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

[Clarkey]

I don't care what so-called year of your rebuild your team is on, if the team plays like crap with no passion or interest they are failing and need to be held to account. Lack of talent is an excuse for not winning, not giving a shart is not.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Spotting 4 consecutive 4-0 leads is unacceptable in any year of any rebuild.

Just saying.

[Dion]

I didn't expect this team to be playing uninspired hockey in year 3 of the rebuild.

[Mister Yamoto]

Consecutive seasons of regression is not rebuilding.

[GranteedEV]

three years ago, a five year rebuild meant adding Nathan MacKinnon, Connor McDavid, Jack Eichel, or Auston Matthews.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

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



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).




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.



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.

Yeah the Phaneuf, Jokinen to NYR trades were atrocious. But it feels close to being in Treliving apologist territory to blame those deals for the lack of young talent in today's organization.

Treliving gave up 3 good draft picks to acquire his young stud defenseman. Sutter got his for a 3rd rounder. I would call that an asset increasing deal if you want to start going trade by trade.

I just think that blaming Sutter and other managers for the state of today's organization is wrong. He had a decent team and tried to go for it. Then he hung on a little long and lost his marbles for a week, but I'm in no way convinced that an earlier sell off changes anything about today's team. You think the Patriots are trading Tom Brady this off season? Did getting rid of Peyton Manning help the Colts any?

This management group has iced a horrible team so they are able to draft better players and more easily sell pending UFA's. That's about the only meaningful difference I see. Auctioning off their UFA's is not some great organizational principle, it is what every bad team does.

As for signing guys like Gio and Brouwer to huge money contacts so you're not the Oilers. Well I guess we'll see which team is able to build a champion first. For the last 25 years, the score is zero to zero. We've been less bad than them for the past few years up until now. Yippee. At least Sutter got us close.

[Weitz]

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.

To be fair they were taking a train to Ottawa after the game according to the radio. So there was no Montreal partying planned.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

I have no interest in the oiler plan if that's what the flames are doing. If other fans like it, hey it's your money. Though I think they're kidding themselves to believe that magically bears fruit in 5 years or any given time frame.

Patiently losing until you get your lottery ball and only then trying to build a team is just not for me.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I am not upset with the team not competing for Lord Stanley this year. I am upset with the lack of development in the young core, and the lack of identity this team seems to be mired in.


That 1.5 seasons where the Flames played hard almost every night, and for the full 60 minutes - win or lose - was the team showing a clear direction that I could really get behind. That was also a very likeable team. This year - and arguably some stretches last year - they were more reminiscent of the post-04 Flames. Remember when Feaster astutely called it a disease? It seems like the Flames are once again infected with it.

When you see basically the entire core take a giant step back, see how little fight this team has, and openly start questioning the work ethic, it becomes discouraging. I have no issues with the time line, 4,5,6,7....that's OK with me, as long as I am seeing progression. The Oilers were a complete joke because there was zero progression for too long. Not only are the Flames not showing progression, but it seems like they are showing regression, especially with the young core.

One or two young kids regressing? That's fine and is almost expected. All of them? Unacceptable.

[jlh2640]

There are only 2 players on this team who have taken a step toward this year. Frolik and Backlund. Johnson over achieved. And Tkachuk is a rookie so we're not sure what we have in him yet long term. Everyone else looks worse then ever or even to what they were

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

3) Regher yielded nothing in return

To be fair, he got us Paul Byron. It was current management that let Byron go without getting anything in return.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by gargamel

To be fair, he got us Paul Byron. It was current management that let Byron go without getting anything in return.

To be fair that's still nothing.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Mister Yamoto

Consecutive seasons of regression is not rebuilding.

Rebuilding is almost never linear progression.

[N-E-B]

I agree with what the OP is saying to a certain extent. I think standings-wise the Flames are exactly where most people thought they'd be; in the mix for a playoff spot but likely on the outside looking in. I also think most people would be fine with where we are considering we're in the third year of a rebuild. When you look at it that way, yes the Flames are showing some good progress, but they're not quite ready yet.

What annoys me is the fact that they're playing absolutely passionless, boring, uninspired hockey. At least in 13-14 and last year you could see the effort was there. This year they look totally checked out. Who the hell goes down 4-0 in four straight games? I'd wager that's a first in NHL history. Absolutely garbage hockey from our best players. I never thought I'd see a time where I'd prefer to see Backlund over Gaudreau. What's extra frustrating is I think the team could contend for the division title this year of our best guys were on their games. It's a weak division which helps, but at the very least they'd be where the Oilers are now.

I really believe in our young core, it just pains me to see them struggling so badly, and what's worse is they seem to feel sorry for themselves. They need to man up and go make something happen out there.

The team as a whole is showing progress from last year, but it could be so much more. Hopefully this is just a bump in the road, as the path to success is rearely linear. The season isn't over yet, they could win 5 in a row and be right back in it. But I feel empty watching this team and I really hope it stops.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Mister Yamoto

Consecutive seasons of regression is not rebuilding.

The only reason last year looked like a step backward is because of the massive over-achievement the year before. Where we finished last year was forgivable if you put it in context of only being year 2 of the rebuild.

Year 1 was nothing but gravy and should not be considered the baseline for the rebuild.

Being in year 3 and seeing players get worse, both visually and in production, is very concerning to say the least.

[ricoFlame]

Speak with your $$. Unlike edmonton, where they would pack the place and occasionally toss a jersey on the ice when they were upset...still filling managements pockets...don't go. Through the 7 year misery of the "young guns" era, there were times where there were 10, 11 or 12,000 fans in the building, they moved people around the building to make it look more full on TV.

Calgary fans are more fickle and they should be...can't rely on the edmonton model of a decade ineptitude and luck to build a team and get a new stadium.

It's not the same here, and i'm proud of that. We aren't as willing to be fed pure bull$hit year after year and just sit there like a bunch of robots and be happy with it.

Things will improve if the front office sees it as a necessity.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by ricoFlame

Speak with your $$. Unlike edmonton, where they would pack the place and occasionally toss a jersey on the ice when they were upset...still filling managements pockets...don't go. Through the 7 year misery of the "young guns" era, there were times where there were 10, 11 or 12,000 fans in the building, they moved people around the building to make it look more full on TV.

Calgary fans are more fickle and they should be...can't rely on the edmonton model of a decade ineptitude and luck to build a team and get a new stadium.

It's not the same here, and i'm proud of that. We aren't as willing to be fed pure bull$hit year after year and just sit there like a bunch of robots and be happy with it.

Things will improve if the front office sees it as a necessity.

That's some very revisionist history there. Both the Flames and Oilers were very realistically at risk of needing to move locations in the late 90's, and the Oilers were actually at more of a risk then the Flames were.

Very different economic conditions going on during the young guns era in Calgary, versus Edmonton's latest decade of ineptitude. Not only was the NHL a much less friendly place with no cost control for small market teams, the Canadian dollar was in the tank and the local economy wasn't the hottest. It's actually very similar to what's going on right now in our city, while once again the Flames are in a rebuild mode, only this time the NHL's structure is much more favorable for our team.

While attendance is down in Calgary the past few years, and a lot of it has to do with a non winner on the ice, one also can't discount the economic factors at play the past 2 years. One also can't discount that the building is still 95% paid for every night and Flames fans are still paying full pop for those tickets. While I think attendance could still get worse through this rebuild, the risk you are trying to suggest exists simply isn't there.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I just think that blaming Sutter and other managers for the state of today's organization is wrong. He had a decent team and tried to go for it. Then he hung on a little long and lost his marbles for a week, but I'm in no way convinced that an earlier sell off changes anything about today's team. You think the Patriots are trading Tom Brady this off season? Did getting rid of Peyton Manning help the Colts any?

So you're good with the strategy the Canucks have been taking the last couple years - still try to win it all with the Sedins? Because the Flames in the last few years with Iginla had about as much a chance of winning the Cup as today's Canucks do.

Rebuilding is a legitimate strategy in the NHL. It takes time. The worse your asset base at the beginning of the rebuild (and the Flames' was terrible), the longer the rebuild. Ultimately, it comes down to drafting and development, but a team can stack the deck in their favour with a lot of picks and trading for some young pieces to complement the new core. The Flames would be in a lot better shape today if they acquired Brayden Schenn and/or Wayne Simmonds for Iginla and got something useful for Langkow or Kipper.

[Corral]

the rebuild model has mythical status around here and I don't know why. the only 2 franchises to pull it off are the Penguins and Blackhawks - and really those rebuilds took place more than 10 years ago - since 2009/2010 - their championships are not based necessarily on rebuilds - definitely not last year's Penguins. Likewise the other current perennial winner LA - I wouldn't call that a rebuild team either. You only have to look at the Islanders and the Oilers prior to McDavid to see that rebuilds aren't a guarantee of anything. All of which to say I agree with others that a regression now is really a bad thing so I hope this is a short term slip.

[automaton 3]

The Penguins and Hawks were fortunate enough to suck in the right years and landed generational talents.

Detroit had both generational talent on the ice, plus a top-notch coach.

Flames are in for a very long rebuild if these are the models for success.