2006: 9 (two 1st rounders, two 4th rounders)
2007: 10 (three 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, 2 4th rounders)
2008: 10 (two 2nd rounders, three 3rd rounders)
2009: 6 (no 5th rounder)
2010: 7 (two 1st rounders)
2011: 8 (no 1st rounder, three 2nd rounders)
2012: 8 (two 3rd rounder)
The Flames since their rebuild began according to you four years ago:
2009: 6 (no 2nd rounder)
2010: 6 (no 1st or 2nd rounder, two 3rd and 4th rounders)
2011: 5 (two 2nd rounders)
2012: 7
2013: 8 (three 1st rounders, no 2nd rounder)
The only draft, that looks anything close to St Louis' rebuild to (successfully) build a contender is the most recent draft, the first year of Calgary's rebuild. If we want to emulate St. Louis' model then we ship guys like Cammelleri off and stock pile draft picks so that we're picking more than seven times in a draft.
The rebuild began, behind the curtains, as soon as Feaster took over the job. The Flames were built improperly and Feaster moved out most of the bad contracts to give us both cap and roster flexibility. In the process he also acquired some useful pieces in Cammalleri, Ramo and Stempniak while swapping out declining players in Bourque, Regher and Langkow.
I think their plan was to always make the playoffs, don't get me wrong, but I think there was always an understanding that the team, as it was built at the time, was on the decline and an organizational shift of focus to the draft and getting younger was needed.
Feaster and co. hit the jackpot in 2011 by drafting Baertschi, Gaudreau, Wotherspoon, Granlund and Broissot. All players that either already have or likely by seasons end will have already turned pro and all show strong promise.
In 2012 Jankowski, Sieloff and Gillies were picked with our top 3 selections. Any arguments on those picks now?
We all know how well we did in the last draft so no need to mention it in great detail.
Feasters first 3 drafts here have stocked our cupboards with promising prospects. He also made some savvy trades of 4ths and 5ths for Russell, Galiardi, Knight and Colborne that will also contribute to the future.
The rebuild may not have officially started until the end of last year but given the amount of work that Feaster and co. have put into redeveloping a younger roster and deeper prospect pool the last few years I think we are further along than most think.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to SeanCharles For This Useful Post:
I like Mike Cammallari, he's a natural Flame and has come back here now for the second time. I think he also fits in well with the direction the Flames are going. Give Mike an extension. 5 years is fine by me.
I've come to realize that talented veteran players would stick around a rebuild like the Flames because the team offers them top minutes they wouldn't get elsewhere. I think Cammi fits this explanation. So its fun to be here .... right until the playoffs near and the urge to compete is too great to ignore. So as a pending UFA he will - in effect-then ask to be traded by telling the team he wants a long term deal he knows the Flames won't agree to - and the Flames will then trade him at the deadline. Another win-win for both sides.
Sutter made them into his own image, tough hard working hard to play against. The big complaint was not enough skill ... not enough secondary offence.
When Feaster took over he went waaaaaay over to the other end of the scale. The team got loaded with skilful guys that were very easy to play against.
Cervenka, Tanguay, Cammalleri, Hudler in your top 6, with Bouwmeester, Butler, Smith on defense. There was absolutely no room to play Baertschi last year.
Someone in the Flames organization after about 20 games last year realized that the Flames were too soft to win and way too soft develop their young talent.
On February 28, 2013 the Flame rebuild officially began. They acquired McGrattan from the Milwaukee Admirals for Joe Piskula. This was a philosophical change in direction, Prior to that the Flames management was adamant about not wasting a roster spot on a goon.
Since that date the Flames have decided their identity was going to be skillful, big and hardworking (the St.L/ LA model). Every move since then has made them bigger and tougher to play against. Jones for Iginla, Bouma for Horak, Russell for Bouwmeester (Ok not bigger but a whole lot tougher), Butler for Smith, Monahan for Cervenka, Galiardi for Tanguay
I don't think that it is an accident or coincidence that Hudler is playing like an All Star. This is the biggest toughest lineup that he has played on. This is the best he has ever played in his 8 NHL seasons.
Getting Cammalleri back from injury makes the lineup less tough. I expect that Hudler level of play and ice time will decline with the smaller lineup. Hudler and Cammalleri are too similar.
There is no way that the Flames do not trade Cammalleri..... they have to to make room for Gaudreau.
There is no way that the Flames do not trade Cammalleri..... they have to to make room for Gaudreau.
I feel like a LOT of people are forgetting this one fact:
What if Gaudreau doesn't work out?
Everyone is so focused on him being penciled into the NHL lineup, but let's keep in mind that there is still an outside chance he doesn't sign in Calgary, and an chance that if he does his skillset won't translate to the NHL properly. He is far from a sure thing, so people looking at him as the reason we need to ship out Cammi should slow it down.
If anything, might be worth giving Cammi a 2 year extension so we can see what exactly we have in Gaudreau before we ship him out.
And hey, trading Gaudreau is always a valid option too.
The rebuild began, behind the curtains, as soon as Feaster took over the job. The Flames were built improperly and Feaster moved out most of the bad contracts to give us both cap and roster flexibility. In the process he also acquired some useful pieces in Cammalleri, Ramo and Stempniak while swapping out declining players in Bourque, Regher and Langkow.
I think their plan was to always make the playoffs, don't get me wrong, but I think there was always an understanding that the team, as it was built at the time, was on the decline and an organizational shift of focus to the draft and getting younger was needed.
The rebuild may not have officially started until the end of last year but given the amount of work that Feaster and co. have put into redeveloping a younger roster and deeper prospect pool the last few years I think we are further along than most think.
Fair points, but I think by your line of thinking pretty much any change in team building focus becomes a rebuild. That to me is stretching the term way too far.
I agree it's likely that Feaster was aware from the beginning of his stint (which btw was less than 3 years ago) that he might be leading the team into a rebuild. It was also apparent to a lot of people that our prospect pool was a mess and needed to improve, and getting better at drafting and development was clearly a priority.
However, putting more focus on scouting and prospect development is not a rebuild, nor is preparing for something that might be coming. It's simply smart hockey management that every succesful team needs to do anyway.
In February 2011 Feaster traded a draft pick for Fredrik Modin. Even if it was just a minor trade, it's a clear signal of the mindset of the organization at the time; trade picks for veterans, hope for playoffs. Even as close as 2012, Feaster made zero trades at trade deadline and kept talking about the playoffs. (...and did people ever hate him back then...)
I recommend going back to Feasters season ending press conference from 2012. If you want me to guess when did Feaster decide that the rebuild is going to happen, I'd point to that spring. I think the disappointment in the old core is pretty clearly there, even though it's slightly between the lines.
http://video.flames.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=171443&catid=11
Since there wasn't much he could actually do before the start of the shortened last season, I think it's perfectly fair to say that the rebuild started March 28th 2013 with the trade of Jarome Iginla. Or slightly before that, if you count the preparation for that trade.
So IMO we're either 7 months into the rebuild, or if we start counting from when Feaster might have decided that it's going to happen, about a year and a half.
(I don't see how bringing in McGrattan is really any sign of a rebuild. Those kinds of trades happen all the time anyway.)
As to Strombads argument that we're into year four, that's just crazy talk. That would put the start of the rebuild somewhere in the middle of the Brent Sutter years.
Last edited by Itse; 10-29-2013 at 08:08 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
(I don't see how bringing in McGrattan is really any sign of a rebuild. Those kinds of trades happen all the time anyway.)
That was the start of the Feaster Rebuild version 2.0. His first rebuild was signing Tanguay long term, Butler and Byron for Regehr, bringing in Cervenka, signing Babchuk as a UFA, Signing Stempniak as a UFA, bringing back Cammalleri, Bringing in Smith, signing Hudler and Wideman.
The direction of the the rebuild was all soft and skilled.
It wasn't driven home that this concept of building a small skilled team (could be labelled the Kevin Lowe plan) was never going to succeed until we saw Kipper being run at random and the team as a whole following the Bouwmeester's lead and skating off to an unoccupied corner.
McGrattan signing was a signal that Feaster rebuild 1.0 was over and a failure. There was no semblance of a McGrattan player in the flames organization.
When McGrattan joined the team and told Baertschi that he would seriously hurt anyone that messed with the young fellow it was seriously different than having Jackman willing to get beat up along with you.
I like the 2.0 rebuild. I like the fact that Horak who has gotten bigger and stronger is now too small and soft to be on this roster even with 3 injuries after playing 81 games on rebuild 1.0 as a 19-20 year old.
As to Strombads argument that we're into year four, that's just crazy talk. That would put the start of the rebuild somewhere in the middle of the Brent Sutter years.
I actually agree with you entirely, and had you read the comment, you would have seen that I was trying to be ridiculous.
What I said was that if St.Louis was 6 years into a rebuild when they became a contender, then we are 4. The point of that wasn't that we're 4 in, but that St.Louis was not 6 in. To put it another way, since Tinordi thought that St.Louis was 6 years into a rebuild when they became a contender, we are most comparable to the 4th year of THEIR rebuild.
We're in year 1, St.Louis was in year 3 when they turned the corner. That's what I was saying.
Trust me, anyone who believes we're more than a year or two into a rebuild doesn't know what a rebuild is.
I feel like a LOT of people are forgetting this one fact:
What if Gaudreau doesn't work out?
Everyone is so focused on him being penciled into the NHL lineup, but let's keep in mind that there is still an outside chance he doesn't sign in Calgary, and an chance that if he does his skillset won't translate to the NHL properly. He is far from a sure thing, so people looking at him as the reason we need to ship out Cammi should slow it down.
If anything, might be worth giving Cammi a 2 year extension so we can see what exactly we have in Gaudreau before we ship him out.
And hey, trading Gaudreau is always a valid option too.
I think you are forgetting the rest of the LW prospects coming up though as well. There is Johnny at the top but there is also Agostino, Ferland, Hanowski, Klimchuck. Hudler is a natural LW (however tough to argue how great he has played on the right side this year).
I believe the hope is Sven will be a top 6 forward by the end of the year along with Glencross. That leaves Galliardi and a kid to fill the side moving forward.
I think you are forgetting the rest of the LW prospects coming up though as well. There is Johnny at the top but there is also Agostino, Ferland, Hanowski, Klimchuck. Hudler is a natural LW (however tough to argue how great he has played on the right side this year).
I believe the hope is Sven will be a top 6 forward by the end of the year along with Glencross. That leaves Galliardi and a kid to fill the side moving forward.
Don't forget about Bouma who should be a staple on the 4th line. That alone makes it tough for any of the prospects if we're looking at Glencross/Sven/Galiardi (should be resigned for 2 more years imo) and Bouma.
The rebuild began, behind the curtains, as soon as Feaster took over the job. The Flames were built improperly and Feaster moved out most of the bad contracts to give us both cap and roster flexibility. In the process he also acquired some useful pieces in Cammalleri, Ramo and Stempniak while swapping out declining players in Bourque, Regher and Langkow.
I think their plan was to always make the playoffs, don't get me wrong, but I think there was always an understanding that the team, as it was built at the time, was on the decline and an organizational shift of focus to the draft and getting younger was needed.
Feaster and co. hit the jackpot in 2011 by drafting Baertschi, Gaudreau, Wotherspoon, Granlund and Broissot. All players that either already have or likely by seasons end will have already turned pro and all show strong promise.
In 2012 Jankowski, Sieloff and Gillies were picked with our top 3 selections. Any arguments on those picks now?
We all know how well we did in the last draft so no need to mention it in great detail.
Feasters first 3 drafts here have stocked our cupboards with promising prospects. He also made some savvy trades of 4ths and 5ths for Russell, Galiardi, Knight and Colborne that will also contribute to the future.
The rebuild may not have officially started until the end of last year but given the amount of work that Feaster and co. have put into redeveloping a younger roster and deeper prospect pool the last few years I think we are further along than most think.
I love posts like this. That the Flames started a clandestine rebuild is one of the most persistent but absurd myths that gets tossed around here.
What Feaster did when he was first installed wasn't a rebuild. He returned the Flames to the mean level of organizational competence by investing in statistics and video, by carving off unproductive and expensive contracts, and by trying to get some youth in the lineup. What he implemented is what most teams had already been doing for years. If anything your post is just a damnation of the Sutter years and the gross incompetence that defined it.
If we were truly rebuilding before even the middle of the last season would we have been offering essentially Monahan for O'Reilly? Would we have traded a 2nd rounder for Paul Byron? Would we have traded Bourque for Cammalleri? Would we have sat on Jackman's one statistically anamalous season to make a push for the playoffs? Would we have had one draft with more than 7 picks or a drafts with no 1st rounder or 2nd rounders?
I give Feaster alot of credit for trying to rebuild the organization after the walls burned down around Sutter but to say we were rebuilding is just not at all consistent with reality. We were in "go for it and to hell with the future" up until midway to last season and to almost disastrous effect.
With that in mind, and getting back on topic, there's little role for a UFA Cammalleri on a rebuilding team. The Flames shouldn't be in the business of rewarding old veterans with offers to re-sign them. We need a cold-eyed and ruthless commitment to acquire highly skilled youth on this squad. When that happens we can support them with some veteran scoring down the road. But until then there are still major pieces missing to get this team back to a contender. That's the priority and that's accomplished by having more "bullets in the chamber" as one poster put it at the draft.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Tinordi For This Useful Post:
Saying that Feaster recognized that "the team as it was built at the time, was on the decline, and an organizatinal shift of focus on the draft and getting younger was needed" does not equate to alleging a "clandestine rebuild"(although saying it began behind the curtains does).
The point is that Feaster strengthened our prospect pool considerably in the two drafts that preceded the decision to give up on trying to win and blowing the core up, which gives us a leg up on starting from scratch.
Recognition that a team's core is on the decline and there is a need to focus on the draft and get younger is something any sound management team does. The Sharks are a great example. Rather than trade the whole core who wasn't getting it done, they replaced an aging Nabakov with the much younger Niemi, developed Couture, drafted Hertl, and moved out pieces like Douglas Murray for picks.
Last edited by Fan in Exile; 10-29-2013 at 02:30 PM.
If someone offers an incredible deal for Cammy at the deadline, he should be traded. If no one is interested in giving up assets for him, he shouldn't be traded. In the off-season, if Cammy decides he wants to come back and the Flames can agree on a contract, he will come back. If only one of the Flames and Cammy want to agree on a contract, he won't be back.
I feel that he is a small winger with scoring ability but that's about it. I don't view him as a leader, he isn't a physical presence and I don't think he's "great in all 3 zones". At the deadline, if the Flames are out of it I think they should take anything they can get for him. If the Flames were offered a Vanek type deal for him now then they should take it. I think that even though the Flames have played well, they're still not a playoff team so they should capitalize on the assets that are holding value (especially if offered multiple draft picks).
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
