travel_dude Posted January 31 Report Share Posted January 31 10 hours ago, robrob74 said: for me, the years you talk about were all up and down. For me the inconsistency meant we weren't a good team then. If we were a perennial team we'd have been good, but it was why I was calling to blow it up back then. They had good players, but it doesn't always mean a good team. Monahan was a 50 point guy without Johnny. The same is said for Lindholm now. Tkachuk should have been away from Backlund earlier and we lacked a true #1 C. I don't think we were ever really contenders. #1C & #1D away from being that. If Lindholm is that with Johnny and Tkachuk, then we needed a #2C and a #1D. I also felt we missed a good second line winger too. Good team? No. it's why we are here now. Johnny hid a lot of problems and the exchange for Tkachuk has one good outcome, Weegar. You are linking sub-par performances with the players not being any good on their own. An injured Monahan or one that plays 3rd or 4th lines, is a 50 point player. Losing Gio's playmaking set the team back initially. The poor coaching by Wardo and the injuries to key players. Adjusting to the Sutter style and getting one good year out of it. He contributed to the loss of good players and created the down year. These are not excuses, since I think we are not close to being like the best teams we have been. Even those had issues. We solve one problem and create two more. Unfortunately, targeting Huberdeau while losing 2/3 of a top line was a mistake no doubt. Having Kadri + Tkachuk (or Gaudreau) would not have been as much a loss. Replacing Gaudreau with Huberdeau is not an even swap. Weegar for Tkachuk is the other part and that is not close to even. Huska has issues, but the talent level is well below a playoff team. We have pieces that could be better used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted January 31 Report Share Posted January 31 1 hour ago, travel_dude said: You are linking sub-par performances with the players not being any good on their own. An injured Monahan or one that plays 3rd or 4th lines, is a 50 point player. Losing Gio's playmaking set the team back initially. The poor coaching by Wardo and the injuries to key players. Adjusting to the Sutter style and getting one good year out of it. He contributed to the loss of good players and created the down year. These are not excuses, since I think we are not close to being like the best teams we have been. Even those had issues. We solve one problem and create two more. Unfortunately, targeting Huberdeau while losing 2/3 of a top line was a mistake no doubt. Having Kadri + Tkachuk (or Gaudreau) would not have been as much a loss. Replacing Gaudreau with Huberdeau is not an even swap. Weegar for Tkachuk is the other part and that is not close to even. Huska has issues, but the talent level is well below a playoff team. We have pieces that could be better used. Ya, I agree. I think we need to have a good reset. I'd like at least one year of drafting in the top 5... Something that I think Warraner pointed out when talking about Tanev on their Podcast yesterday or the day before is that Tanev is a decent skater, but in the NHL the players need to be able to skate. I think we've noticed that while we have found decent NHLers, we also haven't found ones that can skate at a pace that is necessary once the games ramp up into the playoffs. We saw how that affected us against the Avs, the Oils, and we barely got past Dallas, who really, in hindsight, wasn't a terrible team. I'd like to start drafting players who are already decent skaters. So often in drafts we hear knocks on our drafted players that they could use some work on their skating. IQ gets you into the Playoffs, but IQ doesn't get you passed the fast teams with high end talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted January 31 Report Share Posted January 31 2 hours ago, robrob74 said: Ya, I agree. I think we need to have a good reset. I'd like at least one year of drafting in the top 5... Something that I think Warraner pointed out when talking about Tanev on their Podcast yesterday or the day before is that Tanev is a decent skater, but in the NHL the players need to be able to skate. I think we've noticed that while we have found decent NHLers, we also haven't found ones that can skate at a pace that is necessary once the games ramp up into the playoffs. We saw how that affected us against the Avs, the Oils, and we barely got past Dallas, who really, in hindsight, wasn't a terrible team. I'd like to start drafting players who are already decent skaters. So often in drafts we hear knocks on our drafted players that they could use some work on their skating. IQ gets you into the Playoffs, but IQ doesn't get you passed the fast teams with high end talent. To me skating is not the biggest issue, it's moving fast with the puck. It shows on the PP. We can't zone enter or make quick decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted February 1 Report Share Posted February 1 At this time, I don't have any issues with Huska. He has coached several of the Flames at the AHL level. I hope that Calgary goes for a retool by trading the current UFAs for NHL RFAs, prospects and draft picks. This would allow the team and coaching staff to grow together and hopefully be competitive by the time the new arena opens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebrewcrew Posted February 1 Report Share Posted February 1 25 minutes ago, 420since1974 said: At this time, I don't have any issues with Huska. He has coached several of the Flames at the AHL level. I hope that Calgary goes for a retool by trading the current UFAs for NHL RFAs, prospects and draft picks. This would allow the team and coaching staff to grow together and hopefully be competitive by the time the new arena opens. I would agree. He got hired into a tough situation. I think he’s doing fine. I think he will be a good a coach for a rebuild, given his pedigree at junior and the AHL. I’d be fine if they gave him 3-5 years. Then when it looks like the team needs to take a step, I would probably make a change. I think he’s a coach that can get you through a rebuild, but not to that next level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Fry Posted February 16 Report Share Posted February 16 On 1/31/2024 at 4:58 AM, jjgallow said: The problem is that we have a number of players locked in long term contracts who act like 2 year olds through their agents if the coach shows emotions ( like the last one who got fired ). Now is a time to reload on pick and prospects. Basically. On 1/31/2024 at 7:17 AM, The_People1 said: Personally I like a coach to not let the highs get too high and the lows get too low. Stay cool and calm. Analyze objectively. And above all, be fair. And that doesn't mean low intensity. Just rather, controlled emotions. Post-game interviews are certainly not the time to get emotional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Fry Posted February 16 Report Share Posted February 16 1 hour ago, Bob Fry said: I agree that you can only get upset a few times after that the plays tune you out. I still can't beleive that the owners allowed Brad Trevling to sign players to 8 year contracts. The maximum contract should be 5 years, you could add a option to extend the other three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted February 16 Report Share Posted February 16 8 hours ago, Bob Fry said: I agree that you can only get upset a few times after that the plays tune you out. I still can't beleive that the owners allowed Brad Trevling to sign players to 8 year contracts. The maximum contract should be 5 years, you could add a option to extend the other three years. Not allowed in the NHL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted May 17 Report Share Posted May 17 Looks like Huska might be looking for a new assistant coach. he came in with a lot of fan fare, from me too, but I'm not too disappointed by this. The PP really lacked purpose all year and they never did seem to settle on a what they wanted to do. It looks under prepared more often than not. think this also may be a sign that Berube is in fact going to coach the Leafs. Savard was his PP coach previously and I could see him wanting to leave Calgary to coach with him again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketdoctor Posted May 17 Report Share Posted May 17 yeah could be good for us. PP was awful most of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sak22 Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Couldn't find another thread to discuss coaching besides ones for former coaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Not a great hire for me. Get someone with experience and they likely wanted that and I can’t imagine candidates were lining up for the job. but his reputation and background doesn’t generate much excitement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebrewcrew Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Larsen will probably be tasked with coaching the powerplay. I think the powerplay will be a bit better next year. Not necessarily as a result of coaching though. I think contract year for Sharangovich and Kuzmenko will be a big part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 It’s a really defensive minded coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 3 hours ago, JTech780 said: It’s a really defensive minded coaching staff. which if people think Huberdeau will take off again, I doubt it. He's trying to get up to speed defensively but the cost is offence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 16 Report Share Posted June 16 It’s honestly a bit of a mess of a staff which makes sense given the circumstances. Until the flames are done playing Sutter I don’t think they are in a position to build out a proper staff. The fact they arnt lookjg for good for a couple seasons at least, doesn’t help. I would have preferred they just hire Cail Maclean as the assistant but I can understand why they want Larsons experience. I do think it’s a solid staff when it comes to development, just not a great staff in terms of modern tactics or effectiveness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 25 Report Share Posted June 25 Rumored when they parted ways, but Savard has officially been named an assistant with the Leafs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now