I like Jay Feaster

[moon]

Originally Posted by BloodFetish

I very much doubt they expected the sh*tstorm created by that SN article. In my view that was an opinion piece: the journalist "was told" O'Reilly would have to pass through waivers but does not quote a league source. Could have been anybody. Hell, could have been Kypreos! And then he failed to do what all good journalist should, and that is present the other side. Did he even bother to contact the Flames for their side of the story?

I mentioned in the other thread it was shoddy journalism and I stand by that.

The TSN article quotes a league source or are you still relying on you BS twitter feeds?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by BloodFetish

This comes up a lot, and I've yet to see a solid quote from any GM or agent supporting this. And even if you find me a couple, that doesn't come close to 'most'. Honestly, it comes across as an outsider (ie: fan) projecting their emotions into GM and agent shoes.

About the bad PR, I would hope Flames expected some from tendering an offer sheet, as is always the case, but that it didn't dissuade them from attempting to acquire the near-mythical top-line center.

I very much doubt they expected the sh*tstorm created by that SN article. In my view that was an opinion piece: the journalist "was told" O'Reilly would have to pass through waivers but does not quote a league source. Could have been anybody. Hell, could have been Kypreos! And then he failed to do what all good journalist should, and that is present the other side. Did he even bother to contact the Flames for their side of the story?

I mentioned in the other thread it was shoddy journalism and I stand by that.

Duhatschek is a well-regarded journalist. He commented on the radio yesterday (paraphrasing) that a lot of hockey people outside Calgary don't understand or agree with the approach management is taking. And we wasn't talking about the O'Reilly situation, but the overall strategy of Flames management.

[PeteLFan]

The worst thing would be to promote someone from within the organization again. We need to go outside if the organization and get someone who actually can pinpoint our issues and understands the problems in Calgary. Not more of the same, we are a player away crap.

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by BloodFetish

This comes up a lot, and I've yet to see a solid quote from any GM or agent supporting this. And even if you find me a couple, that doesn't come close to 'most'. Honestly, it comes across as an outsider (ie: fan) projecting their emotions into GM and agent shoes.

About the bad PR, I would hope Flames expected some from tendering an offer sheet, as is always the case, but that it didn't dissuade them from attempting to acquire the near-mythical top-line center.

I very much doubt they expected the sh*tstorm created by that SN article. In my view that was an opinion piece: the journalist "was told" O'Reilly would have to pass through waivers but does not quote a league source. Could have been anybody. Hell, could have been Kypreos! And then he failed to do what all good journalist should, and that is present the other side. Did he even bother to contact the Flames for their side of the story?

I mentioned in the other thread it was shoddy journalism and I stand by that.

On TSN both Gillis and Holland talked about the Flames situation and said they knew what was going on. They both pretty much said that it's their job to know what's going on and Feaster doesn't.

As for ROR being a "near-mythical top-line center" is a joke. On most teams he'd be a second line center, he might be considered that on the Flames only by comparison to guys like Stajan.

And by saying the article is an opion piece is just flat out bad. It's fact. It's in the rules and Feaster crapped the bed by know not knowing the rules. If he was unsure he should have just called Daily to find out. He's sticking to his guns by saying that he interprited it differently, thing is that still doesn't make it right.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I, for one, am just happy that Darryl seemingly got buy-in from the owners to expand (or create) the Flames' drafting and development programs, and that Feaster is allowed to continue it (or even be expanding on it).

I do think that over the last few drafts, things have been improving, but it takes time to see the fruition of that body of work. To say that Darryl 'sucked' at drafting isn't quite true - unless he was given a budget and never cared to expand the scouting staff.

Quoted as I think it's really important to reinforce this, but Darryl even though his record wasn't the greatest in the first few years, the context of what Darryl walked into needs to be understood. The Flames were an absolute mess development wise when Darryl walked in. They were sharing a farm team with the Hurricanes and had zero depth during the unexpected run in 2004. The Flames couldn't attract anyone and he laid out a plan to focus on local products to make sure they were excited to play here.

Probably to his long term detriment, Sutter spent his first few years taking the safe and conservative picks, in the hopes that he could fill the cupboards with strong reliable players that had a chance of at least providing depth, while going full out for with the big club with a mandate to win now after the '04 run. I know it was time for Sutter to leave the organization, but his 2010 draft year has the potential to provide some strong dividends in the next year or so. I can see Reinhart, Ramage and Arnold all being apart of the big club by 2014. We'll never know, but I'd always be curious as to what Sutter would have done draftwise in 2011, especially since it looked as though he was making a shift in drafting philosophy. (That being said, I know that without Feaster we don't have Gaudreau, Sven or Sieloff).

Long story short, although his record isn't the greatest Sutter did a far better job of establishing the groundwork for Weisbord and Feaster to start rebuilding the Flames collective depth. He got management to buy-in to investing in a farm team and scouting department, etc.

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by Poe969

On TSN both Gillis and Holland talked about the Flames situation and said they knew what was going on. They both pretty much said that it's their job to know what's going on and Feaster doesn't.

Missed that bit. Those were their words, or are you just paraphrasing? The other part of the original statement I didn't like was "Most GMS and agents". Well okay, if Gillis and Holland do in fact feel this way this doesn't come close to "most".

The other question is this: Would Holland and/or Gillis still trade with the Flames? If Yes, then who cares how they feel?

As for ROR being a "near-mythical top-line center" is a joke. On most teams he'd be a second line center, he might be considered that on the Flames only by comparison to guys like Stajan.

My point exactly. For the Flames he'd be the top-line center. Plus he's 22, so are you sure he'll never develop into a guy the rest of the league would play on their top line?

And by saying the article is an opion piece is just flat out bad. It's fact. It's in the rules and Feaster crapped the bed by know not knowing the rules. If he was unsure he should have just called Daily to find out. He's sticking to his guns by saying that he interprited it differently, thing is that still doesn't make it right.

When I say opinion piece, it's not because of the intent of the rule. It's because the author stated in no uncertain terms the Flames would lose O'Reilly to waivers. Now maybe the author didn't think about the vague language in the rule, and what the possible results could be if it's contested, and he certainly didn't follow up with Flames management for a quote. Could have been a good moment for his story if called Feaster and Feaster said "What? That can't be...are you sure?" or even a simple "no comment".

Plus saying Feaster didn't know the rules is not provable. You've accepted the authors opinion that this is the case, and made it your own. And since you were kind enough to leave me a nice picture...

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Duhatschek is a well-regarded journalist. He commented on the radio yesterday (paraphrasing) that a lot of hockey people outside Calgary don't understand or agree with the approach management is taking. And we wasn't talking about the O'Reilly situation, but the overall strategy of Flames management.

Not sure exactly what we're talking about as that's pretty vague. Is Duhatschek referring the Flames refusal to do an Oiler's style rebuild?

The more important question, rather than counting the heads of GMs, is whether they'd continue to trade with the Flames, and will the Flames still have an equal opportunity for free-agent signings? In my opinion dollars and cents mean more to agents and GMs than what they think of the guy across the table.

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by BloodFetish

Missed that bit. Those were their words, or are you just paraphrasing? The other part of the original statement I didn't like was "Most GMS and agents". Well okay, if Gillis and Holland do in fact feel this way this doesn't come close to "most".

The other question is this: Would Holland and/or Gillis still trade with the Flames? If Yes, then who cares how they feel?

My point exactly. For the Flames he'd be the top-line center. Plus he's 22, so are you sure he'll never develop into a guy the rest of the league would play on their top line?

When I say opinion piece, it's not because of the intent of the rule. It's because the author stated in no uncertain terms the Flames would lose O'Reilly to waivers. Now maybe the author didn't think about the vague language in the rule, and what the possible results could be if it's contested, and he certainly didn't follow up with Flames management for a quote. Could have been a good moment for his story if called Feaster and Feaster said "What? That can't be...are you sure?" or even a simple "no comment".

Plus saying Feaster didn't know the rules is not provable. You've accepted the authors opinion that this is the case, and made it your own. And since you were kind enough to leave me a nice picture...

Wow, well as important as the Flames are to some of us, they aren't to everyone else. TSN didn't interview every GM and every agent and play what they thought.

Of course every team wants to trade with the Flames now, Feaster looks like an idiot and they'll all try to rip him off! We should care that our GM isn't smart enough to know the rules. Stop thinking of excuses.

Because ROR would be our top line center, doesn't mean he's a top line center on a good team. Stajan is our "top line center" because we're a bottom 5 team, he wouldn't be on a team that is in playoff contention let alone a contending team. ROR would be the best center we've had in many years because we haven't had a good center in many years. Is that saying ROR is good or our GM is bad? Where would ROR fit on a playoff team? He's a second line center on a successful team, saying he'd be our top line center is just accepting mediocrity before it happens.

If Feaster knew the rule and did what he did, he's an idiot. The author of the story didn't have to interview other teams to see if ROR would be claimed off of waivers because it's common sense. You can't say he's such a great player and then expect him not to be claimed off of waivers. Of course he'd be claimed, he's a good player. Maybe he did try to contact Feaster and Feaster needed time to make up a story of how he isn't an idiot so he didn't answer his call. Since the story came out, Feaster has said he interpretid the rule differently....hence he didn't know it. You don't make a mistake that big if you know the rules.

I'm not sure if the picture of the men dressed as sheep is aimed at the people who believe the story or the people who believe Feaster. I'm guessing it's aimed at those who believe the story because ya, most people are going to believe the story because it contains facts and makes sense. I guess a picture that would help depict the people who beleive Feaster would look more like this...

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by Poe969

Wow, well as important as the Flames are to some of us, they aren't to everyone else. TSN didn't interview every GM and every agent and play what they thought.

Glad you agree that you have a very small sample size of GM opinion which is better than the poster I originally replied, who offered no support to his statement

Of course every team wants to trade with the Flames now, Feaster looks like an idiot and they'll all try to rip him off! We should care that our GM isn't smart enough to know the rules. Stop thinking of excuses.

Again, glad you agree GMs will continue to deal with the Flames. As to your reasons why that's opinion and conjecture, and hopefully more emotional a response than rival GMs will have.

Because ROR would be our top line center, doesn't mean he's a top line center on a good team. Stajan is our "top line center" because we're a bottom 5 team, he wouldn't be on a team that is in playoff contention let alone a contending team. ROR would be the best center we've had in many years because we haven't had a good center in many years. Is that saying ROR is good or our GM is bad? Where would ROR fit on a playoff team? He's a second line center on a successful team, saying he'd be our top line center is just accepting mediocrity before it happens.

Okay, we agree O'Reilly would be an upgrade over our current top-line center. That's a start. I'm not sure, but it seems you are arguing that trying to get O'Reilly is accepting mediocrity because he's not a guy who could play top-line on any team in the league. Would you have preferred Brad Richards? How about Getzlaf as a UFA (that is of course if his agent hasn't black-balled the Flames by now)?

If Feaster knew the rule and did what he did, he's an idiot.

Your opinion. Don't necessarily disagree with you as it's not a gamble I would have made, except to say I doubt very much Feaster would have acted alone on something like this. They would be incompetent, no question, if the waiver rule caught them by surprise. No matter what statements are made I doubt we'll ever know the truth.

The author of the story didn't have to interview other teams to see if ROR would be claimed off of waivers because it's common sense. You can't say he's such a great player and then expect him not to be claimed off of waivers. Of course he'd be claimed, he's a good player.

I never argued that other teams would not pick O'Reilly up off waivers. Not sure where you got that from.

Maybe he did try to contact Feaster and Feaster needed time to make up a story of how he isn't an idiot so he didn't answer his call. Since the story came out, Feaster has said he interpretid the rule differently....hence he didn't know it. You don't make a mistake that big if you know the rules.

When you say "Maybe" it means you're guessing. If Feaster could not be reached for comment then the author should have said "Jay Feaster could not be reached for comment". If he doesn't acknowledge that there's another side, even if he can't present it, then it's not a very balanced article. Interesting article, well written and researched, but shoddy journalism.

I'm not sure if the picture of the men dressed as sheep is aimed at the people who believe the story or the people who believe Feaster. I'm guessing it's aimed at those who believe the story because ya, most people are going to believe the story because it contains facts and makes sense. I guess a picture that would help depict the people who beleive Feaster would look more like this...

Just paying you back the favour, Poe. I'm glad you got the sheeple reference.

It was aimed at those who read the story, accepted it as the whole truth (not even waiting for a Flames response) and went immediately to DEFCON 1.


What was that nice Orwellian phrase...Group Think? Sadly I think my work router blocked your rebuttal picture. Was it nice and insulting?

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by BloodFetish

Not sure exactly what we're talking about as that's pretty vague. Is Duhatschek referring the Flames refusal to do an Oiler's style rebuild?

The more important question, rather than counting the heads of GMs, is whether they'd continue to trade with the Flames, and will the Flames still have an equal opportunity for free-agent signings? In my opinion dollars and cents mean more to agents and GMs than what they think of the guy across the table.

I think in the cap era any GM that holds a grudge against Calgary and tries to prevent Calgary from getting free agents is just shooting themselves in the foot. Because they're using up dollars from a limited pool. So I don't really think that's going to be an issue.

Regarding the question of the rebuild, and the collective brain trust of general managers in the NHL thinking that Calgary is doing it wrong, I would point out that every year there are 29 general managers that get it wrong. So I'm not exactly sure that following the herd is in and of itself the best way forward. I don't mind the general manager who chooses to do things differently, as long as they're innovative and come up with something new that actually works. On that point I think you can fairly criticize feaster.

There is no arguing with the results so far. Both on the ice and in the general perception of the flames throughout the league.

[Badgers Nose]

Duhatschek Is just one of us on steroids. To call what he and other sports analysts do as journalism is doing a discredit to journalism.

So at the end of the day what the sports analysts say isn't any different then what people here say. It doesn't carry any more weight than what posters on boards like this have to say.

So if the embarrassment doesn't extend beyond what sports analysts have to say about the flames then I don't think anyone in ownership is going to be particularly worried about that.

Nor will feaster, because if any one of those sports analysts was as good as they think they are they would be making half a million per year to run a professional sports franchise.

I might sound like I'm defending him, but really all I'm saying is that on the spectrum of people that I don't really give a #### about sports media are at the far end of the continuum.

[CaramonLS]

At the end of the day it really doesn't matter if Jay may had been right or wrong.

I'm still wondering which source he ran this by, since it wasn't the agent and no one from the PA has stepped up to defend the man either. I don't think he is being truthful.

In terms of labour issues - you need at least one side to be able to go to bat for you, because an individual club's interpretation doesn't matter. Only the PA and the NHL's opinion do. It wasn't clear that anyone was willing to step up and defend his position and still isn't.

[timbit]

Eric is an outstanding journalist and person. He is very different than many of his cohorts in numerous ways.
As far as what he says being similar and having the same validity as the posters on this board. I think not. He has build a solid and trustworthy reputation over the last 30 years as well as many solid relationships with NHL executives, owners , coaches and players.

He is a credit to hockey journalism.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

At the end of the day it really doesn't matter if Jay may had been right or wrong.

I'm still wondering which source he ran this by, since it wasn't the agent and no one from the PA has stepped up to defend the man either. I don't think he is being truthful.

In terms of labour issues - you need at least one side to be able to go to bat for you, because an individual club's interpretation doesn't matter. Only the PA and the NHL's opinion do. It wasn't clear that anyone was willing to step up and defend his position and still isn't.

Yes, actual facts would be very helpful right now in evaluating whether or not this was a colossal mistake. I can't be a hypocrite and on the one hand feel super excited, as I did, when I heard the news of the offer sheet and then later be overly critical about technicalities which may or may not have prevented the deal from happening.

It would be great to have a definitive answer to the question provided either by the players Association or the NHL. Based on how much media hubbub there has been about this issue it seems like there are a lot of inquiring minds that want to know.

If the sports analysts were actual journalists these are the types of data they would be bringing us, rather than a whole lot of off the record non-sense, rumor and speculation.

The closest thing to actual data we have are the comments made by the general managers of Vancouver and Detroit. But even there those guys were hedging their bets. It seems like nobody in the NHL ever wants to offend anyone. It's the quintessential Canadian sport, and it can be so frustrating sometimes.

Another sports leagues general managers and coaches generally say what's on their mind. A guy like Sir Alex Ferguson speaks his mind and I love him for it. Maybe Tortorella should become a general manager!

[Five-hole]

Good posts, BloodFetish.

People are (understandably) upset with the level of performance of the team right now, and the waiver situation has given a convenient target to vent anger upon. I would advocate a great deal of caution in overreacting to this situation as, from what I can tell, the "real story" is very much unknown at this point. It's far more complicated than to just say "we would have lost ROR, end of story". At the very least, it would have got very interesting very quickly.

Prior to that, the flack Feaster was taking was not addressing the center position. I'm not sure what kind of centers people think are just floating around out there, but they have very high acquisition costs. Getting a 1B center like ROR, with possible 1A upside (though unlikely, I admit) at the age of 22 for a first and a 3rd is, frankly, a steal. Colorado wanted much more than that in trade -- Feaster said as much. If people were offended at the cost of that, can you imagine what it would cost to get a bona-fide first line center?

You can't have it both ways, people. We can't hoard assets and address our weaknesses at the same time. Everybody around here is saying you can win with aging vets, you have to build through the draft and acquire young talent. Do you think you're the only people aware of this? Why would teams trade these sorts of assets for the kinds of assets we want to get rid of? You are not going to get a potential first line center for deadline-day veteran pickups like those everybody wants to ship off.

The last thing this organization needs to do right now is panic and fire Feaster. We need more stability, not less. Personally, I believe part of the problem with the Flames is that with so little homegrown talent on the roster, it's a team of professionals and mercenaries. I'm not suggesting they're playing for the pay cheque, but you don't have the same level of loyalty to a team that trades for you or signs you as the team that drafts you. How many Flames draft picks are on our roster? Sven, Backlund, Brodie?

Our captain, franchise player, longest-serving player, holder of all the major records, etc. etc. has to deal with trade talk EVERY SINGLE YEAR. That he can go out every season and do what he does is, frankly, amazing. Would you want to continue to gut it out for a city that talks about trading you, your slow starts, how old you are, that you've lost a step, etc.? Unbelievable.

This fan base has high expectations for their team. That's not necessarily a bad thing. But there's a difference between high expectations and unrealistic expectations. There are a lot of unrealistic expectations not only for the performance on the ice but for what the front office should do off the ice. A lot of you are acting like disenchanted wives.

"Why do you never buy me flowers?" (this team is too soft, why don't we add some grit?)
*tries to solve the problem*
"I don't like these flowers! I don't need this kinds of flowers! Also, why do you never take me on a date?" (why don't you get a first line center)
*tries to solve the problem*
"That date is WAY too expensive? What were you thinking? You're so irresponsible with money! You never listen to me!"

Etc., etc.

People want to get a high draft pick yet absolutely lose their shat when we lose a game. Do you have any idea how much losing you have to do to draft in the top 5? We're going to need to be WORSE than we've been so far. Consistently worse. For the next 30 games.

Ugh. I'm just very disenfranchised with our fan base right now. This is my long winded way of saying, don't fire Feaster.

[MacFlame]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Duhatschek Is just one of us on steroids. To call what he and other sports analysts do as journalism is doing a discredit to journalism.

Sorry, but this is rubbish. Please give an example, any example, of how his writing has been a discredit to journalism.

The man know his stuff and is highly respected.

Maybe people don't like his writing style, but these type of over the top, irrational comments about the sports media in this town are getting ridiculous.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by BloodFetish

Not sure exactly what we're talking about as that's pretty vague. Is Duhatschek referring the Flames refusal to do an Oiler's style rebuild?

The more important question, rather than counting the heads of GMs, is whether they'd continue to trade with the Flames, and will the Flames still have an equal opportunity for free-agent signings? In my opinion dollars and cents mean more to agents and GMs than what they think of the guy across the table.

Why is rebuild always preceded by 'Oilers style' in Calgary? I think he meant a 'dozens of professional sports franchises in North America in the last 20 years' style rebuild. Where you move out depreciating assets for appreciating assets with the intent of sustaining short-term pain to foster long-term gain.

Because nobody outside some Flames fans in denial believe that what this franchise has been doing for the last couple years is any kind of a rebuild.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

You can't have it both ways, people. We can't hoard assets and address our weaknesses at the same time.

The Flames are doing neither.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Duhatschek Is just one of us on steroids. To call what he and other sports analysts do as journalism is doing a discredit to journalism.

So at the end of the day what the sports analysts say isn't any different then what people here say. It doesn't carry any more weight than what posters on boards like this have to say.

So if the embarrassment doesn't extend beyond what sports analysts have to say about the flames then I don't think anyone in ownership is going to be particularly worried about that.

Nor will feaster, because if any one of those sports analysts was as good as they think they are they would be making half a million per year to run a professional sports franchise.

I might sound like I'm defending him, but really all I'm saying is that on the spectrum of people that I don't really give a #### about sports media are at the far end of the continuum.

Duhatschek isn't some blogger sitting in a bathrobe posting his opinions. He has regular, probably daily conversations with NHL managers, coaches, executives, scouts, and agents. Since he's respected around the NHL for not burning sources, these insiders say things to him that they wouldn't say in public.

Sorry, but he is a legitimate source of information about how the Flames are regarded around the NHL. But as the Flames fortunes have declined in recent years, fans on this board have gotten in the habit of shooting the messenger. I mean, isn't it funny how NHL journalists have gotten worse at doing their jobs at exactly the same time that Flames players have gotten worse at doing theirs?

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Why is rebuild always preceded by 'Oilers style' in Calgary? I think he meant a 'dozens of professional sports franchises in North America in the last 20 years' style rebuild. Where you move out depreciating assets for appreciating assets with the intent of sustaining short-term pain to foster long-term gain.

Because nobody outside some Flames fans in denial believe that what this franchise has been doing for the last couple years is any kind of a rebuild.

Did I claim the Flames were rebuilding? No, I didn't. I know they've gotten younger but I don't know whether that's considered rebuilding or not. Probably not.

My post was questioning what Duhatcheck meant by his statement because I found it quite vague, so thanks for your opinion on that.