2021 Off season: You're in charge, what would you do?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by MrMike

I believe it was reported they told Talbot to hang tight, as Markstrom was their number one top target.

I though they told Brodie that too

[blender]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

As a fan, I do not regard finishing 28th in the league as a worse outcome than finishing 20th. Especially if it means better odds of drafting top prospects. I’d honestly prefer Ottawa’s roster and place in the standings to the Flames right now.

I get your point completely and I agree, but what I am trying to suggest is that the Flames issues stem largely from player performance rather than the players themselves.

Granted, there are some team construction problems: lack of elite talent, lack of right wing depth to name the 2 most obvious. These issues need to be addressed and the core that has been here for years needs to be broken up. But you can't just liquidate your roster and expect things to be better with new players. The Flames need to find ways to get improved performance from their players. This comes from proper roster construction, coaching, player development, etc. Not from moving out under-performing players for other lesser players.

Ok, I'm GM here's the plan:

If Gaudreau is committed, sign him long term if the price is reasonable. (8x8?) If not, trade him. I believe that a player of his caliber should fetch a 1st, a prospect and a roster player.

Upgrade at center.
Either Tkachuk or Hanafin are necessary assets to acquire a young top-level C prospect. Make it happen.

Expose Gio to expansion unless you've traded Hanafin, and let the chips fall where they may.

Move on from Backlund if the right deal exists, and try to find a cheaper replacement. Easier said than done.

For some reason, I'm leery of trading Monahan. I feel like he is a very good player that is under-performing and it will be hard to get value for him. I think it depends on if you move Backlund. Can Monahan be a sufficient 2-way center under Sutter? I believe he can and could be a Backlund replacement if utilized properly. Not sure though.

Just some thoughts that I'm sure many will argue against, but my main point is that we can't expect to see a 50% roster turnover of core pieces for next season. As fans we are often too absolute in our assessment of players. Is Gio the player he was in 2019 or the player he was last game? Neither. He's a very good NHL D man at the latter stages of his career. Its how he performs that is what matters. Is Sam Bennett a bust or the player he is today in Florida? Who knows how it will play out long term, but he is performing at a high level right now. He may not sustain the performance, but you certainly take it when you can get it and you work to duplicate the conditions that precipitated it.

TLDR : make changes as available, but don't lose sight of the fact that there are good players on the roster that need the proper conditions to perform at the necessary level for team succcess.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Talbot had a rollercoaster ride between the 2015 trade and his time as a flame in 2020. He had one year as a top workhorse goalie and then 2 years of being a tire fire. He rebuilt himself with the Flames but was still a big risk. Markstrom had 3 years of being a work horse with a lot of positive fancy goalie stats. Taking him from the Canucks and keeping him from the Oilers was seen as a big win for Calgary.

Year 1 certainly was a let down but a bounce back in year 2 playing in front of the fans at the dome with a team playing Sutter style OT wouldn’t shock me if he was back in the Vezina race in 22

I have no doubt Markstrom will rebound. Again, I have no issue with him. I was always impressed with him in Vancouver. It just seemed unnecessary and a strange bit of management to want someone for 6 years, get that player and then discard that player when his role wasn't the biggest issue or concern and possibly for reasons that should have been handled immediately in the off season.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Toonage

I guess I look at it this way, and sure its probably a flawed perspective. But if Treliving were to get fired at the end of the year I can look back on his 7 years as GM and ask what he accomplished.

After 8 years I can look back on Lombardi as GM and see he has 2 Stanley Cups.

So if I'm comparing the 2 and a body of work over a similar period of time I'd see one as wearing out his welcome but having a franchise defining amount of success. The other did not.

What would you have said about Lombardi as he left SJ after seven seasons though?

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ @blender
see I don’t think that it’s right to say the top level talent isn’t there

The team has to play with pace, and then on good teams, top talent is effective when they are the ones who are capable of making plays at a high pace. Somewhere along the way, and I think gradually over time, this team believed in their skill and slowly the pace moved downwards to the point where they are too easy to pressure.

I can’t think of a top team that is cerebral and effective without pace

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

What would you have said about Lombardi as he left SJ after seven seasons though?

Maybe the same things I'm saying about Treliving now. And maybe Trelviing goes on to the same success that Lombardi had.

But Lombardi went on to win 2 cups (with Sutter). Thats what I'm looking at now.

And maybe San Jose wishes they kept him. And Sutter for that matter. Maybe Calgary will look back someday and wish they kept Treliving if he were to be fired.

But of the past 9 Stanley cups awarded, Lombardi was at the helm for 2 of them. Thats what I'm focused on.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Maybe the same things I'm saying about Treliving now. And maybe Trelviing goes on to the same success that Lombardi had.

But Lombardi went on to win 2 cups (with Sutter). Thats what I'm looking at now.

And maybe San Jose wishes they kept him. And Sutter for that matter. Maybe Calgary will look back someday and wish they kept Treliving if he were to be fired.

But of the past 9 Stanley cups awarded, Lombardi was at the helm for 2 of them. Thats what I'm focused on.

Then you are missing my point.

Rutherford has 3 cups and wants back in the game. Maybe we should hire him.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Then you are missing my point.

Rutherford has 3 cups and wants back in the game. Maybe we should hire him.

I wouldn't object to this. I just think Lombardi and Sutter have been successful as a duo, in the west.

[Stanley]

Hire Bob Hartley?

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Toonage

I ultimately have no problem with Markstrom, but the whole Talbot tenure just bothers me. Treliving clearly coveted Talbot from the time he was a Ranger, Tried to get him but didn't have the assets and Edmonton signed him.

Finally gets him and the guy is given a shorter than expected leash until he finally clicks and goes on a run. Then, after a wonky final game against Dallas where the coach yanked him in a questionable call they don't bother re-signing Talbot and double down on the coach that messed up the relationship and then fire that coach anyway.

I just don't get the long term vision or planning there.

WRT goalies, I also question the priorities, and whom they targeted from VAN... Maybe you get a lot further paying Ian Clark $300,000 (or whatever his rate is) than paying Markstrom $6M... I don't know with these flaky guys... Is it the goalie, the goalie whisperer? Looking back, it is certain whisperers that get the consistent results, not the goalies, unless the goalie is franchise level. It is so hard to assess these guys that I, personally, would not pay them a lot of money (for a lot of years) or spend any higher picks on them. Just draft lots low, sign UFA's and have a great whisperer. Seems much more effective....

[dino7c]

In the NHL executives poll Markstrom was ranked #6 of goalies in the league and just finished 4th in Vezina voting. Any time you have a chance at a top player I think you go for it. Talbot also just blew an elimination game.

Talbot isn't playing McDavid 10x... Canadian division sucks but it's really high scoring. Some weird stats this season. I have my doubts Talbot would have the same numbers here as in Minny.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Because Calgary would be seen as desperate to move players. People are saying “sell for whatever we can get”. That’s not really a sound attitude.

This is why I don't see massive change.

Teams are not going to give back what we think our players are worth and Treliving might have to stay put.

[Flamesfan05]

If you went on a vacation when Treliving was hired and now just come back after 7 yrs, you would be in awe of his accomplishments

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by blender

I get your point completely and I agree, but what I am trying to suggest is that the Flames issues stem largely from player performance rather than the players themselves.

.

But at what stage can you not separate the player's performance from the player himself?

For some of these players, their performance issues have gone on for quite a length of time. At some stage, the players become their performance level.

And one of the problems is that in some cases the trade deadline for these players is fast approaching. There may not be enough time to establish that some of these players performance level hasn't become the player himself.

And in some cases, the drop off is so severe that the assumption will be negative until proven otherwise.

[kukkudo]

Originally Posted by dino7c

In the NHL executives poll Markstrom was ranked #6 of goalies in the league and just finished 4th in Vezina voting. Any time you have a chance at a top player I think you go for it. Talbot also just blew an elimination game.

Talbot isn't playing McDavid 10x... Canadian division sucks but it's really high scoring. Some weird stats this season. I have my doubts Talbot would have the same numbers here as in Minny.

Umm, the Honda West division is a tough division with two of the top teams that have more goals than both the Leafs and Oilers. So Talbot playing well in that division is pretty impressive.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by dino7c

In the NHL executives poll Markstrom was ranked #6 of goalies in the league and just finished 4th in Vezina voting. Any time you have a chance at a top player I think you go for it. Talbot also just blew an elimination game.

Talbot isn't playing McDavid 10x... Canadian division sucks but it's really high scoring. Some weird stats this season. I have my doubts Talbot would have the same numbers here as in Minny.

I think you're likely right about Talbot, but perhaps not the goal scoring.

It seems that goals are up across the league. I would guess the east division has the most goals per game on average.
I believe there are only 2 Canadian teams in the top 10 for goals scored, and only 2 Canadian teams in the top 15 for goals against.

[Jore]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ @blender
see I don’t think that it’s right to say the top level talent isn’t there

The team has to play with pace, and then on good teams, top talent is effective when they are the ones who are capable of making plays at a high pace. Somewhere along the way, and I think gradually over time, this team believed in their skill and slowly the pace moved downwards to the point where they are too easy to pressure.

I can’t think of a top team that is cerebral and effective without pace

Led by Treliving, the Flames have had fewer draft picks (50) than all but five teams since 2014.

In that same time span, Calgary has also had fewer first-round picks than every team except Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, and Washington. The major difference, of course, is that those teams have leveraged that draft capital into sustained playoff success and Stanley Cups.

https://www.tsn.ca/seven-years-into-...cess-1.1631065

I think the fact of the matter is that other teams got better. Other teams kept their picks and the Flames cut off their pipeline of talent for short term boosts that sometimes worked out (Hamilton) and much more often didn't (Hamonic, not to mention Elliott, Smith, Stone, Forbort, Gustavsson, Lazar, Fantenberg). By cutting off their only reliable source of value (drafting and developing), the Flames stagnated while other teams got better.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jore

https://www.tsn.ca/seven-years-into-...cess-1.1631065

I think the fact of the matter is that other teams got better. Other teams kept their picks and the Flames cut off their pipeline of talent for short term boosts that sometimes worked out (Hamilton) and much more often didn't (Hamonic, not to mention Elliott, Smith, Stone, Forbort, Gustavsson, Lazar, Fantenberg). By cutting off their only reliable source of value (drafting and developing), the Flames stagnated while other teams got better.

Well that is true too and part of why they will most likely continue to suck

There are two pieces to it.

One is how they play, and they are not playing up to their potential. And that is on ice, current coach, current team

Back to your point, the bad news is that although you are right, we are only seeing the beginning of it. The draft picks are what are going to hurt from about now moving forward. Elliott was for a 2016 2nd, that’s what Dube was. Draft year plus 5 is typical for lower round draft players to start having any impact. So those missing pieces won’t be there, it’s really hoping that what was drafted pans out

[Jore]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well that is true too and part of why they will most likely continue to suck

There are two pieces to it.

One is how they play, and they are not playing up to their potential. And that is on ice, current coach, current team

Back to your point, the bad news is that although you are right, we are only seeing the beginning of it. The draft picks are what are going to hurt from about now moving forward. Elliott was for a 2016 2nd, that’s what Dube was. Draft year plus 5 is typical for lower round draft players to start having any impact. So those missing pieces won’t be there, it’s really hoping that what was drafted pans out

I think the team does not inspire with its play, but it's also just a shoddily constructed team with poor overall balance. Our best offensive player has serious flaws and our highest paid C does nothing a top C does. We fill the bottom of the roster with PTO-tier players every year (Nordstrom, Stone) and Ritchie, another PTO, has been one of our top RWs. What is "up to potential" for a team built like this?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jore

I think the team does not inspire with its play, but it's also just a shoddily constructed team with poor overall balance. Our best offensive player has serious flaws and our highest paid C does nothing a top C does. We fill the bottom of the roster with PTO-tier players every year (Nordstrom, Stone) and Ritchie, another PTO, has been one of our top RWs. What is "up to potential" for a team built like this?

Absolutely it is poorly constructed, we agree.

But top players having what you refer to a ‘serious flaws’ shouldn’t be an issue. Many players have found success with particular strengths.

A guy like Dave Andreychuk, he is a hall of famer who may have never scored a pretty one. Went to the dirty areas and paid the price. I recall reading somewhere that he would purposely shoot at the goalie’s pad sometime to get a rebound to himself that was a better scoring chance.

If he was on the Flames, we’d probably complain about his foot speed or his back checking or find something. Most good teams are a collection of parts, not a collection of complete players


‘Up to potential’ starts with every player being a professional and putting in the effort. It is Matthew Tkachuk getting something closer to a point per game, certainly more than 3 assists in 10 games when the season is on the line. He has the talent, but rather appears to have checked out