[Signing] Gaudreau to Columbus (7 x $9.75 million)

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

You don't know what they tried or had floated out there. The window for them to unload contracts was so small that it is unlikely they had the time to move the players they needed to move. Hench Fletcher saying he couldn't move the players (JVR was the big one) in time and Flyers were out because they did not want to give up the first round picks it would have required to move out the contracts they needed to dump.

They could have signed him and moved guys later.

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Y'all where are the other plans you were hopeful existed? Because I think we can all confidently say these are not being executed/ likely did not exist in any tangible form at all by now, right?

My man, it’s been 5 days. Did you want him to send a PDF titled “Future Planning - No Gaudreau V.1” to your inbox directly or something?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

You don't know what they tried or had floated out there. The window for them to unload contracts was so small that it is unlikely they had the time to move the players they needed to move. Hench Fletcher saying he couldn't move the players (JVR was the big one) in time and Flyers were out because they did not want to give up the first round picks it would have required to move out the contracts they needed to dump.

Friedman believes that when they looked at it they didn't think Johnny would address all the reasons why they finished 40 points out of the playoffs. So losing assets, and making that contract commitment, absent that confidence - they chose to back off.

[Burning Beard]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

That's not a plan, that's an MO or a general policy.



What was said before remains true: There was seemingly NEVER a plan for dealing with Johnny's departure.

It's a long offseason dude. It ain't over yet.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

You keep saying 4th rounder as though that's what was on the table for Gaudreau. That's about as speculative as anything I've said.

But I don't care about the asset they received for Gaudreau (if any) but the direction they would go without Gaudreau. I said it before the draft. This was a franchise altering situation and the path should have been clear. If they didn't have Gaudreau next season, they should be rebuilding and that starts at the draft. Veterans should have been on the table and the team entering a rebuild so they do have assets in the upcoming years especially if they can draft someone like Bedard. Instead they were left in limbo and the GM has to take some responsibility for that.

If Treliving is simply hamstrung by the owners, fair enough, but then who cares who is puppet in the GM role. It's like Lowe and Katz up north, I don't even know who they pretend to call the GM up there.

You have yet to answer the very simple question.

How do you have a plan to force an agent known for waiting to the last minute to reveal his intentions of his client before the draft?

If you have that skill, you're right ... you could have steered this more expertly than Treliving and Edwards.

Guessing you don't though.

Every team would have their owner involved in how to chart a path with their franchise player. That doesn't make the GM a puppet, he's an employee.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Friedman believes that when they looked at it they didn't think Johnny would address all the reasons why they finished 40 points out of the playoffs. So losing assets, and making that contract commitment, absent that confidence - they chose to back off.

And they did that while giving up future assets to get DeAngelo?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Y'all where are the other plans you were hopeful existed? Because I think we can all confidently say these are not being executed/ likely did not exist in any tangible form at all by now, right?

No. What evidence of this do you have? Just because it appears nothing has happened doesn't mean nothing is happening.

No one said, or at least I didn't say, the Flames were going to resolve things in less than a week after Gaudreau left. Treliving said pretty much exactly that. I would assume they are dealing with Tkachuk first and then will chart their course. It's July 18th. Two of the three biggest names to hit the market have not signed and there are likely a number of conversations happening league wide regarding the trade market.

I'm really not sure what your point is.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You have yet to answer the very simple question.

How do you have a plan to force an agent known for waiting to the last minute to reveal his intentions of his client before the draft?

If you have that skill, you're right ... you could have steered this more expertly than Treliving and Edwards.

Guessing you don't though.

Every team would have their owner involved in how to chart a path with their franchise player. That doesn't make the GM a puppet, he's an employee.

This was a franchise altering off-season. Everything leading up to it should have hinged on whether Gaudreau was staying or leaving, especially the draft. You want to blame Gross because Treleving didn't send his best offer until after the draft which is when it was confirmed that Gaudreau wouldn't have stayed, okay, but I'll blame Treliving for doing it after the draft when he should have been able to know the direction of the team at that time.

Chicago took the bull by the horns and said #### it, we're rebuilding. They'll finish at the bottom, giving them best odds to draft Bedard or Michkov, and if they end up winning three more Cups we'll have the same people saying how they got lucky they sucked at the right time, but they saw a franchise altering draft and decided to make a move to try and capitalize on it. The Flames were paralyzed at the same time.

So my plan, which I indicated before the draft and again now, would have been making a deadline before the draft and sticking with it. Give him the best offer prior to the draft, say take it or we're rebuilding and follow through. Either you keep Gaudreau, and know for certain, and could even trade future assets at the draft for players who may have been available to try and go all-in, or you don't have Gaudreau but are giving yourself the best chance to draft his replacement in a franchise player like Bedard.

Instead the Flames aren't a contender nor rebuilding, hockey purgatory.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by TOfan

No. What evidence of this do you have? Just because it appears nothing has happened doesn't mean nothing is happening.

I'm really not sure what your point is.

I'm building further evidence that the management team is not proactive in almost any sense. They are a completely reactionary body. That's not planning. It's not a plan to react to something and hope for the best on other negotiations. A plan is : "If x doesn't happen, we have already set trade y to bring in player z", "If x does happen, then we will propose a different trade or scrap that trade as no longer useful".

Edit: I also admit there's a slight touch of spite in here; people were getting their feathers ruffled about insinuations that management was only focused on Johnny and not working on other things.
Well, that's looking pretty certain to have been the case. Management deserves a lot of egg on face here.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

They could have signed him and moved guys later.



My man, it’s been 5 days. Did you want him to send a PDF titled “Future Planning - No Gaudreau V.1” to your inbox directly or something?

You're joking, but some sort of team statement about the future is probably warranted at this point. Not some vague "we have plans" or super detailed "we need to make x and y trades" but an indication that they have a grasp on how serious of a situation this is pertaining to our chances at competition in the next few seasons, and what that means for the future makeup of this roster.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

They could have signed him and moved guys later.

Fletcher had a pretty good idea what the market was like and what they were prepared to do to move players. He did not like the cost associated with it and back out, much to chagrin of many Flyers fans. I think it was the right move, which is very strange for Chuck Fletcher.

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Friedman believes that when they looked at it they didn't think Johnny would address all the reasons why they finished 40 points out of the playoffs. So losing assets, and making that contract commitment, absent that confidence - they chose to back off.

I'm going on what Fletcher said, not what Friedman speculated. Fletcher answered the question directly to Flyers media, so no speculation required. I'm also not sold on anything Friedman says. You think Anthony DeAngelo is a solution to the 40 points in question? With Fletcher, who knows what he's thinking, which is why it's best to go to the source.

[Northendzone]

'd have to think the flames hockey ops discussed the johnny leaving scenario - you would have to.

perhaps they even had a few names pencilled in to replace johnny; however, it seemed that any replacement guys seemed to get signed as decision day got closer.

even if the hockey ops did not discuss this, at least they are not going crazy and offering say kadri some kind of silly contract that they will hate in two seasons.

this was a complicated off season as i'd assume the priority list was johnny, matthew, mangiapaine, kylington - and maybe mix in some RFA signings along the way

[JohnnyB]

The COVID factor seems plausible to me. My family has been split in two countries since COVID started and it has definitely been tough as a result of travel restrictions. I can understand how someone who is split from family across the border and facing uncertainty of future conditions would make the choice to get all their family in one country. You don't need to be an anti-vaxxer or conspiracy theorist to want all your family together inside one border after living through COVID restrictions. Personally, I wouldn't choose the US as that border to be inside, but it's not like Johnny can just relocate all his family. While it's obviously just speculation, I would understand if that was a factor.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I'm building further evidence that the management team is not proactive in almost any sense. They are a completely reactionary body. That's not planning. It's not a plan to react to something and hope for the best on other negotiations. A plan is : "If x doesn't happen, we have already set trade y to bring in player z", "If x does happen, then we will propose a different trade or scrap that trade as no longer useful".

That’s a plan, but the absence of THAT plan doesn’t mean there is no plan.

An obvious problem with that plan? If guys learn there’s a trade ready to go, that’s going to impact how they feel about the organisation if it doesn’t come to pass (Brodie). Trades also involve other teams, so as much as you want to “have a deal in place” you also have other teams looking at other moves, any of which could nullify their interest in waiting around for you as a GM to wrap a bow on your situation.

The plan could also be to sign Tkachuk and Mangiapane, stand pat on the rest, and go into the 2023 offseason with more cap and a better read in the NHL potential of your younger guys. The plan if one of both of those guys don’t sign could be to stand pat, unload contracts over the year, and try to bring in more 1st round picks for 2023.

You’re not building evidence of anything, you’re whining that the Flames aren’t doing what you want them to do and pretending the fact that they aren’t is evidence of some universal truth. Your ideas come off like this is a video game where timelines and other actual humans are irrelevant to your will to make your moves. It’s pure fantasy.

[dino7c]

Gaudreau would have been a bad move for Philly IMO

how much better would he make them in the next 2-3 years...just enough to miss out on a top pick. Then you likely have a bad contract in not too long

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

'd have to think the flames hockey ops discussed the johnny leaving scenario - you would have to.

perhaps they even had a few names pencilled in to replace johnny; however, it seemed that any replacement guys seemed to get signed as decision day got closer.

even if the hockey ops did not discuss this, at least they are not going crazy and offering say kadri some kind of silly contract that they will hate in two seasons.

this was a complicated off season as i'd assume the priority list was johnny, matthew, mangiapaine, kylington - and maybe mix in some RFA signings along the way

Yeah, being an NHL GM is a complicated job. But, they also get compensated fairly (some would say much more than that) for this work.
Many people work complicated jobs for high compensation. But they also have to perform. We have not seen the performance from this management team that we were promised. The "process" is a joke if this is what it results in the end.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

You're joking, but some sort of team statement about the future is probably warranted at this point. Not some vague "we have plans" or super detailed "we need to make x and y trades" but an indication that they have a grasp on how serious of a situation this is pertaining to our chances at competition in the next few seasons, and what that means for the future makeup of this roster.

Why do you think the Flames don't understand the situation they are in? What else can you tell the Flames about themselves?

I don't think I understand this perspective that just because there has been no formal announcements of their plans, or they haven't signed Kadri, traded Tkachuk, or done what ever it is you think is a 'plan', that there is no plan. I find this to be one of the most obtuse arguments we see in this forum.

555 Saddledome Rise SE. Just go ask to speak with Brad Treliving and set him straight. I'm sure your fresh new perspectives, that they surely would have never ever thought of on their own, will propel this team to greatness.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

This was a franchise altering off-season. Everything leading up to it should have hinged on whether Gaudreau was staying or leaving, especially the draft. You want to blame Gross because Treleving didn't send his best offer until after the draft which is when it was confirmed that Gaudreau wouldn't have stayed, okay, but I'll blame Treliving for doing it after the draft when he should have been able to know the direction of the team at that time.

Chicago took the bull by the horns and said #### it, we're rebuilding. They'll finish at the bottom, giving them best odds to draft Bedard or Michkov, and if they end up winning three more Cups we'll have the same people saying how they got lucky they sucked at the right time, but they saw a franchise altering draft and decided to make a move to try and capitalize on it. The Flames were paralyzed at the same time.

So my plan, which I indicated before the draft and again now, would have been making a deadline before the draft and sticking with it. Give him the best offer prior to the draft, say take it or we're rebuilding and follow through. Either you keep Gaudreau, and know for certain, and could even trade future assets at the draft for players who may have been available to try and go all-in, or you don't have Gaudreau but are giving yourself the best chance to draft his replacement in a franchise player like Bedard.

Instead the Flames aren't a contender nor rebuilding, hockey purgatory.

You've been clear on that. But at what point do you recognize that the team isn't going to re-build now based on the core they have in place (which is in a very different spot than the Hawks) v. just continuing to grind that gear?

I would love a re-build. I just recognize it isn't happening and therefore don't see the value in constantly crying for something that isn't going to happen, at least right now.

Accept the fact they aren't re-building.

Now what?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

That’s a plan, but the absence of THAT plan doesn’t mean there is no plan.

An obvious problem with that plan? If guys learn there’s a trade ready to go, that’s going to impact how they feel about the organisation if it doesn’t come to pass (Brodie). Trades also involve other teams, so as much as you want to “have a deal in place” you also have other teams looking at other moves, any of which could nullify their interest in waiting around for you as a GM to wrap a bow on your situation.

The plan could also be to sign Tkachuk and Mangiapane, stand pat on the rest, and go into the 2023 offseason with more cap and a better read in the NHL potential of your younger guys. The plan if one of both of those guys don’t sign could be to stand pat, unload contracts over the year, and try to bring in more 1st round picks for 2023.

You’re not building evidence of anything, you’re whining that the Flames aren’t doing what you want them to do and pretending the fact that they aren’t is evidence of some universal truth. Your ideas come off like this is a video game where timelines and other actual humans are irrelevant to your will to make your moves. It’s pure fantasy.

Well said.

[OptimalTates]

Just curious what's the point of the discussion board then?

"Well you don't know what was happening so we just have to assume this was the smartest thing possible and you have to be psychic to disagree with their decisions."

If you just want to see who won the game assuming the Flames management are doing the best, why not just look at NHL.com standings to see how they are doing and not engage in a discussion?

People don't like that Gaudreau left and the Flames were apparently directionless, handcuffed by a decision out of their control because they didn't take actions to stop it. The same Flames who have won a single game beyond Round 1 with Treliving as the GM and are criticizing his actions. Of course we don't know what went behind the scenes, just like we don't know if Phaneuf's trade was the best they could have got - but we still can criticize it.

So what could the Flames have done differently?

I think they should have made a deadline, stuck with it, and entered the draft knowing Gaudreau was not in the plans for the Flames. Plan around that when you have the best chance to plan around it (which obviously I advocate for rebuilding).

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

You've been clear on that. But at what point do you recognize that the team isn't going to re-build now based on the core they have in place (which is in a very different spot than the Hawks) v. just continuing to grind that gear?

I would love a re-build. I just recognize it isn't happening and therefore don't see the value in constantly crying for something that isn't going to happen, at least right now.

Accept the fact they aren't re-building.

Now what?

So since I disagree with management... I can't disagree with management?

Bingo asked what I would have done differently. I say what I would have done differently. You say it's crying.