Look at these drops and you tell me its just a coincidence they all have struggled offensively under Sutter.
Olli Jokinen
Daymond Langkow
Matt Stajan
Niklas Hagman
Jay Bouwmeester
Not sure what happened with Jokinen, however...
Langkow had a breakout season playing along side Huselius, Tanguay, and Iginla for a large chunk of the season. He developed some INSANE chemistry with Huselius. He was also seeing more ice-time, as well as power play time. The following season he dropped pretty badly, before Sutter came in. As for him in Phoenix, again, top line minutes, powerplay time.
Stajan was on the top line in TO. Again, plenty of ice time, as well as time on the powerplay. Here, he was given a shot in the top 6, but has been a bottom 6 guy consistently now.
Same deal with Hagman. Went from being on the top line, with PP time, to being a bottom 6 winger.
Langkow had a breakout season playing along side Huselius, Tanguay, and Iginla for a large chunk of the season. He developed some INSANE chemistry with Huselius. He was also seeing more ice-time, as well as power play time. The following season he dropped pretty badly, before Sutter came in. As for him in Phoenix, again, top line minutes, powerplay time.
Stajan was on the top line in TO. Again, plenty of ice time, as well as time on the powerplay. Here, he was given a shot in the top 6, but has been a bottom 6 guy consistently now.
Same deal with Hagman. Went from being on the top line, with PP time, to being a bottom 6 winger.
Bouwmeester however, I agree with you on that.
Not to mention they all aged over this years.
Langkow's numbers before breaking his hand in Keenan's final season were actually very impressive. You have to remember he returned before fully healed because of the number of injuries the team was sustaining. I believe it was injuries to Bourque and Bertuzzi that forced the early return.
As for Stajan and Hagman, maybe you are right. But Stajan was a consistent 14+ goals since breaking into the league. And as a 3rd liner Hagman managed 27 goals for the Stars. And aging 2 years and still being 31 or under is not going to hurt you that much.
Sutter has played a huge part in these declines in productivity.
Langkow's numbers before breaking his hand in Keenan's final season were actually very impressive. You have to remember he returned before fully healed because of the number of injuries the team was sustaining. I believe it was injuries to Bourque and Bertuzzi that forced the early return.
As for Stajan and Hagman, maybe you are right. But Stajan was a consistent 14+ goals since breaking into the league. And as a 3rd liner Hagman managed 27 goals for the Stars. And aging 2 years and still being 31 or under is not going to hurt you that much.
Sutter has played a huge part in these declines in productivity.
They also played a more offensive game in TO and Dallas.
For the umteenth time it is the ****ing players. They play to get a coach fired and generally get their way. I say keep Butter around to the end of the year and force the players to wear lots of egg on their faces. The entire forward corps nearly is UFA pending which is awesome regarding moving them out for picks in a deep draft. Build around youth and a new coach next season.
For the umteenth time it is the ****ing players. They play to get a coach fired and generally get their way. I say keep Butter around to the end of the year and force the players to wear lots of egg on their faces. The entire forward corps nearly is UFA pending which is awesome regarding moving them out for picks in a deep draft. Build around youth and a new coach next season.
The players play to get the coach fired? That has to be the craziest thing I have heard
I honestly just think that Sutter is not the right coach for this group of players, but that is not to say he is not a good coach. When the team plays the way he expects them to, they win and they proved that last season. The problem is that there are some players on this team who stray away from the system and have lapses in their play and thats where the trouble starts. Sutter has had success at every level he has coached at, but he has struggled here because not all the players on the Flames do what is asked of them. I think the players are mostly responsbile for what is going on. That is why Sutter loves guys like Horak, Smith and Backlund, because they are young and coachable and do what is asked of them. The other older players on the team are stuck in their ways and do not play Sutter's system for 60 min's.
This team needs to go in 1 of 2 ways this coming offseason IMO. You trade all the players that are not buying into what Sutter is preaching (including Iginla), or let Sutter go out of his misery and bring in another Keenan type of coach that compliments the players we do have. Its apparent that the mix of what we have going on right now is not working consistently. Again the problem is not just Sutter, he is coaching a group of players that are not buying into the system for a full 60 minutes. Feaster has to decide whether or not he wants to let the coach go OR send some players packing.
Every losing coach in the NHL is on the clock. The league is competitive and flames are lucky to have an elite (but underperforming sniper), one really good puck moving dman and a solid top 10 starter goalie. It is just everything else that is the problem.
Seriously there are only a few coaches in the NHL that can convert this team into a winning team and most are employed. He is pretty much performing in line with what an average NHL coach could do. That said, a new coach might spark the team but let's face it - the coach doesn't really have much to work with.
The players play to get the coach fired? That has to be the craziest thing I have heard
Well this "core" has left a trail of skeletons... Playfair, Keenan and they played like crap last year and Dutter was canned not to mention the assistantd, associates etc. These "veterans" are made up of seemingly primadonnas. Sure Sutter might suck but he does not get on the ****ing ice... those loser players are playing to get yet another coach who makes them do what they do not want (generally play D) get fired.
Well this "core" has left a trail of skeletons... Playfair, Keenan and they played like crap last year and Dutter was canned not to mention the assistantd, associates etc. These "veterans" are made up of seemingly primadonnas. Sure Sutter might suck but he does not get on the ****ing ice... those loser players are playing to get yet another coach who makes them do what they do not want (generally play D) get fired.
and under all those other coaches they were a playoff team. Under Brent, there are not. The coach deserves some responsibility for this. Especially when in the first year under him we were winning and he was still crying that the players were not playing his system
and under all those other coaches they were a playoff team. Under Brent, there are not. The coach deserves some responsibility for this. Especially when in the first year under him we were winning and he was still crying that the players were not playing his system
Sure but not all. A lot was the GM, the stupid moves Dutter made and all to grind this team into the dirt. Everyone is left holding the bag including Brent. Darryl and Brent not being on speaking terms accentuates this further.
Sure but not all. A lot was the GM, the stupid moves Dutter made and all to grind this team into the dirt. Everyone is left holding the bag including Brent. Darryl and Brent not being on speaking terms accentuates this further.
On CalPuck a Finnish poster translated a piece from him morning paper with some quotes from Hagman. Included was one where he asked Brent why he wasn't getting PK time and Sutter said he didn't know Hagman could kill penalties.
I don't care how many coaches we have been through and maybe a coaching change won't make us a great team, but if our coach is that uneducated when it comes to his players, we will do better without him.
The guy doesn't use good PKers on the PK (Hagman and Stajan), he doesn't even try to dress a lineup that can win faceoffs, he has routinely tried forcing the issue with players in certain roles (for example Jokinen on the top line and Dion with Regehr).
The guy is flat out a bad coach. and like I said maybe we won't be a top team with a different coach, but I have no doubt it will make the team better. Sutter being fired will be addition by subtraction.
On CalPuck a Finnish poster translated a piece from him morning paper with some quotes from Hagman. Included was one where he asked Brent why he wasn't getting PK time and Sutter said he didn't know Hagman could kill penalties.
I don't care how many coaches we have been through and maybe a coaching change won't make us a great team, but if our coach is that uneducated when it comes to his players, we will do better without him.
The guy doesn't use good PKers on the PK (Hagman and Stajan), he doesn't even try to dress a lineup that can win faceoffs, he has routinely tried forcing the issue with players in certain roles (for example Jokinen on the top line and Dion with Regehr).
The guy is flat out a bad coach. and like I said maybe we won't be a top team with a different coach, but I have no doubt it will make the team better. Sutter being fired will be addition by subtraction.
Didn't Sutter say something similar last season when he said he didn't know that Kotalik had a booming slap shot or something? I agree, if the guy doesn't know the attributes and things his players bring to the table he's not doing a very good job of having the players play to their best.
Didn't Sutter say something similar last season when he said he didn't know that Kotalik had a booming slap shot or something? I agree, if the guy doesn't know the attributes and things his players bring to the table he's not doing a very good job of having the players play to their best.
Yes he did say something to that effect. And Kotalik's bomb as well as Hagman's PK ability are pretty common knowledge.
How can you use players properly if you don't know what they are capable of.
I think firing Butter would have a Dutter-type effect on the team where we pick it up and play well for a while but still fall short.
I don't think Butter is the best coach for this team, because of the players we have. At the same time though I don't think firing him is going to benefit the Flames in the long run.
Considering if we do blow it up, Butter is exactly the type of coach we want rearing up our young players.
You guys, come on, really? Do actually think Sutter isn't aware of his players best attributes that are playing for him? That is ridiculious to think as such, and you do not know Sutter's dry humor. He was likely taking a stab at both Hagman and Kotalik. He is the one that watches these guys every day in practice, and if fans know this common knowledge then obviously Sutter's has the same info and was just not impressed with these players skill set. Sutter would not be a coach at this level if he was uncapable of recognizing these types of things.
While its cool to knock Sutter right now, I would like to point out that he is also the one who is responsible for keeping Smith and Horak with the club (being able to recognize their talent), and calling up Brodie and Byron which has had a really positive impact on the Flames overall play IMO. I will agree that Sutter has not utilized certain players strengths, but I believe that is because he deemed that others are a better fit playing in particular situations.
Every coach has favorite types of players, and I think Hagman and Kotalik were victim's of this. In contrast, Sutter realized Jokinen's strength, taught him to be the kind of player it takes be successful in his system and now Jokinen is playing to his strengths in Sutter's system. I just want to point this out because for the examples of Hagman and Kotalik, there are also examples on the opposite end of the spectrum in of Jokinen, Tanguay, Gio, Glencross, Backlund, Horak, Smith and Byron that have done very well under Sutter.
However, like I've said a couple of times already that if the Flames do not make the playoffs this year then I think Sutter should be let go and I would be estatic to see Kirk Muller get the job.
I think firing Butter would have a Dutter-type effect on the team where we pick it up and play well for a while but still fall short.
I don't think Butter is the best coach for this team, because of the players we have. At the same time though I don't think firing him is going to benefit the Flames in the long run.
Considering if we do blow it up, Butter is exactly the type of coach we want rearing up our young players.
I hear you, and am kind of inclined to agree (definitely on the first point, somewhat on the second) but I'm just not sure. I say we give it until the end of this month/beginning of December for this team to turn it around some but as said before, if they are out of it by more than 4 points come the trade deadline that we sell off what we can. I'm alright with keeping Butter around for the rest of this season, but in the off season if we're out of the playoffs I think the organization should make a move for some changes behind the bench.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW
You guys, come on, really? Do actually think Sutter isn't aware of his players best attributes that are playing for him? That is ridiculious to think as such, and you do not know Sutter's dry humor. He was likely taking a stab at both Hagman and Kotalik. He is the one that watches these guys every day in practice, and if fans know this common knowledge then obviously Sutter's has the same info and was just not impressed with these players skill set. Sutter would not be a coach at this level if he was uncapable of recognizing these types of things.
While its cool to knock Sutter right now, I would like to point out that he is also the one who is responsible for keeping Smith and Horak with the club (being able to recognize their talent), and calling up Brodie and Byron which has had a really positive impact on the Flames overall play IMO. I will agree that Sutter has not utilized certain players strengths, but I believe that is because he deemed that others are a better fit playing in particular situations.
Every coach has favorite types of players, and I think Hagman and Kotalik were victim's of this. In contrast, Sutter realized Jokinen's strength, taught him to be the kind of player it takes be successful in his system and now Jokinen is playing to his strengths in Sutter's system. I just want to point this out because for the examples of Hagman and Kotalik, there are also examples on the opposite end of the spectrum in of Jokinen, Tanguay, Gio, Glencross, Backlund, Horak, Smith and Byron that have done very well under Sutter.
However, like I've said a couple of times already that if the Flames do not make the playoffs this year then I think Sutter should be let go and I would be estatic to see Kirk Muller get the job.
That's a fair point on Jokinen, but I also don't think Hagman ever got a fair shake on this team by Butter or management. I think most of us can agree on that. And the least he could have done was try Hagman on the penalty kill once in a while if it wasn't working...I mean hell, he played 5 defensemen on the powerplay last season or the season before that for one powerplay? He's shown he's not afraid to try different things, and he should had at least attempted to do that with Hagman. I never liked Kotalik, though and personally didn't watch much of him when he was in the East so I wasn't very aware of his shot...however, Sutter was since he was the coach of the Devil's for two seasons. You can say it's his dry humour, but I'm just not sure. I've never been sold on the guy, but yeah...
I also would love to see Kirk Muller get a job with the organization if Butter was canned.
Last edited by Flames CBA Guy: 11-20-2011 at 06:17 PM.
That's a fair point on Jokinen, but I also don't think Hagman ever got a fair shake on this team by Butter or management. I think most of us can agree on that. And the least he could have done was try Hagman on the penalty kill once in a while if it wasn't working...I mean hell, he played 5 defensemen on the powerplay last season or the season before that for one powerplay? He's shown he's not afraid to try different things, and he should had at least attempted to do that with Hagman. I never liked Kotalik, though and personally didn't watch much of him when he was in the East so I wasn't very aware of his shot...however, Sutter was since he was the coach of the Devil's for two seasons. You can say it's his dry humour, but I'm just not sure. I've never been sold on the guy, but yeah...
I also would love to see Kirk Muller get a job with the organization if Butter was canned.
I agree that Sutter should of tried Hagman on the PK at least on occasion, but I don't think he didn't play him there because he didn't know that Hagman can play on the PK, I think he didn't play him there because he thought there other players on the Flames could do it better than Hagman. I mean, all these guys are professional hockey players and have played on the PK at some point in their careers.
I not arguing with you, I respect your points. IMO, it boiled down to the fact that Sutter was not a fan of Hagman, period. Hence why he didn't play him much in any situations. But to suggest that a coach that had a perfect record in a World Junior tournament does not have the ability to know what his players are capable of is a ridiculious statement. If this was true, Parise would not of had a 92 point season under Sutter, nor would a 34 year old Iginla have an 86 point season under Sutter's watch.
I really think that Sutter's comments to Hagman was Sutter taking a shot at Hagman's lack of on ice play.
I agree that Sutter should of tried Hagman on the PK at least on occasion, but I don't think he didn't play him there because he didn't know that Hagman can play on the PK, I think he didn't play him there because he thought there other players on the Flames could do it better than Hagman. I mean, all these guys are professional hockey players and have played on the PK at some point in their careers.
I not arguing with you, I respect your points. IMO, it boiled down to the fact that Sutter was not a fan of Hagman, period. Hence why he didn't play him much in any situations. But to suggest that a coach that had a perfect record in a World Junior tournament does not have the ability to know what his players are capable of is a ridiculious statement. If this was true, Parise would not of had a 92 point season under Sutter, nor would a 34 year old Iginla have an 86 point season under Sutter's watch.
I really think that Sutter's comments to Hagman was Sutter taking a shot at Hagman's lack of on ice play.
Parise and Iginla would've put up big number no matter who coached them. I mean, Parise had 82 points the year after Sutter, and Iginla had 89 points the year before Sutter coached them, so I think the player's abilities are more of a reflection of their numbers than the coaches who structered them.
As far as Sutter's perfect record goes, he did good work with the 2006 juniors, but the 2005 roster was stacked. Crosby, Getzlaf, Perry, Richards, Carter, etc., would've won gold no matter who was coaching them.
But given that you're using Sutter's history as a coach to use as a indicator to his performance, you'll have to include his history with Flames. Using NHL stats alone, he had two good years (if losing in the first round with Jersey is considered good), and two bad years. This will be his 5th year and it's not looking so good. That's a mediocre record IMO.
I think Sutter's positives, successes, characteristics, ect., don't mean jack **** in the NHL. Results are the only thing that matters. Great coaches get fired all of the time because a team is under performing, having a terrible month, lost in the first round, etc.
Look at some of the coaches on the hotseat (Paul Marice, Alan Vigneault) who are good coaches and have better records than Sutter, but might lose thier job because it is what it is. I think Sutter should be fired, and I don't really need to justify it because this is the NHL, and if your team is underperforming, you'll lose your job.
Hagman did not warrant an opportunity to play on PK based off of his defensive play at even strength.
You can talk all you want about his abilities in the past, but the fact remains that he is no longer that player, and he certainly did not do enough to convince the coach otherwise.
I am not the biggest B. Sutter fan out there, but this scenario is squarely on the shoulders of Hagman.
