[Barn Burner] Boomer: "You were wrong"

[Macindoc]

When talking about the post-lockout Pens, let's not forget that they won the lottery to draft Crosby not because they sucked, but because after the lockout, all teams were entered in the draft lottery. So they land a generational franchise player not as a result of any great plan, but simply luck. One can only dream about what it would have been like if the Flames had won the 2005 draft lottery and selected Crosby instead of Matt Pelech. And it's depressing to think how much the Flames dropped in that draft lottery, from what should have been about a 9th overall pick to a 26th. I don't think any team has ever been cheated so much by the lottery.

My point earlier was that when you look at the how few teams have won the Cup within a reasonable period of time after going scorched earth, the numbers would support the argument that going scorched earth actually reduces your chances of ever winning it. The formula for winning seems to be a combination of being an American city (easier to sign free agents without overpaying), having good management (who can accurately anticipate how players within the organization and potential free agency acquisitions will trend in the future) and coaching staff (who make good use of the team's skillset), and having leaders who promote a winning culture. Almost every team that has won the Cup in the past 20 years has met these criteria, while few if any had started a full "scorched earth" rebuild within 7 or even 10 years of winning the Cup.

Losing intentionally is not the way to build a winning culture. If you get lucky, it might get you a flashy player or two, but it will never make you a championship team. I mean, with Eichel instead of McDavid, the Oilers still wouldn't be a playoff team after nearly 2 decades of futility. And in spite of being the laughingstock of the league for decades, the Coyotes don't look any closer to being a playoff team.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by dino7c

They are also in Tampa where players want to stay/play and nobody cares when you suck

CaliPanthersFan pointed out that this ins't a thing anymore because of the salary cap, lol.

[jayswin]

I really appreciated dobbles perspective and thoughts even it goes against what I believe it takes to build a contender, I take it as new info based on his detailed thoughts. I will point out one thing though - When explaining that 10 years of no playoffs for a lot those teams is a negative about them not competing like it would be a negative for the Flames to follow suit, it is impotent to note that we have, I believe 6 playoffs wins since 1990?

I agree with the one poster that the team and management hasn't been the same for that whole time, but I also ain't against sucking for a prolonged period and aquiring picks and better chances at top end draft talent. Just sayin'.

It isn't a gaurantee, but maybe it's no worse than what we've been through as a middling organization that clearly puts an emphasis on making the playoffs and spending pics for depth to do so, almost every.....friggen......year of our existence?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by jayswin

CaliPanthersFan pointed out that this ins't a thing anymore because of the salary cap, lol.

he of all people should know better lol

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Both of these posts suggest the Flames have just been doing the same thing since the 90s, but putting aside any annoyance with the current season, I think it’s pretty clear that it isn’t true, or that if it is, they’re been doing the same thing every other team has been doing.

Right, and the majority of the league stays mediocre every year.
But there's certain teams that seemingly always get in and always look like a threat:

Boston
Carolina
Tampa
Penguins
Blues

In fact, in the last 10 years the flames sit in 26th @ games played in the playoffs.

Those teams below us (worse) are those teams everyone says are garbage and always rebuilding:

Columbus
Vancouver
Arizona
New Jersey
Vancouver

Yet here we are with the Flames who have never attempted a rebuild, never sold off premium assets at a deadline nor have never been "bad" enough to get a lottery pick. That is the definition of mediocrity, and its not wrong.

They continue to miss the playoffs or get blown out in round 1 92% of the time. Why is that okay?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Right, and the majority of the league stays mediocre every year.
But there's certain teams that seemingly always get in and always look like a threat:

Boston
Carolina
Tampa
Penguins
Blues

In fact, in the last 10 years the flames sit in 26th @ games played in the playoffs.

Those teams below us (worse) are those teams everyone says are garbage and always rebuilding:

Columbus
Vancouver
Arizona
New Jersey
Vancouver

Yet here we are with the Flames who have never attempted a rebuild, never sold off premium assets at a deadline nor have never been "bad" enough to get a lottery pick. That is the definition of mediocrity, and its not wrong.

They continue to miss the playoffs or get blown out in round 1 92% of the time. Why is that okay?

But we have attempted a rebuild and we have sold off assets during the season. How do you suppose we got players like Monahan, Tkachuk, and Bennett? From being bad.

It’s tough to control just how bad you get and a lot of it has to do with luck. Having the right GM at the right time to make the best trades possible, being bad enough in the right years where you can find top tier talent where you draft (and being able to keep that talent), getting lottery picks… these all have a lot to do with luck and fortunate timing.

The teams you mention that always look like a threat haven’t rebuilt. In fact, almost all of them were good, and then were OK, did a little retool, and are back to being good (except for the Blues).

As for why it’s “okay,” it’s just reality. What is anyone supposed to do about it? You want to cheer for a winner and we’ve have a few different GMs try different ways to build a winner over the past couple decades, but it hasn’t worked out, just like it doesn’t for most teams. That’s sports.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Right, and the majority of the league stays mediocre every year.
But there's certain teams that seemingly always get in and always look like a threat:

Boston
Carolina
Tampa
Penguins
Blues

In fact, in the last 10 years the flames sit in 26th @ games played in the playoffs.

Those teams below us (worse) are those teams everyone says are garbage and always rebuilding:

Columbus
Vancouver
Arizona
New Jersey
Vancouver

Yet here we are with the Flames who have never attempted a rebuild, never sold off premium assets at a deadline nor have never been "bad" enough to get a lottery pick. That is the definition of mediocrity, and its not wrong.

They continue to miss the playoffs or get blown out in round 1 92% of the time. Why is that okay?

You have go think if they went full Rangers this year they could get some decent assets for

Toffoli
Hanifin
Lindholm
Tanev

Highly unlikely that they will do it, but those would be 4 guys that would return a boatload of prospects and picks.

[marsplasticeraser]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Right, and the majority of the league stays mediocre every year.
But there's certain teams that seemingly always get in and always look like a threat:

Boston
Carolina
Tampa
Penguins
Blues

In fact, in the last 10 years the flames sit in 26th @ games played in the playoffs.

Those teams below us (worse) are those teams everyone says are garbage and always rebuilding:

Columbus
Vancouver
Arizona
New Jersey
Vancouver

Yet here we are with the Flames who have never attempted a rebuild, never sold off premium assets at a deadline nor have never been "bad" enough to get a lottery pick. That is the definition of mediocrity, and its not wrong.

They continue to miss the playoffs or get blown out in round 1 92% of the time. Why is that okay?

This is the best stat i've seen about the flames perpetual woes, and really puts where we are in perspective. Not sure what it is, but we just can't make it over the hump with the players / coaching / organization we have.

what is worse is it's not like we have a great future of prospects coming up. We have nothing. I hope i have to eat my words, but from any angle it seems the best we can do is compete to be an also-ran.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

But we have attempted a rebuild and we have sold off assets during the season. How do you suppose we got players like Monahan, Tkachuk, and Bennett? From being bad.

None of those players above were acquired through a re-build, not a single one.

A rebuild requires the selling off of PREMIUM assets, the closest the Flames have come to that is trading Iggy when it was too late and getting absolutely nothing for him. So no, we havent seen a re-build at all.

I never said it was easy, I also said it does require LUCK because you NEED to get into the top 3 lottery spots during a draft where the prospect pool is really good.

But the Flames have traded off all 3 of those guys within the last 3 years which means they failed. The main takeaway here is the Flames need to explore a real re-build, anyone should be on the table for a trade except for maybe Wolf.

Hanifin
Lindholm
Backlund
Toffoli
Tanev

All of these guys would command a significant haul for a rebuilding team, but the Flames wont do it. We'll ride out these contracts and lose them for nothing and continue to try and "extend" a window that never really existed.

[marsplasticeraser]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

You have go think if they went full Rangers this year they could get some decent assets for

Toffoli
Hanifin
Lindholm
Tanev

Highly unlikely that they will do it, but those would be 4 guys that would return a boatload of prospects and picks.

The issue is our expiring contracts this year are ritchie, lewis, lucic and michael stone. Not much there.

2023-24 really is a decision point as you have cap going up and big names expiring in Backlund, lindholm, toffoli, hanifin, tanev, kylington, and zadorov.

That feels like a boatload of good picks and prospects.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sure, but the key difference there seems to be that the teams that actively try to be really bad never become really good, and the teams that are just naturally terrible (and get lucky) do.

So as mediocre as the Flames might be, trying to go scorched earth or tank is probably a recipe for the same thing with 5-10 years of even worse hockey in the middle.

Sure, that is a possibility, but the Flames organization has been operating in nearly the exact same silo for decades, and it is getting them nowhere. Basically swapping in new coaches every 3 years in perpetuity and signing a few big free agents from time to time to hope to catch lightning in a bottle.

They aren't alone in this by any means, but at some point the franchise needs to look at itself and figure out how to tweak the approach to get over the hump and actually turn itself into a contender.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

You have go think if they went full Rangers this year they could get some decent assets for

Toffoli
Hanifin
Lindholm
Tanev

Highly unlikely that they will do it, but those would be 4 guys that would return a boatload of prospects and picks.

Yeah the flames need to learn when to sell player. Seems like they consistently hold on too long.
Might be reading it wrong but they have only had 1 year with multiple firsts, in 2013. Literally just 1 year. That seems crazy especially considering the limited success.
They sold their extra 1st from tkachuk deal to move Monahan...

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Royle9

None of those players above were acquired through a re-build, not a single one.

A rebuild requires the selling off of PREMIUM assets, the closest the Flames have come to that is trading Iggy when it was too late and getting absolutely nothing for him. So no, we havent seen a re-build at all.

I never said it was easy, I also said it does require LUCK because you NEED to get into the top 3 lottery spots during a draft where the prospect pool is really good.

But the Flames have traded off all 3 of those guys within the last 3 years which means they failed. The main takeaway here is the Flames need to explore a real re-build, anyone should be on the table for a trade except for maybe Wolf.

Hanifin
Lindholm
Backlund
Toffoli
Tanev

All of these guys would command a significant haul for a rebuilding team, but the Flames wont do it. We'll ride out these contracts and lose them for nothing and continue to try and "extend" a window that never really existed.

Of course they were acquired during a rebuild, your definition of rebuild is just made up. Rebuilding is a phase when your team is bad and you are rebuilding it through the draft and free agency signings. That’s it. Your definition seems to be “scorched earth” based on who you want to ship out, and the teams that do that suck in perpetuity. So I’m not sure why that’s appealing to you. None of the teams you mentioned as always being successful proceed any differently than the Flames. Regardless, saying the Flames always do the same thing is demonstratively wrong. The fact that they have reached the similar mediocre results regardless of how they approach building the team is something to talk about, but pretending they have always done the same thing doesn’t make any sense.

Nor did I say the rebuild was “successful.” Most aren’t. Again, that’s sports. And the reason they won’t trade those players is because the bulk of this team is one that led the league last year. The smart play is seeing if you can retool and get back to that level quickly with a slightly different look. Selling everything because some fans are upset that you’re 8 points off the division lead and just want changes isn’t necessarily the best course of action.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by marsplasticeraser

The issue is our expiring contracts this year are ritchie, lewis, lucic and michael stone. Not much there.

2023-24 really is a decision point as you have cap going up and big names expiring in Backlund, lindholm, toffoli, hanifin, tanev, kylington, and zadorov.

That feels like a boatload of good picks and prospects.

The Flames are not going to do it, so just put that up front. But I think you would get a bigger haul by giving a team two years at a real good contract. Kind of the reason the Coyotes are trading Chychrun now. Any of those guys, outside Kylington, that you trade for the playoff runs should get you a bigger package of prospects and picks. You eat some salary and you probably even get more.

There is a path for the Flames that involves a rebuild in the next 3 weeks. Lindholm alone should get a better package than Horvat got. If the Flames decided to do it and they traded 3 of them (say Lindholm, Toffoli and Tanev) it is conceivable that they get

3 first round picks in 2023
3 top prospects somewhere between D+1 to D+3
3 current NHLers under the age of 25.

The real question the Flames should be asking in my opinion is whether they think this group can compete for a Cup in the next 2 years. If the answer to that is no they really should try to maximize the value of some of those players before they either age out of being good NHLers or become too expensive to keep.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by marsplasticeraser

The issue is our expiring contracts this year are ritchie, lewis, lucic and michael stone. Not much there.

2023-24 really is a decision point as you have cap going up and big names expiring in Backlund, lindholm, toffoli, hanifin, tanev, kylington, and zadorov.

That feels like a boatload of good picks and prospects.

Also can the flames even afford to re-sign these guys. Are we going to give Lindy, hanfin, tanev, backlund and toffoli big contracts into their mid- late 30s? We already have kadri, huberdeau, coleman, markstrom and weegar going until their late 30s. What kind of cap structure is that. But this team without lindholm is done.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Of course they were acquired during a rebuild, your definition of rebuild is just made up. Rebuilding is a phase when your team is bad and you are rebuilding it through the draft and free agency signings. That’s it. Your definition seems to be “scorched earth” based on who you want to ship out, and the teams that do that suck in perpetuity. So

This is completely wrong.

In order to rebuild your team, you have to sell off assets at a time where you'll maximize profit and leverage yourself with either younger players locked up long term or with high draft picks giving your scouts a bigger impact at the draft. Making more than 1-2 moves, getting younger while doing so and acquiring A+ prospects or picks. You're rebuilding your CORE, not re-tooling the "depth" around a core. Most teams 're-tool' and hope to continue to be competitive (See Flames) only a few teams have completely re-built their teams from the Core out in hopes to turn their losing franchise records around long term.

So yes, perhaps your "re-tool" differs from my "scorched-earth" definition of the same word.

2012-13 - When Flames drafted Monahan we traded away Post apex Iggy for nothing, we traded Boumester for nothing and then decided for some reason to acquire Wideman in order to salvage the season.

After a poor season the Flames went into 2014 draft with the highest pick ever and drafted Bennet who was a bust.

They also traded away 4 picks and attempted a "re-tool" acquiring players like Jones, O'Brien, Galiardi, Russell, Smid, Westgarth trading away prospects and younger guys like Horak and Brossoit.

2016 - Drafted Tkachuk - Great pick at the time.
Went on to trade assets in picks for Michael Stone and Mike Smith.

Where's the re-build here?
Where's the trading of aging premium assets to acquire younger skill/prospects etc?

The closest thing to it was 2013 when we drafted Monahan and it was only 2 players in Iginla and Boumester and we got terrible prospects back and late 1st round picks which we squandered away.

The flames have NEVER sold off premium assets during their PRIME to re-build/re-tool/re-anything and that's the point. We've historically held on to these contracts until they expire and have nothing to show for it.

We love to sign overaged "depth" guys, or trade for players on their last legs of their careers. The Flames continually try and extend these "windows" that dont exist, and once again this year we're stuck in that cycle again.

[howard_the_duck]

My issue with the Flames is there's a history of a lack of being honest with themselves, whether that's blind will or ignorance.

What's realistic if they sneak into the playoffs...1, maybe 2 wins? What then is the contingency? For me, salvaging trade value from some of their tradable assets is a prudent decision at this point. There will be roster turnover next year regardless, so you might as well jumpstart some of those moves and get some draft capital/prospects to try and build this thing up again next year.

My continued frustration as a fan is the reluctance to make these types of decisions that will allow more sustainable success. Rather than blowing our limited trade capital to patch up this roster, let's go on asset acquire mode to create some flexibility and reload this roster. I have my suspicions it will once again be the former approach unless we completely fall out of it.

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I really appreciated dobbles perspective and thoughts even it goes against what I believe it takes to build a contender, I take it as new info based on his detailed thoughts. I will point out one thing though - When explaining that 10 years of no playoffs for a lot those teams is a negative about them not competing like it would be a negative for the Flames to follow suit, it is impotent to note that we have, I believe 6 playoffs wins since 1990?

I agree with the one poster that the team and management hasn't been the same for that whole time, but I also ain't against sucking for a prolonged period and aquiring picks and better chances at top end draft talent. Just sayin'.

It isn't a gaurantee, but maybe it's no worse than what we've been through as a middling organization that clearly puts an emphasis on making the playoffs and spending pics for depth to do so, almost every.....friggen......year of our existence?

At the end of the day, you really have nailed the problem you guys have as fans. You have been consistently mediocre for a LONG time. And so I can understand why you guys are trigger happy and wanting to just do something to make a change. Might as well swing for the fences when things are so dire, right?

And that really was the genesis of my post; that trying for the scorched earth rebuild is a nice cliché people throw around but doesn't seem to truly exist. I think the Wings are the closest thing to doing scorched earth we have seen and thus far has not worked out well. They may not fit Royle's definition as they didn't have a ton of high end talent to trade away, but once their streak was over, they were pretty transparent in dumping vets, not signing free agents, accumulating draft picks, and riding out the rest of their bad contracts until they could start fresh. But as others have mentioned, even though they were rather committed to a rebuild, look at their draft luck: 9th, 6th, 6th, 4th, 6th, and 8th. Not a single top 3 pick to show for it. Now they do have Raymond and Seider who I think both will be great players, but do they have a Crosby, McDavid, Stamkos, Ovechkin type player that can carry the franchise for a couple decades? I'm not sure.

So what is my actual point? I think you reorganization has to continue to try and ice the best team because there is no indication rebuilding will make things any better. I think recent history has shown that successful teams have been built over long periods and often take a reshuffling to get over the hump. It really sucks this year is not going well for you. I truly thought your offseason moves were taking lemons and making the best lemonade you could. It's not often 2 100 point players leave in the same offseason because they don't want to be a part of your teams future.

With that said, your current regime has been around a while. Maybe Sutter isn't the best coach for the team as its assembled? Maybe Treveling can't build a deep playoff team despite often making the right moves on paper? Maybe your ownership meddles too much and makes things impossible to be successful? Maybe Calgary isn't the most desirable NHL city in Alberta?!?!?!? ok, ok, ok..... That one was a step too far. I'm sorry. No one deserves to be treated lower than the Oilers!

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Royle9

This is completely wrong.

In order to rebuild your team, you have to sell off assets at a time where you'll maximize profit and leverage yourself with either younger players locked up long term or with high draft picks giving your scouts a bigger impact at the draft. Making more than 1-2 moves, getting younger while doing so and acquiring A+ prospects or picks. You're rebuilding your CORE, not re-tooling the "depth" around a core. Most teams 're-tool' and hope to continue to be competitive (See Flames) only a few teams have completely re-built their teams from the Core out in hopes to turn their losing franchise records around long term.

So yes, perhaps your "re-tool" differs from my "scorched-earth" definition of the same word.

2012-13 - When Flames drafted Monahan we traded away Post apex Iggy for nothing, we traded Boumester for nothing and then decided for some reason to acquire Wideman in order to salvage the season.

After a poor season the Flames went into 2014 draft with the highest pick ever and drafted Bennet who was a bust.

They also traded away 4 picks and attempted a "re-tool" acquiring players like Jones, O'Brien, Galiardi, Russell, Smid, Westgarth trading away prospects and younger guys like Horak and Brossoit.

2016 - Drafted Tkachuk - Great pick at the time.
Went on to trade assets in picks for Michael Stone and Mike Smith.

Where's the re-build here?
Where's the trading of aging premium assets to acquire younger skill/prospects etc?

The closest thing to it was 2013 when we drafted Monahan and it was only 2 players in Iginla and Boumester and we got terrible prospects back and late 1st round picks which we squandered away.

The flames have NEVER sold off premium assets during their PRIME to re-build/re-tool/re-anything and that's the point. We've historically held on to these contracts until they expire and have nothing to show for it.

We love to sign overaged "depth" guys, or trade for players on their last legs of their careers. The Flames continually try and extend these "windows" that dont exist, and once again this year we're stuck in that cycle again.

Again, you’re just making up a very specific, incorrect definition of a rebuild. If that’s your definition, even less teams rebuild, and even less do so successfully (become contenders). Every rebuilding team signs free agents, every rebuilding team still makes trades. Every bad team that is drafting high and making moves to “rebuild” their team are rebuilding, by definition. A retool is when you keep the bulk of your team intact and move in and out a few pieces.

Just because we drafted some 1st rounders that didnt pan out and didn’t get the UTMOST value for some trades doesn’t mean they weren’t rebuilding. Your opinion on it doesn’t mean anything if your definition is “trading premium assets for picks/prospects.” That’s something you can do DURING a rebuild, but how well or how much you do it during the rebuild doesn’t determine whether it’s a rebuild or not, that’s just silly.

I hate to break it to you, but most teams, including almost all Stanley Cup winners in the last decade during their “rebuilding” phase, have sold PREMIUM ASSETS in their PRIME at about the same rate the Flames have, and have let players walk just like the Flames have, and have signed free agents when they weren’t contenders… just like the Flames have.

If you want to be Arizona, be Arizona. Or Columbus. But the specific thing you are upset that the Flames haven’t done isn’t a recipe for anything more than what you’re seeing right now. It’s a fantasy. Time to wake up.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I hate to break it to you, but most teams, including almost all Stanley Cup winners in the last decade during their “rebuilding” phase, have sold PREMIUM ASSETS in their PRIME at about the same rate the Flames have, and have let players walk just like the Flames have, and have signed free agents when they weren’t contenders… just like the Flames have.

Which Premium assets in their prime have the Flames sold in the last 15 years, can you confirm for me?