Lombardi was told not to hire Sutter in L.A.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Ice

I guess the point I'm making is that media speculation is not fact. Nobody in the Kings organization was even hinting that Lombardi's job was ever in jeopardy. Just like Sutter's job was never in danger this season when media was claiming it was. Sure, these make for good headlines, get more hits to your website, more twitter followers. It doesn't make media gossip any more credible than water cooler gossip.

Ever heard that when there's smoke there's fire?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

The sixth year was absolutely Sutter's team and the mess he made of it. Hard to pin that on Feaster.

The team missed the playoffs by three points. If Feaster had actually made any kind of useful moves instead of picking up Freddy Modin at the deadline and twiddling his thumbs the rest of the time, he could very probably have got the team the extra couple of wins. So I do pin that much of it on Feaster.

Of course, making the playoffs would not necessarily have allowed them to win a round. But at that point we're into hypotheticals and counterfactuals, and nobody can say what would have happened.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by FAN

Ever heard that when there's smoke there's fire?

In the media, where there's smoke, there's generally some special effects guy with a smoke machine.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The team missed the playoffs by three points. If Feaster had actually made any kind of useful moves instead of picking up Freddy Modin at the deadline and twiddling his thumbs the rest of the time, he could very probably have got the team the extra couple of wins. So I do pin that much of it on Feaster.

Of course, making the playoffs would not necessarily have allowed them to win a round. But at that point we're into hypotheticals and counterfactuals, and nobody can say what would have happened.

You know as well as I do that the offseason is the period with the most opportunity to shape your team for the upcoming season. Pinning that on Feaster who came in as a caretaker just looks opportunistic.

I also love the line of argument that Sutter saved the team which is completely devoid of context. The rebalancing of the league with two incredibly important drivers did way more than save the Flames than Sutter trading for Kiprusoff ever did.

If the Sutter as Saviour argument is to hold then why aren't the Oilers in need of saving? Arguing that Sutter saved the Flames implies that his deft moves resulting in on-ice success turned the financial fortunes of the team around when the team was at risk of leaving town. The counter factual would be that in Edmonton after 8 years of unprecedented failure they would have to be on the verge of financial and spiritual collapse. But they aren't. They're in pretty good shape financially. So if you can drive a team into the ground without the need for saving then maybe, just maybe, the on ice product that people like Sutter were directly responsible for wasn't the real reason for the franchise to be saved.

The bottom line is two fundamental levers changed the economics for the Flames a) the Canadian dollar and b) the salary cap. Sutter was just the guy fortunate enough to be sitting in the captain's chair when the winds picked up. We all swooned at his ability to sign free agents and trade for people like Tanguay. Luxuries guys like Coates were never allowed. You can't hold that against Coates just as much as you can use it to praise Sutter.

[terminator]

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

You know as well as I do that the offseason is the period with the most opportunity to shape your team for the upcoming season. Pinning that on Feaster who came in as a caretaker just looks opportunistic.

I also love the line of argument that Sutter saved the team which is completely devoid of context. The rebalancing of the league with two incredibly important drivers did way more than save the Flames than Sutter trading for Kiprusoff ever did.

If the Sutter as Saviour argument is to hold then why aren't the Oilers in need of saving? Arguing that Sutter saved the Flames implies that his deft moves resulting in on-ice success turned the financial fortunes of the team around when the team was at risk of leaving town. The counter factual would be that in Edmonton after 8 years of unprecedented failure they would have to be on the verge of financial and spiritual collapse. But they aren't. They're in pretty good shape financially. So if you can drive a team into the ground without the need for saving then maybe, just maybe, the on ice product that people like Sutter were directly responsible for wasn't the real reason for the franchise to be saved.

The bottom line is two fundamental levers changed the economics for the Flames a) the Canadian dollar and b) the salary cap. Sutter was just the guy fortunate enough to be sitting in the captain's chair when the winds picked up. We all swooned at his ability to sign free agents and trade for people like Tanguay. Luxuries guys like Coates were never allowed. You can't hold that against Coates just as much as you can use it to praise Sutter.

Except Sutter changed the fortunes of the team prior to those economic changes. The building was empty in 2002 and full by the end of 2004.

It is completely fair to say that the economic changes would have saved the franchise regardless (as they did in Edmonton), but that doesn't negate his accomplishments.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by terminator

Spoiler!

Yep, I'm gonna print one of these because this cover is way better, and I even voted for Bergeron to win.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

Noteworthy that Grant Pollock suggested Sutter should be let go. A few people agreed but many held the view that his good moves outweighed his bad ones at the time. Most acknowledged that Sutter had made errors but that all GMs do.

As one of the first critics of Sutter on this board, I'm well aware how unpopular an attitude that was at the time.

Originally Posted by Cole436

Because he inherited an absolutely god awful team and built it into one which won and challenged for a division title each and every year.

I give Sutter full credit for revamping the lineup he inherited and making the Cup run. He made some deft moves to round out that squad.

Post-lockout and CBA, he was able to make moves and signings that his predecessors simply couldn't because of the handicap small-market Canadian franchises operated under. He was operating under fundamentally different conditions than Coates and Button, who, like the GMs of Ottawa and Edmonton, had resigned themselves to being little more than development teams for the deep-pocketed franchises in a cap-less league.

The Flames competed for division titles because they had two superstars, and could spend to the cap. Sutter inherited one of those superstars, and brought in the other. He had nothing to do with the increased resources at his disposal - the Canadian dollar and booming energy sector get the credit there.

After Sutter left Calgary, there was no chance another NHL would hire him as a GM. By the merciless arithmetic of professional sports he was a failure - teams that have veteran superstars and spend to the cap are expected to win playoff rounds. And he left the franchise with the worst collection of under-26 talent in the NHL - a terrible situation in a capped league that relies on young and cheap skaters making a difference. But I'm glad he got another shot at being a coach, because he's great at that job.

[Phanuthier]

A team that constantly drafts in the bottom half of the 1st round (usually in the 20-30) doesn't have a lot of top prospects? I'm shocked!

Also, I like how Darryl left the team with no under 26 talent and no prospects, and Feaster re-vamped it. Especially when our top player last year was Mark Giordano and TJ Brodie, and Backlund and Bouma were 2 vital parts of our team last year.

Lastly, the Flames turnaround was only because of the economy? Does anybody else remember in 2002 when much of the 300's were closed, and the ice being littered with garbage and beer every few games because we sucked too much? Save the Flames campaign because we couldn't get 13k season tickets? Darryl went off the rails and left the team in a mess, I agree, but if you were fan in 2002, there was a night and day difference between 2002 and 2012. I remember in 2002, nobody wore a Flames jersey or T-shirt around town. There were probably more Oilers shirts and hats in high school then Flames shirts and hats, in Calgary. Nobody cared about the Flames then, you could probably tell by the popularity of Calgarypuck then. The reason you care enough to whine and bitch now is because expectations for something other then a top 10 pick were actually built up in Darryl's tenure, something that no other GM has been able to do in Calgary for the past 20 years, for better or for worse.

[dino7c]

lol are people really defending Sutter as a GM? he was an absolute disaster

Dion trade was fine because we had to get him outta here? you guys can't be serious, could have gotten a ton for him at that time and "got him outta here"

He traded for a guy that the Rangers couldn't give away...literally

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by dino7c

lol are people really defending Sutter as a GM? he was an absolute disaster

Dion trade was fine because we had to get him outta here? you guys can't be serious, could have gotten a ton for him at that time and "got him outta here"

He traded for a guy that the Rangers couldn't give away...literally

Those 36 hours, yes I agree. I defend him as a GM, but I absolutely thought he had to be let go as GM as well after those deals. We were a mess. And he showed no patience to develop prospects, something he vowed to do in 2004, mabye because he bombed out and misread the 2005-07 drafts so bad.

But I still respect the fact that he actually made the Flames a team that people actually care about, including Calgarians, because that wasn't the case before him.

[Loyal and True]

Absolute disaster.
Dismal Failure.

That's just over the top in my opinion. Kipper and Iggy were in their 30's, and it was time to win now. Trade future assets for veteran players to win playoff rounds. It failed, yes. No playoff rounds won. Bare cupboard. No cap space. Long term deals and no compliance buyouts. Yes those are brutal results.

But Sutter was doing exactly what I (most) would have wanted a GM to do at the time... try to win right now. The Result was bad but the Process was understandable. Obviously by 2010 more people realized the window had closed and the 2010 trades were widely considered desperate and unwise in the long term.

I just expected the on-ice results to be better. A core of Kipper, Iggy, Regehr, Phaneuf, Langkow, Jokinen, Bouwmeester, Bourque should have performed better than they did.

Like I said at the beginning of this, Darryl should have put himself on the bench and either got more out of the core or moved them out if they wouldn't respond to him. Look at his coaching record. Does anyone deny that he would have done a better job with our core than Playfair, Keenan and Brent did?

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by dino7c

lol are people really defending Sutter as a GM? he was an absolute disaster

Dion trade was fine because we had to get him outta here? you guys can't be serious, could have gotten a ton for him at that time and "got him outta here"

He traded for a guy that the Rangers couldn't give away...literally

How the freak do you know that? You got insider information? Is that part of your argument against Sutter?

[mhsyyc]

Originally Posted by Cole436

The three complaints I think you can have with Sutter were

1) His late round drafting from 2004-2009.
2) Reliance on aging FA's
3) The Phaneuf trade

Dion didn't really give Darryl a choice, and the combination of the loss of Phaneuf and the trade return cut the legs off from this organization.

Outside of the last year of Darryl's GM tenure, I can't think of a single trade (Jokinen excluded) that wasn't a benefit for the organization or a contract that was an overpayment.

Well, I think you can add a fourth issue and that was his mismanagement of the salary cap. There's nothing like going into a game short because your GM screwed up counting on his fingers.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by mhsyyc

Well, I think you can add a fourth issue and that was his mismanagement of the salary cap. There's nothing like going into a game short because your GM screwed up counting on his fingers.

IIRC it was only for 1 game, and it was to get Olli ... if so, it was somewhat of a desperation move for that big strong No 1 C that Calgary craved for. Remember we (tried) to gamble away $60M and gave up a 2nd round pick and top pairing defenseman for a chance at Brad Richards....... compared to dressing short players for 1 game, I don't know if I see it as that big of a deal.

The 36 hours of craziness was a whole new level of bad though.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by mhsyyc

Well, I think you can add a fourth issue and that was his mismanagement of the salary cap. There's nothing like going into a game short because your GM screwed up counting on his fingers.

That wasn't really his fault and could have happened to any team.

The problem was that the Flames were hit with a couple of significant injuries to high salary players with less than 10 games left in the season. The CBA rules at the time didn't allow the Flames to put those players on LTIR and replace their salaries because you can only put a player on LTIR if he's going to miss 10 or more regular season games.

Regehr, Sarich, and Phaneuf were all injured within the final 10 games of the season in 2009. Their combined cap hits were over $14 million. That year's cap was $56.7 million. That's nearly 25% of their cap payroll that could not be replaced.

The current CBA has changed the rules so that can't happen again, which tells you all you need to know about how much the league blamed Sutter for that situation happening.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

A team that constantly drafts in the bottom half of the 1st round (usually in the 20-30) doesn't have a lot of top prospects? I'm shocked!

Also, I like how Darryl left the team with no under 26 talent and no prospects, and Feaster re-vamped it. Especially when our top player last year was Mark Giordano and TJ Brodie, and Backlund and Bouma were 2 vital parts of our team last year.

Lastly, the Flames turnaround was only because of the economy? Does anybody else remember in 2002 when much of the 300's were closed, and the ice being littered with garbage and beer every few games because we sucked too much? Save the Flames campaign because we couldn't get 13k season tickets? Darryl went off the rails and left the team in a mess, I agree, but if you were fan in 2002, there was a night and day difference between 2002 and 2012. I remember in 2002, nobody wore a Flames jersey or T-shirt around town. There were probably more Oilers shirts and hats in high school then Flames shirts and hats, in Calgary. Nobody cared about the Flames then, you could probably tell by the popularity of Calgarypuck then. The reason you care enough to whine and bitch now is because expectations for something other then a top 10 pick were actually built up in Darryl's tenure, something that no other GM has been able to do in Calgary for the past 20 years, for better or for worse.

Time heals all wounds, also many here may be too you to remember the laughing stock this team became in the 90's (BTW thanks for reminding me, jerk).

[Vulcan]

In the end Daryl as GM didn't work out but when you consider the disasters before and after him, he was the best GM we had since Cliff Fletcher. I only hope the Burke - Treliving combo puts our bad memories to rest and establishes some long term consistency.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Time heals all wounds, also many here may be too you to remember the laughing stock this team became in the 90's (BTW thanks for reminding me, jerk).

Haha.

"The Library"

Excuse; its because of the dynamics of the Saddledome...it has a low roof.