Treliving needs to start feeling the heat

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

LOL I laugh at comments like this. Are you saying the team needs a medical cure or exorcism? It's simply an organization that has made a lot of poor decisions over the years not unlike the 10-15 teams around the Flames that have also been mired in mediocrity for decades. Enough of the quick fixes and bad coaching hires. Simply hiring an NHL caliber head coach is a big step for this organization as they need to stop hiring guys that never head coach again in this league as Gulutzan will be five in a row which has to be approaching some sort of futility record as if the guys you hire aren't good enough to coach for other NHL teams it's a clear sign you are hiring the wrong guys.

It is a metaphorical approach. If there is a patient with cancer you don’t give them cold medicine and hope things will turn around. (I.e. hire a new coach like Tippett and cross your fingers and then wonder why things aren’t working a few seasons later). I agree they need to hire a new coach, but I don’t have confidence that the person who will make that decision will make the right choice.

The main point is that I don’t think the flames are just unlucky or have been victims of a handful of poor decisions over the last 30 years. The organization has more problems than simply a head coach. I believe it is more systemic and it’s a chronic problem of bad decision making (coaching choices, scouting, free agent talent acquisition, asset management, drafting) which points to a change needing to be made in upper management so the right people can be hired to make effective changes to the culture of mediocrity in Calgary.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Opposed to what?

Certainly Bollig leaves a lot to be desired, but at least he played games.

These arguments that Treliving made various mistakes along the way with no real understanding of context are obtuse.

I know it's unfashionable to say, but yes Brandon Bollig brought more to the team than the asset they used to acquire him.

Bollig produced negative value over the term of his contract.

A coke and a bag of chips had more value.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Bollig produced negative value over the term of his contract.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

By what measure? For a guy whose job was to bring a physical presence an stick up for his teammates, he was fine. He cost the team the 83rd pick & was paid 1.25/ year. Whose job was he taking? Tuner Elson? Freddie Hamilton?

Bottom line; he was a bottom of the rotation guy who had a specific role on the team & did it. Brandon Bollig's presence on the team 2-3 years ago has next to nothing to do with the Flames today or tomorrow.

The fact people use this as ammo to suggest Treliving is a poor GM is weak.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by TOfan

By what measure? For a guy whose job was to bring a physical presence an stick up for his teammates, he was fine. He cost the team the 83rd pick & was paid 1.25/ year. Whose job was he taking? Tuner Elson? Freddie Hamilton?



Bottom line; he was a bottom of the rotation guy who had a specific role on the team & did it. Brandon Bollig's presence on the team 2-3 years ago has next to nothing to do with the Flames today or tomorrow.



The fact people use this as ammo to suggest Treliving is a poor GM is weak.

They bought out his contract. He was more valuable paying him to not play

By that measure.

You can’t win the lottery without buying tickets. And the Flames surrendered a 3rd round pick for negative value.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

They bought out his contract. He was more valuable paying him to not play

By that measure.

You can’t win the lottery without buying tickets. And the Flames surrendered a 3rd round pick for negative value.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, I guess you have a point. After a quick look there were three players chosen after 83 that look to have turned out to be quality NHL players, Arvidson, Hainen & Kase.

That means in the 127 players selected after the pick used to acquire Bollig three turned out. the Flames had a 2.4% chance of finding their diamond in the rough. 3/127=0.0236. 2.4%.

When will the Flames learn? When will they learn??

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TOfan

By what measure? For a guy whose job was to bring a physical presence an stick up for his teammates, he was fine. He cost the team the 83rd pick & was paid 1.25/ year. Whose job was he taking? Tuner Elson? Freddie Hamilton?

Bottom line; he was a bottom of the rotation guy who had a specific role on the team & did it. Brandon Bollig's presence on the team 2-3 years ago has next to nothing to do with the Flames today or tomorrow.

The fact people use this as ammo to suggest Treliving is a poor GM is weak.

It's the pattern of trading draft picks, occasionally for fringe NHLers, which causes me some concern.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Jets GM Kevin Cheveldayoff was mocked to the point where Flames fans started to vocally express being sorry for Jets fans that they have an idiot GM too afraid to do anything.

Now teams all over the NHL are trying to figure out how to capture his "model" and make it their own.

His model seems relatively straight forward, hit with his 1st round picks and don't trade them

Trouba - check
Scheifele - check
Morrisey - check
Ehlers - check
Connor - check
Laine - check

TBD - Roslovic, Stanley, Vesalainan

Over that period of time they picked 10th overall on average (including a lottery win with Laine) 7/70

Flames drafted 11th 7/74

Mix in hitting with 2nd round and beyond picks with the following guys

Lowry, Hellebuyck, Copp

BT tried a new and novel approach, trading a bunch of picks for current help. To the best of my knowledge there has not been a GM who in 3 years has traded 2 1sts, a 2nd, 3 3rds and a 5th to miss the playoffs 2 out of 3 years and be the 15th best team and the 7th seed the one year they made the playoffs. I am not sure if there has been a GM who has traded away that many picks (net) over such a short period of time.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Well, I guess you have a point. After a quick look there were three players chosen after 83 that look to have turned out to be quality NHL players, Arvidson, Hainen & Kase.

That means in the 127 players selected after the pick used to acquire Bollig three turned out. the Flames had a 2.4% chance of finding their diamond in the rough. 3/127=0.0236. 2.4%.

When will the Flames learn? When will they learn??

I would take Forsling, Bjork, Leblanc, and Lindholm as well. The rest of these 21 year old kids are write-offs.

Those 7 players make it a 5.5% chance, assuming every single other 21 year old in that draft 83rd or lower never contributes at the NHL level. I am willing to place a wager that at least one does if you are willing to take said wager.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

His model seems relatively straight forward, hit with his 1st round picks and don't trade them

Trouba - check
Scheifele - check
Morrisey - check
Ehlers - check
Connor - check
Laine - check

TBD - Roslovic, Stanley, Vesalainan

Over that period of time they picked 10th overall on average (including a lottery win with Laine) 7/70

Flames drafted 11th 7/74

Mix in hitting with 2nd round and beyond picks with the following guys

Lowry, Hellebuyck, Copp

BT tried a new and novel approach, trading a bunch of picks for current help. To the best of my knowledge there has not been a GM who in 3 years has traded 2 1sts, a 2nd, 3 3rds and a 5th to miss the playoffs 2 out of 3 years and be the 15th best team and the 7th seed the one year they made the playoffs. I am not sure if there has been a GM who has traded away that many picks (net) over such a short period of time.

Let's not forget that since 2013 the Flames have drafted (in the first two rounds);

2013: 3 first round picks
2014: 1 first 2 seconds
2015: 2 second round picks
2016: 1 first 2 seconds
2017: 1 first

The premise that the Flames don't prioritize drafting is just not true. A team needs to balance their organizational depth chart, which means sometimes you deal picks for active players.

Also, we are more than two months away from the 2018 draft. Plenty of time for the Flames to recoup picks. Nothing here is written in ink just yet.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Jets GM Kevin Cheveldayoff was mocked to the point where Flames fans started to vocally express being sorry for Jets fans that they have an idiot GM too afraid to do anything.

Now teams all over the NHL are trying to figure out how to capture his "model" and make it their own.

Jets fans were saying the exact same thing...and pretty much everyone else in hockey not just Flames fans

I'm gonna wait to crown the Jets model franchise of the NHL...they have some good draft picks and a nice lottery win

They have also never won a playoff game in franchise history and have this season and next to win with this team. They have some guys due for MASSIVE contracts. They also did just trade their first rounder...an early playoff exit makes that look pretty foolish.

That's the NHL for you, one season you are a bum and the next a hero

Chia was a finalist for GM of the year last season and now he is a joke


Hamilton deal was also a slam dunk, 24 year old leading the NHL is scoring...Hard to criticize that one.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I would take Forsling, Bjork, Leblanc, and Lindholm as well. The rest of these 21 year old kids are write-offs.

Those 7 players make it a 5.5% chance, assuming every single other 21 year old in that draft 83rd or lower never contributes at the NHL level. I am willing to place a wager that at least one does if you are willing to take said wager.

A bet? Why? What would that prove? That mid to late round draft picks occasionally turnout? There's no revelation there. The Flames traded a low percentage pick for a guy who filled a role on a team that was in the early stages of a rebuild. No need to overthink this one.

As I said before, the argument that Treliving is not a good GM supported by the fact he traded the 83rd overall pick for a fourth line face puncher isn't reason enough to support the claim. It's weak.

Further, playing the 'what if' game four years afterwards is pure folly. 'The Flames should have selected Victor Arvidsson' oh ok, thanks genius.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by TOfan

A bet? Why? What would that prove? That mid to late round draft picks occasionally turnout? There's no revelation there. The Flames traded a low percentage pick for a guy who filled a role on a team that was in the early stages of a rebuild. No need to overthink this one.

As I said before, the argument that Treliving is not a good GM supported by the fact he traded the 83rd overall pick for a fourth line face puncher isn't reason enough to support the claim. It's weak.

Further, playing the 'what if' game four years afterwards is pure folly. 'The Flames should have selected Victor Arvidsson' oh ok, thanks genius.

Just pointing out that you missed 4 NHLer's when calculating your "averages". The Flames burn a lot of picks for marginal NHLer's, Bollig may have been a good trade or a bad trade, but making 8 trades of picks for players reduces your pipeline of talent.

Random Brad fact, he has never made a player for player trade, draft picks seem to be the guys only currency.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Just pointing out that you missed 4 NHLer's when calculating your "averages". The Flames burn a lot of picks for marginal NHLer's, Bollig may have been a good trade or a bad trade, but making 8 trades of picks for players reduces your pipeline of talent.

Random Brad fact, he has never made a player for player trade, draft picks seem to be the guys only currency.

Get your facts straight.

It took me no time to think of one. Granlund for Shinkaruk.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Just pointing out that you missed 4 NHLer's when calculating your "averages". The Flames burn a lot of picks for marginal NHLer's, Bollig may have been a good trade or a bad trade, but making 8 trades of picks for players reduces your pipeline of talent.

Random Brad fact, he has never made a player for player trade, draft picks seem to be the guys only currency.

Fair enough, good point.

I do think we are entering a window where we will see player for player trades this offseason.

Sure, the cupboards could always use more stocking, but they look better now than they have in a long time.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Fair enough, good point.



I do think we are entering a window where we will see player for player trades this offseason.



Sure, the cupboards could always use more stocking, but they look better now than they have in a long time.

D and G prospects look good, F looks awfully weak

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Did you hear something?

Unfortunately not.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Considering the expectations for the team this year, I would say that everyone involved in the hockey ops department should be feeling some heat and under some scrutiny. That's what a disappointing season does to an organization - and it should have that effect.

With that being said, it isn't like Treliving has shown himself to be a bumbling idiot. While I haven't agreed with every move he has made, he is nowhere close to even being considered a poor GM, or one that should perhaps be fired.

A GM should have a longer leash than a coach. He is no Peter Chiarelli here. Let's see what the off-season changes bring (as there are always some), and let's see how the team responds next season. If the Flames don't become a top team (consistent top 8 or so team in the NHL) over the course of the next few seasons, then we can start having discussions about who should be replacing Treliving.

I think the NHL is fairly cyclic. Teams rise to the top, should stay there, and then they often start fading and end up near the bottom for a while. The Flames should be one of those teams that rise to the top eventually, hopefully stay there awhile, and then like most other organizations eventually deteriorate and the cycle begins anew.

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Unfortunately not.

Thanks.

Honestly I won’t be too worried unless I hear Brad come out and say that he is bringing GG back next year, full stop.

Anything else he says to anyone right now is about being discrete and respectful, and diplomatically avoiding any premature statements.

I still have some faith that BT is a bright guy who does the right thing, and there are so many compelling reasons to move on from this coaching staff. Not the least of which is that it puts his job firmly on the line to try again with a failing coach. Self preservation is very powerful.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

With that being said, it isn't like Treliving has shown himself to be a bumbling idiot. While I haven't agreed with every move he has made, he is nowhere close to even being considered a poor GM, or one that should perhaps be fired.

Bad GMs rarely look like flat out idiots. For example, if you make me GM, I would try to address scoring issues and depth issues, I would trade one of the D for some RH top six RW and bring some depth energetic guys for cheap bottom six. See, I am already looking halfway competent. The nature of GMs job is that the overall general plan is so obvious, that even an average fan like me can make moves that would, at worst, make sense. If I sign Brouwer, I would say - well, the team did need a top-six RW, didn't it, and Brouwer was the best available option. If I trade for Elliott, I would say, we the team needed a starting goalie, and Elliott's numbers were pretty good. If I draft Bennett, I would say well, all the draft experts had Bennett around 4th overall, the pick made sense at that point.

The difference between good GM and bad GM is execution. Making moves that make sense us fairly easy. You rarely see GMs making moves that look stupid from the get-go. Even Hall for Larsson deal actually made sense for Chiarelli.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by TOfan

A bet? Why? What would that prove? That mid to late round draft picks occasionally turnout? There's no revelation there. The Flames traded a low percentage pick for a guy who filled a role on a team that was in the early stages of a rebuild. No need to overthink this one.

The Flames traded a lottery ticket for a guy who was horrible and was subsequently bought out.

They traded positive value for negative value.