Brent Sutter Interview on FAN960

[Phanuthier]

anybody catch this?

just listening to this, a lot of speaking in between the lines that are up to interpretation, but 2 things I caught reading in between the lines:

- when he left, he wanted to rebuild because he didn't feel the talent was elite enough to be a contender (but had a chance to be a 8th place team).... King/Feaster felt the young players were not good enough to rebuild and wanted to keep trying to maket he playoffs and see what happens

- Gio was his captain (just a compliment to Gio, or a slight to Iginla?)....

[polak]

I believe it. Sutter's experience with kids in the WHL would probably make him a good coach for a rebuild but unfortunately we needed to clean house from the old regime with this rebuild and that has to include the coach.

Wonder what he thinks of our rebuild so far? This seems like a Sutter style team. Just a tad better cause it's a Hartley style team

[Coach]

I agree Sutter would have been better with the kids than he was with the 'stars', but that doesn't mean he would have been good.

[JiriHrdina]

It was a clear slight to Iggy - pretty blunt statement.

[Tyler]

I actually think that's a really interesting comment about 'our young players weren't good enough to rebuild'. That's an extremely logical and smart comment. If you have a bunch of high 20's prospects who are duds, a guy you can't sign and not a ton of talent on the farm, you actually probably are better off relying on older guys and FA's.

Having Monahan, Baertschi, Gaudreau and Bennett, etc in our system now makes a rebuild far more sense and potentially successful.

On the Iginla topic.. everyone seems to want to throw him under the bus now that he's gone. But that could also be because he had such an aura here that no one ever dared question or challenge him. Anyways, it sounds like both he and the organization made the right decision

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Tyler

On the Iginla topic.. everyone seems to want to throw him under the bus now that he's gone. But that could also be because he had such an aura here that no one ever dared question or challenge him. Anyways, it sounds like both he and the organization made the right decision

I think this is exactly what it was. It's not really his fault, but it was a problem nonetheless.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tyler

I actually think that's a really interesting comment about 'our young players weren't good enough to rebuild'. That's an extremely logical and smart comment. If you have a bunch of high 20's prospects who are duds, a guy you can't sign and not a ton of talent on the farm, you actually probably are better off relying on older guys and FA's.

Having Monahan, Baertschi, Gaudreau and Bennett, etc in our system now makes a rebuild far more sense and potentially successful.

On the Iginla topic.. everyone seems to want to throw him under the bus now that he's gone. But that could also be because he had such an aura here that no one ever dared question or challenge him. Anyways, it sounds like both he and the organization made the right decision

Agreed.

If there were a few solid kids in the system, a team might be more inclined to turn the page and start to build around them.

However, with nothing on the farm, might as well ride the vets for all they've got and see if you can find magic. Because once you turn the page, it's going to be full rebuild, regardless.

I am also not surprised that Butter wanted to rebuild - I never felt (from day 1) like he believed in the players that he had.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Agreed.

If there were a few solid kids in the system, a team might be more inclined to turn the page and start to build around them.

However, with nothing on the farm, might as well ride the vets for all they've got and see if you can find magic. Because once you turn the page, it's going to be full rebuild, regardless.

I am also not surprised that Butter wanted to rebuild - I never felt (from day 1) like he believed in the players that he had.

I don't understand this point by Feaster / King (supposedly) at all. Yes it's fair, not good prospects, but the whole point would be there was an opportunity to move players like Iginla back in Sutter's time for much more value than we got letting it go on longer, and we'd likely have had some good prospects in the system.

That was the decision to be made, bolster the quality of our prospects, by getting good value for our veteran's. Spinning our wheels trying to make it work was the problem. If they'd moved Iggy and Co back then, we'd likely have the same (or similar) prospect quality we have now, plus some young players coming into their prime that we got back in those trades. We'd be deeper for the future and much closer to competing today than we are now.

[Enoch Root]

I am not going to get into another 'we should have started the rebuild earlier' debate.

I get their thought process. You don't. Cool.

[Locke]

A client of mine bought a Honda Pilot off of Brent Sutter yesterday.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Locke

A client of mine bought a Honda Pilot off of Brent Sutter yesterday.

Ok, you used this picture two posts in a row ... you're cut off now.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I am not going to get into another 'we should have started the rebuild earlier' debate.

I get their thought process. You don't. Cool.

I was more bringing up the topic and using your quote to reference their opinion, not to start a debate with you specifically.

I will say, their logic on this matter is likely why Feaster doesn't have a job that impacts player rosters any more and why the Flames moved to a President of Hockey operations model, leaving King to the non hockey business side.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by nik-

Ok, you used this picture two posts in a row ... you're cut off now.

Fair enough.

[Fischy13]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

anybody catch this?

just listening to this, a lot of speaking in between the lines that are up to interpretation, but 2 things I caught reading in between the lines:

- when he left, he wanted to rebuild because he didn't feel the talent was elite enough to be a contender (but had a chance to be a 8th place team).... King/Feaster felt the young players were not good enough to rebuild and wanted to keep trying to maket he playoffs and see what happens

- Gio was his captain (just a compliment to Gio, or a slight to Iginla?)....

Isn't that exactly what a rebuild is.... You need to be a bottom team to get these good players. You don't get anything but aging vets otherwise and continue spinning your wheels while getting a worse draft slot. This makes absolutley no sense at all.

[Ashasx]

Seems like a dislike Brent more and more every time he talks to the media about something.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by Fischy13

Isn't that exactly what a rebuild is.... You need to be a bottom team to get these good players. You don't get anything but aging vets otherwise and continue spinning your wheels while getting a worse draft slot. This makes absolutley no sense at all.

You don't want the kids to get destroyed though. They need to develop properly. Just look north for that example. They are sooo no good.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Fischy13

Isn't that exactly what a rebuild is.... You need to be a bottom team to get these good players. You don't get anything but aging vets otherwise and continue spinning your wheels while getting a worse draft slot. This makes absolutley no sense at all.

(okay, 1 comment)

Yes it does because if you ride your horses to the end, you're going to have a scorched-earth rebuild and are likely to get better quality picks. If you rebuild sooner, you probably don't dip as deep. In the end, there is really no way of knowing in advance which would be a quicker rebuild (and the outcome is likely similar) so why not take one more shot with the vets?

Not saying it's a better way to go, but it is certainly understandable because there are no guarantees of a faster rebuild either way.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Fischy13

Isn't that exactly what a rebuild is.... You need to be a bottom team to get these good players. You don't get anything but aging vets otherwise and continue spinning your wheels while getting a worse draft slot. This makes absolutley no sense at all.

No you don't. Lots of teams get great players later in the draft. And no, I'm not talking about the incredibly slim chance of a player Datsyuk in the 7th round.

Giroux - 22nd overall
Kopitar - 11th overall
Getzlaf - 19th overall
Perry - 28th overall

Being a bottom team makes it a lot harder to miss, but you certainly don't need to be a bottom team to find top players.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

If there were a few solid kids in the system, a team might be more inclined to turn the page and start to build around them.

However, with nothing on the farm, might as well ride the vets for all they've got and see if you can find magic. Because once you turn the page, it's going to be full rebuild, regardless.

It's going to be the full rebuild - except 2 years later. That is a major waste of time and assets for the ridiculously slim chance that the Flames group of veterans somehow go on a playoff run. And your veterans are 2 years older too, reducing their potential return.

The idea that the farm system isn't good enough to rebuild around is exactly why Feaster & King aren't involved in NHL hockey ops anymore - it simply makes no sense and relies more on miracles than hard facts. Rebuilding by nature will improve your farm system.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Locke

A client of mine bought a Honda Pilot off of Brent Sutter yesterday.

I once test-drove, and almost bought, Jarome Iginla's old car (had no idea it was his I looked through the records).