Sutter had 3 or 4 good trades (Kipper, Tanguay, Cammalleri and possibly one more), but he also drafted poorly, hired terrible coaches, signed players to ridiculous contracts that put this team in cap jail on top of his week of insanity.
There's no way in hell Sutter should be close to the top of this list. I went with Treliving because frankly he hasn't had enough time to screw up this team as badly as the other guys on the list. So far he has drafted decently (maybe too early to tell), signed players to good contracts, made the Hamilton deal and most importantly didn't come in and "put his stamp on the team" by trading away core pieces or firing Hartley.
The Following User Says Thank You to _Q_ For This Useful Post:
You have a GM that traded very well (save 1 week) but couldn't draft worth a damn, and another GM that couldn't trade worth a damn but drafted a lot of talent on the roster.
I'd have to give the edge to Feaster because the Flames success will be longer due to his efforts than what it was under DS.
Treliving hasn't done much yet to get a read. In a year, Tree might be #2 on the list behind Fletcher. Right now though it's too soon to tell.
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
Sutter and Feaster are two guys that will never again be a GM in the NHL because of their past performance. Not sure why they're getting all these votes.
Sutter and Feaster are two guys that will never again be a GM in the NHL because of their past performance. Not sure why they're getting all these votes.
I know it's early but Treliving is my vote.
True, but say you're the owner of a new NHL franchise and those two are your only options, I'd pick Feaster 10 times out of 10. Sutter was atrocious as a GM.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Q_
True, but say you're the owner of a new NHL franchise and those two are your only options, I'd pick Feaster 10 times out of 10. Sutter was atrocious as a GM.
Yeah...except for that time when he GM'd his team to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
You have a GM that traded very well (save 1 week) but couldn't draft worth a damn, and another GM that couldn't trade worth a damn but drafted a lot of talent on the roster.
I'd have to give the edge to Feaster because the Flames success will be longer due to his efforts than what it was under DS.
Treliving hasn't done much yet to get a read. In a year, Tree might be #2 on the list behind Fletcher. Right now though it's too soon to tell.
Feaster never made any of the draft picks, so if that is his best quality, it ain't saying much.
Yeah...except for that time when he GM'd his team to game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals.
That season he traded for Kiprusoff, Nieminen, Nilsson and Simon without giving up a 1st, a blue chip prospect or a roster player. Amazing.
When Sutter came in the Flames were often playing for crowds of less than 12,000 and there were rumours of the team leaving. He put the Calgary Flames back on the map.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mister Yamoto For This Useful Post:
It says a lot about this team's history that this is such a hard choice at the #2 spot, and not because they were all so good.
The Flames have only won a playoff series under the leadership of Fletcher, Sutter, and Treliving.
When Darryl had been on the job as long as Treliving has, the Flames had a Stanley Cup Finals appearance under their belt, and a future Norris Trophy nominee waiting to join the team.
The end of his tenure wasn't as good as the beginning, but the beginning was pretty damned good. I guess Darryl gets my vote here.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
One very terrible week aside, I think he did very well. Looking at when his tenure started, and when it stopped, two things can be said:
1) He made the SCFs
2) The team was a much more talented one than when he first took over.
Now, the biggest 'con' people have (other than the 'one-week of madness' trip) was his drafting. Well, let's examine this a bit more closely.
My argument has always been one of "It is difficult to measure drafting by a GM with the start and the stop of any GM's tenure". Why? Because GMs have to make corrections in their draft philosophy, hire and learn to trust (or not) the scouting staff, etc. I think it isn't particularly easy to just look at the tenure of a GM as the beginning and end date. One has to look at the trajectory before and after the GM's tenure.
When Darryl took over, the scouting staff was tiny. The team was sharing an AHL affiliate (IIRC). The drafting and development program had already experienced massive cuts and had already become one of the smallest in the NHL - a far cry from being one of the better programs in the 80's. Remember, these were the 'terrible 90's' that Canadian teams had the displeasure of working within.
Well, Sutter came in and encouraged management to increase the scouting budget and hire more scouts. He also convinced them to have their own AHL franchise to control for player development. Now, remember, Darryl was a rookie GM - he didn't have the advantage of having relationships with existing scouts.
So, drafting was atrocious. However, it did start improving. There are various players on the Flames today that are Sutter-players - Giordano, Backlund, Brodie, Bouma and Ferland (if he makes the team - which I personally expect him to do). The drafting philosophy became established under Sutter (just search a Todd Button interview where he was stating how the philosophy of 'High Hockey IQ' and 'Character' became important, and he mentioned the 2008 draft as the turning point).
Yes, Sutter made a point to draft the 'big western Canadian kids' - but one has to look as to why. Remember, the scouting staff was small and under-funded as compared to most teams. They simply didn't have enough eyes everywhere. However, Sutter did take a number of Euros (Backlund, Taratukhin, Erixon, etc) as well as some guys from the OHL (Brodie), etc. None of these guys were "Sutter-type" guys that people expect - they were all for the most part more skill than brawn. People just fixate on the "Pelechs" that he did pick.
Another reason why he wanted to select players from the WHL was that he felt it was easier to retain that talent at a good cost. They were more likely to have pride wearing the Flaming C, and would be less likely to leave as FAs or hold-out. Though people may disagree on the extent to which this actually benefits the Flames, there must be some measurable benefit.
I think Sutter had some absolute 'magic' trades. Definitely had a few misses, but definitely had some magic trades. People do fault him on constantly trading away 2nd round picks (and during his tenure, the Flames were without a 1st round pick only once - and that was his attempt to finally address the '1st line center' hole which, in hindsight, obviously didn't work out). However, 2nd round picks - though valuable - weren't exactly valuable on the Flames. What I mean is that due to being a smaller-scouting team (which he was revamping), those 2nd round picks would have had lower than average percentages of working out for the Flames. He brought guys in like Bourque (who was a very, very good player for a number of seasons) and Kipper with those 2nd rounders.
I don't really fault him for the trades - I think he was a strong trading GM. I don't fault him for the UFA signings - he got some high-profile UFAs. I don't even fault him for the drafting and development program (which was terrible when he took over, but was definitely better by the time he left).
What do I fault him on?
The one glaring - and to me, was his single biggest fault as a GM - was his coaching selections.
Playfair was obviously not ready to handle an NHL team - at least not a Veteran-laden team. Keenan was already semi-retired and did nothing at all to 'correct' anything at all that was wrong with the Flames. Brent Sutter was great in the media, but (to me) constantly appeared to be trying to fit square pegs in round holes over and over again instead of trying to adapt any strategies to make use of the Flames' strengths.
Another fault - and this is a tough one to really get any insight on - was Sutter succumbing to the 'pressure to win'. The team did need to be rebuilt, and it just wasn't happening. Now, I don't know if the ownership group wouldn't support a rebuild, so I can't firmly stamp this fault square on Sutter's shoulders'. He may indeed have argued for a rebuild. Who knows? Do I think so? No, I don't think he argued for one, but I do think he was timing for that possibility with how the contracts were at the time.
I do think that he left the Flames 'rebuild ready' in a way - the drafting and development program was essentially in place, and I really do believe that if he didn't do a good job in those areas, Calgary's rebuild would probably be as bungled as that of the Oilers'. Though there were some big contracts to get rid of, etc., those departments were definitely ready for the rebuild challenge as evidenced by how many good late picks there were through the end of Sutter's tenure and into the official rebuild. Oilers were not, and fell (and keep falling) on their faces.
All in all, I thought Sutter's first stab as a GM was extremely successful. Mistakes? Heck ya. Did the Flames have grounds in replacing him? I think so - I think GMs sometimes just need a change to get their heads screwed on straight again. I do think he did do a good job when you view his entire body of work (at least, when you view the things we at least have visibility on). I bet he gets another crack at the position somewhere else eventually.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
Treliving for sure. Tireless worker, sensible, and a good communicator. He will end up neck and neck with Fletcher within 3 years. Each of his moves so far has improved our asset base. Glencross for 2 picks, Baertschi for 2nd, Hamilton, reasonable term and amount contracts. Each move very calculated. In Tre We Trust!
The Following User Says Thank You to Flamescuprun2018 For This Useful Post:
Sutter had 3 or 4 good trades (Kipper, Tanguay, Cammalleri and possibly one more), but he also drafted poorly, hired terrible coaches, signed players to ridiculous contracts that put this team in cap jail on top of his week of insanity.
There's no way in hell Sutter should be close to the top of this list. I went with Treliving because frankly he hasn't had enough time to screw up this team as badly as the other guys on the list. So far he has drafted decently (maybe too early to tell), signed players to good contracts, made the Hamilton deal and most importantly didn't come in and "put his stamp on the team" by trading away core pieces or firing Hartley.
100% agree. Darryl's cap mismanagement also had the Flames icing just 15 skaters for multiple games down the stretch in 2009.
Hiring Brent was a terrible decision, as was Keenan (despite him making the playoffs in both seasons as HC)
His obsession with Jokinen and refusal to admit he didn't work out, "big game hunting" with Bouwmeester, letting Cammalleri walk after a 39 goal season, trading Prust for Kotalik/Higgins, and who can forget picking up Steve Staios
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank MetaMusil For This Useful Post:
The team was garbage when Sutter took over and became an actual cup contender under his tenure. He looked like a genius when he managed to land Bouwmeester and Jokinen, until they didnt pan out. If those guys had actually lived up to their potential he would of looked like a magician.
For all we know maybe Dougie ####s the bed and Gio spends half the season on IR again next year and the Flames become a perpetual first round out. One or two big names that don't work out can make or break the team at this stage. It all looks like roses right now but its to early to tell if Treliving will be more successful. I think he came in with more flexibility and higher draft picks to work with however so his job is a little easier than Sutters was.
sutter left this team a mess can't believe he is leading in votes left us in cap hell, with to many vets and handed out NTC like candy it took feaster years to clean up the roster... I voted for BT though because feaster had too many public embarassments and sucked at trading
Countdown Poll - Flames GMs Rd2
