[News] Flames hire Treliving as GM

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

Maybe because the same things were said about Craig Button, and he was an unmitigated disaster for the Calgary Flames...

So, we should then expect the same thing to happen again? That's ridiculous. Every new GM has to start somewhere, and every one will get his first opportunity at some point. If the hockey world thought like you did, then Bill Torrey would still have a job.

Originally Posted by New Era

Someone said it earlier in the thread that the wild card is Burke and the number of hockey people Treliving is going to be surrounded with. I think we'll see at the draft what kind of GM Treliving is going to be, and how he relies on those other hockey minds. It will be interesting to see the course he plots going forward, as he has a number of very good young players to work with. I'm hopeful, but also skeptical. I hope Treliving is going to be a winner, but I still see the ghost of Craig Button skulking around in the background, which tempers my enthusiasm.

Well, you should really get over that for a few reasons. Never mind the fact that Burke's position helps to insulate Treliving, the present situation in the NHL is so different that it was when Button was in charge of the Flames that it effectively defies any comparison. Button was charged with making a small budget, small market team with being competitive. The Flames were badly handicapped by the low Canadian dollar, and were on the brink of relocation. There were internal power struggles among the top executives. It is really no surprise at all that Button failed in these circumstances, but by the same token, it should also be noted that he is an exception to the rule.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, we should then expect the same thing to happen again? That's ridiculous. Every new GM has to start somewhere, and every one will get his first opportunity at some point. If the hockey world thought like you did, then Bill Torrey would still have a job.

The only ridiculous thing here is the personal crusade you are on to try and convince anyone who doesn't agree with you that the hiring of Treliving was a great move. People are allowed to have a different opinion. They are allowed to state why they have a different opinion without being told their opinion is invalid by someone who has just as little to back up their counter opinion.

Now, should we expect the same thing to happen as happened with Button? Probably not. Could it happen again? Yes. Just as easily as Treliving turning into the next Bill Torrey. The NHL is a tough business and GMs are setup to fail. The proof will be in the pudding and some people are going to wait until the guy does something than go do a few press conferences to say whether the decision was a good one or whether they like it.

Well, you should really get over that for a few reasons. Never mind the fact that Burke's position helps to insulate Treliving, the present situation in the NHL is so different that it was when Button was in charge of the Flames that it effectively defies any comparison. Button was charged with making a small budget, small market team with being competitive. The Flames were badly handicapped by the low Canadian dollar, and were on the brink of relocation. There were internal power struggles among the top executives. It is really no surprise at all that Button failed in these circumstances, but by the same token, it should also be noted that he is an exception to the rule.

Button was a disaster because Button didn't know what he was doing and couldn't adapt. All the mitigating circumstances were constraints other managers had to work through and Button proved to be substandard in every way. Will Treliving have similar circumstances to work under? Probably not as severe, but he will face challenges that will test him as a manager. Those circumstances will tell us if we should be happy with the hiring or not.

Brian Burke is a wild card here. It is obvious that you are one of the set that thinks he is good for the hockey club. I'm still on the fence and waiting for a move to put his stamp on this team. What I have seen of Burke with the Flames is he's got a massive ego that stands in the way of progress, as we saw with the trade deadline. I'm not being sucked in by the myth being developed around this guy. I see him as a manager that happened into circumstances that allowed a championship to fall into his lap. I don't see a guy that has built much anywhere he's been. So far, the success we have seen with the Flames is a result of the Feaster/Weisbrod team. We're still waiting for Burke to make his big move. So far the hiring of Treliving is it, and he is an unknown. To me, their success is tied together and their story has yet to be written. I'll wait until that chapter has been penned before I proclaim anyone a winner or a loser.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by New Era

I'm not being sucked in by the myth being developed around this guy. I see him as a manager that happened into circumstances that allowed a championship to fall into his lap. I don't see a guy that has built much anywhere he's been.

Burke certainly isn't flawless, but let's give credit where credit is due.

He brought back Selanne, signed Scott Niedermayer, traded for Chris Pronger, and also brought in May, Beauchemin, Jackman, Moen, O'Donnell, Parros........all players who were part of the Cup winning team.

It's not like he inherited the team and didn't tinker with it. He made some pretty important moves that allowed them to win a championship.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Burke certainly isn't flawless, but let's give credit where credit is due.

He brought back Selanne, signed Scott Niedermayer, traded for Chris Pronger, and also brought in May, Beauchemin, Jackman, Moen, O'Donnell, Parros........all players who were part of the Cup winning team.

It's not like he inherited the team and didn't tinker with it. He made some pretty important moves that allowed them to win a championship.

You can also look at the Canucks who were in shambles when he took over and a pretty good team when he left. He's the guy that started the team that gained a lot of the bandwagon fan support you still see today in Vancouver.

Some fans simply don't like Brian Burke and there's probably not a lot you can do to change that even when you counter with evidence such as above. He's a polarizing guy and it's just the way it's going to be as going forward Treliving will probably get credit for any successes and most missteps will be blamed on Burke. Fortunately Burke has thick skin and I don't think he really cares.

[united]

Hope_Smoke ‏@Hope_Smoke 7m
LeBrun "I think the Treliving hire in Calgary was a great hire. To me he is a young Chiarelli in the making"
LeBrun "I think the Flames struck gold with Treliving and he's a rising star"
https://twitter.com/Hope_Smoke

[HerbalMagic]

Originally Posted by gargamel

If Burke was being honest about his reasons for not taking the best offer available for Cammalleri at the deadline, then the lines are at least somewhat blurred. "Organizations" don't get reputations for being taken advantage of in trades - people do - so he must still plan on being directly involved in duties that are traditionally reserved for GMs. Not that that's a bad thing.

We didn't have a GM at the time, who else was supposed to make the call on trading him or not? I think you're doing a lot of assuming...never a good idea.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by united

Hope_Smoke ‏@Hope_Smoke 7m
LeBrun "I think the Treliving hire in Calgary was a great hire. To me he is a young Chiarelli in the making"
LeBrun "I think the Flames struck gold with Treliving and he's a rising star"
https://twitter.com/Hope_Smoke

I sure F'n hope so.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by New Era

The only ridiculous thing here is the personal crusade you are on to try and convince anyone who doesn't agree with you that the hiring of Treliving was a great move. People are allowed to have a different opinion. They are allowed to state why they have a different opinion without being told their opinion is invalid by someone who has just as little to back up their counter opinion.

Now, should we expect the same thing to happen as happened with Button? Probably not. Could it happen again? Yes. Just as easily as Treliving turning into the next Bill Torrey. The NHL is a tough business and GMs are setup to fail. The proof will be in the pudding and some people are going to wait until the guy does something than go do a few press conferences to say whether the decision was a good one or whether they like it.

.

So then by using your logic, basically making assumptions, then taking the positive assumption would be that he could become the next Stan Bowman or Shero, another group of AGM's nobody had ever heard of. We get it, you hated Button but stop trying to compare the 2 situations.

It's funny on here to read comments from negative posters telling people who are trying to be positive that they shouldn't tell others how to think, pot meet kettle.

[Boreal]

Great interview with Brad from 2010. Interesting hearing past evaluations of Phoenix players knowing now how they've turned out. Especially Turris. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/thehock...y-writers-live

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I mean when was the last time someone got hired and it resulted in dozens of league-wide reactions that were tantimont to recoiling in horror about the hire? I mean can you find a date-stamped for the time of the hire example of overwhelmingly negative industry reaction... When everyone is super, no one is.

Ironically, when Sutter was hired in LA to coach, the reaction was almost universally (and loudly) negative.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

The only ridiculous thing here is the personal crusade you are on to try and convince anyone who doesn't agree with you that the hiring of Treliving was a great move. People are allowed to have a different opinion. They are allowed to state why they have a different opinion without being told their opinion is invalid by someone who has just as little to back up their counter opinion.

If one's opinion resides in a vacuum of reason or evidence, then he will be criticised for it. The reasons people have thus far provided for not liking this hire are so far not very good, and they are being called on it. It seems to me that some people are more nervous and paranoid about the Flames repeating past history more than they are actually disappointed by the fact that the new GM is Treliving.

Originally Posted by New Era

Now, should we expect the same thing to happen as happened with Button? Probably not. Could it happen again? Yes. Just as easily as Treliving turning into the next Bill Torrey. The NHL is a tough business and GMs are setup to fail. The proof will be in the pudding and some people are going to wait until the guy does something than go do a few press conferences to say whether the decision was a good one or whether they like it.

But my problem is that those who are "reserving judgment" seem to be ignoring the reputation that Treliving has developed among professional observers, hockey analysts, and executives. I would agree that Treliving will need to prove himself, but it is perfectly reasonable to 1) Acknowledge his past accomplishments, and to treat these as great prerequisites for future success as a general manager; 2) Recognise this hire as a positive change in direction for this franchise, and a great indication of forward thinking.

I have asked this before, but have yet to receive any response: Beyond his inexperience, what is it about Treliving that you do not like?

Originally Posted by New Era

Brian Burke is a wild card here. It is obvious that you are one of the set that thinks he is good for the hockey club. I'm still on the fence and waiting for a move to put his stamp on this team...

If you do a search for my posts about Brian Burke, and my first impressions of this hire, I think you may be surprised. I was never a Burke fan, and am slowly being won over. So far, I can't complain about his time here—albeit, he hasn't really done a lot before hiring Treliving.

Originally Posted by New Era

We're still waiting for Burke to make his big move. So far the hiring of Treliving is it, and he is an unknown.

He is NOT an unknown. He is unknown about fans, but is by all counts very well regarded in the NHL and throughout professional hockey.

Originally Posted by New Era

To me, their success is tied together and their story has yet to be written. I'll wait until that chapter has been penned before I proclaim anyone a winner or a loser.

I don't think I have proclaimed the team a winner with this hire, but in my mind that is completely different from recognising this as a great move. Of course, we don't know how it will all work out, but at this stage and based on what we do know, it looks very promising.

[Boreal]

I wonder if Treliving's previous relationship with Tim Murray while in Ottawa will have an effect on potentially moving up in the draft if Ekblad is available at 2? Burke said he wouldn't likely trade up, but Brad's not burke.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by nobles_point

I wonder if Treliving's previous relationship with Tim Murray while in Ottawa will have an effect on potentially moving up in the draft if Ekblad is available at 2? Burke said he wouldn't likely trade up, but Brad's not burke.

I practically grew up at Noble's point....summers that is. Long, long time ago haha.

I wonder how many of the "best player available" proponents would consider trading up for a non generational talent?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If one's opinion resides in a vacuum of reason or evidence, then he will be criticised for it.

An opinion residing in a vacuum of reason or evidence? Your arrogance really is incredible. The only evidence of anything you have presented is the fact that the media loves this selection. Considering the reaction to most media on this site, that is not a ringing endorsement. In fact, it seems that the only time anyone seems to think highly of the media is when the media agrees with a particular narrative one wishes to forward. It's called confirmation bias and I think it is playing hard in this thread.

The reasons people have thus far provided for not liking this hire are so far not very good, and they are being called on it. It seems to me that some people are more nervous and paranoid about the Flames repeating past history more than they are actually disappointed by the fact that the new GM is Treliving.

I don't like nor dislike the hiring, although your constant confrontational approach to not loving it is making me lean towards disliking it. I'm on the fence because his background is neither impressive or substantive in my opinion.

But my problem is that those who are "reserving judgment" seem to be ignoring the reputation that Treliving has developed among professional observers, hockey analysts, and executives. I would agree that Treliving will need to prove himself, but it is perfectly reasonable to 1) Acknowledge his past accomplishments, and to treat these as great prerequisites for future success as a general manager; 2) Recognise this hire as a positive change in direction for this franchise, and a great indication of forward thinking.

What fabulous reputation? What fabulous accomplishments? What positive change? Are you saying this is a great hire because we didn't go full Oiler?

I have asked this before, but have yet to receive any response: Beyond his inexperience, what is it about Treliving that you do not like?

See, that's just it, I'm just not sold on his experience! I see a Phoenix team that is not very good and plays the worst brand of hockey imaginable. He is part of that legacy. I'm sure you're going to demand specifics, so here's what I don't like.

From a business side of things, Phoenix is the 5th largest media market in the United States, yet there is no buzz around the team, and frankly, no one gives a #### about the team. The management of the Coyotes has done such a piss poor job reaching out to the community and attempting to build the game. All they have done is allowed a small vocal group, the Goldwater Institute and friends, to build up a level of animosity toward the team and the NHL that the locals in Glendale spit blood when the team is mentioned. They did a very poor job countering this narrative and getting their own out in the media. They have done nothing to reach out to the public and develop the grassroots fanbase. They have managed the market horribly. While this is not Treliving's primary responsibility, he has to assume some of the blame. He was part of the management team for the past seven years.

The Phoenix Coyotes system is not very good. Since Treliving arrived on the scene, outside of their first round picks, they struggle to find and develop talent. I just hate some of the players they have drafted. The Flames are big on character, but the Coyotes have drafted the antithesis of character in my opinion. Wheeler and Mueller were picked before he arrived, and Turris was drafted the year he joined the club, but Samuelsson and Domi are definitely on his watch. The Coyotes go after guys that just have character flaws in spades. I do not want that being brought over to the Calgary Flames. I like the guys the Flames have picked, and with the exception of Baertschi, they continue to over-achieve and make big gains because of that character.

Their minor league teams have never been very good. San Antonio in 2007-2008 finished 5th in their division, but made the playoffs. In 2008-2009 they finished 8th (last) in their division. In 2009-2010 they finished 6th in their division (2nd last). In 2010-2011 they finished 7th (2nd last) in their division, and then relocated to Portland for the 2011-2012 season. During that season they finished 3rd in their five team division. In the 2012-2013 season they improved, finishing 2nd in the division and making the playoffs. In the 7 years Treliving was with the Coyotes their farm team only made the playoffs twice and never got past the first round. Not a stellar record, and that spills over to the NHL club.

That NHL club is just not very good. They play crap hockey. They have had some success, but nothing consistent. Yes, they have been handcuffed by the economics of their situation, but every team has faced constraints that make their situation unique and challenging. I just don't think they have done the things required to take their team to the next level, and the management team would have done anything different in a different city. They are what they are.

So is Treliving responsible for all of that stuff? Hell no! Is it a great series of accomplishments that many seem to be proclaiming? Again, hell no! He's coming from a mediocre organization, who don't have a great draft record or have much success at developing players, and they have been a failure in their marketplace. He may be the right guy for the Flames job, or he may not. His resume doesn't wow me, but it also doesn't make me shake my head either. He seems like a good guy and he comes with a lot of different experiences, but so would a lot of other guys available at the moment.

He [Treliving] is NOT an unknown. He is unknown about fans, but is by all counts very well regarded in the NHL and throughout professional hockey.

Big ####ing deal! Craig Button was highly regarded! Greg Gilbert was highly regarded! There are all sorts of people that are highly regarded in hockey circles, and they fail regularly!

I don't think I have proclaimed the team a winner with this hire, but in my mind that is completely different from recognising this as a great move. Of course, we don't know how it will all work out, but at this stage and based on what we do know, it looks very promising.

What is the difference between a great hire and proclaiming the team a winner with the hire? Based on the amount of time you're investing arguing with those who are wanting to take a wait-and-see approach, and your attempts to either convince them of their ill-conceived position, or attempt to discredit them all together, you have taken a firm stance that this is a great hiring and the team is a full on winner by making the hiring.

Let's spin this and ask you a question. What exactly is it in Treliving's accomplishments that makes him great for the job? Please list specific accomplishments and successes that are directly attributable to Treliving that make him great for the job?

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by New Era

I don't like nor dislike the hiring, although your constant confrontational approach to not loving it is making me lean towards disliking it. I'm on the fence because his background is neither impressive or substantive in my opinion.

You must be ####ing kidding me. "On the fence" my ass.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

You must be ####ing kidding me. "On the fence" my ass.

No, I'm not ####ing kidding you. I'm really ambivalent to the hiring. What I don't like is someone telling me that I'm crazy for not really loving something. That is a pet peeve of mine. My wife does it to me all the time and it drives me crazy!

Truth be told, I was hoping for Futa, strictly on his input on drafting and player development. Treliving seems like a good guy too, but the proof will be in what he does in the next year to put his stamp on the team. I like what I've heard, but every GM we've had has talked a good game.

[Igster]

Originally Posted by New Era

No, I'm not ####ing kidding you. I'm really ambivalent to the hiring. What I don't like is someone telling me that I'm crazy for not really loving something. That is a pet peeve of mine. My wife does it to me all the time and it drives me crazy!

Maybe you are crazy?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Igster

Maybe you are crazy?

Maybe. But if I am, then most people are nucking futs!

[strombad]

Can't we all just get along?

[FakenHaken]

Originally Posted by strombad

Can't we all just get along?

It wouldn't be CP if we all group thinked.