiapane.

 

The concern I have for Sutter is that he plays Lucic on the 3rd line again.

Lucic-Backlund-Pitlick is fine for forechecking, and maybe some limited offense, but I see it as a bit risky.

Play Lucic with a similar skill type and let him loose.

like

[conundrumed]

9 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

i think the only thing wrong with Dube was they gifted him a top line spot too early. He thought he was “there, that he made it.” He is a player. I think if they kept him with Bennett we would have had a whole different team last year.  But we would have had to trade Bennett anyway. But they could’ve told them to earn their ice and play like they did in the playoffs…

 

 

In fairness, he's young with a lot of skill so moving him around the lineup is a good thing to do. Another good summer regiment for him this summer, and I think we have ourselves a player.

Of all of our LWs, I'd move him to RW first. He's the most skilled to take pucks on his backhand and the best passer. And breakaway threat.

Ideally, to me:

JG-Mony-Dube

Tkachuk-Lindholm-Mangia

Coleman-Backs-Pitlick

Lucic-Ruzicka-Lewis (Either righty at C)

Facepuncher, Phillips or Gawdin

 

Ideally, Lindholm with Mony and JG, but we lack C's.

I don't love it, but most of the top 9 can be fluid for in-game change ups.

Need Zary and Pelletier to run to the NHL, but that's not practical.

 

 

[robrob74]

14 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

In fairness, he's young with a lot of skill so moving him around the lineup is a good thing to do. Another good summer regiment for him this summer, and I think we have ourselves a player.

Of all of our LWs, I'd move him to RW first. He's the most skilled to take pucks on his backhand and the best passer. And breakaway threat.

Ideally, to me:

JG-Mony-Dube

Tkachuk-Lindholm-Mangia

Coleman-Backs-Pitlick

Lucic-Ruzicka-Lewis (Either righty at C)

Facepuncher, Phillips or Gawdin

 

Ideally, Lindholm with Mony and JG, but we lack C's.

I don't love it, but most of the top 9 can be fluid for in-game change ups.

Need Zary and Pelletier to run to the NHL, but that's not practical.

 

 

who knows, maybe they come make it next year after a year in jr and this core could be fine, minus one trade for a RW. Tkachuk is probably the one to get a quality one. 
 

if Eichel doesn’t kill the current prospect pool, could be fine.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

when you say do them well or do them right, they will say there’s no right way. 
 

but I think Calgary has definitely shown how it shouldn’t be done, more than once! 
 

Hartley embraced the rebuild, then once he made the playoffs it changed everything and sealed his fate. They were basically like Ottawa was last year. Once they made the playoffs their mindset changed and cockiness sunk in. It’s odd when losers are cocky. They have this idea that they’re never out until they’re actually out and then say they’re  underachievers and next year will be better or we thought it was going to be easier… the nhl is not easy nor should any player think it will be, no matter what team you play. And it’s been their crux as they seem to have troubles getting up for the lowly dance partners. That’s a lack of killer instinct.

 

I don't think it's that simple.  We accomplished nothing against the Ducks after beating VAN.

The following year we had attrocious goaltending.

Whether they blames Hartley or he made the room toxic, nobody knows for sure.

 

I think there has been a problem in the past with taking games too lightly.

I don't think that was the issue last year at all.

We had a lack of skill.

No 2RW.

Dube was okay as 1RW, but not really top 6 at this point.

The 3rd line was a malcontent, Looch and a frustrating Backlund.

Not trashing Bennett, but he had a bad impact on that line.

Played in the wrong spot, should have been a C.

Too many broken plays.

 

[robrob74]

57 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't think it's that simple.  We accomplished nothing against the Ducks after beating VAN.

The following year we had attrocious goaltending.

Whether they blames Hartley or he made the room toxic, nobody knows for sure.

 

I think there has been a problem in the past with taking games too lightly.

I don't think that was the issue last year at all.

We had a lack of skill.

No 2RW.

Dube was okay as 1RW, but not really top 6 at this point.

The 3rd line was a malcontent, Looch and a frustrating Backlund.

Not trashing Bennett, but he had a bad impact on that line.

Played in the wrong spot, should have been a C.

Too many broken plays.

 

one of the biggest things coming out of the room was they said they thought it was going to be easy. I take that as they took the Canadian division too lightly Thinking they had a playoff spot in the bag to begin the season.