Treliving needs to start feeling the heat

[Roof-Daddy]

The scoring depth is definitely an issue.

Bennett has stagnated offensively, and Brouwer completely turned into a pumpkin after signing here. If Bennett had developed like one would expect a 4th overall to develop, and Brouwer was still roughly a 20 goal guy this team would likely be comfortably in a playoff spot.

Very frustrating. This team has lost 5 in a row, but held the lead in every one of those games, and with just a touch more scoring they could easily be on a 12 game winning streak right now.

The life of a Flames fan. For one reason or another, this team always seems to be left wanting for something. Just never wuite good enough.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by googol

If the bottom 2 lines were able to contribute just 12 goals more this season. The flames could comfortably be 10 points ahead in the standings. Think of all those 1 goal games. If they scored one goal yesterday. It would have been 3-1 and the game would have been out of reach. Considering all the minutes they spend on the ice, is there a playoff team with a more useless 4th line?

Playoff team ? Is there any NHL team in history with a worst 4th line ?

It doesn’t matter who we put on that line , they can’t score

[Classic_Sniper]

Here’s a telling stat to show our lack of depth. Of the Flame’s forwards:

- 4 forwards have scored 64% of the goals scored

- The top 2 lines have contributed nearly 80%

- Johnny Gaudreau figures in on approximately 40% of the entire team’s goals

These stats tell me that this team is significantly top heavy and are relying way too much on a few players to score game after game. This is the real problem with this team. Watching this team play against teams with deep forward groups confirms my belief that until we fix this problem, we’re not going to be a top team.

[neo45]

He had a really solid offseason as far as GMs go. The Smith trade is one of the best for our team in recent memory. He has managed to bring in two top 4 RHD which a lot of managers struggle mightily to do.

I think they do a poor job (as a franchise) of evaluating their own depth players. We have an awful fourth line yet placed our best fourth liner on waivers at the start of the season (thank god nobody claimed Hathaway). A lot of passengers who essentially are on the roster to let the better players catch their breath.

Still a top GM in the league who has a couple brilliant trades (Smith, Hamilton). It is however becoming obvious to me that (in hindsight) Feaster did a pretty solid job setting his successor up for success. Treliving came into his role as GM with unlimited cap space, all of his picks, and some solid young players/prospects from which to build a winning team.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Mangiapane/Lomberg-Lazar-Hathaway would serve just fine as an energy line.

4th line is still a line and must be a legit NHL quality line. You can't just throw anyone who looks lively out there.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The last thing Treliving should do is trade for a 4th liner. Absolute terrible decision.

The last time he did that was flipping a 3rd for Bollig and that was an awful move. Don’t give up assets for 4th liners.

I doubt anyone is hoping or suggesting we trade for a 4th liner. I think people are hoping to trade for someone we can put in our top 6...which allows other players to shift down the lineup.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by neo45

He had a really solid offseason as far as GMs go. The Smith trade is one of the best for our team in recent memory. He has managed to bring in two top 4 RHD which a lot of managers struggle mightily to do.

I think they do a poor job (as a franchise) of evaluating their own depth players. We have an awful fourth line yet placed our best fourth liner on waivers at the start of the season (thank god nobody claimed Hathaway). A lot of passengers who essentially are on the roster to let the better players catch their breath.

Still a top GM in the league who has a couple brilliant trades (Smith, Hamilton). It is however becoming obvious to me that (in hindsight) Feaster did a pretty solid job setting his successor up for success. Treliving came into his role as GM with unlimited cap space, all of his picks, and some solid young players/prospects from which to build a winning team.

Feaster failed and that's why they have some young assets. That said it also looks like Feaster blew chunks on the Iggy and Bouw trades. Flames are looking like they got a big fat goose egg on the return.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Feaster failed and that's why they have some young assets. That said it also looks like Feaster blew chunks on the Iggy and Bouw trades. Flames are looking like they got a big fat goose egg on the return.

Poirier, Klimchuk and Hunter Smith are all that's left from the Iggy and Bouw trades.

Jesus.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Poirier, Klimchuk and Hunter Smith are all that's left from the Iggy and Bouw trades.

Jesus.

Compare that with Nieuwendyk for Iginla, Fleury for Regehr and Roberts for Giguere trades.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Here’s a telling stat to show our lack of depth. Of the Flame’s forwards:

- 4 forwards have scored 64% of the goals scored

- The top 2 lines have contributed nearly 80%

- Johnny Gaudreau figures in on approximately 40% of the entire team’s goals

These stats tell me that this team is significantly top heavy and are relying way too much on a few players to score game after game. This is the real problem with this team. Watching this team play against teams with deep forward groups confirms my belief that until we fix this problem, we’re not going to be a top team.

So you are saying Treliving probably shouldn't have mortgaged the future for a number 4 defenseman?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Compare that with Nieuwendyk for Iginla, Fleury for Regehr and Roberts for Giguere trades.

Don't forget Andrew Cassels in the Roberts trade. He was a useful player.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

So you are saying Treliving probably shouldn't have mortgaged the future for a number 4 defenseman?

I remember asking Treliving about his 3 needs at the STH event prior to the draft last summer. You could tell goaltending and most importantly a Dman were at the top of his list. He seemed to dismiss the top line winger need as not as important.

Follow up a couple weeks later the Flames held another event and we had Smith and Hamonic. Treliving described Hamonic as the target he had going into the draft weekend.

We did just watch Nashville go to the finals on the backs of an elite d Corp.

Personally I think the Flames had raised expectations for Bennett and hoped others like Brouwer would be better. Bad gamble on his part and giving up 3 future picks to make the deal absolutely stings as we are left with very few trade chips

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

So you are saying Treliving probably shouldn't have mortgaged the future for a number 4 defenseman?

This is what's killed us and will sting for many years to come. Gave up FAR too much in the deal and we'll never recover those assets without hurting the team further.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Pointman

It could be argued the Flames have about 7-8 NHL caliber forwards. Depth is atrocious.

Which goes back to drafting and development. This team has struggled for decades to develop a steady stream of bottom-six forwards to plug into the lineup. So many prospects have fizzled out or busted. It's a systemic weakness.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

So you are saying Treliving probably shouldn't have mortgaged the future for a number 4 defenseman?

Well I didn’t necessarily say that, but I don’t disagree with you either. The way this team plays is differently from Hartley, we rely more on our forwards to produce offense instead of out defensemen. Hamonic was very expensive for a slight upgrade over Engelland if even, I’m still not convinced. But there’s no doubt in my mind several forwards on this team need to be upgraded in order fot us to reach the sky high expectations.

Treliving himself said in the summer that he was likely going to lose the most sleep because of the potential that we weren’t going to score enough goals. Well that problem has become reality despite the career years from our top forwards.

Personally I think there’s a lot of blame going around that’s completely unwarranted. From the coaching staff, to the top players, our special teams to an extent and even to the team’s mental fortitude. But I don’t see much blame directed to the real problem, our lack of forward depth.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Which goes back to drafting and development. This team has struggled for decades to develop a steady stream of bottom-six forwards to plug into the lineup. So many prospects have fizzled out or busted. It's a systemic weakness.

which makes it twice as damaging because of Calgary being an unattractive place to play.

Hard to lure guys to play here, helps tremendously if they have no choice.

ELC players fit that mould perfectly.

[Karl]

This team's 4th line just flat out sucks. There's no getting around that.

They may not lose a lot of games outright, but it is disheartening because they are so useless on offense and that hinders this team because that puts all the more pressure on the top-6 and when the top 6 isn't going, there isn't much to fall back on because of the offensively inept 4th line.

Until those 4th line guys (any of them) actually start doing something on offense, this team will struggle just to make the playoffs.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Pointman

4th line is still a line and must be a legit NHL quality line. You can't just throw anyone who looks lively out there.

Not entirely sure how my suggestion differs from the actual 4L of
Lazar-Stajan-Hathaway, but ok.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Pointman

It could be argued the Flames have about 7-8 NHL caliber forwards. Depth is atrocious.

This is ridiculously hyperbolic.

Our depth is perfectly serviceable. It's just that we're a relatively badly coached team, and the depth guys don't have the skill to cover that up.

Much of the point of coaching is getting the most out of what players can do and limiting the harm of what they can't do. This is how you turn a team into more than the sum of it's parts, and this is why the effect of coaching is most often seen in how the depth of the team looks.

When Hartley got the team to the 2nd round, people liked our depth. Go back and look at that roster. It wasn't the quality of players that made our depth look good.

Unless the coaching is truly horrible, stars are going to look good. Skilled players like Gaudreau and Monahan can make even subpar systems work.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Which goes back to drafting and development. This team has struggled for decades to develop a steady stream of bottom-six forwards to plug into the lineup. So many prospects have fizzled out or busted. It's a systemic weakness.

There is strong evidence now, if you look at what % of the team is now home grown compared to the past, that this has changed.
However, the long-term terrible drafting has really hurt the organization in terms of overall assets. That has long been my biggest concern is that the franchise overall is weak from an asset point of view. So there is a constant trade off between trading futures for now and now for futures, instead of a healthy balance where there are enough assets to trade of help now, without mortgaging the future outright.

But I do think that when you look at the lineup and the number of drafted players on the team - that has improved mightly: Monahan, Johnny, Ferland, Brodie, Gio, Kulak, Rittich, Sam, Janko, etc. All home grown and make up a big chunk of the core.