Brian Burke and the Business of NHL Event

[Dagger]

At least it seems he's not going to take the Kessel approach with the Flames and just try and take a short cut at being competitive if he's talking about the importance of the draft a year from now. That was one of the hugest concerns of mine when we hired him.

[macrov]

(1) steal underpants (2) ask for a government money (3) profit

[sureLoss]

my responses in red

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Disagree.

Burke has only had the opportunity to make a handful of comments compared to the years of Feaster commentary.

What he has done in his comments is lay out a strategy that seems completely different than what Feaster had been implementing, namely, getting bigger and tougher. Feaster was seemingly implementing a plan of an undersized roster without centres.

I don't see a different strategy. Feaster has been saying the Flames need to get larger for the past two seasons. Feaster has been saying the Flames need to be drafting well for the past 3 seasons. I guess if Burke says truculence and says it with confidence its a different strategy. Without knowing what sort of deals and free agents were on the table it is kind of hard to judge how well Feaster was implementing his plan.

If the belief is that the Colbourne acquisition has Burke's fingerprints on it, you've got a bit of a history developing of Calgary making moves to get bigger, and improving the centre ice position, the opposite of what Feaster had accomplished previously.

So drafting Monahan and trading for Knight all before Burke joined the organization means nothing? Burke himself said Monahan wasn't a no-brainer as many people thought it was. Knight arguably could or soon could be what Colborne is now.

I think they sound wildly different in how they have talked about the team and franchise direction. Burke actually speaks with confidence about the direction of the organization whereas Feaster never sounded like anything more than the pointman for a hockey operations department. That in and of itself is a massive change. Not hearing much from Ken King is part of that residual change.

Where one person hears confidence another hears arrogance. And I don't believe for a minute that the arena comments weren't influenced by Ken King.

Burke might include a 'we' here or there and talk about the ownership group and king, but it's very clear that he is the one with his hands on the wheel and his feet on pedals. Feaster always seemed like he was reading the map in the passenger seat or taking input on what radio station to listen to.
Pretty sure one of the reasons Feaster was brought in was that he listened to the guys in his operations department. The exact opposite of what Sutter was doing.

Even hearing him be candid about the state of the team is refreshing, not hearing that nonsense that was continually spouted. Admitting next year's pick will be a high one is plainly invigorating in some ways. Nik said as much in this thread I think, a 'waive of calm' washed over him.
I don't think I heard Feaster say anything about next year's team being good or not having a high draft pick next year. In fact I recall Feaster's comments about this years team not likely to win many games but they would play with effort. My relief at that statement comes from the fact Burke will not be trying to force an accelerated rebuild.

Night and day difference and Burke has only appeared in control for a few weeks.

[macrov]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I never really put much thought into an arena attracting free agents before, until listening to Iginla gush about the facilities the Penguins have and the spa treatment they basically get.

The Saddledome was great for its time, but times have changed and Calgary really deserves a modern world class arena.

As a side note, could they be waiting for the Canadian dollar to lower more before starting the project?

Why would they wait for the $ to drop?
Their revenues are moistly in cad and 50% of expenses in USD. The dollar dropping isnt good for the business.

[Muta]

Pittsburgh's Consol Energy Center is simply an amazing arena. A good benchmark for how facilities will be designed in the future, including Calgary's.

[Joborule]

Nice to hear Burke also advocate for the arena business done soon so it can finally be built. King has teased us about it for so long that I've lost my patience and now just want to finally see the damn proposal.

[Phanuthier]

Where one person hears confidence another hears arrogance. And I don't believe for a minute that the arena comments weren't influenced by Ken King.

Honestly I don't care how "nice" a GM sounds in an interview. All that matters is whether they are good at their job or not.

As many in the media pointed out, Feaster/Weisbrod gave off the impression they thought they were smarter then everyone else. It didn't work out very well for them because in the end, they were pretty bad at their job.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Honestly I don't care how "nice" a GM sounds in an interview. All that matters is whether they are good at their job or not.

As many in the media pointed out, Feaster/Weisbrod gave off the impression they thought they were smarter then everyone else. It didn't work out very well for them because in the end, they were pretty bad at their job.

And thats fair... the point being discussed is that the plan and strategy for the future of this team laid out by Burke is the same one laid out be Feaster and Weisbrod.

Like I said Burke may be better equipped to execute it, but there is little to no difference to what Burke said today as to what Feaster has said for the last 2 seasons.

[lifetimefan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Seems kind of silly to point this out, but except for Feaster over hyping prospects and Burke lowering expectations on them, Burke has said basically the same thing Feaster has been saying over the last 2 seasons regarding the future of the team.

They are both correct, IMO. The team did (and still does) need to get bigger and smarter. I agree with Burke, that there is a place for smaller guys, provided they have some size on the ice to back them up.

However, let's reserve judgement for actions rather than words. Feaster traded for, signed or drafted guys like:
Cammy (5.10)
Agostino (5.11)
Cundari (5.09)
Russel (5.10)
Byron (5.10)
Granlund (5.10)
Gaudreau (5.07)
Baertschi (5.10)

and low hockey IQ guys like:
Butler
D. Jones
SOB

The only upgrade Feaster pulled during his reign was acquiring McGrattan from Nashville. Even then, he's a situational player.

Sure, some of the small guys are proven NHLers, but not on successful teams. Some are still developing - we have no idea how they'll turn out.

My point is, Feaster said one thing and did the opposite. Now the roster and prospect pool has a lot of small, soft, skilled players that gets handled by heavy teams.

[googol]

Can someone show me proof that our small players get handled by larger teams?

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Originally Posted by googol

Can someone show me proof that our small players get handled by larger teams?

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by lifetimefan

My point is, Feaster said one thing and did the opposite. Now the roster and prospect pool has a lot of small, soft, skilled players that gets handled by heavy teams.

Feaster also drafted or traded for:
Sean Monahan (6.02)
Emile Poirier (6.01)
Keegan Kainzig(6.07)
Eric Roy(6.03)
Mark Jankowski(6.03)
Ryan Culkin(6.02)
Tyler Wotherspoon(6.02)
TJ Galiardi(6.02)
Lane MacDermid(6.03)
Ladislav Smid(6.03)
Corban Knight(6.02)
Mike Testwuide(6.03)
Blair Jones(6.03)

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Having no first line, only half a second line and running paper thin defence in front of two new NHL goaltenders will do that to you, no matter what size your team is.

I'll take a large team over a small team any day of the week, but a team with 6'6" on average will still get itself manhandled if one of its better forwards for 20 games was just drafted.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Hmm. So the reddit says

He is above all in the entertainment biz
He loses sleep when his team is losing.
He thinks losing games to get a higher pick is disgusting.

Perhaps his intention is not to tank next year after all... As confused as ever

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by lifetimefan

However, let's reserve judgement for actions rather than words. Feaster traded for, signed or drafted guys like:
Cammy (5.10)
Agostino (5.11)
Cundari (5.09)
Russel (5.10)
Byron (5.10)
Granlund (5.10)
Gaudreau (5.07)
Baertschi (5.10)

However, let's reserve judgement for actions rather than words. Feaster traded for, signed or drafted guys like:
McGrattan (6.04)
Colborne (6.05)
Kanzig (6.07)
Monahan (6.02)
Jones (6.02)
Knight (6.02)
Galiardi (6.02)
O'Brien (6.03)


...See, It's easy to cherry-pick to find some confirmation bias for a pre-formed opinion.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by nik-

If we ended up with Ekblad this year (still unlikely as the Grease are so bad) and Eichel next year ... well that wouldn't be so bad.

This franchise doesn't have the luck to end up with McDavid. Even if we finish last.

Stranger things have happened, maybe a couple shrewd trades for 1st round draft picks and we get both McDavid and Eichel. Give a desperate team like the Jets a couple solid players "+ taking on salary" for their 2015 first rounder.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

Hmm. So the reddit says

He is above all in the entertainment biz
He loses sleep when his team is losing.
He thinks losing games to get a higher pick is disgusting.

Perhaps his intention is not to tank next year after all... As confused as ever

It's not his intention, but the reality of the team we can ice if we don't go foolishly get a bunch of free agents this summer. That doesn't mean that you should be fine with losing and listless play

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by kirant

I'll take a large team over a small team any day of the week

All other things being equal sure... but I'll take a highly skilled small team over a bunch of huge replacement level players any day of the week.

Big does not = good. Sure, I'd take a highly skilled big team over a highly skilled small team but the constant has to be "skilled".

[lifetimefan]

Originally Posted by Parallex

All other things being equal sure... but I'll take a highly skilled small team over a bunch of huge replacement level players any day of the week.

Big does not = good. Sure, I'd take a highly skilled big team over a highly skilled small team but the constant has to be "skilled".

And then you end up with the Oilers or Hurricanes.
I'd rather support Burke's philosophy of size and grit mixed with skill, rather than all skill no grit.

[CliffFletcher]

I don't understand why Burke's comments about Gaudreau should be controversial. Players that small do not have a good chance of sticking in the NHL, regardless of how skilled they are. That's a simple fact.