Brad Treliving needs to go

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If this is in fact "Darryl's team" then what GM is going to even want to come on board to implement some one else's vision? And how many GMs will want to sign on with the Flames but with the caveat that he cannot bring in his own coach? I could see Dean Lombardi as an option if this was a job he wanted, but I am not at all confident that he would rebuild the roster through the draft, which is what needs to happen.

Darryl is not going to coach this thing through a rebuild and the team won’t tear it down after a poor shortened season during the pandemic. As badly as some people want to see it I do not see a path where that happens short of multiple trade requests.

No doubt they shake the team up but guaranteed they come back with a goal to compete next year. Try and poach Ian Clarke out of Vancouver and move on from a few players and make room for some younger guys like Zary, Pelletier, Philips, Pettersson etc to push for spots. Trade Gaudreau and Monahan and see what happens when they play 82 against all teams.

Even if we are shocked by some players getting moved for futures at the deadline I think we see moves in the offseason that help fill the holes created by those moves.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I’m still sour over losing Paul Byron. He was fast, relentless, had game breaking ability, played with heart and is the type of player the Flames could use today. I don’t know how often I’ve heard the last 3 Flames coaches (including Darryl) talk about playing with more pace, but Paul Byron can play with pace. Instead, they let go of Paul Byron to make room for that useless plug Brandon Bollig.

I guess Paul Byron is a sore spot for you? Starting off with a stupid comment for you

Game breaking? Lol

You must misremember him as he was certainly a fast guy, who couldn’t finish on most of the breakaways he created for himself here.

But yes, he was a good fit on the team and did add speed. And better than Bollig who was not good

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

It contributes to the overall problem. Tre put too much stock into his core and because it’s not a strong group in comparison to other cores, he had less leeway to make mistakes; but there’s been a lot of them. So that leads us to this season where the culmination of all the mistakes resulted in him trying to patch up every line with a bargain bin plug and they’ve all failed to close the leaks and now the ship is sinking faster then it ever has before.

Sure, we can quibble over PTO’s, waived players, and 4th liners on one year league min contracts but, again, all GM’s play these cards. Are we going to be talking about how good Tobias Rieder was on his one year two way deal 4-5 years from now? Goes both ways. Not too sure why we cling onto the ‘mistakes’.

But let’s be straight, it’s the core that is the issue.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

2018 trade deadline was prior to his Lindholm and Hanifin trade.

I would argue Lindholm, Hanifin, Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Andersson, Dube, Valimaki are more important pieces of the core than the list you have above (which includes Brodie for some reason?).

I think Treliving’s biggest failure was believing the Monahan-Gaudreau-Tkachuk-Lindholm core of forwards were good enough to win a cup. Those players peaked 2 years ago and it was more of a flash in the pan than a sign of things to come which is disappointing when talking about players aged 21, 24, 24, 25

We can debate the nuances of these details as much we want.

At the end of the day, the topic of this thread is boolean in nature. The 7 year tenure of this gm has shown that he is capable of building a cup contending roster, true or false?

That's it. There is no in between.. If the answer is no, then management must fire him and find another candidate to get 7 years to prove their plan.

Brad treliving is not a gm with the competence required to build a cup contender, full stop.

Maybe I just value his ability in gathering 4-6 dmen and middle 6 forwards far less than most here...

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

We can debate the nuances of these details as much we want.

At the end of the day, the topic of this thread is boolean in nature. The 7 year tenure of this gm has shown that he is capable of building a cup contending roster, true or false?

That's it. There is no in between.. If the answer is no, then management must fire him and find another candidate to get 7 years to prove their plan.

Brad treliving is not a gm with the competence required to build a cup contender, full stop.

Maybe I just value his ability in gathering 4-6 dmen and middle 6 forwards far less than most here...

Thanked for use of boolean.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

We can debate the nuances of these details as much we want.

At the end of the day, the topic of this thread is boolean in nature. The 7 year tenure of this gm has shown that he is capable of building a cup contending roster, true or false?

That's it. There is no in between.. If the answer is no, then management must fire him and find another candidate to get 7 years to prove their plan.

Brad treliving is not a gm with the competence required to build a cup contender, full stop.

Maybe I just value his ability in gathering 4-6 dmen and middle 6 forwards far less than most here...

I'm not a fan of binary decision making for complex things.
Per my post earlier, it's easy to blame the GM, but if there are underlying issues then those are just as important to understand.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'm not a fan of binary decision making for complex things.
Per my post earlier, it's easy to blame the GM, but if there are underlying issues then those are just as important to understand.

Sure the issues must be understood

Brad himself would tell you that the team has a primary goal, and he would tell you that the buck stops with him.

It becomes really simple when the GM tells you outright that he is accountable for all of the issues

[Jiri Hrdina]

Sure a good leader takes the blame and the bullet.
But whoever is making the decision on whether to fire him or not hopefully goes much deeper.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Sure a good leader takes the blame and the bullet.
But whoever is making the decision on whether to fire him or not hopefully goes much deeper.

Sure, and at the end of the day, it is a Boolean decision

In helping them arrive at a yay or nay, Brad is building a long list of underwhelming decisions that haven’t worked out.

Sometimes when a guy has to explain why a large number of what seemed like good ideas don’t pan out, you have to look at the common denominator

Results matter and his are unfortunately not good.

Should they decide to replace him (and I don’t think they will), he is leaving a lot more behind in the way of underachieving commitments than his predecessor.

[Jiri Hrdina]

The decision is binary, but the topic isn't.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'm not a fan of binary decision making for complex things.
Per my post earlier, it's easy to blame the GM, but if there are underlying issues then those are just as important to understand.

It's 7 years in. The team he curated hit it's peak of about 50 games about 3 years ago.

He is either a competent roster architect or he's not. He is the ceo. He's failed in steering this ship to a positive trajectory.

I fail to understand what benefit of the doubt he deserves at this point.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The decision is binary, but the topic isn't.

Well the topic, by thread title, seems to be whether or not he should go (binary), not reasons why he should or shouldn’t go (multivariate)

[Jiri Hrdina]

I've articulated what I think are the other factors that need to be looked at. You have made your mind up - which is a valid view.
I just don't see it being that simple. And in fact I think making those easy decisions is part of the problem with this organization. Fire another Gm and not look at what may be more core to the problem.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well the topic, by thread title, seems to be whether or not he should go (binary), not reasons why he should or shouldn’t go (multivariate)

I'm sure everyone would really enjoy debating the semantics of a thread title.
The topic of whether or not the GM of this organization should be fired is far from binary due to the underlying factors in play.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I guess Paul Byron is a sore spot for you? Starting off with a stupid comment for you

Game breaking? Lol

You must misremember him as he was certainly a fast guy, who couldn’t finish on most of the breakaways he created for himself here.

But yes, he was a good fit on the team and did add speed. And better than Bollig who was not good

Like I said, I am still sour that Treliving picked Brandon Bollig over a future 20 goal scorer who absolutely has game breaking ability with his speed alone. He may have struggled to score on breakaways here, but first off, getting breakaways itself in the NHL is a difficult feat and secondly, he sure figured it out in Montreal where’s he’s been great there and even wears a letter.

Also, the only stupid comment is the years of bellyaching over Sam Bennett needing an elite coach or better line mates to take him to the next level. He’s had his shot with better linemates this season and finally he gets his elite coach and nothing has changed, still exactly the same player. Maybe worse because he’s on pace for the worst plus minus of his career. He’s been a colossal disappointment and he’s absolutely a big reason the Flames aren’t where they want to be. This could all be stated in the Sam Bennett thread, but I can’t even bump that thread anymore with all the overly sensitive Sam Bennett fans who may have to finally come to terms with what he actually is instead of blaming everything and everyone else.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I've articulated what I think are the other factors that need to be looked at. You have made your mind up - which is a valid view.
I just don't see it being that simple. And in fact I think making those easy decisions is part of the problem with this organization. Fire another Gm and not look at what may be more core to the problem.

Outside of choosing the owners, what decisions is the GM not a part of that must be looked at?

Ownership isn't changing. Everything else is tied to the gm.

Are you suggesting that ownership have set this franchise up for inevitable and utter failure regardless of the gm? (sorry I haven't gone back in the thread to find the crux of your argument).

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

We can debate the nuances of these details as much we want.

At the end of the day, the topic of this thread is boolean in nature. The 7 year tenure of this gm has shown that he is capable of building a cup contending roster, true or false?

That's it. There is no in between.. If the answer is no, then management must fire him and find another candidate to get 7 years to prove their plan.

Brad treliving is not a gm with the competence required to build a cup contender, full stop.

Maybe I just value his ability in gathering 4-6 dmen and middle 6 forwards far less than most here...

Why 7 years? Why not 4? 8? 9? Is there some sort of rule of thumb on how many years a GM should get?

Understanding BT has had 7 years, but there’s also a 7 year investment with this GM the organization has made. He was/is a young hockey executive whom I’m sure the ownership has expected to grow. Why is a GM only permitted one rebuild or one ‘cycle’?

It seems to me many of the people here arguing for BT’s dismissal think who ever it is that replaces him will carry this team to a meteoric rise to greatness. I’m highly skeptical. Who out there replaces Treliving and is a no doubt about it better GM? Lombardi? Botterill? Or are the Flames going to roll the dice on another first timer like Kevin Weekes?

As for the bolded part, you state that as a fact, but it isn’t. Whether it is here or somewhere else, circumstances will dictate whether Treliving is able to build a cup contender. Labelling him as incompetent, as you have repeatedly done, is misguided.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Why 7 years? Why not 4? 8? 9? Is there some sort of rule of thumb on how many years a GM should get?

Understanding BT has had 7 years, but there’s also a 7 year investment with this GM the organization has made. He was/is a young hockey executive whom I’m sure the ownership has expected to grow. Why is a GM only permitted one rebuild or one ‘cycle’?

It seems to me many of the people here arguing for BT’s dismissal think who ever it is that replaces him will carry this team to a meteoric rise to greatness. I’m highly skeptical. Who out there replaces Treliving and is a no doubt about it better GM? Lombardi? Botterill? Or are the Flames going to roll the dice on another first timer like Kevin Weekes?

As for the bolded part, you state that as a fact, but it isn’t. Whether it is here or somewhere else, circumstances will dictate whether Treliving is able to build a cup contender. Labelling him as incompetent, as you have repeatedly done, is misguided.

I'm not a mind reader but i think he chose 7 years because that's how long Treliving has been the GM of the Flames....

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Sure, we can quibble over PTO’s, waived players, and 4th liners on one year league min contracts but, again, all GM’s play these cards. Are we going to be talking about how good Tobias Rieder was on his one year two way deal 4-5 years from now? Goes both ways. Not too sure why we cling onto the ‘mistakes’.

But let’s be straight, it’s the core that is the issue.

Yes and Treliving chose to go with that core. Another GM might have said, that’s not enough and let’s keep adding pieces patiently instead of trading for Dougie Hamilton after a very luck driven season. Then the Brian Elliott and Lazar trades. Then he saves the worst one of all in the Travis Hamonic acquisition.

I’m not even sure I agree with his philosophy of building from the back end out. He used 6 quality draft picks on 2 defensemen that resulted in a non playoff appearance the following season. Sure, the decision to go with the core that he did at the time seemed fine, but it ended up being a weaker core in the grand scheme of things. So the margin for error is razor thin. But errors occurred too often and now the team is left in shambles. 5 different coaches, player values at an all time low, cupboards looking thin, direction looks murky at best and what we as fans ended up with was a pile of quick first round exits and ugly regular seasons.

I will say Treliving did some good things, but I will continue to say that this fanbase needs to collectively raise expectations and stop accepting mediocrity because until we do, we’ll continue to see the same middling garbage over and over and over.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Why 7 years? Why not 4? 8? 9? Is there some sort of rule of thumb on how many years a GM should get?

Understanding BT has had 7 years, but there’s also a 7 year investment with this GM the organization has made. He was/is a young hockey executive whom I’m sure the ownership has expected to grow. Why is a GM only permitted one rebuild or one ‘cycle’?

It seems to me many of the people here arguing for BT’s dismissal think who ever it is that replaces him will carry this team to a meteoric rise to greatness. I’m highly skeptical. Who out there replaces Treliving and is a no doubt about it better GM? Lombardi? Botterill? Or are the Flames going to roll the dice on another first timer like Kevin Weekes?

As for the bolded part, you state that as a fact, but it isn’t. Whether it is here or somewhere else, circumstances will dictate whether Treliving is able to build a cup contender. Labelling him as incompetent, as you have repeatedly done, is misguided.

Umm. He's a loser gm, whose only experience comes from a loser organization, he's come here and in 7 years has built a loser team.

You make a brilliant point. Let's give him infinite rope to figure this out. Since choosing another gm who may or may not be better is not 100% sure to work.....