While I was part of the Fire Sutter chorus, it seems a little silly to me to try and link the shooting percentage of a team to the fate of the GM. The team's record was, in my mind, more a product of variance. Without spending all day on it, the team was more talented than the record showed in the first half, and it evened out during the second half.
Of course, the change in atmosphere (?) that supposedly accompanied Sutter's firing may very well had a very drastic effect on the teams ability to win games. You never know; Magic forces are hard to measure.
But lets play along. Ok. I'll pretend that Darryl Sutter's scowl was a hindrance on the team's ability to win games. It should follow that removing that hindrance would therefore provide a benefit to the teams ability to win. It seems to me that the benefit should be a permanent one: Darryl Sutter's scowl has been permanently removed, therefore the benefit one gained from removing the scowl should last forever, or at least until scowls return.
I don't know about you guys, but the record of the Flames in the period of time before Christmas doesn't look all that different in the two years looked at.
Again, one can clearly see from the chart that after Christmas in the 2010-2011 year, the team won more games. The Flames collected 48% of the points available pre-Christmas, and 64% of them post-Christmas. While I am not saying that firing Darryl Sutter had no effect (because, quite frankly, I do not know how magic works) I think it had less of an effect than people make out. And I think that because Darryl Sutter and his bad, record deflating attitude was no longer around the team in the pre-Christmas portion of the 2011-2012 season, and yet the record looks remarkably similar to 2010-2011 pre-Christmas one.
Now the point percentage from the second half of 2011-2012 is not complete as there are 5 games left to play. Lets say the Flames split those games and go 2-2-1. That would change the P% of the second half of 2012 to 64%. In other words, the chances of the team having a pretty similar season to that of last year are pretty good.
Which would seem to suggest to me that firing Darryl Sutter had no actual effect on the teams play at all, regardless of the protestations of the dirt throwers in the local media who didn't like the guy because he didn't treat them like unique snowflakes, in the way Brent and Feaster do.
I don't know why the team doesn't play as well in the first half of the season as it does in the second half. Perhaps the coach of the team isn't able to communicate a sense of urgency to his players, who knows. I just think it has nothing to do with the atmosphere the GM of the club creates. At least it doesn't appear that way.
With that said, a 'Sutter Sucks' chant at the Dome tonight wouldn't, well, suck.
Furthermore, I think