Treliving needs to start feeling the heat

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Treliving is the 11th longest tenured GM in the league right now. 20 other teams have brought in someone new since the Flames hired him.

I think the stability for the sake of it angle is overblown. The Flames should rightly make a GM change if they miss the playoffs again, IMO.

Change for the change sake is also overblown
Again I hope the Flames make decisions with a lot more consideration and factors than a binary "miss the playoffs and you are out" type of approach.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

So pay Bobrovsky.

If Treliving just stopped signing replacement players to large deals on July 1, we could afford to do this with zero concern. If you don't have a goalie, you're not doing anything.

Get the goalie. Whatever it costs. Get the goalie.

Ugh.

Again, a $10.0 m UFA contract IS JUST TOO MUCH MONEY TO SINK INTO THE POSITION. It would be a terrible idea to simply hand over a blank cheque to Bobrovsky in hopes that he would fix everything moving forward. Treliving needs to be smart about this.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

My concern with this is largely that this is precisely how this organization has operated historically.
Again, I would strongly suggest that one of the shared characteristics of poor organizations is lack of consistency within upper management. And part of this is GMs not being given enough time.
Ultimately, results matter, but I don’t think you can just evaluate a GM on the basis of standings. At some point the roster has to do the job.
So when I look at BT I think you have to evaluate the entire body of work including:

• Drafting
• Trades
• Retaining free agents
• Signing new free agents and if those deals are good or not
• Overall cap management
• Overall asset management

I won’t go blow by blow, but for me, BT makes more good moves than bad.
Firing him after this season, because the team doesn’t make the playoffs, will be more of the same for this franchise. Meaning, hire a guy, don’t give him enough time, fire him, rinse and repeat.

At some point you gotta break the cycle and just believe that the guy you have on top is smart and ultimately is making more good moves than bad. If, you don’t believe that, then yes he should be canned.

Looking at it blow by blow like that is a good way for fans to assess how a GM is doing, as that is the only information we have.

If I am the owner though, I am assessing the GM on his vision and their execution against that vision. Are they reactionary, or are they purpose led?

We just aren't privy to a lot of the things that drive Treliving's agenda. What attributes do championships teams have? How do you go about acquiring players with those attributes? What is the plan to be competitive now? Five years from now? What is the team's expected salary structure in 2 years? In 5 years?

What's your plan to change course if your assessments of the current team is off? What do your contingency plans look like? Do you believe the team's core is good enough to contend? How are you coming to that conclusion? Are Gaudreau, Monahan and Tkachuk good enough to be the best players on a championship team? If not, what do you plan to do about it? Show me a plan A, B and C for goaltending.

We don't know very much about how Treliving thinks about any of this IMO

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Treliving is the 11th longest tenured GM in the league right now. 20 other teams have brought in someone new since the Flames hired him.

I think the stability for the sake of it angle is overblown. The Flames should rightly make a GM change if they miss the playoffs again, IMO.

I expect this will probably happen, but would hope that the decision is not made so arbitrarily. I generally think that NHL team owners are too impatient, and end up hurting their own team's chances of success by expectations for short turnarounds and too much managerial turnover.

[MolsonInBothHands]

So, assuming Treliving does end up being the head on the pike, whether you agree with that or not, who has confidence in Ken King leading the the recruitment of his successor?

[I_H8_Crawford]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But it is no longer 1995. Like it or not the NHL players culture has changed, and there simply is no room in today's game for coaches like Hartley or Scotty Bowman. I have serious doubts that players of any team would respond at all to a "hard ass coach." This is a different world in which we live.

D Sutter who is a hard ass did alright with the Kings for a number of years just recently.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

So pay Bobrovsky.

If Treliving just stopped signing replacement players to large deals on July 1, we could afford to do this with zero concern. If you don't have a goalie, you're not doing anything.

Get the goalie. Whatever it costs. Get the goalie.

This...and he hasn't had great success with those signs either.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I expect this will probably happen, but would hope that the decision is not made so arbitrarily. I generally think that NHL team owners are too impatient, and end up hurting their own team's chances of success by expectations for short turnarounds and too much managerial turnover.

Explain the Penguins ownership. I can't think of a more accurate counter example, every time they've fired a coach or GM it comes up aces.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Ugh.

Again, a $10.0 m UFA contract IS JUST TOO MUCH MONEY TO SINK INTO THE POSITION. It would be a terrible idea to simply hand over a blank cheque to Bobrovsky in hopes that he would fix everything moving forward. Treliving needs to be smart about this.

Trade some people and make room for Bobrovsky. The list of untouchables on this roster has to be pretty small. Five at most.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Explain the Penguins ownership. I can't think of a more accurate counter example, every time they've fired a coach or GM it comes up aces.

Yeah, what do they have that other teams don't?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

D Sutter who is a hard ass did alright with the Kings for a number of years just recently.

Is he really, though? I mean, he can be tough on players, but D Sutter is also with great frequency his players's biggest advocate and supporter. He is a special kind of coach, but I also wouldn't be surprised if even he has coached his last NHL game.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Trade some people and make room for Bobrovsky. The list of untouchables on this roster has to be pretty small. Five at most.

Having the cap room available to sign a $10 m goalie does nothing to change the fact that it is too much money to allocate to the position.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yeah, what do they have that other teams don't?

Sure, they've got two of the league's best players. I'm speaking to the conclusion that impatience is some kind of plague.

Being that the Penguins have these greats, they should be the ones who exhibit more patience, yet they pull the trigger when deemed necessary.

There were legitimate discussions here that Pittsburgh should get max value for Malkin before his decline (like Iginla) The Penguins were playing a bad brand of hockey under Mike Johnston.

A GM and coaching change later, they've added two more cups *shrug*

[jayswin]

I'm willing to bet Bobrovski will be signed to 7.5-8mil AAV contract when all is said and done. Yeah, he wants $10mil so now that's become the price that every fan pencils into a mock up roster for next season, but I don't see him actually getting that.

Most teams would balk at $10mil to sign the best goalie in the league (Price) due to the absolute wrench it throws in the standard cap structure. Plus, if his play keeps up it could come down even more.

Personally, I'd roll the dice on Bobrovski right now if Columbus is willing and start contract talks immediately with his poor start, try to get a 7-8m/yr deal done.

[jayswin]

You can nail a roster build to perfection and throw it all away with a faltering goalie like Mike Smith is showing signs of now.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Sure, they've got two of the league's best players. I'm speaking to the conclusion that impatience is some kind of plague.

Being that the Penguins have these greats, they should be the ones who exhibit more patience, yet they pull the trigger when deemed necessary.

There were legitimate discussions here that Pittsburgh should get max value for Malkin before his decline (like Iginla) The Penguins were playing a bad brand of hockey under Mike Johnston.

A GM and coaching change later, they've added two more cups *shrug*

Is this more a case of correlation not equalling causation? I will agree that the coaching change was smart, but in that situation you also trust that the two best centres on the planet will do a lot to make its work.

I still maintain that regardless of whatever the Penguins did after bringing in Rutherford the pattern of frequent administrative change undertaken by most NHL owners is not good. As a counter example, take the Washington Capitals: they just won their first Stanley Cup with a core that was assembled starting in 2004. In that time there have been two GMs in 15 years.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Is this more a case of correlation not equalling causation? I will agree that the coaching change was smart, but in that situation you also trust that the two best centres on the planet will do a lot to make its work.

I still maintain that regardless of whatever the Penguins did after bringing in Rutherford the pattern of frequent administrative change undertaken by most NHL owners is not good. As a counter example, take the Washington Capitals: they just won their first Stanley Cup with a core that was assembled starting in 2004. In that time there have been two GMs in 15 years.

So they have been at or near the top of the league since 07-08, after a franchise changing player in Ovechkin, the most prolific goal scorer of our era, had a couple of years to develop.

Easy to argue for stability in that case.

It took 2 years after drafting Ovechkin to become a top team perennially. Flames are in year 4 or so of the rebuild with no appreciable improvement at all.

[The Boy Wonder]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Having the cap room available to sign a $10 m goalie does nothing to change the fact that it is too much money to allocate to the position.

If you wouldn't allocate $10mil to that position I don't know what position you would deem more important...

Goaltending, as we've already seen this year, is the reason that games are close or not.

If you can get a stud goalie who can give you 55-65 high quality starts and gives you say a .700 Winning % in those games, then you are already setting yourself up for success in this league.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Having the cap room available to sign a $10 m goalie does nothing to change the fact that it is too much money to allocate to the position.

Why? A $10M goalie only precludes you from doing things like signing guys like Raymond, Brouwer and Ryan.

Again, if you don't have a goalie, you don't have a team. Get a goalie. The goalie is THE story of every team that gets to the finals with rare, rare exceptions.

Pay what it costs to get the most important player on the team. Until that position is settled, the Calgary Flames are pretending they matter.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Why? A $10M goalie only precludes you from doing things like signing guys like Raymond, Brouwer and Ryan.

Again, if you don't have a goalie, you don't have a team. Get a goalie. The goalie is THE story of every team that gets to the finals with rare, rare exceptions.

Pay what it costs to get the most important player on the team. Until that position is settled, the Calgary Flames are pretending they matter.

Yeah, I’ve posted the percentage breakdown before, but the Flames could easily fit in a $10 million goalie.

We can afford a $10M goalie because we don’t have a Stamkos, Tavares, Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Karlsson, etc.

We may very well need a $10M goalie because we don’t have any of those caliber players.