Blow it up!

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Gaudreau and Lindholm have been good.
Backlund has been inconsistent but mostly good.
Gio has taken a step back but as should be expected for his age, plus others at D have stepped up.

The only core guy who's really laying an egg is Tkachuk.

Its cliché to say it's the core.
The problems with this team are systematic, not individual players.

I’d say Jonny has been the only real bright spot.
It’s not cliche it’s the truth.
Your not winning anything with this core sorry.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Yoho

I’d say Jonny has been the only real bright spot.
It’s not cliche it’s the truth.
Your not winning anything with this core sorry.

I'm not fully in disagreement, I'd trade a couple of them myself.
But we'll never know exactly how rotten the team is unless we have a real coach first.

You have to start there and if it still doesn't work you've at least exhausted all alternative reasonings for the team flaws.

Man to man, the players having individually bad seasons is actually very low on this team right now.

[Enoch Root]

There is no way they are blowing it up. It's a pretty ridiculous and short-sighted notion when the core is almost all between 23 and 27.

They have an elite goalie.

They have a deep and strong defense - certainly good enough to be a competitive team.

They have some talent up front. But there are definitely some problems. I think they need to do two things:

1) decide what type of team they want to be.
2) get a coach who can play that style, then move out the players who can't, and bring in players who can

The biggest question is: is the current management capable of doing that? I have been a Treliving supporter from the start. But 7 years in and he hasn't accomplished either of those things.

[CroCop]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There is no way they are blowing it up. It's a pretty ridiculous and short-sighted notion when the core is almost all between 23 and 27.

They have an elite goalie.

They have a deep and strong defense - certainly good enough to be a competitive team.

They have some talent up front. But there are definitely some problems. I think they need to do two things:

1) decide what type of team they want to be.
2) get a coach who can play that style, then move out the players who can't, and bring in players who can

The biggest question is: is the current management capable of doing that? I have been a Treliving supporter from the start. But 7 years in and he hasn't accomplished either of those things.

Ok that’s probably what most of us would consider blowing it up

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CroCop

Ok that’s probably what most of us would consider blowing it up

Fair enough!

My idea of blowing it up is trading all the talent for picks and prospects, and starting over.

Considering that we are in the top 10 in the league (easily IMO) with respect to goaltending and defense (combined), I don't see us starting over.

So not a rebuild IMO.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There is no way they are blowing it up. It's a pretty ridiculous and short-sighted notion when the core is almost all between 23 and 27.

They have an elite goalie.

They have a deep and strong defense - certainly good enough to be a competitive team.

They have some talent up front. But there are definitely some problems. I think they need to do two things:

1) decide what type of team they want to be.
2) get a coach who can play that style, then move out the players who can't, and bring in players who can

The biggest question is: is the current management capable of doing that? I have been a Treliving supporter from the start. But 7 years in and he hasn't accomplished either of those things.

Thing is, I suspect posters here have vastly different ideas about who the problems are up front.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

1) decide what type of team they want to be.
2) get a coach who can play that style, then move out the players who can't, and bring in players who can

The biggest question is: is the current management capable of doing that? I have been a Treliving supporter from the start. But 7 years in and he hasn't accomplished either of those things.

Those two things are actually just what I think Treliving has been doing. The move from Hartley to Gulutzan was a total change in style, and since then it's all been fairly similar approach but with different coaches behind the bench. Tre seems to have an idea about how he wants the team to play and has repeatedly gone for coaches whose approach match his vision. He has made some excellent trades, and he's managed the cap and player contracts well, but the pieces haven't quite been a good fit together and his vision hasn't found sustainable success. There are few GMs in the league who I would have more confidence in for trades, player acquisition and cap management, but I'm not confident that what he has envisioned the team becoming is actually a winning model on the ice.

It's disappointing, because there are good tools to build a team there, but it feels they're being employed to realize a vision that is flawed. If Tre is given more time, the question is whether he uses that to keep retooling players and coaches towards better realizing his vision in the belief it can still work, or he changes his vision and uses his strong operational skills to build towards something different.

[CroCop]

I think the hope is that if you move talent out you get talent back. Sometimes a change of scenery for players and teams is enough to inject life into a group. This current Flames group have had more than a big enough sample size to prove they are not good enough. It is inexcusable to not be ready to play yet this has been the case for them almost every time out this season. There are problems with this team and it’s personnel related. I feel that instead of entertaining the fan base they’ve been infuriating them on most nights. Another problem is that our prospect pool is not elite so no help coming from there. Blow it up whoever that may include and hopefully they find a mix that works or at least competes.

[Lanny_McDonald]

It is actually hilarious to look at this lineup and suggest that we blow it up. The answers are in the room. They really are. The forward mix is fine. The defensive mix is fine. The goaltending mix is more than fine. The problem is we have bozos running the show.

How ####ing hard is it to look at the lineup cards of the past and see where successes have been? This isn't rocket science. Go back and put together a lineup based on previous successes and run those lines and pairs. Don't overthink it. Don't try and make guys play roles they are not suited to. This is an automatic thing.

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm was one of the best lines in the NHL and terrorized teams for the better part of a season, before it got tinkered with by someone believing playoff hockey had to be different from the dominating style the team employed. Go back and let these guys play their up tempo high speed attack game and success will follow.

Tkachuk-Backlund-Mangipane was a great second line, bordering on a first line. Again, why mess with success? Because you have to prove you're the smartest guy in the room? Terry Crisp was a great coach because he came in, put together a system that worked for the talent in the room, filled out the lineup card, kicked the guys in the ass when they needed it, and then stay the hell out of the way. Only when things was going sideways did he step in and tinker, and only to counter what was happening in the game. Beyond that he knew his team was the best in the league and he let them play. We need someone that can do just that and let guys that play well toegther, stay together and garner success.

Lucic-Bennett-Dube was dominant in the play-in and post season. As much as I dislike Bennett and what he brings t the table, this was an effective line. If we're going to sit on Bennett, play him with guys where he has had success. Let these guys play together and hopefully they rekindle what they had.

That's the make up of your forward lines. The 4th line is for role players and get spot duty except for special teams and such. Defensively we know what pairings have worked this year. Stick with them. Goaltending is fixed.

Now, just get the hell out of the way and let these guys play to their strengths. No more stupid moving the puck backwards to organize. Move the puck forward and toward the oppositions net at all times. First guy that makes a pass back into their own zone except for a line change get's taken out behind the Saddledome and gets a paddlin'. Up tempo high speed transition game. Entertaining hockey or GTFO!!!

[MillerTime GFG]

Pretty much the same core since 2014, with multiple coaches, but the answers are in the room?

It's the intangibles that this room doesn't have. The will to win. Going to bat for each other. Compete level. Those are not in this room. At least, there's enough in there that don't to drag down those that do.

[Coach]

On paper, this is the best Flames team I've probably seen in my lifetime (unless prime Kipper and Iggy are worth 2-3 players each, which is possible).

We don't need to blow it up. We need this man.

[Strange Brew]

I am not convinced that changing line combinations does much of anything. We have seen for years now that when the other team ups their intensity level, the core of team has a hard time winning.

[Moneyhands23]

Half the players on the team don't finish checks and refuse to take a hit or drive to the middle of the ice. That is a huge part of the problems

[1234iggykipper]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/960/boomer-...chuk-incident/

Figured this was relative to the thread. A good rant from Rhett on today's morning show

[CroCop]

Originally Posted by 1234iggykipper

https://www.sportsnet.ca/960/boomer-...chuk-incident/

Figured this was relative to the thread. A good rant from Rhett on today's morning show

Good on Rhett! Echos everything I feel about this group.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Thing is, I suspect posters here have vastly different ideas about who the problems are up front.

Absolutely, but maybe it isn't a matter of precise surgery, but rather an amputation based on practical considerations (age, contract terms, position, etc.).

Some of us saw this before the last TDL. I was advocating that the ideas of selling assets and being competitive in the playoffs were not mutually exclusive (I contend that we could have just as easily found ourselves knocked out in rd. 1 game 6 w/o Brodie and even Gaudreau on the roster).

Every cup winner since the big lockout won multiple playoff rounds in the 2-3 years before winning the cup (the Kings are the sole exception - though even their two consecutive eliminations in game 6 rd. 1 were more impressive than the Flames previous 4 years).

It was obvious to me that it was time to fold the hand we had and try to refresh around our promising pieces like Andersson, Dubé, Mange, Valimaki, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Hanifin. Instead we pushed out chips into the middle chasing an inside straight, when the winning hand was probably going to be a flush or full house anyways.

Hope is never a good plan, yet it seems to be an integral part of this org's vision for the future.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by New Era

It is actually hilarious to look at this lineup and suggest that we blow it up. The answers are in the room. They really are. The forward mix is fine. The defensive mix is fine. The goaltending mix is more than fine. The problem is we have bozos running the show.

How ####ing hard is it to look at the lineup cards of the past and see where successes have been? This isn't rocket science. Go back and put together a lineup based on previous successes and run those lines and pairs. Don't overthink it. Don't try and make guys play roles they are not suited to. This is an automatic thing.

Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm was one of the best lines in the NHL and terrorized teams for the better part of a season, before it got tinkered with by someone believing playoff hockey had to be different from the dominating style the team employed. Go back and let these guys play their up tempo high speed attack game and success will follow.

Tkachuk-Backlund-Mangipane was a great second line, bordering on a first line. Again, why mess with success? Because you have to prove you're the smartest guy in the room? Terry Crisp was a great coach because he came in, put together a system that worked for the talent in the room, filled out the lineup card, kicked the guys in the ass when they needed it, and then stay the hell out of the way. Only when things was going sideways did he step in and tinker, and only to counter what was happening in the game. Beyond that he knew his team was the best in the league and he let them play. We need someone that can do just that and let guys that play well toegther, stay together and garner success.

Lucic-Bennett-Dube was dominant in the play-in and post season. As much as I dislike Bennett and what he brings t the table, this was an effective line. If we're going to sit on Bennett, play him with guys where he has had success. Let these guys play together and hopefully they rekindle what they had.

That's the make up of your forward lines. The 4th line is for role players and get spot duty except for special teams and such. Defensively we know what pairings have worked this year. Stick with them. Goaltending is fixed.

Now, just get the hell out of the way and let these guys play to their strengths. No more stupid moving the puck backwards to organize. Move the puck forward and toward the oppositions net at all times. First guy that makes a pass back into their own zone except for a line change get's taken out behind the Saddledome and gets a paddlin'. Up tempo high speed transition game. Entertaining hockey or GTFO!!!

Well said.

A major difference I see when watching the Flames vs other teams, is that the Flames stars don't actually get to play their own games. I get that it's better to have defensively aware and well rounded players, but you can't take a player like JG and stop him from playing his game and expect success. You have to let him free roam. If that means having someone else cover for him defensively, then so be it.

Let the players play to their strengths and give them linemates that compliment these strengths. This is exactly why your point about lines is so on point. Tkachuk works very well with a player like Backlund. JG works well with a trigger man and a distraction (he can't be double teamed). Hence why he, Monahan, and Lindholm were so dominant.

Even when you compare them to Vancouver, the Flames set up is very frustrating. They are giving Pettersson 77.5 offensive zone starts. Why can't the Flames do the same with Gaudreau? We have one of the best defensive centres in the game, Backlund, but we feel the need to train Gaudreau to be more well rounded as a player? Drop these systems and let the players play.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Coach

On paper, this is the best Flames team I've probably seen in my lifetime (unless prime Kipper and Iggy are worth 2-3 players each, which is possible).

We don't need to blow it up. We need this man.

Why would we entrust a bobblehead wearing sunglasses on his T-shirt to fix this team?

[Calgary4LIfe]

If your definition of a proper rebuild and competitive team is winning the cup, maybe sports isn't for you.


The Stanley Cup is the goal of course. However, we have seen great teams miss out on the cup due to injuries, lucky-bounces, running into a team that is riding red-hot and just seems to have your team's number - that stuff happens. Personally, winning the cup is what I hope for, but not necessarily what I expect.


What I expect is for the team I cheer for to be a legitimate contender for the cup. For a core group of players to have a few runs during their prime years. 3rd round, 4th round... to have success in the regular season as well.


A properly rebuilt team shouldn't be a bubble-team. It shouldn't be 1st round fodder every time when it gets to the show.


Is this a failed rebuild? Does the coach need replacing? Both?


I don't see a Stanley Cup finalist team in the North Division. I just don't. Sorry Toronto and Montreal Fans, but your teams aren't good enough.


With that being said, is Calgary? Absolutely not. In the North Division, the Flames aren't doing so hot. 4 game series against Vancouver, and who was the better team? I would say Vancouver.


Calgary was backstopped by Markstrom who is fricken good. Of course he is part of the team, and that counts. No apologies there. Dig a little deeper... Gaudreau is scoring right now at an insane (and dare I say, unsustainable?) shooting percentage. He has looked great - he really does, and I was an advocate for NOT trading him away. He will come back down to earth in terms of shooting percentage, however. I am sure he will still be playing great though - and I say that sincerely. I love Gaudreau. When he comes back down to his normal shooting percentage, suddenly things are going to look worse.


Things aren't looking great. Vancouver out-played Calgary. It seemed they had a better system that nullified Calgary's breakouts. They played a MUCH better defensive game all-around in my opinion, especially as the games went on.


Here is the conclusion that I have come to:


Gaudreau MAY not be good enough to win a cup.
Monahan MAY not be good enough to win a cup.
Tkachuk... Lindholm... Backlund... Dube... Mangiapane.. the rest of the forwards and defence, and even Markstrom (and Rittich). This team MAY not be good enough to win a cup.


I also think that Ward may not be good enough to win a cup. Anyone want to argue that point?



Now, the Flames can go out and trade some of the core and try to get core pieces back - though the off-season is a much more likely scenario to do so. However, you also waste a year. More prime seasons and team-friendly deals wasted, I may add.


It is a heck of a lot easier to change the coach. Yeah, some people will say: "Another coach? Maybe if you keep doing the same things and expecting different results, then you are crazy." (I thought I would get the jump on that statement - I HATE that statement, it is an idiotic statement that is not something that either Einstein stated or is even close to the definition of insanity!! grrr).


Can anyone make a case as to why Ward is RIGHT? Can anyone make a legitimate case as to why Ward is the right coach for this team, and that he is making the most of the team on paper in terms of results on the ice? Any rationale as to what makes you confident that he is part of the solution, other than the Flames have gone through a bunch of coaches already?



Flames have also tried Leivo, Nordstrom, Simon, Bennett, Mangiapane, Ritchie (and I believe Dube - but maybe I am wrong on that one). So I guess since they tried all these different players on the top line RW, and none of them worked out, then might as well just keep Ritchie there for good then, right? It is the exact same argument, and for me, it is a non-starter.


I think Ward was the wrong call. I would have preferred that Treliving did a search and retained an experienced head coach with a decent track record after Peters was let go. Fine - let's see what Ward can do... and I wasn't impressed (and neither were a lot of other people here too).


I think good teams have good coaching. Most coaches have a shelf-life, but it is crazy to be a hockey fan and not see how much a coach can impact a team. We saw it with Darryl Sutter here in Calgary (and just look at the turn around in LA when he got there!!). Berube in St. Louis was huge (unproven, but an impact nonetheless).



Want to change the culture on your team? You have two choices - change a bunch of the players, or change the coach. Have a team that doesn't feel like starting on time over and over again? Change the players, or change the coach.


In my opinion, the coach is who is responsible for the players' effort. If they are not giving a full effort, well, he has to address it and manage it. If the players don't cooperate, the coach benches that player, if the team doesn't cooperate, run exhausting drills. If the players are still not cooperating, you escalate to the GM and let him know that players x,y,z are not team players, and you want them moved. Sure, it may cost you your job, but you are toast anyway if this doesn't get resolved.


It may very well be the players. I am not saying it is absolutely not. I do think that this is Calgary's last and best shot at winning a cup with the current core, and the team friendly deals that they have. Flames are going to have to address the Gaudreau situation THIS off-season. Maybe they re-sign him, and then the Flames have another team-friendly deal to work with. Maybe they trade him - and the team could improve or it could get worse (IMO, you are not going to get someone as skilled as Gaudreau in any trade, but I will accept that argument that the players back may end up as 'better fits').


I see no possible rationale that continuing with Ward as the coach is giving this team the best chance to win. I don't see it. Maybe he is not part of the problem (but coaches are ultimately responsible in my opinion, so to me, it almost doesn't matter).


You have THIS season. This is the best season for the Flames to win (or at least go far in the playoffs). If you are not 100% sure that your coach is the right person for the job, then what are you really doing? Why bank on a coach who is inexperienced AND not getting the results needed in what may very well be your last best chance?


Changing the coach is much easier than changing the players. If there was one single high end coach that was brought in since Hartley, I would be on the bandwagon of: "Change the core, or just blow it up". I can't say that.



I can't say that Ward is the right coach just like I can't say that Brett Ritchie is this team's first line RW. Maybe they both are. I am betting that neither are suited for their respective roles.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by 1234iggykipper

https://www.sportsnet.ca/960/boomer-...chuk-incident/

Figured this was relative to the thread. A good rant from Rhett on today's morning show

Heard it this morning and was just nodding my head about everything he said.

There is something wrong in the locker room. They don’t stand up for each other.