Brad Treliving needs to go

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And what is your point - that Treliving should be criticized because Buffalo hasn't done anything yet?

My point it it's been 7+ years, and the team isn't any better.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Hillary wins, and “Hannibal” gets a 4th season.

It’s not that silly - Feaster offered all three 1sts for MacKinnon. That’s known.

He should’ve offered six 1st round picks, because that player is worth it.

He might still have a job if he’d done that.

Yes, it’s known he offered the three firsts. Had he offered 6 firsts would the avalanche have accepted? Had the Flames offered the Oilers 17 1sts for McDavid would the have accepted?

Your suggestion is silly because it’s make believe. Had the Flames acquired MacKinnon on that fateful day, one way or the other, there is no telling how things would have played out. Do they trade the 2015 pick for Hamilton, or Griffen Reinhart? Do they trade the pick at all? Do they have the 15th pick or the 8th the 28th? Do MacKinnon and Gaudreau lay waist to the league and both are $10+M player’s? what effect does that have on the rest of the roster? Are they both playing for the Flames? Are they drafting 6OA in 2016? What else happens in this alternate universe you have concocted?

What if the Flames never traded Gilmour? What if the Flames outbid Philadelphia for Lindros? What if the Jets didn’t match the offer sheet for Selanne? What if Niedermeyer signs with the Flames instead of the Ducks?

None of it matters.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Every step?

So it's just going to be semantics from you then, I guess.

Fine, is 'failed more often than not' better for you?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

So it's just going to be semantics from you then, I guess.

Fine, is 'failed more often than not' better for you?

Semantics, or otherwise, you’ve clearly indicated your not going to make your evaluation from a balanced point of view.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Yes, it’s known he offered the three firsts. Had he offered 6 firsts would the avalanche have accepted? Had the Flames offered the Oilers 17 1sts for McDavid would the have accepted?

Your suggestion is silly because it’s make believe. Had the Flames acquired MacKinnon on that fateful day, one way or the other, there is no telling how things would have played out. Do they trade the 2015 pick for Hamilton, or Griffen Reinhart? Do they trade the pick at all? Do they have the 15th pick or the 8th the 28th? Do MacKinnon and Gaudreau lay waist to the league and both are $10+M player’s? what effect does that have on the rest of the roster? Are they both playing for the Flames? Are they drafting 6OA in 2016? What else happens in this alternate universe you have concocted?

What if the Flames never traded Gilmour? What if the Flames outbid Philadelphia for Lindros? What if the Jets didn’t match the offer sheet for Selanne? What if Niedermeyer signs with the Flames instead of the Ducks?

None of it matters.

What if Eichel’d fused neck scores a hat trick?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

So why do the avs do it?

Fair enough, the Avs probably don’t do that no matter what’s offered - MacKinnon had a hype train and a half behind him.

But would Florida have said no to that package for Barkov?

I don’t know.

It always comes back to this for me: if you think a guy is that level of player - MacKinnon, Eichel, Barkov, whoever - if you have the chance to get him, pay the cost.

Don’t overthink it.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I suspect that some of the same folks calling for him to make any deal are highly likely to criticize any deal he does make

Yep. A player like Monahan doesn’t have close to the value a lot of fans seem to think he has. GMs can’t just conjure up good deals in trades. Treliving will take the blame around here if the market for our core players is revealed.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yep. A player like Monahan doesn’t have close to the value a lot of fans seem to think he has. GMs can’t just conjure up good deals in trades. Treliving will take the blame around here if the market for our core players is revealed.

The scary thing is the team is starting to have some good prospects and the lottery picks in the next couple years look really good

We are lucky if Treliving doesn’t do more damage before they get rid of him

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

That people seem to be crying for a deal for the sake of any deal
Which is rarely a good approach

No but thinking this core can win is not a good approach neither

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

That people seem to be crying for a deal for the sake of any deal
Which is rarely a good approach

Rarely, but this is one of the times change for the sake of change would be good. The team hasn't been good enough...for quite a while. This off season they lost their best defenseman, there's rumours about Tkachuk not being happy and there have been no significant changes to improve the team. How does this roster as is do better than last yesrs? If they don't make any changes to the roster they will be a bubble team th will just try to squeeze into the playoffs because "anything can happen". And that's taking into consideration having Sutter coaching all year. He won't turn Monahan into MacKinnon or Hanifin into Hamilton, he'll make an average team slightly better. Change something hope for something better.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by zamler

I suspect people will respond to success.

Probably true, but Brad should be given at least 10 years to achieve that lofty goal. Finding a good coach after I heritage a good coach was the first goal, he accomplished that last year after a 5 year search. Next up is a decent roster and then success.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Fair enough, the Avs probably don’t do that no matter what’s offered - MacKinnon had a hype train and a half behind him.

But would Florida have said no to that package for Barkov?

I don’t know.

It always comes back to this for me: if you think a guy is that level of player - MacKinnon, Eichel, Barkov, whoever - if you have the chance to get him, pay the cost.

Don’t overthink it.

Lindros.

He is the best example of what you are saying - pay whatever it takes - and it was a disaster.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Lindros.

He is the best example of what you are saying - pay whatever it takes - and it was a disaster.

If It wasn’t Forsberg and/or if Lindros never gets his bell rung it’s still a lopsided trade for Philly.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

My point it it's been 7+ years, and the team isn't any better.

That is absurdly untrue. When Treliving started:

• The Flames hadn't made the playoffs in 5 seasons. Since his arrival we have made the playoffs 4 of 7 times and won the regular season conference once.
• The prospect pool included two guys drafted top 6 (Monahan, Bennett) and Gaudreau. CP was rioting over the utilization of Baertshi. The rest of the pool was in shambles despite us being at the end of a rebuild. Since then, Treliving has found Andersson, Kylington, Mangiapane, Dube, Fox, etc outside of the first round. He added Valimaki and Tkachuk with his first round picks. He has also quietly developed a strong prospect pool.
• When he took over the roster our top two Cs were Backlund and Stajan. Hudler was our ice time leader. Our most productive line was Cammalleri-Backlund-Byron and our most common line was Cammalleri-Stajan-Stempniak. In addition to locking in our young core for a reasonable cap hit, he also added core players like Lindholm, Hanafin, and Markstrom while surrounding them with good depth players.

I could go on. The team is MUCH better then it was when he took the reigns.

What some are saying is Treliving hasn't been able to take the team to the next level. And that is fair. We have only made it to the second round once with him, and generally we haven't looked good in the playoffs. Some of that is out of Trelivings hands. (Every elite team acquired elite players high up in the draft and we haven't been gifted in the draft lottery. Its great to get Monahan at 6, but MacKinnon went at 1). But he owns some criticism.

[Max Cow Disease]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Probably true, but Brad should be given at least 10 years to achieve that lofty goal. Finding a good coach after I heritage a good coach was the first goal, he accomplished that last year after a 5 year search. Next up is a decent roster and then success.

I’m not sure if this is sarcasm but this is actually my position with regards to Treliving, and why I voted for (and remain in) the “should not and will not be fired” camp.

I’m of the view that the GM position needs to be granted a hefty amount of latitude to make directional changes to the team, and that tolerance of errors is part and parcel of that. Tre was a rookie GM when he joined the Flames and has undoubtedly made some decisions he wish he could take back, but unless there are signs of your GM being an abject disaster, I think it’s important for the stability of a franchise that a manager be granted a pretty wide window of time within which to make changes, witness the results of those changes, and then make corrections if required.

This does basically translate to a GM probably needing something like a decade to fiddle around with the team. 10 years lets a guy preside over the graduation of a couple of draft classes to the NHL level, learn from mistakes, and may lessen the impetus to make rash decisions due to the “I may not be here in 6 months” effect.

Despite the team’s fetish for treading water at the moment, I feel that there have been enough positive signs in Treliving’s decisions over the years that we should allow him the leeway to climb the team out of the funk it seems to currently be in.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by MrMike

If It wasn’t Forsberg and/or if Lindros never gets his bell rung it’s still a lopsided trade for Philly.

Well, it WAS Forsberg. That's the point (price matters)

As far as Lindros' concussion goes, that also matters - injuries happen, so paying 'anything' for a player comes with risk. And we are talking about Eichel here, so injury risk is much more than an academic debate here.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by kehatch

That is absurdly untrue. When Treliving started:

• The Flames hadn't made the playoffs in 5 seasons. Since his arrival we have made the playoffs 4 of 7 times and won the regular season conference once.
• The prospect pool included two guys drafted top 6 (Monahan, Bennett) and Gaudreau. CP was rioting over the utilization of Baertshi. The rest of the pool was in shambles despite us being at the end of a rebuild. Since then, Treliving has found Andersson, Kylington, Mangiapane, Dube, Fox, etc outside of the first round. He added Valimaki and Tkachuk with his first round picks. He has also quietly developed a strong prospect pool.
• When he took over the roster our top two Cs were Backlund and Stajan. Hudler was our ice time leader. Our most productive line was Cammalleri-Backlund-Byron and our most common line was Cammalleri-Stajan-Stempniak. In addition to locking in our young core for a reasonable cap hit, he also added core players like Lindholm, Hanafin, and Markstrom while surrounding them with good depth players.

I could go on. The team is MUCH better then it was when he took the reigns.

What some are saying is Treliving hasn't been able to take the team to the next level. And that is fair. We have only made it to the second round once with him, and generally we haven't looked good in the playoffs. Some of that is out of Trelivings hands. (Every elite team acquired elite players high up in the draft and we haven't been gifted in the draft lottery. Its great to get Monahan at 6, but MacKinnon went at 1). But he owns some criticism.

While I don't think Treliving has done a good job, I thought this post was excellent, especially as you avoided targeting any cper's that share a different opinion. Some fans are frustrated and this is understandable for many "good" reasons; But you have pointed out a few good arguments to make a case for Brad Treliving. I have from the beginning felt that hiring Treliving as a rookie was a mistake. To be fair to those that disagree, it is a lot to ask paying fans to wait 10 years to see those results. We agree stability is important, will Brad bring those results given this larger window?

It was not until we hired Darryl Sutter (also Hartley) that we are actually talking about what kind of team the Flames are building. Under Treliving's direction we seemed to be adding pieces, but it was hard to tell if Treliving actually had a plan. Several players added had a low impact, didn't fit with the team and were jettisoned. Some of these decisions affected the teams cap flexibility, which could have been used to identified and add players with a specific need and impact. See Sam Bennett who Panthers identified as the player, and found him a spot to fit into their identity and to his strengths.

Treliving needs to identify the team needs better and acquire players that actually fit what we are trying to do. What is the identity of Treliving's team, is it fast, skilled, big, hard to play against? These are important questions that can help sustain playoffs success.

Treliving seems to beat to his own drum when it comes to coaching hires, targeting certain players. Perhaps Darryl will help Treliving identify key areas and players: Sutter pointed out that the team was running out of gas and that the skill on other teams was much higher. Conditioning and commitment needs to be a priority so that we can at least succeed as hard working team.

Bottom line, Treliving needs to stop being a rookie and the Flames need to start doing a better job. I don't share your optimism that Treliving can do the job seeing how stubborn he was about how he went about his coaching hires.

I feel more optimistic about Darryl Sutter being the coach, he actually has experience and being an experienced person he has added more experienced coaching. This small little oversite Brad should have done from the beginning.

[Erick Estrada]

IMO a major role of the GM is to be able to evaluate coaches and that's an area Treliving has been abysmal. The fact that ownership had to step in and hire Darryl is telling of how much of a failure Treliving has been at evaluating coaches. Pro scouting has also been poor so there's a lot of good and a lot of bad which is a recipe for mediocrity. Too good to be really bad and not good enough to challenge for a cup. He's got to stop with the big mistakes and keep building the team through the draft which is why I kind of hope the Flames don't trade for Eichel as I'm just not sure if he on his own is better than Zary, Pelletier, Monahan and a 1st round pick.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

While I don't think Treliving has done a good job, I thought this post was excellent, especially as you avoided targeting any cper's that share a different opinion. Some fans are frustrated and this is understandable for many "good" reasons; But you have pointed out a few good arguments to make a case for Brad Treliving. I have from the beginning felt that hiring Treliving as a rookie was a mistake. To be fair to those that disagree, it is a lot to ask paying fans to wait 10 years to see those results. We agree stability is important, will Brad bring those results given this larger window?

It was not until we hired Darryl Sutter (also Hartley) that we are actually talking about what kind of team the Flames are building. Under Treliving's direction we seemed to be adding pieces, but it was hard to tell if Treliving actually had a plan. Several players added had a low impact, didn't fit with the team and were jettisoned. Some of these decisions affected the teams cap flexibility, which could have been used to identified and add players with a specific need and impact. See Sam Bennett who Panthers identified as the player, and found him a spot to fit into their identity and to his strengths.

Treliving needs to identify the team needs better and acquire players that actually fit what we are trying to do. What is the identity of Treliving's team, is it fast, skilled, big, hard to play against? These are important questions that can help sustain playoffs success.

Treliving seems to beat to his own drum when it comes to coaching hires, targeting certain players. Perhaps Darryl will help Treliving identify key areas and players: Sutter pointed out that the team was running out of gas and that the skill on other teams was much higher. Conditioning and commitment needs to be a priority so that we can at least succeed as hard working team.

Bottom line, Treliving needs to stop being a rookie and the Flames need to start doing a better job. I don't share your optimism that Treliving can do the job seeing how stubborn he was about how he went about his coaching hires.

I feel more optimistic about Darryl Sutter being the coach, he actually has experience and being an experienced person he has added more experienced coaching. This small little oversite Brad should have done from the beginning.

I agree with this part. BT seems to have a 'be the smartest guy in the room' complex and he has tried to be overly clever in his coaching hires and that has hurt us.

Peters was a theoretically a good pick-up. But Gulutzan was not, and staying with Ward last season was a huge mistake.

The Sutter hire was the obvious and correct hire though IMO. And Treliving seems to be bringing on the right kind of players to compliment his coach. Lewis, Pitlick, Zadarov, and Coleman may not be big ticket pick-ups. But they do inject the Sutter culture across the line-up.

Even without a shuffle of the core, I think a full season of Sutter and the pick-ups this summer will have a moderately large impact on the team. I think the Flames are going to be a lot better then many are expecting. I just don't see them contending for a cup (outside of a 04 Calgary, 06 Edmonton, 20 Montreal, etc fluke).

[TheSquatch]

Currently, the team is worse, on paper, than last year. Zadorov (assuming they sign him!) is a good pick up, but no kind of replacement for Gio (who I didn't think had a great year but is still a top pairing guy).

Coleman is a nice pickup, but not really a gamebreaker, it will just be nice for the team to have more than 1 right winger!

But all in all, we saw no real change in the team last year under Sutter, certainly the w/l record was no different under him than Ward (not saying he's not a better coach, I think we all saw some really peculiar decisions or lack of decisions with Ward).

So right now, until there's a big deal of some kind, I'm not thrilled with the team this year. Really, really want to see an Eichel deal, take the risk, do what it takes. 4 more years of mediocrity if something like this doesn't happen. The team so badly needs a driving center.