Friedman: Flames ownership killed Bishop trade to Flames last summer

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by AC

Ok sure. But the reports are that Treliving was specifically stuck waiting for Ken King to give him approval for the trade.

A trade for a #1 goalie at the deadline that could have drastically improved our playoff success given how much Elliott let the team down.

Are we sure it wasn't because it was due to the extension though? Wasn't it rumoured that Flames were only trading for him if they could ink him to an extension? So if it was a simply trade without the extension, I don't think it would have needed approval from King / Edwards.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by AC

Ok sure. But the reports are that Treliving was specifically stuck waiting for Ken King to give him approval for the trade.

A trade for a #1 goalie at the deadline that could have drastically improved our playoff success given how much Elliott let the team down.

You can make an argument that if Bishop had started the season for Calgary the Flames may have won their division and the oilers might not be in the playoffs.

Man, what a freakin' turd sandwich this is to eat on a Tuesday afternoon.

Goddamnit.

[Love]

Originally Posted by AC

@LarryFisher_KDC
Big condition in Brad Treliving's new contract/re-signing with #Flames was full autonomy, meaning he can now make moves without King consent

[Roof-Daddy]

Oh well then no WONDER the guy would rather go to Dallas than come here if he'd already agreed to a deal once upon a time with the Flames only to have ownership toss it in the trash.

Another great decision in the long line of great decisions that's lead to sweet #### all for the last 29 seasons.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You can make an argument that if Bishop had started the season for Calgary the Flames may have won their division and the oilers might not be in the playoffs.

Man, what a freakin' turd sandwich this is to eat on a Tuesday afternoon.

Goddamnit.

We assuredly wouldn't have been bounced 4 straight in the first round because of wrist shots going in from the half wall, or because of big fat juicy rebound goals given out freely after weak shots being lobbed in from the goddamn point.

But yeah, probably have a better shot at the division too.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You can make an argument that if Bishop had started the season for Calgary the Flames may have won their division and the oilers might not be in the playoffs.

Man, what a freakin' turd sandwich this is to eat on a Tuesday afternoon.

Goddamnit.

How does that equal the Oil not making the playoffs? Had the Flames swept them, they would still have finished with 95 points, caeteris paribus.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Friedman isn't always right on Flames rumours. This one might be true, but I could see ownership having the final say in a big money deal like that.

[Aarongavey]

Flames ownership nixed any talk of trading Iginla until it was too late as well. You would think ownership would set a budget and then allow the hockey folks to work from that. Instead it is "let's play GM for a day". Not really sure why you would ever have to run a hockey move by Ken King.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

We assuredly wouldn't have been bounced 4 straight in the first round because of wrist shots going in from the half wall, or because of big fat juicy rebound goals given out freely after weak shots being lobbed in from the goddamn point.

But yeah, probably have a better shot at the division too.

Man, I don't know about that. It's still a hypothetical. The Flames have had crap goaltending for awhile now, with two different head coaches and player systems. I still believe the Flames need to address the personnel responsible for preparing their goalies before they commit serious money to another one.

[868904]

But didn't Bishop say that they didn't talk contract? The Lightning only asked him if he would be willing to waive to discuss a contract extension with the Flames.

If they didn't talk contract, how could ownership nix it?

[mrdonkey]

It doesn't really surprise me to learn about ownership meddling in hockey ops, but it's still pretty grim news regardless.

It does sort of explain why this franchise has been utterly incapable of moving past bubble team status for the better part of three decades.

[SuperMatt18]

Although I dislike any type of ownership involvement for the most part, the two rumoured deals (Bishop in the offseason, Seguin in 2013) that we avoided may actually end up in our favour.

Would have loved Bishop for cheap at the trade deadline though.

From an ownership perspective though I can see where a deal where the term is 6+ years and is costing $30+ Million dollars then maybe it should require some type of sign off from the owner.

However in the case of the trade deadline when you are getting a rental then Treliving should have full autonomy to make that deal no questions asked.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by 868904

But didn't Bishop say that they didn't talk contract? The Lightning only asked him if he would be willing to waive to discuss a contract extension with the Flames.

If they didn't talk contract, how could ownership nix it?

Speculation is a trade was in place at the draft, with the condition of a new contract being agreed to (i.e. Contract fell apart)

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Ok, I hate hearing the news of a meddling ownership group, but think about what we had before Treliving showed up and started winning trades.

Jay Frickin' Feaster.

The man who almost gave Brad Richard $10 million a year for god knows how many years.

The man who signed Ryan O'Reilly to an offer sheet that would have cost the Flames draft picks AND lost the player as well.

The man who got horrible returns for Regehr, Iginla, and Bouwmeester.

Can you really blame Edwards for feeling like he has to have a say in contract and roster decisions? It is his money after all, and while he isn't an expert, it's safe to say that there needed to be some oversight in this department.


However, that begs the question of why they bothered hiring Burke at all. Burke is supposed to be the guy that oversees hockey operations, separating the hockey from the owners and financiers. If Edwards still feels the need to step in, it means that Burke is nothing more than a figurehead of the organization, and should probably be let go ASAP.

Also, you have to think that with a rookie GM in Treliving, they weren't going to hand him the keys to the franchise without a track record of trading and signings. Now that he's out of his "probation period" the owners probably felt they knew how he would handle things and they didn't need to stay involved in the day-to-day.



I'm just trying to see this from both sides. I don't blame ownership for being involved on the big, big deals, as those can set a franchise back if they're not the right deals.

[Caged Great]

From what I've heard the return for Bishop was 2 2nd's and Backlund (Dube pick + the one we dealt for Elliott). Not from official sources though.

Both trades would have been poor, very poor deals for the Flames. I'm glad they were vetoed. Losing Gaudreau, Monahan, and Backlund + 2 2nd's just to have Seguin and Bishop would have been a disaster for the organization.

[nik-]

I'm conflicted on this. I don't want this ownership meddling, especially via King, but I also would have hated that Bishop contract.

I don't know what to think.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by DionTheDman

In the loop is one thing. Being unreachable to approve a transaction because you're on a flight on friggin' trade deadline day is just stupidity.

To be clear Bishop was traded 3 days before the trade deadline.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

From what I've heard the return for Bishop was 2 2nd's and Backlund (Dube pick + the one we dealt for Elliott). Not from official sources though.

Both trades would have been poor, very poor deals for the Flames. I'm glad they were vetoed. Losing Gaudreau, Monahan, and Backlund + 2 2nd's just to have Seguin and Bishop would have been a disaster for the organization.

Yeah that is not a price I'm willing to pay.

Two 2nds maybe... but Backlund?? I am glad Bishop went for a paltry 7th + Budaj.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Ok, I hate hearing the news of a meddling ownership group, but think about what we had before Treliving showed up and started winning trades.

Jay Frickin' Feaster.

The man who almost gave Brad Richard $10 million a year for god knows how many years.

The man who signed Ryan O'Reilly to an offer sheet that would have cost the Flames draft picks AND lost the player as well.

The man who got horrible returns for Regehr, Iginla, and Bouwmeester.

Can you really blame Edwards for feeling like he has to have a say in contract and roster decisions? It is his money after all, and while he isn't an expert, it's safe to say that there needed to be some oversight in this department.


However, that begs the question of why they bothered hiring Burke at all. Burke is supposed to be the guy that oversees hockey operations, separating the hockey from the owners and financiers. If Edwards still feels the need to step in, it means that Burke is nothing more than a figurehead of the organization, and should probably be let go ASAP.

Also, you have to think that with a rookie GM in Treliving, they weren't going to hand him the keys to the franchise without a track record of trading and signings. Now that he's out of his "probation period" the owners probably felt they knew how he would handle things and they didn't need to stay involved in the day-to-day.



I'm just trying to see this from both sides. I don't blame ownership for being involved on the big, big deals, as those can set a franchise back if they're not the right deals.

Here's something to ponder, how involved did King get when Feaster was here? I mean he's willing to meddle when he has Brian frickin Burke and Treliving below him. What if he had a supplicant yes man in Feaster below him?

I think those Feaster years and some of those moves should be viewed as a management by committee era with King pulling most of the strings.

The fact that it was King who was blubbering to the media after the ROR deal went pear shaped signals to me he was deeply into the action.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Here's something to ponder, how involved did King get when Feaster was here? I mean he's willing to meddle when he has Brian frickin Burke and Treliving below him. What if he had a supplicant yes man in Feaster below him?

I think those Feaster years and some of those moves should be viewed as a management by committee era with King pulling most of the strings.

The fact that it was King who was blubbering to the media after the ROR deal went pear shaped signals to me he was deeply into the action.

What you say is possible, even probable, but I don't know if they would have bee comfortable with those massive moves and then turn around to veto relatively lesser deals that make more sense. Either the philosophy changed or ownership wasn't heavily involved at the time that you say they were. Besides, Feaster did most of his own defending on the ROR deal, saying their interpretation of the rules should have been the correct one.