I don't know if any GM could have foreseen Gaudreau and Monahan's precipitous drop in production during what most would consider their prime years. Monahan's decline has been particularly alarming. I thought they were a dangerous top line, obviously BT did too, because they were, I can't blame him for their decline.
However, I have been thinking about what concerns me the most about Treliving's tenure and for me it's been that there has been really no coherent plan that is being adhered to during his time here. I mentioned in the past, and I am sure a lot can agree, but what I want is a sustainable, consistently competitive Flames franchise. To get there, in a salary cap world, you need to do that by focusing on drafting and development; you need a deep pool of prospects. Or at the very least build a team with a coherent identity, targeting players with specific attributes, that fits an organizational identity that he is trying to build. I haven't seen either a focus on drafting and development or a focus on team identity. I would describe Treliving's approach as scattershot.
When BT was hired he mentioned identity multiple times and how important it is to have it. Hartley seemed to have established some sort of identity with this team, and Treliving took note of that.
I would say that since BT has taken over this team has almost no identity to speak of. They aren't fast, skilled, big, physical, hard working, or resilient. In fact I would describe this team as complacent and fragile. If BT was trying to establish an identity with this team I would have a hard time identifying what he was aiming for.
Also when he was hired he had 5 picks in the first three rounds, he promptly traded one of those thirds for Brandon Bollig. This was the first indication of BT's attitude towards draft capital, often deeming it expendable in order to acquire players whose time with the Flames ended up being short. In fact his reluctance to accrue draft capital and develop a deep pool of prospects meant that there were always holes to be filled in our pro group, which would see more draft picks being traded away for depth players to fill those holes, and the cycle continues and our pool of prospects never really develops. BT has only had 7 or more draft picks twice during his career, and our prospect pool is verifiably poor, which is not at all a surprise seeing how cavalier BT is with draft capital.
When BT was hired the Flames had 35 wins, and the Carolina Hurricanes had 36 wins. Since then the Flames have drafted 43 players and Carolina has drafted 59 players, they are currently leading their division, are third overall in the NHL in P%, have a top 5 prospect pool and have about 20 million in cap space next year. They are set up for success for a long time. They are also there without a first overall pick, and have not been afraid to move on from top picks if they feel it makes their team better, Lindholm, Hanifin and Fleury have all been moved. I don't think I need to examine the Flames current situation relative to Carolina's.
Steve Yzerman had an incredibly successful tenure as a GM with Tampa. Since his arrival in Detroit in 2019 he had 11 picks in 2019 Draft, 12 in the 2020 draft, he has 12 picks in the 2021 draft and 10 picks in the 2022 draft. That speaks to me of having a coherent plan in place.
Its' not really a secret that the path to success is drafting and development, why can't the Flames take this approach? Will BT ever actually take this approach?
Then there is his process in regards to coaching hires. When he first hired Gulutzan he spoke about it being an exhaustive process, leaving no stone unturned.
Quote:
“It’s one of Calgary’s worst-kept secrets over the last couple of days,” Treliving admitted.
“We went through a real thorough process in this search. This is an important person we need to bring into our organization. We spent the first while building a profile. What is it we’re looking for in a coach? What’s the best fit? You talk about who the best coach is for a particular team. What kind of coach was our team ready for? We went through a lot of those attributes before we got into the field and the market and talking to people.
“We built a real in-depth profile and started going through the process.
“As you went through it, it became very clear meeting with Glen early that this was a perfect match.”
|
We all know how Gulutzan turned out. Then the process for Peters was a stark reversal. No one else interviewed, simply targeting Bill Peters as his guy. Then with Ward it was simply succession, perhaps the decision to hold onto Ward was a bit of trepidation in having a revolving carousel of coaches, hoping for continuity, that's just speculation on my part. Then of course Sutter, and in fairness I don't know what process BT used for hiring Sutter, if he interviewed other candidates. If Sutter is not here for a rebuild, as some have mentioned, and this team is in desperate need of a rebuild, then is that even the right guy for the job? With BT I see someone constantly changing their process and still getting the results wrong. Sutter, I really hope, works out.
Outside of Treliving, the processes in general for this team doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. Burke said they interviewed one person for the GM role, Treliving, and no one else. Treliving had no full time NHL GM experience and came from an organization that is basically a complete mess. And that was their only interview.
I already voted and made my point that he should get fired, and hoped that he would, but I don't think he will actually be fired. I think he gets at the very least the next year to right this ship, I don't agree with it, but there doesn't seem to be any indication that he will be fired.
Sorry for the long winded post.