If you watched the Calgary Flames during the Darryl Sutter coaching era you will undoubtedly noticed a certain necktie that Darryl wore on a fairly regular basis. I called it 'the road tie' because you'll notice it's obvious resemblance to a highway with a dotted line. I'm pretty sure Darryl almost never wore it at home games as well. I think he considered it his road tie as well.
To me, the road tie symbolized everything that was great about the Flames. The road tie was hard work. The road tie was perseverance. The road tie was smarts. The road tie was preperation. The road tie...was winning.
The Sutter clan has never been known for clever game strategy, (although Brent is starting to turn that around), but Darryl coached this team very well for his first season and a half. The 2004 playoff run was a stroke of genius in fact. The game was changing, although many coaches refused to acknowledge it. But Darryl figured it out. He knew he had a team that was a bit short on talent but heavy on speed and try. The Flames used a two man forecheck system. There was constant puck pressure on the opposing team's defenceman (or whatever poor soul happened to be trying to break the puck out) and the Flames both scored a lot of goals on that forecheck, and killed off a lot of time defensively. I called our forecheck system 'The Swarm.'
Remember the tandem of Nieminen, Nilson and Donovan? Probably one of the most effective 3rd line groups I have ever seen, which is especially impressive considering the career status of every single individual player from that line has plummeted since that time.
Back in those days, Darryl Sutter was probably the best coach in the NHL. The road tie was a symbol of his prowess.
That was then.
Now, Jim Playfair patrols the Flame's bench. We no longer see perserverence. We no longer see smarts. We certainly no longer see preperation.
I used to take pleasure in a road tie. Now what I'd really like to see is a road win. And I'm no longer just accepting road wins. I will only accept road wins against playoff teams.
Unfortunately, this team, or perhaps this coach, seems unwilling to deliver to my expectations.
The Flames no longer have a system, or at least one that works. This team has enough pure talent to beat any team, which would imply that we should choose a system and use it against every team. Force them to play our game. It's a philosophy that many successful teams abide by. Its a philosophy that took this team (this jersey at least) to the Stanley Cup Finals only a couple of seasons ago.
If we are forcing other teams to play to our strengths, then we're not doing a very good job of it. Firstly, we obviously cannot identify our strengths. Early in the season, Playfair talked about 'building an identity,' or 'playing to our identity.' In fact, he identified the Flames lack of success due to their not playing to their identity. When we went to the finals, our identity, our strength was speed, try, and defence. Now...
Is it:
a) Defence? Despite our abundance of defenceman drafted in the first round, our abundance of defenceman with well known names, our abundance of defenceman with a physical edge, our defenceman with defensive defenceman, our top 5 goaltender...quite simply put, team defence is often a week point in our game. Many of this team's defenders either have major mental lapses in terms of defending, in terms of distributing, or in terms of penalty taking. Therefore, I would say, defence is not our strongpoint. (Despite being ranked 9th in the league in GA).
b) Offense? Iginla, Tanguay, Langkow, Huselius, Lombardi, Moss, Conroy, Phaneuf, Hamrlik, Stuart. This is the offensive core of this team. Pretty big isn't it? Our Goals per Game ranking supports the idea of offense as being this team's strength.
This would imply that the Flames would want to get into high scoring games often (ala the Penguins or Sabres). Instead though, the Flames (or perhaps Playfair) seem to insist on pretending to be a defensively minded team, and instead of playing run and gun hockey (although the Flames occasionally fall back on that strategy). Its a strategy that has in fact succeeded more than it has failed, however, I would argue that this is because of the team's immense talent, rather than the actual efficacy of the strategy.
I have news for Playfair - the Flames identity is offence, and your strategy is playing counter to that.
Even assuming the Flames identity is not offense, Playfair has mangled the job of managing the team. I would postulate the hardest part of coaching is creating offence, that is something thats done mostly through talent. Systems are more likely to ruin offence than create it. Now that Playfair has the talent for offence, that would imply the Flames simply need to take care of their own end of the ice, and the rest of it will take care of itself. However, the coaching staff has refused to make adjustments to improve overall team defence.
Now it's probably a bit unfair to take the offensive credit away from Playfair and put the defensive blame on him. Perhaps I've overly complicated the issue.
But the fact is the Flames are (as many fellow Flames bloggers have pointed out) underachieving to a great degree. Its up to the coaching staff to get the most out of each and every player, and to get the most out of the group as a single unit. That's what Darryl Sutter was so great at in the days of the road tie. Thats what Jim Playfair and crew have failed to do this season.
Posts
