HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Calgary Flames
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Are the Flames better off under Sutter than they were under Keenan?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-19-2012, 02:37 AM
  #1
Al Bundy*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 5,073
vCash: 500
Are the Flames better off under Sutter than they were under Keenan?

This is something I've wondered about the Flames.

They are currently in their third season under Brent Sutter, and I sometimes think if they were better off overall under Mike Keenan (or even Playfair):

In Sutter's first season, 2009-10, they had 201 goals scored, fewest in the West and second-fewest overall.

By contrast, the year before under Keenan, they had 251 goals, 4th in the West and eighth-most overall. (And I'll also throw in the 255 goals they had under Playfair in 2006-07, 4th in the West and seventh-most overall)

I hear that Keenan wasn't easy to play for, but unlike Sutter, he did get them to the playoffs.

I know they lost twice in the first-round under Keenan, but they drew a short straw both times:

in 2007-08, they drew the second-place overall Sharks in a 2-7 matchup. If they finished one point ahead of Colorado, they would have drawn Minnesota in what may have been a better chance.

In 2008-09, had they held on to win the division, they face playoff neophyte St. Louis in a 3-6 matchup instead of a Chicago team that had their number.

IMHO, I think Calgary may have been better off giving Keenan another year rather than going after Sutter.

What do you say?

Al Bundy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:40 AM
  #2
Medium Rare*
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,065
vCash: 500
no they are not. Sutter is a ****** coach. They were much better under Keenan and the moves they made that coinciuded with hiring Sutter quite frankly made no sense.

Jokinen and Bouwmeester had their best years under Keenan, then then let Keenan go the summer after acquiring Jokinen and around the time they acquired Bouwmeester. Keenan's system (though some argue he never had one) always played to the strengths of the players. I don't think you seem Bouwmeester, Hagman, Stajan and Jokinen have their numbers fall off the charts under Keenan. A;though it wouldn't have been good for Kipper

Medium Rare* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 09:05 AM
  #3
King In The North
Sean Bennett
 
King In The North's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hamilton, On
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,996
vCash: 500
Sutter has a better defensive system, while Keenan played to the strengths of players. However Keenan also never practised the powerplay; we were something like 2/51 heading into the playoffs against Chicago.

King In The North is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 09:29 AM
  #4
Medium Rare*
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLaDOS View Post
Sutter has a better defensive system, while Keenan played to the strengths of players. However Keenan also never practised the powerplay; we were something like 2/51 heading into the playoffs against Chicago.
and strangely despite not practicing the powerplay it was only 0.88% lower under Keenan. Based on the # of powerplays we are on pace for this year that would be a difference of about 2.2 goals over an entire season.

Seems to me like Sutter could be spending all that time working on the powerplay for something else, like maybe something to help hold onto leads.

and in fairness to Keenan about that bad stretch in his final year, we were missing Giordano, Phaneuf was hurt and pretty much 1/2 our top 6 were injured. he injuries have been more common this year, but they were more costly injuries at the end of that season.

Medium Rare* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 09:49 AM
  #5
FLAMES666
Retrofit not Rebuild
 
FLAMES666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,487
vCash: 1800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medium Rare View Post
and in fairness to Keenan about that bad stretch in his final year, we were missing Giordano, Phaneuf was hurt and pretty much 1/2 our top 6 were injured. he injuries have been more common this year, but they were more costly injuries at the end of that season.

I believe Regehr was out to, Our D was so banged up that season. God damn Anders Eriksson was playing come playoff time.

FLAMES666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 10:02 AM
  #6
I Hate Chris Butler
Backlund Fan Club
 
I Hate Chris Butler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,969
vCash: 300
Keenan had a significantly better team than Sutter does.

I Hate Chris Butler is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 10:16 AM
  #7
King In The North
Sean Bennett
 
King In The North's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hamilton, On
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medium Rare View Post
and strangely despite not practicing the powerplay it was only 0.88% lower under Keenan. Based on the # of powerplays we are on pace for this year that would be a difference of about 2.2 goals over an entire season.

Seems to me like Sutter could be spending all that time working on the powerplay for something else, like maybe something to help hold onto leads.

and in fairness to Keenan about that bad stretch in his final year, we were missing Giordano, Phaneuf was hurt and pretty much 1/2 our top 6 were injured. he injuries have been more common this year, but they were more costly injuries at the end of that season.
Wow didn't realize our PP was just as abysmal.

King In The North is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:10 AM
  #8
Devilspuppet666
Registered User
 
Devilspuppet666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Hate Jay Feaster View Post
Keenan had a significantly better team than Sutter does.
this. i still like playfair better

Devilspuppet666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:18 AM
  #9
Stewie Griffin
Moderator
Driving a Bandwagon
 
Stewie Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,349
vCash: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Hate Jay Feaster View Post
Keenan had a significantly better team than Sutter does.
Significantly? Um, no.

Sutter's biggest disappointment has been the extreme lack of consistency in the team. Going from 8th overall in goals to 24th overall in a single season (with improved offensive talent added) while generally keeping the goals against the same should be reason enough to not invite him back. Never mind the late game meltdowns. Never mind the atrocious face off win percentage (hey, let Stajan sit on the bench while Moss takes the important defensive zone draw). Never mind that this team is quite a bit worse 5 on 5 than they were last season.

Stewie Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:23 AM
  #10
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
 
SmellOfVictory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,186
vCash: 50
Yes and no. Keenan was a better coach in terms of strategy, but he caused a lot of friction on the team; there's also no chance he'd give the kind of minutes to young guys that Sutter currently is. And if the Flames had Keenan you can bet there'd be no Tanguay, who's been one of the best forwards on the team since he came back.

SmellOfVictory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:26 PM
  #11
FLAMES666
Retrofit not Rebuild
 
FLAMES666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,487
vCash: 1800
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmellOfVictory View Post
Yes and no. Keenan was a better coach in terms of strategy, but he caused a lot of friction on the team; there's also no chance he'd give the kind of minutes to young guys that Sutter currently is. And if the Flames had Keenan you can bet there'd be no Tanguay, who's been one of the best forwards on the team since he came back.
Sutter doesn't really have a choice, he is basically forced to with injuries, and the fact Feaster made this team younger since taking over. Keenan didn't have young guys to play either so that is an assumption.

FLAMES666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 01:39 PM
  #12
King In The North
Sean Bennett
 
King In The North's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hamilton, On
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,996
vCash: 500
Also, going by what has been recorded about D. Sutter's methods, he would push certain players to play at certain roles.

King In The North is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 03:18 PM
  #13
Backlund
Registered User
 
Backlund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,804
vCash: 1263
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLaDOS View Post
Also, going by what has been recorded about D. Sutter's methods, he would push certain players to play at certain roles.
Wrong Sutter :p

Backlund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 05:46 PM
  #14
King In The North
Sean Bennett
 
King In The North's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hamilton, On
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backlund View Post
Wrong Sutter :p
Nah, I remember reading from an article Darryl would push Brent to use certain players in key roles, which was one of the reasons why Brent did much better after Feaster became interim GM.

King In The North is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 06:21 PM
  #15
CGYPUKSUX
The No Kool-aid Zone
 
CGYPUKSUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hockey Purgatory
Posts: 2,101
vCash: 500
Keenan was a horrible coach. In fact, he did little coaching and had no system. He set the lineup and barked out when to change lines. He had our franchise player in his prime and that is what made him successful as a coach. Sadly, that lack of structure killed our franchise player's work ethic at the rink and developed one of the biggest cherry pickers in the league. I hate Keenan for what he did to the team in a very short time. He made many of them underachievers.

Sutter is a good coach but has a team that is not buying into the program. This is why the team plays its best when the vest are hurt and the young kids are filling the ranks. They buy into the program and execute their duties accordingly. This forces the veterans to do the same or be showed up by some young buck. This is the team Sutter would be most successful with and one I would give him.

Frankly, this team needs an enema. It needs to purge itself of a few players who've been around a little too long. It's time for a change in leadership and vision, regardless of who is coaching the team. I'd rather Sutter stayed and the team cleaned house of anyone over the age of 31. It's time. I don't care what coach is available they will never be able to goad a performance out of this team, especially in games that matter.

CGYPUKSUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 06:43 PM
  #16
HighLifeMan
HFB Partner
 
HighLifeMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGYPUKSUX View Post
Keenan was a horrible coach. In fact, he did little coaching and had no system. He set the lineup and barked out when to change lines. He had our franchise player in his prime and that is what made him successful as a coach. Sadly, that lack of structure killed our franchise player's work ethic at the rink and developed one of the biggest cherry pickers in the league. I hate Keenan for what he did to the team in a very short time. He made many of them underachievers.

Sutter is a good coach but has a team that is not buying into the program. This is why the team plays its best when the vest are hurt and the young kids are filling the ranks. They buy into the program and execute their duties accordingly. This forces the veterans to do the same or be showed up by some young buck. This is the team Sutter would be most successful with and one I would give him.

Frankly, this team needs an enema. It needs to purge itself of a few players who've been around a little too long. It's time for a change in leadership and vision, regardless of who is coaching the team. I'd rather Sutter stayed and the team cleaned house of anyone over the age of 31. It's time. I don't care what coach is available they will never be able to goad a performance out of this team, especially in games that matter.
You just contradicted yourself...It has been three seasons now and he has yet to get his "team" to buy into a system that he is STILL trying to implement on a core of players that it clearly does not work for the way it is currently constructed.

That does not scream good coach to me...

My biggest problems with Brent are:

1. Change in mentality once we have a lead/Inability to adapt his players to a change in the opponents game plan

2. His infatuation with certain role players such as Blake Comeau, Tom Kostopoulos and Blair Jones.

3. Mishandling players throughout his lineup.
Examples include
-Playing Matt Stajan on the 4th line until injuries forced him up the lineup
- Sitting Anton Babchuk the entire season even though he is an absolute threat on the PP and can shine in a sheltered role.
-His insistence on playing Chris Butler in such important roles, when at this point in time he is clearly not ready.

In my view he has simply not EARNED a contract extension given the results his team has produced during his three year tenure here in Calgary.

HighLifeMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 07:03 PM
  #17
Medium Rare*
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmellOfVictory View Post
Yes and no. Keenan was a better coach in terms of strategy, but he caused a lot of friction on the team; there's also no chance he'd give the kind of minutes to young guys that Sutter currently is. And if the Flames had Keenan you can bet there'd be no Tanguay, who's been one of the best forwards on the team since he came back.
Keenan would ride ay player worthy regardless of age. Keenan may loved his top players no matter how old they were. This is the guy that rode Bouwmeester hard in Florida, Pronger in St. Louis and Phaneuf here. If anything if Keenan saw potential on Bordie he would be playing him top 4 minutes.

Medium Rare* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 08:01 PM
  #18
MarkGio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighLifeMan View Post
You just contradicted yourself...It has been three seasons now and he has yet to get his "team" to buy into a system that he is STILL trying to implement on a core of players that it clearly does not work for the way it is currently constructed.

That does not scream good coach to me...

My biggest problems with Brent are:

1. Change in mentality once we have a lead/Inability to adapt his players to a change in the opponents game plan

2. His infatuation with certain role players such as Blake Comeau, Tom Kostopoulos and Blair Jones.

3. Mishandling players throughout his lineup.
Examples include
-Playing Matt Stajan on the 4th line until injuries forced him up the lineup
- Sitting Anton Babchuk the entire season even though he is an absolute threat on the PP and can shine in a sheltered role.
-His insistence on playing Chris Butler in such important roles, when at this point in time he is clearly not ready.

In my view he has simply not EARNED a contract extension given the results his team has produced during his three year tenure here in Calgary.
Amen brother. Plus I think Sutter has been inconsistent when calling his time outs. He's done a better job as of late, but you couldn't pay him to call a time out in the early part of the season. It's not like he has a lot of duties during the actual game...

In addition, I would disagree with his choices in the shoot-out. If you've gone cold after 3 shoot-out attempts, there's no harm in picking someone else. He could be picking players who get hot during the game. Like Stajan would've been a better pick than Tangauy last game, as Stajan has been putting it in the net as of late.

Those who believe Sutter is still a good coach don't have a leg to stand on anymore. While some of those players 30 years or older have proven to be consistent year after year, Sutter has been so inconsistent. Sutter is defensive one year, offensive the next, and then defensive again. He's either bad on the road one year, bad at home the next year, and then different again. And then he has the gully to blame it on the players; claiming that there's no buy in. It's a cowardly, chicken-**** excuse if you ask me.

MarkGio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 10:40 PM
  #19
FLAMES666
Retrofit not Rebuild
 
FLAMES666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,487
vCash: 1800
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
In addition, I would disagree with his choices in the shoot-out. If you've gone cold after 3 shoot-out attempts, there's no harm in picking someone else. He could be picking players who get hot during the game. Like Stajan would've been a better pick than Tangauy last game, as Stajan has been putting it in the net as of late.
I think you put Tanguay in every SO, he is easily the best on our team in that reguards. I definitely wouldn't of put Glencross in last game, but really what other options to we have right now outside of those guys. I could see Stajan given a chance but other then that we are not built to win SO's.

FLAMES666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 10:55 PM
  #20
CGYPUKSUX
The No Kool-aid Zone
 
CGYPUKSUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hockey Purgatory
Posts: 2,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighLifeMan View Post
You just contradicted yourself...It has been three seasons now and he has yet to get his "team" to buy into a system that he is STILL trying to implement on a core of players that it clearly does not work for the way it is currently constructed.

That does not scream good coach to me...
There's no contradiction there at all. A coach can be put in a really bad situation in having a group of veterans that are set in their ways. Its even worse when the GM refuses to deal those players away and keeps that leadership group in the room. It is even tougher when you have a star player focused on one side of the puck and not both. When you're constantly fighting that leader there is little chance for success.

Quote:
My biggest problems with Brent are:

1. Change in mentality once we have a lead/Inability to adapt his players to a change in the opponents game plan
Every team does this. This isn't a problem unique to Sutter or the Flames. The teams whose best players play the team concept are the teams who have the most success. When the Flames best players commit to the game plan the team finds success. When they don't play hard or get outplayed badly by the opposition the results are obvious.

Quote:
2. His infatuation with certain role players such as Blake Comeau, Tom Kostopoulos and Blair Jones.
Hate relying on players who give it all out every shift. Better to rely on those guys who mail in 40% of their performances. The team that works the hardest is the one who wins.

Quote:
3. Mishandling players throughout his lineup.
Examples include
-Playing Matt Stajan on the 4th line until injuries forced him up the lineup
Now Stajan isn't the whipping boy he's been all year and should have been playing up the lineup all season? You mentioned contradiction earlier?

Quote:
- Sitting Anton Babchuk the entire season even though he is an absolute threat on the PP and can shine in a sheltered role.
Shine in a sheltered role? That's not the make of the team. Sutter rolled three lines and three pairs and then gave the 4th line spot play. There was no place to hide Babchuk. Also, wasn't it on Babchuk to earn his way back into the lineup? I don't think there is a coach in the league that would have dressed Babchuk as a PP specialist.

Quote:
-His insistence on playing Chris Butler in such important roles, when at this point in time he is clearly not ready.
I don't disagree with this, but Butler really only had a few horrendous games the fans tend to focus on. He and Bouwmeester wee not the best pairing. I think he should have paired Bouwmeester and Hannan and Buttler and Sarich, blending the puck moving with some toughness, but I understand his desire to try and move the puck up ice quickly, which Butler was very good at. I think that since Butler got hurt we see just how badly the Flames miss him and that puck moving ability.

Quote:
In my view he has simply not EARNED a contract extension given the results his team has produced during his three year tenure here in Calgary.
I can respect that. The results have been very disappointing, but to hang it all on the coach again is just wrong. There are certain players who have abandoned this team and the coach in their play and they need to accept just as much responsibility for the negative outcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Amen brother. Plus I think Sutter has been inconsistent when calling his time outs. He's done a better job as of late, but you couldn't pay him to call a time out in the early part of the season. It's not like he has a lot of duties during the actual game...
Timeouts? That's how you measure a coach? When he calls his timeouts? This isn't basketball.

Quote:
In addition, I would disagree with his choices in the shoot-out. If you've gone cold after 3 shoot-out attempts, there's no harm in picking someone else. He could be picking players who get hot during the game. Like Stajan would've been a better pick than Tangauy last game, as Stajan has been putting it in the net as of late.
So we're measuring a coach by who he picks in the super skills contest as well? Sutter went with three of his top four scorers. Was it his fault that those guys went in and buried the puck right in the chest of the goaltender?

Quote:
Those who believe Sutter is still a good coach don't have a leg to stand on anymore. While some of those players 30 years or older have proven to be consistent year after year, Sutter has been so inconsistent. Sutter is defensive one year, offensive the next, and then defensive again. He's either bad on the road one year, bad at home the next year, and then different again.
Sutter has actually tried to adapt to his talent, something he's been accused of not doing, but the talent has been extremely inconsistent, counter to your claims. ]

Quote:
And then he has the gully to blame it on the players; claiming that there's no buy in. It's a cowardly, chicken-**** excuse if you ask me.
Who else is there to blame? Coaches don't go out there and score goals or blow assignments leading to goals against. Coaches don't cherry pick at the blueline while the team is hemmed in. Coaches don't play soft in front of the net. Coaches don't leave the zone early. Coaches, and Sutter is one of them, put on a brave face when their team plays like a bunch of losers, taking the heat for piss poor performance after piss poor performance. The players need to learn to listen to their coach. Sutter won more in his career than that whole collection of underachievers can dream of. Sadly, they don't, and it shows.

CGYPUKSUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:03 PM
  #21
MarkGio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLAMES666 View Post
I think you put Tanguay in every SO, he is easily the best on our team in that reguards. I definitely wouldn't of put Glencross in last game, but really what other options to we have right now outside of those guys. I could see Stajan given a chance but other then that we are not built to win SO's.
Nemisz or Horak would probably have some moves. Stempniak is another guy. I'm not saying Tangs is bad in the shoot-out, but he hasn't been able to get the job done.

Einstein said "insanity was doing something over and over again and expecting different results".

MarkGio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:10 PM
  #22
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,928
vCash: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Nemisz or Horak would probably have some moves. Stempniak is another guy. I'm not saying Tangs is bad in the shoot-out, but he hasn't been able to get the job done.

Einstein said "insanity was doing something over and over again and expecting different results".
Technically that is what quantum mechanics is.

I hated Keenan but he was able to get this team into the playoffs so I guess he has the edge.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:41 PM
  #23
MarkGio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGYPUKSUX View Post
Timeouts? That's how you measure a coach? When he calls his timeouts? This isn't basketball.
Really? I hadn't noticed. What I had noticed, however, is that coaches are given a time out for a reason. What would that reason be? Certainly not to be used....

Quote:
Originally Posted by CGYPUKSUX View Post
So we're measuring a coach by who he picks in the super skills contest as well? Sutter went with three of his top four scorers. Was it his fault that those guys went in and buried the puck right in the chest of the goaltender?.
Yes I measure a coach based on his decisions. That's what he gets paid for....

Quote:
Originally Posted by CGYPUKSUX View Post
Sutter has actually tried to adapt to his talent, something he's been accused of not doing, but the talent has been extremely inconsistent, counter to your claims.
Claims? Compare the teams goals for each year and goals against. Notice a difference?
Now compare the player's variance. Iggy has had 30+ goals for the past three seasons. Jokinen has put up 50+ points. I would argue that the player's have been consistent, but have trouble taking it to the next level and trying to improve.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CGYPUKSUX View Post
Who else is there to blame? Coaches don't go out there and score goals or blow assignments leading to goals against. Coaches don't cherry pick at the blueline while the team is hemmed in. Coaches don't play soft in front of the net. Coaches don't leave the zone early. Coaches, and Sutter is one of them, put on a brave face when their team plays like a bunch of losers, taking the heat for piss poor performance after piss poor performance. The players need to learn to listen to their coach. Sutter won more in his career than that whole collection of underachievers can dream of. Sadly, they don't, and it shows.
You're not conceptual are you? You certainly wouldn't make a good manager. A good manager holds those who have the most power and responsibility the most accountable. I would be pretty foolish to go up to my boss and tell him that my lazy workforce is the reason why we're losing money. The bossman would wonder why he pays me to make decisions, and then fire me for making lousy excuses.

Even though I can't personally make my workers keep steady during their shift and I can't make them work within the most efficient means possible. I can't make sure they get enough sleep before work and force them to stop thinking about their Friday night plans. Despite all that, I stay accountable for the margins, the safety, and the quality of the business that I regulate and dictate. No excuses.

The workforce can only produce within the parameters of the decision maker. If they're not achieving the goals that's established for them, then it's up to the decision makers to make the proper adjustments, as workers simply can't plan, control, or organize the production or quality of a businesses product. Only decision makers can do that.

Similarly, a single player can't simply decide to hog the puck and try to win the game alone, as they wouldn't play another shift. Player's have to play within the system otherwise they don't play. Player's have to perform the power play and penalty kill as planned, they practice, watch tapes, work out, and get personal time as organized, and they play the game as controlled by the system.

If you blame the failures of an organization on the actions of a few labourers, you simple don't belong in business.


Last edited by MarkGio: 03-20-2012 at 12:11 AM.
MarkGio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2012, 07:42 AM
  #24
HighLifeMan
HFB Partner
 
HighLifeMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,987
vCash: 500
@ CGYPUKSUX
Quote:
There's no contradiction there at all. A coach can be put in a really bad situation in having a group of veterans that are set in their ways. Its even worse when the GM refuses to deal those players away and keeps that leadership group in the room. It is even tougher when you have a star player focused on one side of the puck and not both. When you're constantly fighting that leader there is little chance for success.
Brent Sutter did not come into a "really bad situation". Lets face the facts here, he inherited a perennial playoff team that is now fighting tooth and nail just for the opportunity to be where they once were three seasons ago. I can't agree with you in the sense that you believe Jay Feaster has refused to move out any pieces of our leadership group as we have seen Robyn Regehr, Daymond Langkow and Rene Bourque moved. Those three were absolutely key members and pieces of our core and leadership group. As far as Iginla goes, do you seriously expect an elite player who has found success playing a certain way for over a decade to completely change his play style due to a coaches demands? If you ask me, that is another strike against Brent. Again he should absolutely cater/compromise his system around his best players, and in my opinion he has not done that with Jarome and more specifically Jay Bouwmeester.


Quote:
Every team does this. This isn't a problem unique to Sutter or the Flames. The teams whose best players play the team concept are the teams who have the most success. When the Flames best players commit to the game plan the team finds success. When they don't play hard or get outplayed badly by the opposition the results are obvious.
What I take from that is that Brent's system he currently has implemented is simply unattainable for the current core group of players to perform to on a game to game basis. It hasn't worked so far...that much is clear.

Quote:
Hate relying on players who give it all out every shift. Better to rely on those guys who mail in 40% of their performances. The team that works the hardest is the one who wins.
Nope, I absolutely love those "types of players" and every team needs them to be successful. However the problem lies in the fact that Brent plays them in situations where they are no longer of use or as useful as they would normally be(i.e a top six role)

Quote:
Now Stajan isn't the whipping boy he's been all year and should have been playing up the lineup all season? You mentioned contradiction earlier?
Actually I have been an advocate of placing Stajan in the top from the get go.He was never my whipping boy, I knew he was being mishandled the entire time (as did a few others around these parts). No contradiction here.

Quote:
Shine in a sheltered role? That's not the make of the team. Sutter rolled three lines and three pairs and then gave the 4th line spot play. There was no place to hide Babchuk. Also, wasn't it on Babchuk to earn his way back into the lineup? I don't think there is a coach in the league that would have dressed Babchuk as a PP specialist.
Again, I completely disagree. Derek Smith has played sheltered minutes for nearly the entire season. T.J Brodie's matchups also get manipulated to help ease his transition into the NHL game. Anton Babchuk showed just how much of an impact he could make last season when given powerplay time and a bottom pairing role at even strength. We miss his point production from the back end, and when used "properly" like last season he is not a liability defensively.

Quote:
I don't disagree with this, but Butler really only had a few horrendous games the fans tend to focus on. He and Bouwmeester wee not the best pairing. I think he should have paired Bouwmeester and Hannan and Buttler and Sarich, blending the puck moving with some toughness, but I understand his desire to try and move the puck up ice quickly, which Butler was very good at. I think that since Butler got hurt we see just how badly the Flames miss him and that puck moving ability.
This I agree with!
I actually think Butler compliments Bouwmeester's game quite nicely, and I am one of the few people who have not completely ripped apart Butlers game. I would just prefer to have Butler/Hannan/Brodie rotate next to Bouwmeester at even strength and the penalty kill as he is not ready and may never be for the types of minutes, and situations he has found himself in this entire season.

Quote:
I can respect that. The results have been very disappointing, but to hang it all on the coach again is just wrong. There are certain players who have abandoned this team and the coach in their play and they need to accept just as much responsibility for the negative outcome.
By no means am I trying to direct all of the blame towards brent, but at the same time he has yet to exceed or for that matter meet the expectations of the franchise and fanbase. I am all for a continuous change of player personal as well, but I do not willingly except a complete rebuild or fire sale. I personally like the direction Feaster is taking this team, but that can be saved for another thread.

I suppose I should also say that I dont honestly believe he is a "bad coach" but in my eyes he is not a good fit for our team as is constructed. He could very well find success somewhere else in the NHL, I just dont think it will ever be here.

HighLifeMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2012, 09:03 AM
  #25
CGYPUKSUX
The No Kool-aid Zone
 
CGYPUKSUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hockey Purgatory
Posts: 2,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Really? I hadn't noticed. What I had noticed, however, is that coaches are given a time out for a reason. What would that reason be? Certainly not to be used....
How did teams ever get through those times of pressure prior to the timeout? Oh yeah, the players sucked it up and played through it. They didn't need a timeout for the coach to "settle them down" they just played through it and learned to be mentally tough.

Quote:
Yes I measure a coach based on his decisions. That's what he gets paid for....
And what would your response be if he went with his third and forth liners in the shootout? You'd piss and moan about that, claiming Sutter had lost his mind and wasn't right in the head for leaving his top scorers on the bench. The coach is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Sutter made the right decision. The fault is on the players, the top four scorers on the team, who each went in and took low percentage shots from the hashmarks. It's quite funny, but you're crying about him relying on the top four scorers and another guy is crying about his reliance on the muckers. Which is it guys?

Quote:
Claims? Compare the teams goals for each year and goals against. Notice a difference?
Now compare the player's variance. Iggy has had 30+ goals for the past three seasons. Jokinen has put up 50+ points. I would argue that the player's have been consistent, but have trouble taking it to the next level and trying to improve.
The players have been consistent. Consistent losers. Their individual goals have superseded that of the team for years. They play as a group of individuals and fight against the desires of the coaches. They have for every coach.

Quote:
You're not conceptual are you? You certainly wouldn't make a good manager. A good manager holds those who have the most power and responsibility the most accountable. I would be pretty foolish to go up to my boss and tell him that my lazy workforce is the reason why we're losing money. The bossman would wonder why he pays me to make decisions, and then fire me for making lousy excuses.
Yeah, horrible manager. Don't have a clue. I guess being contracted by companies to fix their dysfunctional business units gives me no unique perspective on the issue and you with your wealth of expertise in human and organizational psychology are probably more equipped to make the call. Say, Dr. Gio, what do you focus on when the company in question has gone through four line managers in a short period of time? Is it likely a problem with the line managers or a bigger problem, like the workers or the culture established by the workers?

Quote:
Even though I can't personally make my workers keep steady during their shift and I can't make them work within the most efficient means possible. I can't make sure they get enough sleep before work and force them to stop thinking about their Friday night plans. Despite all that, I stay accountable for the margins, the safety, and the quality of the business that I regulate and dictate. No excuses.
If you can't do those things don't you replace the workers who exhibit these bad performance characteristics? That's exactly what you do, except you have a small problem. The top guy is the golf buddy of the owner of the company and he's protected on high. You also have a bunch of guys with huge buyouts in their contracts and it makes it cost prohibitive to eliminate them. So what do you do, Dr. Gio?

Quote:
The workforce can only produce within the parameters of the decision maker. If they're not achieving the goals that's established for them, then it's up to the decision makers to make the proper adjustments, as workers simply can't plan, control, or organize the production or quality of a businesses product. Only decision makers can do that.
The manager can only produce within the parameters of the decision maker. If the workers are not achieving the goals that's established for them, then it's up to the decision makers to make the proper adjustments, because the workers simply won't comply with the plans, controls, or organization the managers put in place, negatively affecting production or quality of a businesses product. Only decision makers can do that.

Quote:
Similarly, a single player can't simply decide to hog the puck and try to win the game alone, as they wouldn't play another shift. Player's have to play within the system otherwise they don't play. Player's have to perform the power play and penalty kill as planned, they practice, watch tapes, work out, and get personal time as organized, and they play the game as controlled by the system.
Watch #12 during a game. Cherry picks at the blueline. Think that is part of the game plan? Crosses the blueline and curls on the half boards as his team mates go to the net, but waits too long and loses the puck. Think that is part of the game plan? Enters the zone and then attempts to over-handle the puck and beat the defender by himself, usually resulting in a turnover. Think that is part of the game plan? This is the leader on the team and he never complies with the game plan. If any of these behaviors were the game plan you'd see other players on other lines exhibiting the same behaviors. You don't. There are others that are doing stupid things as well, and not following the plan, so it isn't just Iginla. Every player has his warts, but not all of them are in leadership roles or carry such responsibility.

Quote:
If you blame the failures of an organization on the actions of a few labourers, you simple don't belong in business.
What was that Einstein quote? Apply that to the practice of firing coaches rather than making dramatic changes in personnel and leadership.

CGYPUKSUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.