3 years ago we all said a 5 year rebuild would be fine.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Igottago

A new coaching staff and a couple of roster tweaks would go a long way, I think things could improve in a hurry. There's some good pieces here. They can't let this fester too long though or we risk entering Oiler territory. Treliving needs to swallow his pride and fire Gulutzan asap.

This.

You let it go too long and it becomes a culture that the players carry foward even after the tenure of the coach, because they got used to half assing being the status quo.

Then you have to cut all remnants of it out like the Oilers did.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Lol, he literally stated that we looked like an expansion team AFTER you consider the dick all we got for those assets. Yes, we were very close to an expansion line-up at the beginning of this rebuild.

Yup and keep in mind I'm not just talking about line-up - but rather the overall asset base of the organization.
It is tremendously shallow and has been for decades by virtue of
- Poor drafting
- Regimes that swapped picks to go for it
- Unwilligness to trade aging players until their value was virtually nothing

So when the rebuild FINALLY started (2-3 years too late) there was no foundation to build from at all.

So should we wonder why we still have significant holes holding the team back? To try and fill those holes would gut the asset base further.

Just look at what they got for Iginla, Bouwmeester, Kipper and Regehr combined. Unless Poirier or Klimchuk turn out (probably 3rd liners at best) the return is sweet f all.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I'm assuming you aren't a season ticket holder?

If you think any season ticket holder signed up for 5 years of garbage hockey you are out of your mind

As a season ticket holder I have way more patience for this than I had for any of the seasons after 2009 and prior to them actually starting the rebuild. Watching this team continue to try and make moves to squeak an over the hill core onto the playoffs and fail year after year, with 0 chance of even making a dent if we did happen to make it was way more painful than this.

I'm dissapointed in they way the past couple of weeks have turned on our team, but in the grand scheme this is far from the worst.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Yup and keep in mind I'm not just talking about line-up - but rather the overall asset base of the organization.
It is tremendously shallow and has been for decades by virtue of
- Poor drafting
- Regimes that swapped picks to go for it
- Unwilligness to trade aging players until their value was virtually nothing

So when the rebuild FINALLY started (2-3 years too late) there was no foundation to build from at all.

So should we wonder why we still have significant holes holding the team back? To try and fill those holes would gut the asset base further.

Just look at what they got for Iginla, Bouwmeester, Kipper and Regehr combined. Unless Poirier or Klimchuk turn out (probably 3rd liners at best) the return is sweet f all.

Fair enough

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Yup and keep in mind I'm not just talking about line-up - but rather the overall asset base of the organization.
It is tremendously shallow and has been for decades by virtue of
- Poor drafting
- Regimes that swapped picks to go for it
- Unwilligness to trade aging players until their value was virtually nothing

So when the rebuild FINALLY started (2-3 years too late) there was no foundation to build from at all.

So should we wonder why we still have significant holes holding the team back? To try and fill those holes would gut the asset base further.

Just look at what they got for Iginla, Bouwmeester, Kipper and Regehr combined. Unless Poirier or Klimchuk turn out (probably 3rd liners at best) the return is sweet f all.

Well if you are arguing we have an asset thin organization, you will find no objection here. But it seems like you are trying to pin all the responsibility on Feaster, Sutter et al and I'm not sure current management is so much different. They have had the benefit of super high draft picks, which the aforementioned never had. And you ignore some of the assets (Brodie, Backlund, Gio) that did carry over.

Has current management traded away picks? In 2 drafts, BT has traded away a first and 3 seconds. Maybe you like the return on those trades. Well I liked the Jokinen trade when it happened. A lot.

You mention the lack of return for aging veterans. That is certainly disappointing but is there an example of a winning organization that was built on the returns for it's aging stars? I can't think of any. Hindsight is great but if you are supposed to trade away veterans every year you're not contending, why in the world are guys like Brouwer and Giordano on this team? Their trade value declines every year.

[Flamescuprun2018]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

The Flames are hamstrung by having 15 million dollars tied up in players that could be replaced by AHL talent and you wouldn't notice much difference in the ability of the group.

Because of that, the team cannot field a team with then proper depth, which affects everyone else.

Looking at next season.

Gaudreau-Monahan-UFA/Trade
Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik
UFA/Trade-Bennett-Brouwer
Ferland-Stajan/Jankowski if the former is dealt-Hathaway

Giordano-Brodie
UFA/Trade-Hamilton
Kylington/Andersson-Kulak/Cheap Vet UFA

Johnson + young goalie or veteran UFA/trade

If the Flames fall hard in the standings, they will be getting another high end player like Tippett, who may be able to slide into the NHL lineup. Calgary can easily use 8-10 million on two of those three main holes in the lineup, the other may need to be filled via a prospect making the NHL.

This is exactly correct. BT will finally be free of Wideman and Smid contracts.

1st line right winger biggest hole in lineup sure to be filled by free agency or trade for picks/prospects. Gaudreau needs playmaking or sniper winger.

2nd pairing defenseman not too difficult to fill by FA (Russell siging by Oilers is an example).

Call up Riddich and see what he is made of. We must know if Johnson/Riddich is a viable tandem next year. Otherwise we focus one of our two major FA signings on 1A goalie and hope a prospect graduates to 4th Dman.

My great fear right now is that panic sets in with ownership and they clean house including GM. The Friedman thread is frightening if real. Stay the course with BT/BB. Anyone on CP with a direct line to ownership needs to say that. 88% approval rating for BT this week says it all. Especially when you consider how critical a crowd CP can be.

Figure out quick why GG seems passionless and cannot keep the team psyche positive. This team lacks emotion and crumbles too easily. Not the case in 2014-15. Different leadership, just luck with all those last second heroics, Hudler?

Also do not like how this team does not rally around one another when wronged (Gaudreau headshot)? Do we not enough big guys who can stand up for team?

Silver lining for this increasingly likely nonplayoff season is an affordable bridge contract for Bennett; selling a trade deadline where we add 3 or more draft picks (Versteeg, Engelland, Wideman, and maybe Elliott); high 1st rounder. We need a 40 goal RW sniper to complete our core group!

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

I wish the idea of a 5 year rebuild would just #### off and die already. For every Toronto this year I'll give you the Islanders. The Oilers needed a lottery ball to get a generational talent. Is that available to us Flames and Jets fans? (Channeling inner Burke I guess)

Either GM can put together a winning team or not. Treliving still has another year or two tops to prove he can do it, and Chevy sure as hell has proven he can't.

This hockey myth needs to go away.

Pretty much this. For whatever reason, the number 5 was tossed around with the (false) assumption that it would slowly improve year after year, reaching full force after 5 years and instant cup contender. Totally not how it works in reality.

Toronto may look good this season. But it's very possible they stumble next season. We all thought in year 2 when we made the playoffs that we accelerated the rebuild. Of course that was wrong. Even now everyone is labelling the Oilers as playoff contenders. Sure this season they are. But it doesn't erase 10 years of suckage.

LA missed the playoffs from '03-'09. I remember things feeling very grim for them until their cup run. Chicago had 1 first round appearance from '98-08. Things looked incredibly bleak for them for a decade.

This rebuild formula is a complete crap shoot. Just like the draft, you never know how things will turn out season to season. You just do the best you can with your free agent signing, trust in your scouting staff at the draft, hopefully win some trades and pray you come ahead of the other 29 teams.

This season would have been a great season for the Flames to take the next step. Often to jump ahead of everyone, you need other teams to falter. The West is pretty bad this year and in the perfect world the Flames would have taken advantage.

Personally I don't think this rebuild will be done by year 5, barring some miracle. Will we ever reach the heights the Kings or Hawks did after so many years of pain? Dwelling at the bottom is no guarantee of future success. But really, the best shot a team has at winning a cup is doing the scorched earth rebuild and acquiring top talent via the draft. As painful as it to suffer through this, this gives us our best shot at future success.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Well if you are arguing we have an asset thin organization, you will find no objection here. But it seems like you are trying to pin all the responsibility on Feaster, Sutter et al and I'm not sure current management is so much different. They have had the benefit of super high draft picks, which the aforementioned never had. And you ignore some of the assets (Brodie, Backlund, Gio) that did carry over.

I'm talking about what they started with when the new management took over. And I'm not ignoring assets - I've simply not detailed every asset they had. But if you compared what they DID have with what other organizations had - you would see they had next to nothing.
I have a hard time blaming Feaster as I think he wasn't allowed to trigger the re-build. He was following orders. Sutter did a tremendous amount of damage with some real head scratcher deals in his tenure. Dealing off core pieces without getting core pieces back.
But the blame dates back to basically the post Fletcher era, when, for literally decades the organization eroded their asset base to where we are now.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Has current management traded away picks? In 2 drafts, BT has traded away a first and 3 seconds. Maybe you like the return on those trades. Well I liked the Jokinen trade when it happened. A lot.

Surely you see the difference in trading for a young top dman (Hamilton) as opposed to an aging veteran (Jokinen). BT traded 3 of those picks for Hamilton. That's not an asset diminishing deal.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

You mention the lack of return for aging veterans. That is certainly disappointing but is there an example of a winning organization that was built on the returns for it's aging stars? I can't think of any. Hindsight is great but if you are supposed to trade away veterans every year you're not contending, why in the world are guys like Brouwer and Giordano on this team? Their trade value declines every year.

No team was built on the returns of aging stars but if you don't turnover part of your core into something that matters - you are screwed.

And you can't have a team full of youngsters - you need some vets like Gio and Brouwer. The Oilers have demonstrated that.

[Flash Walken]

Hey come on guys, we still have Klimchuk!

[Flash Walken]

It was the constant pick dealing over the years by Sutter as well that ended up being the most significant factor in my opinion. You just can't deal away picks in the first 3 rounds years after year without getting long term assets back in return.

I'm glad the Flames got Hamilton with a bunch of picks, but they can't keep doing that if they want to be successful. If the team bottoms out here in the games after the All-Star break I will be relieved somewhat. This team has valuable assets that can help speed things up, but you gotta move them when the time presents itself.

Give this flames team another 15 million dollars in cap and a few more drafts with 4-6 picks in the first 3 rounds and the flames could be a contender.

[MarkGio]

Ownership and Management dropped the ball in a few places along the way. Let's look at the building plan:

-- Replace Iginla, Cammalleri, Regher, Bouwmeester, Kipper, Tanguay, and Glencross with a newer and better core that leads to a playoff team.

1) We got Klimchuck, Hanowski and Agostino out of Iginla. 4 years later there's only Klimchuck and he is a long shot to replace Iginla or otherwise be a guy to bring about the playoffs

2) We now only have Poirer from Jbow, and he's a long shot

3) Regher yielded nothing in return

4) Cammy yielded nothing in return

5) Tanguay yielded nothing

6) Kipper yielded nothing

7) Glencross got a sweet return, which helped bring in Hamilton

8) Along the way we replaced our prospects, traded-for players, and young college or international signings of Baertschi, Granlund, Knight, Arnold, Wolf, Berra, Ramo, and Colborne for nothing.

9) Free agents we signed such as Engelland, Wideman, Brouwer, Bolligs, Raymond, Hiller, Johnson, Versteeg haven't made an impact

10) Players we traded for such as Russell, Elliott, Smid, Jones, SOB, Jokipakka, and Chiasson haven't made an impact or put the Flames into the playoffs

10) Draft picks haven't been bad, since Bouma, Backlund, Brodie, Bennett, Tkachuk, Ferland, and Gaudreau have excelled, but at this point we need Jankowski, Poirer, Klimchuck, and otherwise 2013 or older prospects making that jump.

All in all the seasons coming into the rebuild has showed some poor asset management, while post-rebuild the Flames have only made small potatoes in terms of acquiring assets (ie, Kris Russell and Brouwer). Only Hamilton was the big piece the Flames went and added and he has proven to be worthwhile.

The Flames can't scout, so therefore when they make a trade (ie, Granlund for Shinkaruk), it sucks. When they make important draft picks (ie, Erixon) it sucks. And when they make signings (ie Wideman or Knight) it sucks. When you can't scout at the pro and amateur level, this is what you get for results.

[icecube]

3 years ago we all said a 5 year rebuild would be fine.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I'm talking about what they started with when the new management took over. And I'm not ignoring assets - I've simply not detailed every asset they had. But if you compared what they DID have with what other organizations had - you would see they had next to nothing.
I have a hard time blaming Feaster as I think he wasn't allowed to trigger the re-build. He was following orders. Sutter did a tremendous amount of damage with some real head scratcher deals in his tenure. Dealing off core pieces without getting core pieces back.
But the blame dates back to basically the post Fletcher era, when, for literally decades the organization eroded their asset base to where we are now.



Surely you see the difference in trading for a young top dman (Hamilton) as opposed to an aging veteran (Jokinen). BT traded 3 of those picks for Hamilton. That's not an asset diminishing deal.



No team was built on the returns of aging stars but if you don't turnover part of your core into something that matters - you are screwed.

And you can't have a team full of youngsters - you need some vets like Gio and Brouwer. The Oilers have demonstrated that.

You can't perpetually rebuild. The Jokinen trade made sense to me at the time. In hindsight you are right. And obviously Sutter made some bad deals, there is no debating this. But he also left the team with some nice pieces.

I don't know what an asset diminishing trade really means. Most trades are assets for assets, sometimes they are about potential for present value. If a trade makes you older, is it asset diminishing? Is trading 3 high picks for 5 years of Dougie Hamilton worth it if you know your team won't be a contender during that time? Do you really need to pay top dollar for Troy Brouwer for veteran leadership when you don't expect to be a contender during any of the prime years of his contract? Do you trade a high second round pick for a backup goalie with one year on his deal if you are rebuilding? Why are you buying a guy out of his contract in a year when you're not a contender, creating a cap burden for the following year?

My point is that current management hasn't really shown they are good at this rebuilding thing, and I'm not prepared to give then credit for it. All they've done is have the luxury of high draft picks by fielding a crappy team, and holding auctions for their pending UFA's at the deadline. That's not yet enough for me to say they are so different from previous regimes.

[jlh2640]

I have said that this team is not close to being a contender and the worst thing that could have ever happened is to over achieve and make the playoffs in year 2

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

You can't perpetually rebuild. The Jokinen trade made sense to me at the time. In hindsight you are right. And obviously Sutter made some bad deals, there is no debating this. But he also left the team with some nice pieces.

I don't know what an asset diminishing trade really means. Most trades are assets for assets, sometimes they are about potential for present value. If a trade makes you older, is it asset diminishing? Is trading 3 high picks for 5 years of Dougie Hamilton worth it if you know your team won't be a contender during that time? Do you really need to pay top dollar for Troy Brouwer for veteran leadership when you don't expect to be a contender during any of the prime years of his contract? Do you trade a high second round pick for a backup goalie with one year on his deal if you are rebuilding? Why are you buying a guy out of his contract in a year when you're not a contender, creating a cap burden for the following year?

My point is that current management hasn't really shown they are good at this rebuilding thing, and I'm not prepared to give then credit for it. All they've done is have the luxury of high draft picks by fielding a crappy team, and holding auctions for their pending UFA's at the deadline. That's not yet enough for me to say they are so different from previous regimes.

I don't think there is enough evidence yet.

The only serious mis-step so far has been re-signing Giordano in my opinion, everything else has been relatively smooth sailing from a rebuild perspective.

[Husky]

Flames need more skilled size. Was hoping ferland would add more. Oilers have added draisaitl, Maroon and Lucic in last couple of years to their top 6. Flames have no comparables.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I don't think there is enough evidence yet.

The only serious mis-step so far has been re-signing Giordano in my opinion, everything else has been relatively smooth sailing from a rebuild perspective.

Seems like we are at a point in the current season where a leader and captain could really earn their salary.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Seems like we are at a point in the current season where a leader and captain could really earn their salary.

Maybe i'm just apathetic but I question what Giordano is really supposed to do right now.

Gaudreau is the team's best player and he was freaking awful tonight, the worst player on the team and in my opinion was the goat for the loss.

Sounds like tomorrow's offday is cancelled, which actually means tonights partying in Montreal is cancelled (the boys hate this more than most would think), but it's not like Stajan is going to score another goal or two in every 10 games for the rest of the year if Giordano yells at him after the game.

This whole organization is in a holding pattern this season until most of the toxic assets are off the roster. There are things the team can do to be better game to game but unfortunately this is just the way this season is going to be more likely than not.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

You can't perpetually rebuild.

Right. And the problem with the Flames wasn't perpetually rebuilding. It was NEVER rebuilding. So odd comment

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The Jokinen trade made sense to me at the time. In hindsight you are right. And obviously Sutter made some bad deals, there is no debating this. But he also left the team with some nice pieces.

The Jokinen deal isn't one I object too strongly to either. The deals that really set the organization back were the Phaneuf trade, the second Jokinen trade (that eventually would also cost them a 2nd to off-load Kotalik) and a lot of other secondary deals (like the Stralman one).

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don't know what an asset diminishing trade really means. Most trades are assets for assets, sometimes they are about potential for present value. If a trade makes you older, is it asset diminishing? Is trading 3 high picks for 5 years of Dougie Hamilton worth it if you know your team won't be a contender during that time? Do you really need to pay top dollar for Troy Brouwer for veteran leadership when you don't expect to be a contender during any of the prime years of his contract? Do you trade a high second round pick for a backup goalie with one year on his deal if you are rebuilding? Why are you buying a guy out of his contract in a year when you're not a contender, creating a cap burden for the following year?

An asset diminishing trade is one that leaves you with less organizational value than before. Now sometimes you do that to go for the win, but the Flames were kidding themselves based on the team they had.
Yes I make that deal for Hamilton ALL DAY LONG. You are assuming you just get 5 years out of him and don't get anything for him when he is done as a Flames. But as an asset - he has huge value.
They didn't trade a second for a backup. They traded for a guy who had excellent statistical evidence to suggest he could start. Hasn't worked out but virtually everyone thought it was good value.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

My point is that current management hasn't really shown they are good at this rebuilding thing, and I'm not prepared to give then credit for it. All they've done is have the luxury of high draft picks by fielding a crappy team, and holding auctions for their pending UFA's at the deadline. That's not yet enough for me to say they are so different from previous regimes.

Ok sure. And that's not what we have been arguing. I've not given them credit for a successful rebuild because they haven't done it.
This discussion is about the state of the organization when they took over and the lack of assets.
So you are now arguing something different.

Though I would counter that extracting value at the deadline is a HELLUVA improvement over what happened for a long time before.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Maybe i'm just apathetic but I question what Giordano is really supposed to do right now.

Gaudreau is the team's best player and he was freaking awful tonight, the worst player on the team and in my opinion was the goat for the loss.

Sounds like tomorrow's offday is cancelled, which actually means tonights partying in Montreal is cancelled (the boys hate this more than most would think), but it's not like Stajan is going to score another goal or two in every 10 games for the rest of the year if Giordano yells at him after the game.

This whole organization is in a holding pattern this season until most of the toxic assets are off the roster. There are things the team can do to be better game to game but unfortunately this is just the way this season is going to be more likely than not.

LOL - more yelling at Stajan!! Poor Stajan. Kulak could use a good tongue lashing too.

IDK - Giordano is the leader, captain and highest paid player on the team. In fact, they seemed to make a point of making him the highest paid guy on the team. Maybe he could play like it for a game?

Remember that bull rush to beat the Kings in OT a couple of years ago? Watching Gio drive the net and get a big goal could loosen these guys up a bit. He was getting paid less then though.

And yeah, those boys are going to hate being grounded in Montreal tonight if that is the case.