Feaster credibility with fan base on the line

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

For once I'd like to see the source on that piece of information.

He said in an interview where he was asked the question point blank, 'will you waive your no trade clause?'

He straight out said he took less money for the NMC and that both sides were going to honour it. End of story.

I was certainly not the only person to see that interview and it was highly discussed back then on these very boards.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This team can do itself so many favours by selling and tanking. This team can be rebuilt at the draft. Acquire picks and NHL ready prospects for our aging stars, get MacKinnon, open up cap space and make deals at the draft and sign ufa's. there will likely be an larger pool of free agents and available players due to buyouts and teams trying to fit in the cap

Don't screw this up flames it is only 20 more games. Get what we can for our players and get a top 5 pick in the draft

There are 30teams constantly trying to do the above.

Also if you have a full message board full of people calling our stars "aged" then how are you going to get more then below value on the open market? Just look at the Kovalchuk trade...the only tangible piece that turned out was Odulya and he was traded for a 2nd & a 3rd this season.

Even if you do believe trading Iggy/Kipper tanks our team...you have to take into account that the age NHLer's really start contributing is 23-30yrs old. It's an 18yr old draft! You're not tanking us for 1-2yrs, you're tanking us for 5yrs if we have to wait for high level talent and then when that talent develops we're sitting in the exact same spot we are today with one elite player.

If you want this team to tank and get supplementary elite talent that adds to our current crop then you look at trading the following for picks and hope that your scouting can pick up players in rounds 1-3 that will improve on the below:
1. Glencross
2. Giordano
3. Stempniak

All players playing ok on decent contracts that would fit on a number of teams and all are playing at a peak.

Anyway my 2cents

[Jake]

I just want a decision made with Iginla... either resign him or trade him by the deadline. Just don't lose him for nothing!

I really think this team is in a great position to rebuild. Lots of valuable and tradable assets... without moving Kipper or Iginla, there is still Glencross, Stempniak, Cammalleri, Tanguay, Stajan, Comeau, Bouwmeester, Giordano, and Butler. Obviously the Flames won't move all of those guys, but even moving just three could add a huge number of draft picks. I'd argue that many of them could even fetch 1st round picks.

Please Feaster, make the obvious decision here... sell!

[Badgers Nose]

Yeah I don't think uncertainty over the one big asset they have is winning Feaster any friends.

[Badgers Nose]

... also, is the offer sheet fiasco going to affect his ability to do deals? Is he persona non grata now?

[Day Tripper]

It's clear that if ownership/management still believes they stand any chance to "win now", they're self-deluded beyond any hope. I really hope it's not the case, but I suppose we'll find out soon enough.

[DeluxeMoustache]

[QUOTE=JayP;4141341

Well when you clearly don't have any value placed on a 2nd/3rd rounder so it's tough to debate. Sarich's value has gone from something to nothing - that's not debatable. If you want to bring up Stajan as a valuable asset then Sarich of last season is in the conversation too. Depth d-men are always more valuable than depth forwards. And 25 decent games this year doesn't over-ride two years of crap from Stajan. Add in Stajan's bad contract and Sarich having all the intangibles teams look for and they are similar assets (for their time).

He is taking on tougher competition, but I don't see why he's not valid to be brought up. You love to rag on J-Bouw for facing tough competition, but getting schooled by it. Giordando is the exact same this year.

Well, the topic is maximizing assets this deadline vs. last deadline. You can't simply ignore a guy like Jokinen who would've brought back a lot. Him being gone gives more opportunities to guys like Stajan so is it really a question of Hartley better utilizing players? Like I mentioned, J-Bouw is doing better, but another of our better defenseman in Giordano is doing worse - you can't just cherry pick the positives.[/QUOTE]

I don't really know what you are looking for. We are looking at this quite differently, and can agree to do so. Again, look at the guys I noted. 27-30 age range, signed through next year. Specifically ideal assets to consider moving as there is some term left, one year after this, and they are in their prime. Guys signed through the next year do not have the discounted value of pending UFAs.

I didn't say I didn't value a late 2nd or 3rd rounder. I said that Sarich would be valued as a depth defender, be it last year or this year. Playoff teams are not adding him to their top 4, they are adding him for depth, toughness, and his Cup win. Even if he played top 4 for Brent. I disagree that his value is nothing. Maybe off by a round in the draft pick you get back.

That is a small difference in value of a guy who was a UFA, compared to what I see as a big difference from 3 steady years of underachievement (again, under a coach with a square peg round hole system) of overpaid guys.

Are you being serious about Hartley not using guys to their strengths better than the last guy? The question about Bouw and Stajan was whether they had essentially lost their ability to do the jobs they were paid handsomely for. Stajan and Bouw are the exact same. Underachieved under Brent and back to expectations. Yes, in my opinion 25 good games from both of them makes up for some of the last couple of years of crap. It makes perfect sense, and reinforces my exact point. People were talking about them as buyout candidates.

It is valid to bring up Gio but you position him as taking a huge step back, I see him as in a development year, and not really on the table like the guys who are nearing the end of their contracts, largely due to the term of contract. Seems like a guy the Flames are invested in for the longer haul. His value isn't set back due to being misused, or underused (like Stajan on the 4th line or Bouw apparently being encouraged to be quite selective about jumping in to the offense), he is being challenged with a tougher role. I don't see how this is confusing.

And it is different than Bouw, who by the way has gotten ragged on for lack of compete and making dumb decisions.

You want to talk about Olli and Sarich. Sure, they were worth something last year, and the Flames didn't sell, but they were UFAs. And older players.

And no the Flames didn't sell. Neither guy may have waived, and only one guy is here, and he is a depth defender. Whatever draft pick he may or may not bring, it seems pretty darn obvious to me that guys like Bouwmeester and Stajan are no longer generally viewed as buyout material. I give the GM and coaching change credit for that. That is a pretty big deal.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

... also, is the offer sheet fiasco going to affect his ability to do deals? Is he persona non grata now?

After his bungling of the offer sheet I am sure that there are other GMs circling the Flames 1st round pick and other assets.

Maybe the GM club on the whole does not have the highest intellect or make the soundest decisions but everyone wants to deal with the weakest rather than the strongest.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

He said in an interview where he was asked the question point blank, 'will you waive your no trade clause?'

He straight out said he took less money for the NMC and that both sides were going to honour it. End of story.

I was certainly not the only person to see that interview and it was highly discussed back then on these very boards.

I'd still like to see that source. Even so, what you're saying doesn't mean that he outright declined to be traded. Based on that, we don't know if there was any kind of discussion.

What I found was just Eric Francis reporting that Jokinen has not been asked to waive his no-trade clause.
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=114917

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/02/25...n--with-flames

It’s official: Olli Jokinen will finish the season with the Calgary Flames.
It was confirmed Saturday Jokinen has not been asked to waive his no-trade clause and will stay beyond Monday’s trade deadline.
Jokinen has previously made it clear he wanted to stay in Calgary this season and hopes to sign a contract extension this summer when he becomes an unrestricted free agent.
That’s good news for the Flames, as Jokinen is the team’s best centre and the club’s leading scorer this year.
However, Jokinen and the Flames have yet to discuss his future beyond this year, choosing instead to focus on trying to make the playoffs.
Jay Feaster said on Hockey Night in Canada Saturday he wants to re-sign Jokinen and didn’t think it would be a problem to get done.
Simply put, if Ales Hemsky signed for $5 million a year and has five goals, what then is Jokinen worth?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

After his bungling of the offer sheet I am sure that there are other GMs circling the Flames 1st round pick and other assets.

.

I can just see it now... our 1st for someone like Mikkel Boedker or Bryan Little. A known commodity is better than a risky draft pick to Feaster... at least that's the impression he left.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by nik-

Whether Jokinen was assured he wouldn't be asked, or was told he wouldn't waive, he rewarded the ability to stay with playing like hot garbage after the deadline.

So glad he's gone.

Jokinen + Prust returned Kotalik + Higgins the last time he was traded.

Funny enough, Prust turned out to be a pretty good pick for Calgary considering it was the Chucko draft year.

[Frequitude]

Fool him thrice.

[Flame Of Liberty]

I don't think Feaster has done anything to actually earn credibility, it was always "wait and see" approach towards him.

All he did was couple of decent/mediocre moves, some headscratchers, some useless moves, some total blunders and of course lot of talking (until recently).

He's a mediocre GM who's apparently running out of rope and likely on his way out of the league once he's done in Calgary.

[Mr.Coffee]

Regarding credibility and Jay Feaster, there is no one way to build a team. I don't think it's necessary to tank and rebuild, or rebuild on the fly, or any such buzz phrase. Each year is different, but what should remain the same is not a core of players, but an ideology, culture and identity.

I think it's important that:
a) You have a very clear, very understandable identity, culture, reputation that you want your team to exhibit, represent, embody. This gives the players, coaching staff, and entire organization something to buy into. And it has to make sense. Specifically, you could build your team based on any of the following characteristics- speed, toughness, strong defence, high octane offence (I think the Flames are supposed to be this, but not sure), size, strong puck movers. When Sutter was here, he wanted a fast, tough team that was primarily western Canadian in their roots. He also provided 5 year plans, goals, and he also measured the Flames season in blocks of 10 games, as if to measure the season in "mini seasons". These were all little things that helped with clarity as to where the team was at, and what they were trying to do. It helped the team buy in, it helped the fans buy in, it helped ownership buy in.

b) You go very public with this identity you've created. Everyone, fans included, should know what your team's identity is.

Now I'm not sure that there is an identity. There might be, but they haven't gone public with it, not to the extent of blatantly saying "our identity is...". This team seems so lost, completely at a point of huge transformation. We are at a critical juncture for this organization, and I'm not convinced that management or ownership realize that. If they do, I'm not sure they've convinced the fanbase, the people they truly count on, that they do. And so I think that credibility is extremely fragile if not already lost.

The other part about credibility, is effective management of assets that fit the identity.

Now, if Iginla goes un-signed, and not traded beyond the trade deadline, it will be clear that this team is in complete shambles, a shadow of a former and otherwise proud franchise, and an organization rife with politics, people games and inexcusable BS for the sake of friendships getting in the way of what's best for the team. You won't need to be behind closed doors to understand that, you will be able to tell by action (or in this case inaction). The thing about credibility, is that it's based on action, not talk. This team, led by Iginla, has been all talk for so long. Every loss, Iginla is interviewed, what does he say? "We need to be better". That's just such a hollow, pathetic, ridiculous BS thing to say. There's no excuses, there's no reason to talk. All they need to do is do. We'll see. Either get the guy signed up, say he's part of your go-forward identity and make clear what that is, or trade him and move the fata on already.

This one is so incredibly no-brainer.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I can just see it now... our 1st for someone like Mikkel Boedker or Bryan Little. A known commodity is better than a risky draft pick to Feaster... at least that's the impression he left.

No, that's Darryl Sutter you're thinking of...and even he never traded our first away.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

b) You go very public with this identity you've created. Everyone, fans included, should know what your team's identity is.

Now I'm not sure that there is an identity. There might be, but they haven't gone public with it, not to the extent of blatantly saying "our identity is...". This team seems so lost, completely at a point of huge transformation. We are at a critical juncture for this organization, and I'm not convinced that management or ownership realize that. If they do, I'm not sure they've convinced the fanbase, the people they truly count on, that they do. And so I think that credibility is extremely fragile if not already lost.

The other part about credibility, is effective management of assets that fit the identity.

Uh, here you go dude. It may not be specific to a skills or size, but it is an identity: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=639743

Assistant general manager John Weisbrod has furthered the team's drafting philosophy from what Darryl Sutter's regime began a few years earlier: identifying and snaring players with high hockey IQs.

"Sometimes you draft a guy that's a great skater or [has] great hands and all this, but then when he gets up to the next level, where everybody's a better skater and everybody has better hands, if they don't have the brain to figure it out and still maximize what they bring to the table, then they struggle," Weisbrod told NHL.com.

The Flames have started to accumulate some interesting pieces who seem to possess a healthy dash of brain power that is able to mesh with the instinct needed on the ice. The hope is a pipeline of productive players who give the franchise a much-needed jolt.

"I always use examples with our staff like Logan Couture in San Jose or Jeff Skinner in Carolina, or even Patrice Bergeron from my time with Boston," Weisbrod said. "These were guys that were downgraded [before they were drafted] whether it was their skating, their hands or some physical element, and they ended up rising above where they were projected just based on their hockey IQ and feel for the game. I would certainly say that is one of the more distinct changes we've made -- to really prioritize people that have hockey sense the way we define it, and have the ability to think and feel the game so that if their skills are in order, they'll have the rest of the pieces they need to compete at the highest level."

[Karl Racki]

Murray Edwards made his fortune running public companies. He is not a hockey guy.

Public companies are focused almost exclusively on keeping investors (the equivalent of ticket and merchandise buying fans in hockey) happy and active and buying stock. They do that almost exclusively by keeping the share price high. Today. Every day. That makes investors money. And it makes those running public companies A LOT of money. Enough money to buy a professional hockey team in some cases.

A struggling public company has few options. Being bought by another company or fund or selling off significant "non-core assets" for needed cash or massive cutting of staff/spending are the most common. Only companies that are on the verge of bankruptcy are likely to sell core assets, when there is NO other course of action available. Middling companies do a few things. Minor acquisitions/ asset sales to tweak their asset base and generate interest is one. Less drastic cost cutting measures to aid the bottom line is another. And unfortunately more often than should be the case manipulating results of operations to make them appear as good as possible to all but the most sophisticated investors is prevalent too. Investor relations personnel are key. Frustrated investors call and the investor relations group talks them off the cliff and tells them not only is everything going to be ok, its going to be great. Just be patient. We have a rock solid plan. All in the name of keeping the share price up. Today. Every day. This is how Murray Edwards has made his fortune. Running public companies. He does it well.

The Flames are a middling franchise, by hockey standards anyway. They are not on the verge of bankruptcy. They are not short on cash. No need to improve any bottom line by decreasing expenses. They want to keep their "investors", the ticket and merchandise buying public happy and active (spending). Middling public companies do not sell "core" assets to rebuild and for as long as fans are spending I do not expect the Flames will either. They will make minor changes to the roster, maybe even sacrifice more of the future, to keep the share price, errr, position in standings, as high as possible. Today. Every day. Every season. They have a media guy running the show and a media friendly GM. "Investor" relations is key after all. It's not just going to be ok, it's going to be great. Just be patient. They have a rock solid plan. As long as the investors are investing, errr fans are spending, the Flames will be successful. By public company standards. Just not by hockey standards.

Murray Edwards made his fortune running public companies. He is not a hockey guy.

[Zulu29]

You don't need to be a "hockey guy" to be an owner of an NHL franchise. You need to surround yourself with hockey guys though and allow them to do their jobs. That doesn't seem to be the case with Calgary ownership.

[Karl Racki]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

You don't need to be a "hockey guy" to be an owner of an NHL franchise. You need to surround yourself with hockey guys though and allow them to do their jobs. That doesn't seem to be the case with Calgary ownership.

Exactly. And let THEM do THEIR job.

[mister__big]

The only thing ownership cares about is trying to make the playoffs so they can make a few extra million in revenue so Feaster will never be allowed to burn the team to the ground for a rebuild. Ownership will most likely instruct Feaster to either be a buyer at the deadline or stand pat.