[News] Flames and Treliving agree to part ways. Maloney promoted to PoHO and interim GM

[Huntingwhale]

I could have sworn during BT's last contract negotiation, it was reported that he was in fact going to have full autonomy. Maybe I imagined that, but I could have sworn that was part of the stipulation of him returning. Wasn't that the same season the Ben Bishop fiasco occurred and something about them missing the chance to acquire him because some decision maker was on a plane or something? Too lazy took it up, but I swear this exact scenario about him having full autonomy already played out...but I guess it was just for show?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

I could have sworn during BT's last contract negotiation, it was reported that he was in fact going to have full autonomy. Maybe I imagined that, but I could have sworn that was part of the stipulation of him returning. Wasn't that the same season the Ben Bishop fiasco occurred and something about them missing the chance to acquire him because some decision maker was on a plane or something? Too lazy took it up, but I swear this exact scenario about him having full autonomy already played out...but I guess it was just for show?

That is definitely correct, and we can assume that this autonomy ended once Darryl was hired during the covid shortened season.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

If Treliving was offered all of this autonomy he would be insane to turn the job down. With the exception of a few big market teams, attracting and retaining talent is tough. PERIOD. Suggesting this is the reason Treliving pulled the plug doesn’t make sense as 2/3rds of the teams in the league will face the same challenge. When you add in Treliving’s budgetary skills, any market advantage disappears. Treliving is leaving because he reads his own hand writing on the wall. The future is bleak because of Treliving and his moves.

How does this square with so many modified no-trade clauses having just Canadian teams on it?

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

If payroll goes from $82M to $62M if you commit to a true rebuild I think you can mitigate some of the financial risk.

If anything the real financial risk is spending to the cap, missing the playoffs, and attendance dropping anyways.

Which is more of a real risk for this org right now IMO

Playoff tickets were a really easy sell last year versus regular season and I think they go re-tool first to try another kick at the can. Swap around some players with other teams who fall short and hope Markstrom bounces back and then if that fails they will be drug into a rebuild. They did it when Iggy finally left.

I think the Jets and Flames are closer comparables than the Flames and Oilers. Edmonton knows that they will sell tickets even if they are losing season after season.

[GullFoss]

Some of these posts seem really wild to me.

Apparently there's no vision and wasn't a rebuild. Yet...there clearly was a rebuild around Johnny, Monahan, Lindholm, Hanifin, Chuckie and Bennett. It culminated in two great regular seasons and one second round appearance - both of which were last season. To say the team doesn't rebuild is wild given that three of these guys were drafted in the top 5 by the flames themselves

Even going into this season, the team was built properly and was ranked among a top 4 team to win a cup. So to suggest it 100% made sense to rebuild when you had a consensus top-5 team is insane to me. This isn't ownership with its head in the cloud. This is gambling odds makers, expert pundits, analytics sites, etc...all saying the flames were a really good team.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The John Bean comment about not being able to say the word rebuild was a facepalm moment for me.

But then Francis asked if the club at least recognizes that sometime rebuilds are necessary, he immediately followed that up by agreeing and saying that they had a "rebuild" type of offer for Tkachuk and they were willing to rebuild at that time.

I don't know all the context in that statement, and I don't think anyone here does. Were they willing to only until the Huberdeau deal was tabled, or was it the GM's discretion... who knows?

I will say though, that there are a lot of people on this forum who are dead set against rebuilding. Any time it gets mentioned, you get a lot of resistance and comparisons to teams that have tried it and either didn't succeed, needed multiple rebuilds before succeeding, or still only had mediocre success. Murray may just be trying to cater to that segment of the fanbase. The ones that always say you don't need to rebuild for success, or that you just need to re-tool over and over until it works. I am personally not one of those people, but if this forum can be considered a cross-section of the hardcore fanbase, it shouldn't be surprising that ownership also feels the same way.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

I agree with both those post whole heartedly.
Hell, I've been this person for a large part of the last decade.

And think because of the climate that's probably why Edwards et al are so scared of an actual rebuild. The hardcore fans would get it. But generally speaking revenue would continue to dip, and suddenly it's 1998 again.

Looking at it from a business perspective their primary market would be Alberta. Their in direct competition with the oilers for market share in Alberta. Currently the oilers have a competitive advantage in their product that they sell to potential fans, in McDavid and Draisaitl.

If the flames continue down their current path with boring, old and mediocre hockey fan apathy towards the flames will grow and their market share will continue to erode.

If your a 6-13 year old kid in Alberta your 9/10 times your going to be watching McD and Drai. Who on the flames has close to that appeal?

I think the majority of fans would rather watch a young team with a guy like Hughes or zegras then whatever we got right now. Atleast it's fun and exciting.

Heck, my wife doesn't watch hockey at all but she is definitely more interested in the oilers then the flames because they're exciting.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Some of these posts seem really wild to me.

Apparently there's no vision and wasn't a rebuild. Yet...there clearly was a rebuild around Johnny, Monahan, Lindholm, Hanifin, Chuckie and Bennett. It culminated in two great regular seasons and one second round appearance - both of which were last season. To say the team doesn't rebuild is wild given that three of these guys were drafted in the top 5 by the flames themselves

Even going into this season, the team was built properly and was ranked among a top 4 team to win a cup. So to suggest it 100% made sense to rebuild when you had a consensus top-5 team is insane to me. This isn't ownership with its head in the cloud. This is gambling odds makers, expert pundits, analytics sites, etc...all saying the flames were a really good team.

Yeah, on paper I totally believed the Flames could go deep like St Louis once they added Huberdeau, Weegar, and Kadri. If Florida doesn't put Huberdeau and Weegar on the table then maybe they go with the Necas and 1st offer from Carolina and rebuild.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

But then Francis asked if the club at least recognizes that sometime rebuilds are necessary, he immediately followed that up by agreeing and saying that they had a "rebuild" type of offer for Tkachuk and they were willing to rebuild at that time.

I don't know all the context in that statement, and I don't think anyone here does. Were they willing to only until the Huberdeau deal was tabled, or was it the GM's discretion... who knows?

I will say though, that there are a lot of people on this forum who are dead set against rebuilding. Any time it gets mentioned, you get a lot of resistance and comparisons to teams that have tried it and either didn't succeed, needed multiple rebuilds before succeeding, or still only had mediocre success. Murray may just be trying to cater to that segment of the fanbase. The ones that always say you don't need to rebuild for success, or that you just need to re-tool over and over until it works. I am personally not one of those people, but if this forum can be considered a cross-section of the hardcore fanbase, it shouldn't be surprising that ownership also feels the same way.

There are times to rebuild but this org seems to miss them. I get why they chose not to rebuild last year when in addition to the 2 top 10 scorers they had the Selke and Vezina runner up. They got the extra 1st and knew Monahan was cooked so they saw a path to add a 115pt player, over ppg center and an upgrade on the blueline.

To me hindsight shows they likely should have taken that path but it is frustrating that one of the only things we ever hear about Murray is he doesn’t even want to hear the word rebuild.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by traptor

Looking at it from a business perspective their primary market would be Alberta. Their in direct competition with the oilers for market share in Alberta. Currently the oilers have a competitive advantage in their product that they sell to potential fans, in McDavid and Draisaitl.

If the flames continue down their current path with boring, old and mediocre hockey fan apathy towards the flames will grow and their market share will continue to erode.

If your a 6-13 year old kid in Alberta your 9/10 times your going to be watching McD and Drai. Who on the flames has close to that appeal?

I think the majority of fans would rather watch a young team with a guy like Hughes or zegras then whatever we got right now. Atleast it's fun and exciting.

Heck, my wife doesn't watch hockey at all but she is definitely more interested in the oilers then the flames because they're exciting.

For sure.

I think it was on Barn Burner that Boomer made the point that if you go to arena in Edmonton for youth hockey it's like wall to wall Oilers hats.

In Calgary you'd have a slight majority Flames hats, with a spattering of other teams.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Forbes has the Flames operating revenue at 41 million bucks a year so not quite sure how one could come to the conclusion that they are losing money each year.

You are proving my point. $41M last year....the most by almost double (understood inflation etc...) since 2005. What happened last year? 7 home playoff games. The most home playoff games we've had since 04. The playoff gates are where the owners and the team start to actually make money, when the costs for the team other than game day expenses for staff at the dome are completely sunk. Players don't get more money for playoffs, neither do coaches or any other hockey staff. The playoff gates last year drove that number.

It's also easy to pull one number and say look - $41M that's a lot. But:

- The Covid Season before - Forbes has the Flames losing ($39M) in operating revenue.
- The interrupted season before - Forbes has the Flames making $400K (that's less than the league minimum for one player)

So last years 7 home playoff games, only drew the Flames ownership to break even essentially since COVID hit.

All the other seasons before COVID dating back to 05/06:

- Average Operating Revenue per season: $8.7M / season
- Lowest is an (800K) loss in 08/09
- Highest is a $25.9M profit in 14/15 (surprise surprise, our next longest playoff run with 5 home games)
- 2 seasons in that time frame where they lost money, only 2 seasons above $20M

The point being, playoffs drive the positive revenue. And the investment required to run a hockey club, for an average $8.7M return on investment per year for the owners...........it's nothing. They'd be better off investing their money in a savings account.

The Flames are not a sound investment for these businessmen, we need to move on from that fallacy.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Some of these posts seem really wild to me.

Apparently there's no vision and wasn't a rebuild. Yet...there clearly was a rebuild around Johnny, Monahan, Lindholm, Hanifin, Chuckie and Bennett. It culminated in two great regular seasons and one second round appearance - both of which were last season. To say the team doesn't rebuild is wild given that three of these guys were drafted in the top 5 by the flames themselves

Even going into this season, the team was built properly and was ranked among a top 4 team to win a cup. So to suggest it 100% made sense to rebuild when you had a consensus top-5 team is insane to me. This isn't ownership with its head in the cloud. This is gambling odds makers, expert pundits, analytics sites, etc...all saying the flames were a really good team.

I think people really overestimate other teams "plans" and underestimate how flexible those plans actually are. I'm conifdent Treliving had plans which he outlined for ownership. I'm equally confident they changed on the fly depending on what happened. There was a pretty clear plan in my mind when they acquired Lindholm, Hanifin and Neal as well as Smith. They then had a major adjustment because Neal sucked and so did Smith.

[NegativeSpace]

I have taken some time to reflect upon my thoughts on the team losing its GM. Yesterday was disappointing but not unexpected. The number of years and the inconsistency of the team over those years suggests that perhaps a different vision may be required. I believed that Brad was a good GM through his tenure here and learned from his mistakes over the years. However, I have warmed to the thought that there will be a different GM.

I do believe that there were some different visions for the team moving forward between the coach and the GM. There is too much smoke for something there to not exist. My disappointment is that I have more concerns with Darryl's vision than Brad's. At least with Brad, I could understand the thought process and see on paper the team that he was building. He just could never find the coach to consistently fulfill the execution of that vision.

With Darryl, I just have too many questions about how this year proceeded - the strange line combinations, the powerplay, the insistence on playing Lucic, not playing Pelletier when he seemed better than some other players, not playing some younger players when the team seemed sluggish, etc. When he has a mind to addressing these concerns, I can see Darryl's point of view. He just so rarely directly engages with the media on issues that fans are looking at with the team.

However, it seems to me that this is a great opportunity for a new GM to give a new vision to the team. The number of deals that expire next season and the season afterwards means that this team could very well be in the midst of a complete shake-up in less than a calendar year.

If the team tries to run it back and either scenario happens (they make it and lose their players in the off-season or they are terrible and sell at the deadline), we may be sitting here looking at significant outflow of players. A rebuild/retool appears to be coming up regardless of the path they take. I'm okay with that.

I would prefer that the team hire a GM to be active and make smart decisions on the upcoming expiring contracts, including trading Lindholm and Backlund if they aren't going to sign extensions this summer. I don't see a scenario where two pillars of the team enter the season without extensions, particularly if you want to compete this year.

Lastly, I want to respond to some posters saying that GM Conroy is a bad idea because he's not a tough negotiator. In my view, the marketplace like the NHL requires principled negotiators but not jerks. I think that a quality a GM requires is a near-universal appeal such that everyone in the room likes you because you are only ever dealing with 31 other franchises plus a limited pool players and their agents. To get deals done in this market place, it would be a very significant plus for the GM to be extremely likeable. I have no other information on whether Conroy is smart enough for the job, but he certainly has the experience and qualifications that he should in my view be a significant if not the leading candidate.

My only concern that arises after typing this out is that Sutter is the one who is in full control. I hope that is not the case. Sutter is a good coach (at least he can be, not sure what happened this year) but I think he's best as a person to execute the vision, not lay it out.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

If payroll goes from $82M to $62M if you commit to a true rebuild I think you can mitigate some of the financial risk.

If anything the real financial risk is spending to the cap, missing the playoffs, and attendance dropping anyways.

Which is more of a real risk for this org right now IMO

TBH I'm a bit surprised Edwards didn't use Tkachuk and Gaudreau leaving last season as a flash point. I thought for sure he might use it as a way to try to gain support for the arena. "We can't keep our top talent because of our arena", "We can't spend to the cap anymore because the arena doesn't provide the same type of revenue streams that the Oilers have access too".

Then use that as an excuse to re-build and cut our spending as you try to time your contention window with the opening of a new arena.

Really it would have made a lot of sense for this org to try to do it that way - but as others seem to say the only long term plan Edwards has is "Make the playoffs"

The Forbes numbers at the end of 2022 for operating revenue (take them for what they are worth) had the Flames operating revenue at 41 million and the Ottawa Senators operating revenue at 47 million. Sens would have had much lower gate revenue than the Flames but presumably because they paid about 16 million less in salary the reduced salary offset the reduced revenue from the gate, leaving Melnyk 6 million ahead overall.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

You are proving my point. $41M last year....the most by almost double (understood inflation etc...) since 2005. What happened last year? 7 home playoff games. The most home playoff games we've had since 04. The playoff gates are where the owners and the team start to actually make money, when the costs for the team other than game day expenses for staff at the dome are completely sunk. Players don't get more money for playoffs, neither do coaches or any other hockey staff. The playoff gates last year drove that number.

It's also easy to pull one number and say look - $41M that's a lot. But:

- The Covid Season before - Forbes has the Flames losing ($39M) in operating revenue.
- The interrupted season before - Forbes has the Flames making $400K (that's less than the league minimum for one player)

So last years 7 home playoff games, only drew the Flames ownership to break even essentially since COVID hit.

All the other seasons before COVID dating back to 05/06:

- Average Operating Revenue per season: $8.7M / season
- Lowest is an (800K) loss in 08/09
- Highest is a $25.9M profit in 14/15 (surprise surprise, our next longest playoff run with 5 home games)
- 2 seasons in that time frame where they lost money, only 2 seasons above $20M

The point being, playoffs drive the positive revenue. And the investment required to run a hockey club, for an average $8.7M return on investment per year for the owners...........it's nothing. They'd be better off investing their money in a savings account.

The Flames are not a sound investment for these businessmen, we need to move on from that fallacy.

The Sens made 47 million in operating revenue, so they were somehow more successful than the Flames despite having no playoff.

Flames made 22.3 million in operating revenue in 2014, no playoff games helped them that year. You said they lose money, they do not lose money.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The Sens made 47 million in operating revenue, so they were somehow more successful than the Flames despite having no playoff.

Flames made 22.3 million in operating revenue in 2014, no playoff games helped them that year. You said they lose money, they do not lose money.

Fair, and who knows, one would have to look at it and see (salary cap expenses, etc..). But you've cherry picked one year. If you take the same look at Ottawa's operating revenue back to the 05 season, it's a very similar profile to the Flames, with actually a worse average outcome, including 3 seasons with over $1M in losses and lower peaks than the Flames best years.

The Ottawa Senators are also not a strong investment for their ownership group.

We are getting nit picky on losing money vs. not losing money. Proof is in the stats. The Flames lose money sometimes, and earn very little money (in comparison to expense) most of the time, and they have their best earning seasons when there are playoffs involved. Same with other teams.

Grabbing one season here or there to try and make a point means nothing. I'm sure there are exception seasons all over the place for a variety of reasons. The general point, this is not a lucrative venture for the Flames ownership. Playoff games make it less of a burden for them, so the motivation to make playoffs as much as possible is understandable.

If you think getting an average of $8.7M a year (which btw is actually less than $8.7M when you include last years $41M and the two COVID years) is making money for this ownership group, you don't get it. You don't invest the hundreds of millions it costs to run this team each for $8.7M average return if you are interested in making money. Lot's of things they could to do instead to increase that return, so from an ownership perspective, the Flames cost them lost potential earnings.

It's also why, they don't just build the arena themselves when it's time for a Billion dollar investment to continue the teams operations. It's not feasible........

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Gate receipts are 33% of total league revenues so it is not nothing, definitely something to think about. If you had a corresponding reduction in your salaries, which would naturally follow during a rebuild it may be a wash.

It's not close to a wash.
League wide gate receipts are close to 1/3. I suspect CGY would be higher.
Also, gate receipts correlate to suites, concessions, parking, local sponsorships, jerseys, etc. $200 sweaters and $12 beers do a poop tonne more for profits than a $100 ticket.
And of course playoff revenues are the real gravy, which are near zero for 5-10 years in a full tear down.

The flames could shed at most 10 or 20M in salaries (less if they are buying bad contracts for picks) but easily lose 25-50M in revenues every year. Unless revenues are already bottomed out the math is inevitably bad.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Some of these posts seem really wild to me.

Apparently there's no vision and wasn't a rebuild. Yet...there clearly was a rebuild around Johnny, Monahan, Lindholm, Hanifin, Chuckie and Bennett. It culminated in two great regular seasons and one second round appearance - both of which were last season. To say the team doesn't rebuild is wild given that three of these guys were drafted in the top 5 by the flames themselves

Even going into this season, the team was built properly and was ranked among a top 4 team to win a cup. So to suggest it 100% made sense to rebuild when you had a consensus top-5 team is insane to me. This isn't ownership with its head in the cloud. This is gambling odds makers, expert pundits, analytics sites, etc...all saying the flames were a really good team.

No they tried to start competing right after making the playoffs hence the Dougie Hamilton trade for two 1sts and 2 seconds. They failed and lucked into Matthew Tkachuk and tried to compete right after that as well with the horrific signing for Troy Bouwer.

The signing of Mason Raymond and Jonas Hiller where aimed at keeping the tame competitive while they tried to retool.

They waited way too long to trade Iginla and got back a crappy 1st and a couple of cashiers for him because of the idiot GM they had hired. After that he gave away Bouwmeester for Gios doppleganger and the greatest goalie of all time and another crappy 1st.

The Sam Bennett pick might be the only earned pick trying to build, but it seemed like once we got a high pick it was time to try and make it in again.

This is more of a shot at Edwards and his meddling.

[NilssonistheReal14]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Seems likeNR14 is speculating on Tre's reasons; his intel can still be true in terms of 'what' happened even if he doesn't actually know why (and the what may not be the fullest/truest picture).

It seems likely to me that autonomy was a contentious issue in Tre's previous extension, and he may not feel like the agreement was sufficiently respected to trust a similar promise again. I think it sucks, but Edwards can meddle if he wants to, just like Tre can leave if he wants to.

Not speculting at all. Not revealing sources at all either. But, I have had my sources verified by mods on here a number of times over the past 12 years.

I am privy to quite a bit within the Flames organization. Most of the time, I choose not to divulge it on here.

[GullFoss]

I think this is the better outcome vs Tre leaving in a year or two. I think you bring in a GM who can work with Sutter. Say like Maloney and Sutter basically running shotgun. Execute the vision Sutter thinks he needs to make a run next year. And if it fails, you fire Sutter, bring in a new GM to start fresh and rebuild next off-season.