Treliving needs to start feeling the heat

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I think you meant a number 4 dman. Top 4 implies he could play anywhere between 1 and 4. Hamonic can only play 4 on a half decent team. One can easily name 62 dmen in the league who are objectively better than Hamonic. One can probably name 93 that are better as well, placing Hamonic firmly in the number 4 dman category. On his best day he might compete for the 80th best dman in the league, which would give him a shot at being a number 3 dman.

Real question is whether we could get a 1st and two 2nds for him now. I doubt we could, which means we overpaid.

It's known the flames out bid the leafs. It stands to reason the Leafs made a very competitive offer. Treliving is no dummy. I find it hard to believe the difference between the two offers was night and day. They were likely fairly close.

Case in point; the Hamilton deal was made after Arizona said 'no' to trading the 3rd overall pick to the bruins for Dougie. BT also beat Edmonton to the punch, leaving the Oilers with Griffin Reinhardt.

Hamonic is a top 4 D, 27 years old, on a great contract with term. What do you think that type of asset is worth?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by TOfan

It's known the flames out bid the leafs. It stands to reason the Leafs made a very competitive offer. Treliving is no dummy. I find it hard to believe the difference between the two offers was night and day. They were likely fairly close.

Case in point; the Hamilton deal was made after Arizona said 'no' to trading the 3rd overall pick to the bruins for Dougie. BT also beat Edmonton to the punch, leaving the Oilers with Griffin Reinhardt.

Hamonic is a top 4 D, 25 years old, on a great contract with term. What do you think that type of asset is worth?

Hamonic is not 25 so thst weskens your arguement.

Treliving thought we needed to spend all the assets on the blueline and the forwards were fine. I asked him at the STH event before the draft how he valued fixing the 3 holes on the roster. Goaltending was a top priority but he mentioned he felt a top 4 D was by far the biggest need. Patrick Sharp was plan A, and Jagr was plan C or D maybe?

Clearly he did not judge the needs of the team properly. He likely also overestimated how well Bennett, Brouwer, Backlund, Frolik, Jankowski would do offensively.

I think for those reasons he needs to feel the heat and fix everything this summer or he could be on the chopping block this time next year

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Brouwer - nice guy, doesn't produce
Hamonic - nice guy, doesn't produce
Stajan - nice guy, doesn't produce
Lazar - nice guy, doesn't produce

Too much focus on character, not enough focus on talent

None of those guys were acquired because of character, aside from maybe being an additional factor. Brouwer was expected to be a scorer, and his track record supported that. Stajan was a 50 point guy, and a good two way centre, which the Flames needed. When Burke resigned him, the Flames were really thin down the middle. Hamonic, as mentioned, wasn't signed to produce - he was something the Flames lacked - a stay at home defender who can transition well. Lazar was a decent depth grab for a late second round pick, and still had high draft choice cachet. I think he could chip in given a better role.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Hamonic is not 25 so thst weskens your arguement.

Treliving thought we needed to spend all the assets on the blueline and the forwards were fine. I asked him at the STH event before the draft how he valued fixing the 3 holes on the roster. Goaltending was a top priority but he mentioned he felt a top 4 D was by far the biggest need. Patrick Sharp was plan A, and Jagr was plan C or D maybe?

Clearly he did not judge the needs of the team properly. He likely also overestimated how well Bennett, Brouwer, Backlund, Frolik, Jankowski would do offensively.

I think for those reasons he needs to feel the heat and fix everything this summer or he could be on the chopping block this time next year

Yes, I stand corrected. Hamonic is 27.

I also agree Treliving, and hockey ops, likely expected more out of Bennett.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

None of those guys were acquired because of character, aside from maybe being an additional factor. Brouwer was expected to be a scorer, and his track record supported that. Stajan was a 50 point guy, and a good two way centre, which the Flames needed. When Burke resigned him, the Flames were really thin down the middle. Hamonic, as mentioned, wasn't signed to produce - he was something the Flames lacked - a stay at home defender who can transition well. Lazar was a decent depth grab for a late second round pick, and still had high draft choice cachet. I think he could chip in given a better role.

Actually, virtually every player Treliving and co has acquired involves character. Just listen to the press conferences or interviews he does, the first thing he did was talk about was Brouwer’s character, leadership and presence. Lazar is all character and no skill.

The pro scouting in this organization is as bad as it gets and they’re the ones who should be fired. Just look at this long list of screw ups: raymond, brouwer, bollig, hiller, elliott, lazar, f hamilton, eddie lack, jokipakka, chiasson, grossman, shinkaruk, glass and etc. The amount of assets and dough we’ve wasted on these players who’ve provided almost zero value is a big reason why we are stuck in this crap situation.

It’s been like this for a long time. Even the Sutter era had the same problems. Too many whiffs on player acquisitions. Looking at the wrong types of players. At some point here, this organization needs to stop spinning their wheels and realize that they’ve been building teams the wrong way. We can keep firing coaches left and right like we have in the past, but that still hasn’t solved the major problems that we’ve seen from this franchise since the 90’s.

My guess is, things don’t change and we’re in for another decade of mediocrity. If this organization has proven anything over the last couple decades +, they’re consistent at being good, but never great. Giving us a chance, but never enough to put us over the top.

[868904]

with all the existing character here maybe they can acquire Ho-sang and bring balance back to the force.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

My guess is, things don’t change and we’re in for another decade of mediocrity. If this organization has proven anything over the last couple decades +, they’re consistent at being good, but never great. Giving us a chance, but never enough to put us over the top.

I would take good. This team has been better than average maybe 4 times in last 20 years?

[Angelino]

Is Cliff Fletcher still alive? He was the last decent Flames GM.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Angelino

Is Cliff Fletcher still alive? He was the last decent Flames GM.

Sutter gets a lot of grief and he clearly lost it at the end. But we had a few years of excitement and he took a run at it. He made some incredible acquisitions.

Feaster was not a good GM, but he was also responsible for much of the quality on the current roster. And a few underrated moves, like acquiring Russell for a 5th.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I would take good. This team has been better than average maybe 4 times in last 20 years?

Team is what it is. The character on this team always ensures we’re not bad and always in the playoff mix, but never good enough to be up there with the great teams. There’s a certain ceiling you hit when you build a team that lacks the fundamental skills to win against the top half of the league.

We’ve been average forever and I’m not sure it’ll ever change until upper management admits they have a problem. I might just copy this statement and use it for next year too because based on this team’s track record, there’s an excellent chance we lose in the 1st round or finish just outside of the playoffs again.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Sutter gets a lot of grief and he clearly lost it at the end. But we had a few years of excitement and he took a run at it. He made some incredible acquisitions.

Feaster was not a good GM, but he was also responsible for much of the quality on the current roster. And a few underrated moves, like acquiring Russell for a 5th.

This fanbase needs to demand higher standards from upper management. It’s been nearly 30 years now where we’ve only been out of the 1st round twice. That has to be as bad as it gets. Sutter era gave us some decent go hockey, but too many disappointments. Without Kipper, we weren’t a playoff team. He covered up for a lot of Sutter’s mistakes.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Actually, virtually every player Treliving and co has acquired involves character. Just listen to the press conferences or interviews he does, the first thing he did was talk about was Brouwer’s character, leadership and presence. Lazar is all character and no skill.

The pro scouting in this organization is as bad as it gets and they’re the ones who should be fired. Just look at this long list of screw ups: raymond, brouwer, bollig, hiller, elliott, lazar, f hamilton, eddie lack, jokipakka, chiasson, grossman, shinkaruk, glass and etc. The amount of assets and dough we’ve wasted on these players who’ve provided almost zero value is a big reason why we are stuck in this crap situation.

It’s been like this for a long time. Even the Sutter era had the same problems. Too many whiffs on player acquisitions. Looking at the wrong types of players. At some point here, this organization needs to stop spinning their wheels and realize that they’ve been building teams the wrong way. We can keep firing coaches left and right like we have in the past, but that still hasn’t solved the major problems that we’ve seen from this franchise since the 90’s.

My guess is, things don’t change and we’re in for another decade of mediocrity. If this organization has proven anything over the last couple decades +, they’re consistent at being good, but never great. Giving us a chance, but never enough to put us over the top.

This is an interesting point; Some posters commenting on Glen Gulutzan being a nice guy had me thinking about how players might respond to him as a leader. Good character can be important in a coach, but not if he can't lead or motivate the troops. Just like "good character" without skill in a player won't get you very far in today's NHL. The team either is playing the system, or not responding to the coach. GG asking Sutter how he got the players to go to the wall for him in 2004 is very telling. He asks because he wants to know. There are some people who know how to get a group of people emotionally invested in a goal so that they believe in it and will do anything to obtain it. Gerard Gallant, being a nice guy seems to have this ability as does Darryl Sutter a stern coach. BT wanted a possession based coach and got one but either misjudged or overlooked the importance of having a true leader, or motivator.

Lots of examples out there where you can have a boss that's really smart, nice guy but not everyone follows his lead. To make matters worse GG doesn't seem to be able to help this team create an identity. Are we a fast team, skilled or the hardest working. The Flames don't seem to have any identity.

BT is a nice guy, a smart man hopefully he adds a few more boxes that check off on his coaching/players lists so he can get the right hire/players for this team.

[tsquared1967]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Yes, I stand corrected. Hamonic is 27.

I also agree Treliving, and hockey ops, likely expected more out of Bennett.

More out of Bennett? They should have stopped the experiment of Bennett at center. Didn't work last year so they tried it again this year. He isn't a center and the team lacks quality wingers when he plays at center. The Flames wasted time and effort with Bennett by brining in wingers past their prime.

I like the way Bennett plays on the wing but he needs to be smarter cause he takes too many penalties.

[taxbuster]

All this talk of "character" has me reviewing in my mind the Vegas game and what I recall (possibly incorrectly) of VGK: they pressured the puck *constantly*. Reminded me of the old "workboots" 2004 Flames - just hounded whomever had the puck mercilessly. Took the most direct route to get to the puck each time - and if it meant going through someone, that's what they'd try to do.

I was quite impressed -- and THAT is what I'd like to see back in the Flames.

Most of this year I've seen them back off and not apply pressure, give the skater a chance to lose the puck rather than force the skater to lose it or cough it up. (For anyone who plays Chess or Go, it's taking a position from the skater the way a Knight attacks a piece on a board - one spot over and two spots down. It works well in Go and Chess, not so well in Hockey.)

The defending players on the Flames use their sticks a LOT and their bodies not so much. So offensively-minded forwards chip, skip and scoot around the defender FAR too often. It's a poor style of play unless your D is hyper-mobile (laterally especially) and the supporting cast follows it up with physicality. The Flames do not do that at all, which is why their D has been misused and looked like junk for most of the year.

The players are good - the style of D-play being coached has inhibited their natural abilities.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

This is an interesting point; Some posters commenting on Glen Gulutzan being a nice guy had me thinking about how players might respond to him as a leader. Good character can be important in a coach, but not if he can't lead or motivate the troops. Just like "good character" without skill in a player won't get you very far in today's NHL. The team either is playing the system, or not responding to the coach. GG asking Sutter how he got the players to go to the wall for him in 2004 is very telling. He asks because he wants to know. There are some people who know how to get a group of people emotionally invested in a goal so that they believe in it and will do anything to obtain it. Gerard Gallant, being a nice guy seems to have this ability as does Darryl Sutter a stern coach. BT wanted a possession based coach and got one but either misjudged or overlooked the importance of having a true leader, or motivator.

Lots of examples out there where you can have a boss that's really smart, nice guy but not everyone follows his lead. To make matters worse GG doesn't seem to be able to help this team create an identity. Are we a fast team, skilled or the hardest working. The Flames don't seem to have any identity.

BT is a nice guy, a smart man hopefully he adds a few more boxes that check off on his coaching/players lists so he can get the right hire/players for this team.

My post was specifically meant for the players and the roster construction. The identity of this team is directly tied to the way the roster was built. You can’t turn a slow team into a fast team and you can’t turn an unskilled team into a skill team because the truly fast teams and truly skilled teams will pick you apart at the end of the day.

Vegas was built fast and therefore play fast, you can’t teach speed, you either have it or you don’t and those guys skated circles around us this season. Same goes for skill. In terms of hard work, this team works hard out there, it’s not like they’re constantly playing in their own zone and getting soundly outplayed, they just can’t score worth a damn. You take our top line out of the lineup and look what happened, shut out after shut out and no difference makers who can break a game wide open. Columbus had that last night in Panarin and Dubois. We didn’t.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by tsquared1967

More out of Bennett? They should have stopped the experiment of Bennett at center. Didn't work last year so they tried it again this year. He isn't a center and the team lacks quality wingers when he plays at center. The Flames wasted time and effort with Bennett by brining in wingers past their prime.

I like the way Bennett plays on the wing but he needs to be smarter cause he takes too many penalties.

I don’t think there’s a player on this team that management expected more from, only to see crash and burn. Bennett has seen every situation this season, top line, 2nd line, 3rd line, special teams and etc, but he hasn’t done anything to impress.

His season crumbling the way it has hurt the team. When you have more minor penalties than you have points, you’re hurting the team. When your +/- is 2nd worst on the team with a -18, you’re hurting the team. I wouldn’t be surprised if Bennett is dealt this season ala Baertschi. If he didn’t take so many undisciplined, boneheaded penalties, then I’d probably be able to live with his lack of production, but too many goals against as result of his play, so I wouldn’t miss him too much.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I don’t think there’s a player on this team that management expected more from, only to see crash and burn. Bennett has seen every situation this season, top line, 2nd line, 3rd line, special teams and etc, but he hasn’t done anything to impress.

His season crumbling the way it has hurt the team. When you have more minor penalties than you have points, you’re hurting the team. When your +/- is 2nd worst on the team with a -18, you’re hurting the team. I wouldn’t be surprised if Bennett is dealt this season ala Baertschi. If he didn’t take so many undisciplined, boneheaded penalties, then I’d probably be able to live with his lack of production, but too many goals against as result of his play, so I wouldn’t miss him too much.

Baertschi requested a trade because he couldn't crack the lineup

They won't trade Bennett for next to nothing now but he is certainly running out of excuses

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

My post was specifically meant for the players and the roster construction. The identity of this team is directly tied to the way the roster was built. You can’t turn a slow team into a fast team and you can’t turn an unskilled team into a skill team because the truly fast teams and truly skilled teams will pick you apart at the end of the day.

Vegas was built fast and therefore play fast, you can’t teach speed, you either have it or you don’t and those guys skated circles around us this season. Same goes for skill. In terms of hard work, this team works hard out there, it’s not like they’re constantly playing in their own zone and getting soundly outplayed, they just can’t score worth a damn. You take our top line out of the lineup and look what happened, shut out after shut out and no difference makers who can break a game wide open. Columbus had that last night in Panarin and Dubois. We didn’t.

That's kind of my point, I agree with you! My point was that the player character you mentioned is something BT values. But not only did he acquire character said players you mentioned he hired a nice guy coach. What we really need is to develop an identity, and add a coach who knows how to instill and maintain an identity; Such as the one Vegas has that is built on speed.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by TOfan

It's known the flames out bid the leafs. It stands to reason the Leafs made a very competitive offer. Treliving is no dummy. I find it hard to believe the difference between the two offers was night and day. They were likely fairly close.

Case in point; the Hamilton deal was made after Arizona said 'no' to trading the 3rd overall pick to the bruins for Dougie. BT also beat Edmonton to the punch, leaving the Oilers with Griffin Reinhardt.

Hamonic is a top 4 D, 27 years old, on a great contract with term. What do you think that type of asset is worth?

Hamonic is a number 4 dman. He has no ability to play on the top pairing on any half decent team.

I would love to see them trade Hamonic if he has such a high value. Maybe we can grab two firsts and a second for him.

To compare it to a trade the Feaster haters like to bring up, Hamonic is no Ryan O'Reilly (a guy we tried to sign and have be a Flames asset for 4 years), Hamonic we have for 3 years, gave up more than Feaster would have given up for O'Reilly and undoubtedly will not be worth what O'Reilly was when the Avs traded him. And it was for a position the Flames did not need help in.

BT is a poor GM, who made a bad trade. It happens.

But I would not give up a 1st and two 2nds for a number 4 dman.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Baertschi requested a trade because he couldn't crack the lineup

They won't trade Bennett for next to nothing now but he is certainly running out of excuses

You’re correct. Meant more so that we trade Bennett for a change of scenery for his sake though. He can go take penalties for another team. Might actually be a net benefit. Being one of the most penalized teams in the league does not help us win considering our scoring troubles. Cleaning up their penalty situation in the future could result in several more wins next season.