Brad Treliving needs to go

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

All true. Which is why small-market Canadian teams need to build patiently through the draft. The problem is owners who refuse to recognize that logic.

I know Winnipeg hasn’t won anything, but at least they seem to have an ownership and management group who recognize the handicaps they labour under and how they need to operate to try to find long-term success.

I don’t blame the owners for the terrible Travis Hamonic trade. That’s on Treliving. That Lazar trade? Treliving. That Elliott trade? Treliving - there were better goalies in free agency (…literally anything would have been better than Elliott that season).

Even if the owners mandate aggression, the GM has to do a MUCH better job at being aggressive than Treliving has. In the ones mentioned above Treliving dealt a 1st round pick and four 2nd round picks for a bottom pairing defenceman (we played him as a bad top four defenceman), a 13th forward, and a goalie who was absolutely horrendous in his year here. That’s all just horrible work by Treliving.

[Roof-Daddy]

I can't lump the Elliot trade in with the rest. He was a proven NHL goaltender who had multiple years of good to great performance as a starting netminder. Plus, he was pretty good that year, he just blew his wad in the payoffs. That's on Elliot, not Treliving.

Plus, didn't Treliving try to acquire Bishop at the deadline that year only to be thwarted by Ken King not answering his phone because he was in the air?

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I don’t blame the owners for the terrible Travis Hamonic trade. That’s on Treliving. That Lazar trade? Treliving. That Elliott trade? Treliving - there were better goalies in free agency (…literally anything would have been better than Elliott that season).

Even if the owners mandate aggression, the GM has to do a MUCH better job at being aggressive than Treliving has. In the ones mentioned above Treliving dealt a 1st round pick and four 2nd round picks for a bottom pairing defenceman (we played him as a bad top four defenceman), a 13th forward, and a goalie who was absolutely horrendous in his year here. That’s all just horrible work by Treliving.

I think that's more of an indicator of poor pro scouting. Elliott put up some crazy good numbers in STL, and I thought we got a number 1 goalie for cheap. Especially after the ask for Bishop was a 1st(Tkachuk I believe). The Hamonic trade seemed like a decent trade because I thought the Hamilton trade was a home run, so I trusted management. He was on a good contract, and just came off a playoff run where he contained Crosby(could be off on that) pretty well. Lazar was definitely a case of someone in the organization being high on the prospect. I don't know how much player watching does Tre actually do. From his interviews he said that was the biggest change from the switch from an AGM to a GM. He said specifically that he didn't get to watch players as much, and had to rely on other people a lot more.

You make a good point, and I agree Tre had made a lot of mistakes that seemed like good trades at the time. He is the one to ultimately carry the responsibility, but something is certainly lacking in the scouting of NHL players. And before I get flamed for being a hater, I recognize the good scouting to. Tanev was a great add, so were Lindholm and Hanifin, etc. Bottom line it's not all bad, but there's definite room for improvement.

[Northendzone]

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ Wow. That’s a wild scene.

Thinks Tre wants to pay how many head coaches at once?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

I’m sorry but that’s just a goofy article. The owners just gave Sutter a 3 year contract. He ain’t on the hot seat.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

That’s a bunch of #### and the writer knows it.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

This is just bizarre. The only way this makes any sense at all is if Treliving actively fought against ownership to hire Sutter, and is looking to replace him with another one of his own awful coaching choices.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

This is just bizarre. The only way this makes any sense at all is if Treliving actively fought against ownership to hire Sutter, and is looking to replace him with another one of his own awful coaching choices.

Which he couldn’t do if the owners made him hire Sutter.

[ah123]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

Sounds like pure speculation. Article felt like reporters needed to write something about the Flames, and decided to piggy back on the fans’ anger, to get clicks.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Boy how far The Hockey News has fallen. Pure click bait article with no actual insight or rationale. Brutal

[mile]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

This is the same guy who wrote the article saying the Oilers won the Neal-Lucic trade after Neal went on waivers



Trash article written by a trash writer

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

What ####ing garbage is this?

I won't bother checking a hockey writers article again after this trash. What the hell actual info or reasonable opinion does this share?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

The article details all the metrics that Sutter improved - almost all except win% - and somehow he’s on the hot seat?

[dino7c]

If Sutter got the kind of goaltending Ward was getting at the start of the year his win% would be looking pretty darn good

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I am not sure where to,atick this, but here seems good enough:

https://thehockeywriters.com/flames-...t-seat-report/

To me you can’t fire sitter, without firing treliving

Sutter is here to stay for awhile. Without meaningful changes, he is the team’s biggest hope. I am sure he will make them compete better, more ready against weaker competition and they won’t lose because of him like they did with Ward. Not sure they can win when it matters (playoffs) against good teams. Coaches can only do so much.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

2) Identity - funny that the Athletic came out with that article on the Flames, when for the first time in a couple of years (at least) I feel like the Flames have acquired an identity. What's that? They are going to be a team that is very difficult to play against - both physically and defensively - and they are going to attack quickly.

So, a team that last year fell below the hapless Senators, Ann arguably lost as much in the off season as they gained, is all of a sudden going to go from easy to play against to very difficult to play against, both physically and defensively, and also going to attack quickly?

Sutter is good, but there is on,y so much he can do.

I think Calgary lacks the dmen to attack quickly, or even at all. They’ll have one line that can attack offensively.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

So, a team that last year fell below the hapless Senators, Ann arguably lost as much in the off season as they gained, is all of a sudden going to go from easy to play against to very difficult to play against, both physically and defensively, and also going to attack quickly?

Sutter is good, but there is on,y so much he can do.

I think Calgary lacks the dmen to attack quickly, or even at all. They’ll have one line that can attack offensively.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think this is overly pessimistic. I think the additions of Coleman, Zadorov, Pitlick, and Lewis will make the Flames, at the very least, a more physical team and harder to play against. I also think they will be more consistent and better defensively under Sutter. That said, a Tanev injury could really set this team back. Fingers crossed. A healthy Markstrom will go a long way as well.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Boy how far The Hockey News has fallen. Pure click bait article with no actual insight or rationale. Brutal

Though I don't disagree with either sentiment. I do think The Hockey News has fallen since Sports Illustrated bought it & The posted article is clearly crap click bait.


It should be noted, though, that article is from The Hockey Writers (which seems to be some independent writers' collective and not The Hockey News.


On topic - I think BT & Sutter get their 2 years to turn it around but no playoff wins = no contract extensions.

[Knightslayer]

What a weird article that is. He states numerous stats in the article that have changed for the better and then says not much has changed since Sutter took over.

It's like 2 different people wrote the article. Very poor journalism.