Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

Calgary4LIfe · 05-03-2021, 04:02 PM

I am not exactly sure why we are arguing if Treliving inherited a team with bare cupboards or not.

It has been 7 years now. He has not made this team into a consistent playoff team in that time frame. This is his team now. Every single player on this team has a contract that Treliving signed. Every prospect in the organization now is a player that Treliving picked. This is his team in every way.

Argue what you want about empty cupboards. That conversation lasts at best a few seasons. It has been 7 seasons now, and this team is not going to make the playoffs, and looks nothing like a contender, and as it stands, there isn't a whole lot coming down the pipe either. I like Zary, and Pelletier, and Wolf, and Parsons, and a bunch of other prospects, but I also liked a lot of the other prospects that Feaster drafted too that flopped. There is nothing significant of the 'blue-chip, can't miss, absolutely no questions about it' type of player coming through.

This team is a bit of a mess. I still believe that this team is MORE talented than what they show. I do think that a large measure of why they haven't been as successful as they should have been (based on my opinion of this roster's ability) is perhaps from a continual parade of inept coaches and holes on the team.

However, I can not say that the team constructed is anywhere near a contender. They SHOULD be a perennial playoff team. They should NOT be a contender, however.

So one impatient question I have to ask is - how much longer does Treliving need to build one? 3 more seasons to make it a round 10 years?

I don't know the answer, quite honestly. On one hand, things can be worse with someone else. Instead of getting a Fletcher or even a Sutter, you can get a Riseborough or a Feaster. On the other hand, sometimes you just have to say: "Accountability needs to happen, and keeping a guy around because you are scared that the next guy might be worse" is just not a good decision either.

Treliving is a hard working, intelligent and professional GM. I like him. However, at this point in time, I no longer have the trust in him to make the right decisions to get this team turned around and heading in the right direction. Much like Treliving said abotu Hartley, I feel that Treliving has taken this team as far as he could as well.

Who should replace him? I honestly don't have a clue. Everyone else will have their own set of warts. I just think that at this time, some change is probably warranted at the GM level. I don't think torches and pitchforks are needed at the moment, but it sure is starting to feel like we should start buying them in bulk. Another poor season - which to me now includes making the playoffs but getting bounced in the first round - will probably get me to reach for mine.

Under Treliving, this team has won ONE playoff round, and that happened in his first season on the backs of players that Sutter and Feaster drafted. Flames are 7-18 in the playoffs under Treliving. Take out that 'lucky' year (which I don't think is lucky, but was well-coached under Hartley) and it falls to 3 -12.

In the last 3 combined playoff series, the Flames have not managed to win 4 games total. Including this season (that they are now practically guaranteed to miss), that amounts to ONE SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME VICTORY EVERY TWO YEARS.

That's where I draw the line of accountability now. I think that in 7 years of rebuilding, a GM should be averaging more than one playoff game win every 2 years. With the Flames failing to make the playoffs yet again this season, you can't even make the argument that things are trending up and you have to just keep showing some faith and patience.

2015-16 season, Flames were 12th out of 14 teams in the western conference.
2015-16 - 12th out of 14

2016-17 - 7th out of 14
2017-18 - 11th out of 15
2018-19 - 1st out of 15
2019-20 - 8th out of 15
2020-21 - 5th out of 7

Notice how the Flames are basically making the playoffs every 2 years, in a conference where MORE than half the teams make the playoffs?

Treliving has not built more than just a bubble-team. You can't say that he hasn't had owners willing to spend to the cap - this team spends to the cap and he has had buyouts on the books almost every year of his tenure. The Flames have paid coaches not to coach them. Money isn't holding him back.

3 playoff game victories in 6 seasons. I really liked Treliving. I - for the most part - liked the team he assembled - though it took 6 season to bring in a legitimate starting goaltender and coach.

Like I said, I don't think he is incompetent, but there is very little in terms of results that support the notion that he should be retained. I honestly didn't think I would come to this conclusion, but I have arrived.

For me, I would rather take the chance that this team hires a dummy that sees them plummet down the standings, than to continue with Treliving. I don't think that is an either/or scenario, as the next GM might legitimately be better. I just don't see the point in continuing with a GM who has this team trending the wrong way, and hasn't brought anything to the organization other than 'looks decent on paper' but only 3 playoff game victories in 6 seasons.

05-03-2021, 04:02 PM	#3038
Calgary4LIfe Franchise Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Exp:	I am not exactly sure why we are arguing if Treliving inherited a team with bare cupboards or not. It has been 7 years now. He has not made this team into a consistent playoff team in that time frame. This is his team now. Every single player on this team has a contract that Treliving signed. Every prospect in the organization now is a player that Treliving picked. This is his team in every way. Argue what you want about empty cupboards. That conversation lasts at best a few seasons. It has been 7 seasons now, and this team is not going to make the playoffs, and looks nothing like a contender, and as it stands, there isn't a whole lot coming down the pipe either. I like Zary, and Pelletier, and Wolf, and Parsons, and a bunch of other prospects, but I also liked a lot of the other prospects that Feaster drafted too that flopped. There is nothing significant of the 'blue-chip, can't miss, absolutely no questions about it' type of player coming through. This team is a bit of a mess. I still believe that this team is MORE talented than what they show. I do think that a large measure of why they haven't been as successful as they should have been (based on my opinion of this roster's ability) is perhaps from a continual parade of inept coaches and holes on the team. However, I can not say that the team constructed is anywhere near a contender. They SHOULD be a perennial playoff team. They should NOT be a contender, however. So one impatient question I have to ask is - how much longer does Treliving need to build one? 3 more seasons to make it a round 10 years? I don't know the answer, quite honestly. On one hand, things can be worse with someone else. Instead of getting a Fletcher or even a Sutter, you can get a Riseborough or a Feaster. On the other hand, sometimes you just have to say: "Accountability needs to happen, and keeping a guy around because you are scared that the next guy might be worse" is just not a good decision either. Treliving is a hard working, intelligent and professional GM. I like him. However, at this point in time, I no longer have the trust in him to make the right decisions to get this team turned around and heading in the right direction. Much like Treliving said abotu Hartley, I feel that Treliving has taken this team as far as he could as well. Who should replace him? I honestly don't have a clue. Everyone else will have their own set of warts. I just think that at this time, some change is probably warranted at the GM level. I don't think torches and pitchforks are needed at the moment, but it sure is starting to feel like we should start buying them in bulk. Another poor season - which to me now includes making the playoffs but getting bounced in the first round - will probably get me to reach for mine. Under Treliving, this team has won ONE playoff round, and that happened in his first season on the backs of players that Sutter and Feaster drafted. Flames are 7-18 in the playoffs under Treliving. Take out that 'lucky' year (which I don't think is lucky, but was well-coached under Hartley) and it falls to 3 -12. In the last 3 combined playoff series, the Flames have not managed to win 4 games total. Including this season (that they are now practically guaranteed to miss), that amounts to ONE SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME VICTORY EVERY TWO YEARS. That's where I draw the line of accountability now. I think that in 7 years of rebuilding, a GM should be averaging more than one playoff game win every 2 years. With the Flames failing to make the playoffs yet again this season, you can't even make the argument that things are trending up and you have to just keep showing some faith and patience. 2015-16 season, Flames were 12th out of 14 teams in the western conference. 2015-16 - 12th out of 14 2016-17 - 7th out of 14 2017-18 - 11th out of 15 2018-19 - 1st out of 15 2019-20 - 8th out of 15 2020-21 - 5th out of 7 Notice how the Flames are basically making the playoffs every 2 years, in a conference where MORE than half the teams make the playoffs? Treliving has not built more than just a bubble-team. You can't say that he hasn't had owners willing to spend to the cap - this team spends to the cap and he has had buyouts on the books almost every year of his tenure. The Flames have paid coaches not to coach them. Money isn't holding him back. 3 playoff game victories in 6 seasons. I really liked Treliving. I - for the most part - liked the team he assembled - though it took 6 season to bring in a legitimate starting goaltender and coach. Like I said, I don't think he is incompetent, but there is very little in terms of results that support the notion that he should be retained. I honestly didn't think I would come to this conclusion, but I have arrived. For me, I would rather take the chance that this team hires a dummy that sees them plummet down the standings, than to continue with Treliving. I don't think that is an either/or scenario, as the next GM might legitimately be better. I just don't see the point in continuing with a GM who has this team trending the wrong way, and hasn't brought anything to the organization other than 'looks decent on paper' but only 3 playoff game victories in 6 seasons.