Treliving needs to start feeling the heat

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

The Flames are going to either miss or squeak into the playoffs because they simply cannot score. That is the reason.

But why can't they score?

Why have points from defensemen gone from 203 to 176 to 150 (current pace) over the last 3 years?

Is it because the D core has gotten worse over that time?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

For a team that is trying to go for it for the next few seasons the hamonic trade is not a bad trade though.

I am not sure you can finish 8th in the conference and then 11th the next year and be "going for it". The Flames roster is not in the same league as teams that actually have the talent to go for it.

[Red Potato Standing By]

I am assuming that by 11th you mean this year,and if that is the case I didn’t realize the season was over. My apologies

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Hamonic bad move

Not picking up any scoring help in the offseason bad move.

Lazar, horrible move.

Trying to fill a top 6 forward spot with PTO's in back to back seasons is a different approach.

Having one of the thinnest prospect pools in hockey bad move.

Hamilton was a good move

Frolik signing was a good move.

Not sure if I am missing any good moves.

The Flames have one of the deepest prospect pools in hockey... not sure what you're talking about. Did you see the WJCs?

Also they only tried a PTO in the top-6 once, with Versteeg, and it worked.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

But why can't they score?

Why have points from defensemen gone from 203 to 176 to 150 (current pace) over the last 3 years?

Is it because the D core has gotten worse over that time?

I would guess your answer is a combo of - GG, Gio getting older, Brodie dropping off and Russell and Wideman being better offensively than Hamonic and Stone.

[Enoch Root]

No, that would not be my answer.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

The Flames have one of the deepest prospect pools in hockey... not sure what you're talking about. Did you see the WJCs?

Also they only tried a PTO in the top-6 once, with Versteeg, and it worked.

The 3 players we had playing on legit teams (as any team could load up on Slovaks and have a lot of prospects)?

There are at least 20 teams that have deeper prospect pools right now than the Flames and the remaining teams will pass us in the near future since we are not really drafting this year.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Which is why I think the 'just make the playoffs' mandate comes from higher up the organization. But I can't for the life of me think why ownership would be willing to store up long-term pain in the desperate hopes of making a playoff run in the near term...

It's unquestionably the owners.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I am curious if he has any bad moves on his resume? Seems to me giving up a 2nd and two 3rds for 4 years of goaltending at the most is a bad move. I would also guess that the package for Elliott probably would have got us Jones, I suspect Brad picked Elliott over Jones, not that the Bruins found greater value in a 29th overall pick and a former 5th rounder than a potential 34th overall and a potential 75th overall.

Hamonic bad move

Not picking up any scoring help in the offseason bad move.

Lazar, horrible move.

Trying to fill a top 6 forward spot with PTO's in back to back seasons is a different approach.

Having one of the thinnest prospect pools in hockey bad move.

Hamilton was a good move

Frolik signing was a good move.

Not sure if I am missing any good moves.

You think Brad chose Elliot over Jones based on what?

And you assume Boston would have taken a 2nd round pick over a 1st round pick for what reason? You do realize at the start of the season Boston doesn't have a magic ball that tells them San Jose is going to go to the Cup Final right?

What scoring help do you suggest the Flames should have picked up in the off season? If it's that easy lets hear the moves you would have made?

Treliving has essentially had 3 drafts. Out of these we have Tkachuk, Parsons, Dube, Fox, Andersson, Mangiapane, Kylington, Valimaki, Ruzicka. 6 of his players were at the world juniors. I'm curious to know how you think he has done a bad job there.

[monkeyman]

It's pretty ironic isn't it. Every year the owners seem to concern themselves with making the playoffs, dictating the direction management should move. Yet, Calgary has to be one of the worst playoff performing teams in terms of making or having any kind of prolonged success in the last 30 years.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I think that's literally the first time a Flames fan or anyone in the hockey world has described the Hamilton trade as "somewhat salvageable" for Calgary.

I said from an asset-management perspective.

That first round pick and those 2nd rounders are more shots in the barrel to really hit a home run.

You win the cup with home runs. You are a 7th to 11th place bubble team if all you do is get market value for trades/contracts and spend to the cap. The Flames have been happy with a 7th to 11th place bubble team for far too long, and the Hamilton trade is exactly that.

In my opinion, we won from a value perspective at the time of the trade, but completely lost from an asset management perspective. One for two isn't terrible, but that's why I characterize it as "salvageable".

[Hackey]

So what if those picks turned into nothing? Do you win like that?

[Red Potato Standing By]

If one of those picks turned into a Hamilton caliber player would that be considered a homerun?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Which is why I think the 'just make the playoffs' mandate comes from higher up the organization. But I can't for the life of me think why ownership would be willing to store up long-term pain in the desperate hopes of making a playoff run in the near term...

They wouldn't. Any rational owner would conclude that the best way to make the most playoff revenue over the long term is to have the strongest and healthiest organization possible.

Choosing short-term gain over long-term goals only makes sense in desperation. The Flames owners are not in a desperate situation with respect to their ownership of the team and its value.

So assuming they are in fact interested in 'just making the playoffs' is attempting to argue that they are stupid, short-sighted, or have ulterior motives that we are missing.

I doubt those conclusions and would be more inclined to believe that they are rational and that, in a league of incredible parity, where 3 or 4 wins in an 82 game season can mean the difference between home-ice in the playoffs and missing them entirely, and where teams draft players as 18 year olds, far before they are physically mature mature, that there is some randomness to success and it isn't as simple as some would like to suggest.

Having said that, I don't disagree that arguments can be made about the approach in the past. Economics were different in the 90s. But I don't see anything since the 2005 lockout (i.e. revenue sharing) that suggests they haven't set their goals as long-term in nature.

And yes, Treliving, went after Hamonic in a clear signal of where thy think the team is. But that is going to happen - a team with a long-term focus will still find themselves at different points on the life cycle over time. And should act accordingly.

Whether we agree with the assessment of where on the life cycle they are, does not change what management's long-term focus is.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

If one of those picks turned into a Hamilton caliber player would that be considered a homerun?

Yes, and then you have a cost controlled Hamilton-esque player on their ELC instead of Hamilton at 5.75M. You can absolutely win a cup if you have this type of player.

Every cup winning team has players that drastically overplay their contracts, whether it's an ELC or just an huge out performance (On Calgary I'd say only Ferland and Tkachuk are those players).

Then you also have 2 additional 2nd rounders that could turn into something else.

Again, I'm not saying the trade was awful by any means - I think it's a reasonable trade, and there's still potential. However, the entire reasoning is that we get a seasoned Hamilton to "go for it" in the next few years - that's been a massive failure.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Hackey

You think Brad chose Elliot over Jones based on what?

And you assume Boston would have taken a 2nd round pick over a 1st round pick for what reason? You do realize at the start of the season Boston doesn't have a magic ball that tells them San Jose is going to go to the Cup Final right?

What scoring help do you suggest the Flames should have picked up in the off season? If it's that easy lets hear the moves you would have made?

Treliving has essentially had 3 drafts. Out of these we have Tkachuk, Parsons, Dube, Fox, Andersson, Mangiapane, Kylington, Valimaki, Ruzicka. 6 of his players were at the world juniors. I'm curious to know how you think he has done a bad job there.

I would have used the picks for Hamonic and grabbed Turris, he is not a bad player. One of those right handed shot 50-60 point guys.

I will save you the time and say "but we have no idea if he was available in the summer, or he was not available, he was only available on November 6th."

I also would have been willing to flip a 2nd or even two 2nds to the Islanders for Eberle.

The reason the Flames did not pick up any scoring was because they did not prioritize picking up scoring. The GM wanted to grab another dman.

6 players at the WJC is sort of meh. There are 220 players in that championship, and even after you severely discount Denmark, Slovakia and Belarus, 6 players would be nominally above the average in a 31 team league. I am more curious to see how many guys Brad has at the 2019 and 2020 WJC.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Hackey

So what if those picks turned into nothing? Do you win like that?

I think that's the thing about picks and why it's so important to keep them. some pan out, some don't. you increase your odds when you have more picks. extra picks also help you develop depth and depth gives you leverage to gain more picks by trading some of that depth, which gives you a better chance of remaining competitive over a longer period of time.
I don't want to speak for Regorium though, that's just my take.
I don't mind the Hamilton trade though, I think he was young enough to still realize some additional value. Plus, I'd have paid twice that just to steal him away from the Oilers.

[Fan in Exile]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Hamilton is a far more valuable player than Barzal...sometimes I wonder about CP

Top goal scoring D man in the league who plays on one of the top pairs statistically. Hamilton is not our problem

100% disagree. Dougie is a valuable player but he is not the guy you build your team or your defence around. I would trade Dougie for Barzal for a heartbeat but the Isles wouldn't.

[Red Potato Standing By]

See I was more meaning the odds of getting one player that turns out like Hamilton in those three picks combined are pretty low.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

See I was more meaning the odds of getting one player that turns out like Hamilton in those three picks combined are pretty low.

And I completely agree.

Maybe slightly more odds than most years in that deep 2015 draft, but it was the depth of that draft that allowed just draft picks to get a player of Hamilton's calibre.

If you do though, you're set up to win a cup.

If those 3 picks bust, I agree we're worse off than if we had Hamilton. However, my philosophy is that anything less than a "real" cup contender (top 6ish team in the league, division leader or fighting for div leader type) is a failure of the organization. Hamilton didn't do anything to get us into that range, whereas the mystery box might have.

It likely wouldn't, but then you try again next year.