Brad Treliving needs to go

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Terrible seems about right to me. What GMs in the league are demonstrably worse? Maybe Benning? Some would have previously said Bergeron, but that seems dubious given the current situation for both teams.

You can argue that while Benning has been every bit the same disaster as Treliving when it comes to free agency, that he at least stocked the cupboards with young talent. Their long term outlook is considerably better than the Flames.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by neo45

It’s actually impressive how Treliving has been in charge of this hockey team for more than 7 years and has managed to deliver a non playoff team, with cap problems, AND a bottom 5 prospect pool all while keeping his job

He’s a terrible GM but he must be world class at managing expectations and assigning blame

I’m in the camp that doesn’t seen him as a bad GM but at the same time am perfectly comfortable with firing him for a lack of success after 7 years.

That said:

Non-PO team: that’s half the league, and it’s not like the Flames are perennially non-PO or even like they shouldn’t have been in the POs this year if the group had performed properly.

Cap trouble: that’s the majority of teams in the league. And it’s all down to one bad signing. It’s not like he’s handing out huge Skinner-like contracts all the time.

Prospect pool: This is the result of graduating players and also the fact that the Flames have been in the POs or just missed every year. Overall I’d give minor scouting a good mark over the last few years. It’s one of the team strengths IMO.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I’m in the camp that doesn’t seen him as a bad GM but at the same time am perfectly comfortable with firing him for a lack of success after 7 years.

That said:

Non-PO team: that’s half the league, and it’s not like the Flames are perennially non-PO or even like they shouldn’t have been in the POs this year if the group had performed properly.

Cap trouble: that’s the majority of teams in the league. And it’s all down to one bad signing. It’s not like he’s handing out huge Skinner-like contracts all the time.

Prospect pool: This is the result of graduating players and also the fact that the Flames have been in the POs or just missed every year. Overall I’d give minor scouting a good mark over the last few years. It’s one of the team strengths IMO.

Minor scouting and development has been pretty good, the problem with the prospect pool is treliving keeps trading away too many bullets.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You can argue that while Benning has been every bit the same disaster as Treliving when it comes to free agency, that he at least stocked the cupboards with young talent. Their long term outlook is considerably better than the Flames.

I think in many ways they are following the same path as the Flames, they are just 2 years behind.

- Group of young and talented players but with some flaws
- Effort by management to kick open the contending window early - spending future capital to do so
- Now some questions coming about whether that core is the right one that will be able to contend.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Maybe I'm of a different mindset but I want my GM to be forward thinking and not a gambler. Treliving gambled and lost and it set the organization back years. That's cause for termination as far as I'm concerned. He's still employed because the Flames owners are probably getting tired paying for coaches and players that are no longer with the organization and it was cheaper to bring back Darryl to try and make something of Treliving's mess. Even Darryl has acknowledged he's been brought in to try and right the ship that's not operating with an elite crew.

Well we are both arguing the unknowns, and your case is equally as possible.

I just see the gamble as you call it, an organizational gamble, not one that the GM made alone. Additionally, I don't know if more than 10% of the fans on this site disagreed with that gamble of assuming he had 2/3 of a first line and was adding to it to win now.

But they just fired a coach they just hired, and brought in a more expensive replacement. Think the precedent has been set that they'd be firing Treliving if they wanted to.

[Toonage]

Yeah at this point I have to figure if Treliving moves on, its to become the POHO for the Flames and in a weird way buy himself more job security.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Significantly? They've maybe slowed a little, but even that's pretty debatable. He got nothing for Brodie, gave up assets for depth defensemen at the 2020 deadline so that Stone and Kylington could eat popcorn, made no changes to a core that obviously needed it last off season, and gave Tkachuk an awful second contract requiring a 9M qualifying offer. Not to mention Markstrom's contract has plenty of room to blow up in their faces and he let his only good goalie move (signing Talbot) walk to make it happen.


Edit: I forgot to even mention the coaching hires of Peters and Ward! Blunders are definitely not slowing post POHO.

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3627

I vehemently disagreed with spending assets in 2020 and not trading Brodie, but that is simply a philosophical disagreement and not really a 'blunder'.

Tkachuk's 2nd contract? The other comparable RFA's got the same structured deal. It was a wacky year for RFAs. The alternatives were: a higher AAV on a 3 yr deal, or a higher AAV on a longer term deal. Not sure either would be much better...not really a 'blunder' IMO, just a less than ideal situation.

Peters was technically hired before Burke left. Gulutzan before vs. Ward after...


This team was set up for failure during Burke's tenure. It simply took a few years to come to fruition. We have barely begun to feel the impacts from most of the transactions made (or not made) post-Burke.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You can argue that while Benning has been every bit the same disaster as Treliving when it comes to free agency, that he at least stocked the cupboards with young talent. Their long term outlook is considerably better than the Flames.

Yeah that was so shrewd of him to be terrible and pick the next ranked player

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3627

This team was set up for failure during Burke's tenure. It simply took a few years to come to fruition. We have barely begun to feel the impacts from most of the transactions made (or not made) post-Burke.

I could quibble with the rest of your post, but I feel like we would just be going around in circles. I 100% agree with your last point though. Although I think we're mostly going to feel negative effects from the post-Burke transactions and very few positive ones.

[Azhouse]

My boy is going to be 13 this summer. I raised him to be a Flames fan. He has seen exactly one playoff series win in his lifetime.

Fire his (Tre's) a$$. My kid will have a 13 year old before we can enjoy another series win.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3627

I vehemently disagreed with spending assets in 2020 and not trading Brodie, but that is simply a philosophical disagreement and not really a 'blunder'.

Tkachuk's 2nd contract? The other comparable RFA's got the same structured deal. It was a wacky year for RFAs. The alternatives were: a higher AAV on a 3 yr deal, or a higher AAV on a longer term deal. Not sure either would be much better...not really a 'blunder' IMO, just a less than ideal situation.

Peters was technically hired before Burke left. Gulutzan before vs. Ward after...


This team was set up for failure during Burke's tenure. It simply took a few years to come to fruition. We have barely begun to feel the impacts from most of the transactions made (or not made) post-Burke.

The only real blunders I ID are Hamonic and Neal, which I don’t even see as mistakes from a team building perspective as opposed to a player identification perspective (in other words, a top 4 D and top 6 RW were good targets, just not those guys).

GG was the old “new blood versus retread” argument heard on this site all the time back then. Peters was one I didn’t like because I didn’t think he searched enough, but then they had a great season under him. Ward was tough - he arguably salvaged a season and it was probably tough to make a hire for the COVID season. I’m not convinced Ward is a terrible coach anyway. He had a limited camp and his players didn’t perform.

I think Treliving had almost no space to negotiate Tkachuk’s deal. It’s not like he’s bad at RFA deals, so you know Chuckie had leverage in that one.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Azhouse

My boy is going to be 13 this summer. I raised him to be a Flames fan. He has seen exactly one playoff series win in his lifetime.

Fire his (Tre's) a$$. My kid will have a 13 year old before we can enjoy another series win.

If we’re lucky.

[Badgers Nose]

The way the NHL works now severely punishes badly or mediocre managed teams. You have to be good at drafting, asset management, free agency, all aspects - just being good a couple facets is not enough. I'm not sure a small team of scouts and a GM can be everything anymore (like how do we have one guy scouting all of Europe?).

There is no cap on back office, this is where you can really spend to make a difference - not just in GM and Coaching but all the other cutting edge sports stuff that great teams (not just NHL) invest in.

Flames will suffer as long as they keep a cheap front office. We dumpster dive for key talent. Every once in a while magic happens like the last rebuild/Hartley.

If you want to celebrate winning the big prizes you are cheering for the wrong team. There is nothing about this franchise that says 'The Best.'

Flames are like the Saddledome, elite in the 1980s when they were new and the league was smaller. But only serviceable now.

[Azhouse]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

The way the NHL works now severely punishes badly or mediocre managed teams. You have to be good at drafting, asset management, free agency, all aspects - just being good a couple facets is not enough. I'm not sure a small team of scouts and a GM can be everything anymore (like how do we have one guy scouting all of Europe?).

There is no cap on back office, this is where you can really spend to make a difference - not just in GM and Coaching but all the other cutting edge sports stuff that great teams (not just NHL) invest in.

Flames will suffer as long as they keep a cheap front office. We dumpster dive for key talent. Every once in a while magic happens like the last rebuild/Hartley.

If you want to celebrate winning the big prizes you are cheering for the wrong team. There is nothing about this franchise that says 'The Best.'

Flames are like the Saddledome, elite in the 1980s when they were new and the league was smaller. But only serviceable now.

Depressing. We as rabid hockey fans deserve better.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

The way the NHL works now severely punishes badly or mediocre managed teams. You have to be good at drafting, asset management, free agency, all aspects - just being good a couple facets is not enough. I'm not sure a small team of scouts and a GM can be everything anymore (like how do we have one guy scouting all of Europe?).

There is no cap on back office, this is where you can really spend to make a difference - not just in GM and Coaching but all the other cutting edge sports stuff that great teams (not just NHL) invest in.

Flames will suffer as long as they keep a cheap front office. We dumpster dive for key talent. Every once in a while magic happens like the last rebuild/Hartley.

If you want to celebrate winning the big prizes you are cheering for the wrong team. There is nothing about this franchise that says 'The Best.'

Flames are like the Saddledome, elite in the 1980s when they were new and the league was smaller. But only serviceable now.

We as Flames fans are pretty much hoping the KIA we just bought somehow competes with the Lexus across the street in every single category. The problem is, more often than not it ends up smoldering on the side of the road. Like for the better part of the last 15 years.

The fact no changes to management are coming at this point, it's becoming crystal clear it will be another "wait for a move that makes sense offseason" that does nothing to advance the roster and its fortunes. Sometimes you just need to cut out the rot, even if it appears to be a step backwards.

Tre doesn't have the gumption to do anything that can cost him his job at this point and it's an incredibly terrible way to manage a team.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

I could quibble with the rest of your post, but I feel like we would just be going around in circles. I 100% agree with your last point though. Although I think we're mostly going to feel negative effects from the post-Burke transactions and very few positive ones.

I don't disagree; there have been opportunities to adjust course, but the mandate has been to keep the pedal to the floor.

As long as the mandate is 'get in and anything can happen' I don't think it really matters who is in charge. Flawed as he is, I think BT is good as anyone to steer us through the next 1-3 years of hail-mary before the very likely actual rebuild.

I'd make changes to the roster for the sake of change at this point. I wouldn't change the GM for the sake of change (and to end up with fewer on-ice changes).

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The only real blunders I ID are Hamonic and Neal, which I don’t even see as mistakes from a team building perspective as opposed to a player identification perspective (in other words, a top 4 D and top 6 RW were good targets, just not those guys).

GG was the old “new blood versus retread” argument heard on this site all the time back then. Peters was one I didn’t like because I didn’t think he searched enough, but then they had a great season under him. Ward was tough - he arguably salvaged a season and it was probably tough to make a hire for the COVID season. I’m not convinced Ward is a terrible coach anyway. He had a limited camp and his players didn’t perform.

I think Treliving had almost no space to negotiate Tkachuk’s deal. It’s not like he’s bad at RFA deals, so you know Chuckie had leverage in that one.

Hard to ignore Brouwer, though it may not have even been one of the worst 5 UFA signings that year. Ripple effects to player development (Bennett).

Elliott to me might be the most unforgivable.

I also wonder if we would all hand-wave the Hamilton trade as a win if Barzal/Conner/Chabot were selected with the actual pick we traded. Ripple effects to our salary composition, even though we ended up with great value in Hanifin and Lindholm. Might we otherwise have turned Ferland and Fox into other assets? Or hung on to Ferland and not signed Neal? A lot of butterfly effects from an initial transaction that may seem like a win on paper.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I also wonder if we would all hand-wave the Hamilton trade as a win if Barzal/Conner/Chabot were selected with the actual pick we traded. Ripple effects to our salary composition, even though we ended up with great value in Hanifin and Lindholm. Might we otherwise have turned Ferland and Fox into other assets? Or hung on to Ferland and not signed Neal? A lot of butterfly effects from an initial transaction that may seem like a win on paper.

Sounds like you’ve been spending some time by the reflecting pond. Joking aside, I think Friedman has mentioned a couple times the Flames had their eyes on Konecny in 2015. There’s no telling what wheels are set into motion after any given move.

I definitely agree with you on the point that if people are expecting a new GM will result in some sort of fundamental shift in the mandate this organization has exercised for decades, they’re mistaken.

Better to have Treliving guide the ship for at least this next season.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Sounds like you’ve been spending some time by the reflecting pond. Joking aside, I think Friedman has mentioned a couple times the Flames had their eyes on Konecny in 2015. There’s no telling what wheels are set into motion after any given move.

I definitely agree with you on the point that if people are expecting a new GM will result in some sort of fundamental shift in the mandate this organization has exercised for decades, they’re mistaken.

Better to have Treliving guide the ship for at least this next season.

This is silly. It's better to get out from under a GM that clearly can't make it work. You don't stick with demonstrated failure because the next guy might be no good. The current guy is no good. This is sunk cost fallacy.

He should be gone already, but this is the Flames so of course he'll stay.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Sounds like you’ve been spending some time by the reflecting pond. Joking aside, I think Friedman has mentioned a couple times the Flames had their eyes on Konecny in 2015. There’s no telling what wheels are set into motion after any given move.

I definitely agree with you on the point that if people are expecting a new GM will result in some sort of fundamental shift in the mandate this organization has exercised for decades, they’re mistaken.

Better to have Treliving guide the ship for at least this next season.

For all the pearl clutching we do about the Jankowski trade-down (which I still don't really mind based on the timing and pursuit of a #1C), it seems we missed out an even more likely 'sure-thing' in the Hamilton trade.

Senyshyn
Barzal
Connor
Chabot
Bad Svechnikov
Eriksson Ek
Colin White
Samsonov
Boeser
Konecny
Roslovic

9/11 next picks are now impact players.


If you want to get sad for a moment, imagine this revisionist history:

NSFW!

we trade down from 15 to say 20 and take Konecny (we could still have epic pearl clutching over missing Barzal/Connor/Chabot, but at least we'd have TK.

Then we use that new pick to trade up from pick 45 and take Aho or Carlo or Blackwood or Cernak. And we'd still have Andersson and probably Kylington. Or maybe we've already drafted enough D so we take Cirelli.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

For all the pearl clutching we do about the Jankowski trade-down (which I still don't really mind based on the timing and pursuit of a #1C), it seems we missed out an even more likely 'sure-thing' in the Hamilton trade.

Senyshyn
Barzal
Connor
Chabot
Bad Svechnikov
Eriksson Ek
Colin White
Samsonov
Boeser
Konecny
Roslovic

9/11 next picks are now impact players.


If you want to get sad for a moment, imagine this revisionist history:

NSFW!

we trade down from 15 to say 20 and take Konecny (we could still have epic pearl clutching over missing Barzal/Connor/Chabot, but at least we'd have TK.

Then we use that new pick to trade up from pick 45 and take Aho or Carlo or Blackwood or Cernak. And we'd still have Andersson and probably Kylington. Or maybe we've already drafted enough D so we take Cirelli.

None of those names are better than Hamilton or Lindholm+Hanifin. Only Barzal is close.