Flames Identity Crisis

[Enoch Root]

The team has quit, that appears to be true.

It could be they have quit on each other, or it could be that they have quit on the coach. Or maybe there is some of both.

Regardless, there appears to be problems. Things have to change.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

IMO I have to disagree that the roster is not built skill and creativity. Gaudreau is a skilled puck handler, a pretty good area passer. Aside from that, nah. Monahan is a guy who has good instincts, shoots well and goes into hard areas. Lucic is the same, with a better board game and a worse shot. Mangiapane and Dube are guys with a medium amount of skill who skate hard. Lindholm is a good 200 foot guy who can shoot. Backlund is the same, with more D and less O. Tkachuk - well on his game he’s a creative guy in tight and is good at protecting the puck (not this year).

Across the 18-19 and 19-20 seasons this "core" was top 5 in Goals For. There is a lot of skill on this roster.

It's just playing in a system that is limiting that skill right now.

[2ArmBands]

Did Tre not make a statement shortly after naming Ward the coach that it was "now on the players" and that they have gone through enough coaching changes that it was up to the core to now elevate. No more excuses.

Maybe I am dreaming it up but I'm pretty certain something along those lines was said.

Ball is in your court now Tre.

I know a lot of people are still making the "hire a legitimate coach" argument. I don't necessarily think they are wrong and yes there might be something to it. But after watching this team night in and night out and the ridiculous amount of inconsistency and drive do you really think just a coaching change is the answer?

[Red]

Originally Posted by rogermexico

That segment from Rhett was really something and it's worth taking a listen to once they post it on the podcast.

This is my Coles notes version from what I remember:
He talked about the divide on the Flames teams he was on between the offence-first forwards and the defence-first group. He was very deliberate to emphasize that it's not like they didn't respect or like each-other – they all got along, it was more a matter of, after a loss, Rhett and Reg and Kipper would say 'We could have won that game if there was a bit more back-checking' and Iggy and Tanguay would say 'We could have won that game if the D had got the puck up to us a bit quicker so we could score some goals.' Rhett said something to the effect of 'Both sides were probably right, but the problem was, we were never in agreement and pulling in the same direction.'

They talked about the current team and they quickly got to Tkachuk, the Muzzin thing, etc. They made it clear they were speculating. But Rhett started to get pretty passionate. He basically said 'If there is a group in the dressing room that wants Tkachuk to dial it back, and isn't willing to play with that edge, then shame on them. And if Tkachuk is pouting or not trying for whatever reason, then shame on him.'

He said, and I'm roughly paraphrasing from memory here, that what it looks like to him is that there are too many players that just don't care.

Pinder said something along the lines of 'You can't fix that – there's too many of them, it's not like you can ship them all out.'

And Rhett disagreed. He said 'You don't ship them all out - you identify the biggest problem in the leadership group, and you get rid of that person. Move them out. Lose the trade. Don't worry about the return - what matters is getting rid of someone and sending the message that the other guys that don't care won't be sheltered anymore.'

There was a really interesting moment. He got really emotional about it, and said something along the lines of 'Because what does it matter if you don't win? I was on some really good Flames teams but it didn't matter because we never won. Who remembers the 07/08 Flames?'

Anyway that's a rough re-telling. Go back and listen to it though, because it was quite a segment.

Thanks for posting this. I wasn't able to listen.

He is so right. Couch GMs, like us fans want to win every deal on paper. But when you have a real team out there with "personalities" you better just fix that and fast. You can lose a trade and improve the team long term.

This is why I said day one to trade Bennett for whatever they get. He is not going to bring a big return anyways so waiting on a better deal is pointless. Meanwhile we have a player in the room that asked to be moved.

Now we potentially have the Tkachuk situation. What if the outcome is that they have to trade Chucky? How many months will it take for Treliving to find the "right" deal? Meanwhile the team is a mess.


Treliving's "process" got us where exactly in 7 years? How many great players did he whiff on after getting close? Penny pinchers don't win in this league.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The team has quit, that appears to be true.

It could be they have quit on each other, or it could be that they have quit on the coach. Or maybe there is some of both.

Regardless, there appears to be problems. Things have to change.

And honestly they should do both.

Get a new coach AND make a major deal.

I shared this in the game thread yesterday but this team has had a lot of "core" turnover even though it doesn't feel like it.

Here in 17-18: Gio, Backlund, Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Bennett

New since then: Lindholm, Mangiapane, Dube, Lucic, Ryan, Hanifin, Tanev, Andersson, Valimaki, Markstrom

Only 6 guys are still the same from those years! We’ve turned over 75% of the roster.

So if you want to make a locker room changing deal it needs to be one of those 6:

Bennett - Not Impactful enough
Backlund - Actually seems like a guy who has success with any of the coaches and gives a damn
Tkachuk - Plays like a heart and soul guy but could be moved in the right deal.

To me it feels like if you want to shake up the locker room you have one of three options - Gaudreau, Monahan, or Gio.

[Red]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

And honestly they should do both.

Get a new coach AND make a major deal.

I shared this in the game thread yesterday but this team has had a lot of turnover even though it doesn't feel like it.

Here in 17-18: Gio, Backlund, Monahan, Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Bennett

New since then: Lindholm, Mangiapane, Dube, Lucic, Ryan, Hanifin, Tanev, Andersson, Valimaki, Markstrom

Only 6 guys are still the same from those years! We’ve turned over 75% of the roster.

So if you want to make a locker room changing deal it needs to be one of those 6:

Bennett - Not Impactful enough
Backlund - Actually seems like a guy who has success with any of the coaches and gives a damn
Tkachuk - Plays like a heart and soul guy but could be moved in the right deal.

To me it feels like if you want to shake up the locker room you have one of three options - Gaudreau, Monahan, or Gio.

Gio has no trade value so no point to trade him. Johnny is playing quite well all things considered. He won't be a top player here when it matters, but he can make guys around him better.
Monahan has 4 goals in the last 36 games. Going back to the covid restart. Could be longer as I didnt check the tail end of the last season.
He scored:
2 PP goals
1 EN
1 5on5

Yikes.

[rogermexico]

I have been a 'this team is close, no need to over-react, just need a few adjustments to realize their potential' guy for a long time.

The tone of Rhett's voice when he said 'Who remembers the 07/08 Flames?' really shook me.

Because that team was probably legitimately some bad breaks away from doing something, and things didn't go their way. And in the end they just lost and that's all that's left.

I don't think this team is as anywhere near as close as that team was. So my god, what do you do? Because you've got to do something.

[MillerTime GFG]

Originally Posted by Red

Gio has no trade value so no point to trade him. Johnny is playing quite well all things considered. He won't be a top player here when it matters, but he can make guys around him better.
Monahan has 4 goals in the last 36 games. Going back to the covid restart. Could be longer as I didnt check the tail end of the last season.
He scored:
2 PP goals
1 EN
1 5on5

Yikes.

In terms of return, I think Monahan fetches us the most, and I agree with your assessment on JG. I don't mind the thought of keeping him, which is kind of a pivot from where I previously stood.

At this point though, moving Gio also would be addition by subtraction. Free up some cap, and I think our D is actually better off without him at this point. Love Gio, but it's time to move on.

*Disclaimer - I don't know the expansion rules well enough to comment on how the above would impact protecting/exposing other players.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

To me it feels like if you want to shake up the locker room you have one of three options - Gaudreau, Monahan, or Gio.

Or all 3.

Tkachuk is/should definitely be an option as well. He is not a fast player and will regress faster than a lot of players. And his upcoming contract will be a major issue for this organization. And who knows what he's like off the ice, in the room.

Besides, if the goal is to change the culture of the team everyone should be an option.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Or all 3.

Tkachuk is/should definitely be an option as well. He is not a fast player and will regress faster than a lot of players. And his upcoming contract will be a major issue for this organization. And who knows what he's like off the ice, in the room.

Besides, if the goal is to change the culture of the team everyone should be an option.

You need to start with trading one, and it’s whoever gets you the best return.

You’re not making midseason trades of three core players that have term left during a pandemic.

[CalgaryFan1988]

If our teams identity wants to be hard working and gritty, I don't think that means that every player needs to fit that mold. I still think you need players like Monahan and Gaudreau. I do think they need to be split up 5 on 5 though.

It's a lot easier to change a coach than it is to win every trade that's wanted.

That said, I would be down with trading Gaudreau, Monahan and Giordano. I just don't see us dealing from a position of strength (maybe Gaudreau)

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by rogermexico

I don't think this team is as anywhere near as close as that team was. So my god, what do you do? Because you've got to do something.

The whole point is to win a championship. That's it. Yes, I know it's about just making the playoffs, hoping to go on a run, entertain the fans, etc. But realistically the only goal is to win it all.

This team won't. So BT has to ask himself, what do I have to do to get there? I think he's been too loyal to this core, and I think there's a lot of tough decisions coming up soon. Things he probably should have done already but left to give this core one more chance. It's not just one move, one trade. There's a lot of work to be done if this team is serious about winning it all.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

You need to start with trading one, and it’s whoever gets you the best return.

You’re not making midseason trades of three core players that have term left during a pandemic.

Sorry, I should have clarified, I meant in the offseason. You are correct, with everything going on it would be tough to make multiple big trades, not happening. I'm thinking about after this season. This team isn't winning anything this season, only make a huge trade right now if it makes sense. Leave the heavy lifting for later.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Across the 18-19 and 19-20 seasons this "core" was top 5 in Goals For. There is a lot of skill on this roster.

It's just playing in a system that is limiting that skill right now.

You and I are defining skilled differently. Skill in the context of “a skilled and creative team” =/= merely scoring a lot of goals. Dino Ciccerelli scored a lot of goals, Brett Hull scored a lot but they weren’t creative.

This team has a couple guys who can really shoot well - Lindholm, Monahan. It has a couple guys who skate well - Mangiapane and Dube. It has a good stick handler and passer (Gaudreau) though I’d argue he’s a better area passer than a pinpoint guy and he doesn’t use his edge work like he used to. And it has a couple guys who create havoc, use their body, and have decent enough hands for all that (Lucic, Tkachuk). That can add to goals.

But what they aren’t, IMO is a highly creative team that dazzles with pretty plays on a consistent basis. Those elements can result in one, but I think they are most successful with direct, go to the net, cycle the puck, get a good shot hockey.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

Did Tre not make a statement shortly after naming Ward the coach that it was "now on the players" and that they have gone through enough coaching changes that it was up to the core to now elevate. No more excuses.

Maybe I am dreaming it up but I'm pretty certain something along those lines was said.

Ball is in your court now Tre.

I know a lot of people are still making the "hire a legitimate coach" argument. I don't necessarily think they are wrong and yes there might be something to it. But after watching this team night in and night out and the ridiculous amount of inconsistency and drive do you really think just a coaching change is the answer?

I think this group needs an experienced task master and motivator. The following link Duston Brown talks about the fact it is not always X and O's but that the team has to be emotionally invested and u for games.

https://www.espn.com/blog/los-angele...-bag-of-tricks

An experienced coach would have used the Matt Tkachuk situation to bring the team together. He may be a pest but he does a lot of good things inside the game! A lot of past Flames teams had guys like that and the whole team there to back them up.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

The whole point is to win a championship. That's it. Yes, I know it's about just making the playoffs, hoping to go on a run, entertain the fans, etc. But realistically the only goal is to win it all.

This team won't. So BT has to ask himself, what do I have to do to get there? I think he's been too loyal to this core, and I think there's a lot of tough decisions coming up soon. Things he probably should have done already but left to give this core one more chance. It's not just one move, one trade. There's a lot of work to be done if this team is serious about winning it all.

I hate to say it but I think it is lack of experience outside of doing a lot of really good things. You hit the nail on the button he is a loyal guy and is loyal to the core, but at what point does it hinder the teams progress.

[CliffFletcher]

You don’t go anywhere in this league if your star players don’t play as hard without the puck as they do with it. We’ve seen that again and again in the playoffs. How many coaches does this core have to go through to find one they’ll listen to and play hard for?

Treliving will shake up the core before he changes the coach again. The problem is it’s terrible timing this season to make a big trade. And it will only get harder as the playoff races heat up. Throw in the expansion complications, and Treliving is in a real tough spot. I agree with Kootenay that his willingness to give the core on more shot this offseason may be his undoing.

[Harry Lime]

Monahan is an interesting case study. I think that he has bought into the coach's system, and is being more defensively responsible while standing at the blueline, waiting to enter the offensive zone as a five man unit. He is being a good soldier, and I actually like his new commitment to defensive play.

What it has cost (and I look at the zone entry problem) is probably about five goals this season from Monahan alone. That's one player!

[Teroy]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Monahan is an interesting case study. I think that he has bought into the coach's system, and is being more defensively responsible while standing at the blueline, waiting to enter the offensive zone as a five man unit. He is being a good soldier, and I actually like his new commitment to defensive play.

What it has cost (and I look at the zone entry problem) is probably about five goals this season from Monahan alone. That's one player!

I think his lack of production is due to his commitment to defence and having to play with Gaudreau. Trading Monahan won't change anything. If you want to change the culture of this team, trade Gaudreau.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Monahan is an interesting case study. I think that he has bought into the coach's system, and is being more defensively responsible while standing at the blueline, waiting to enter the offensive zone as a five man unit. He is being a good soldier, and I actually like his new commitment to defensive play.

What it has cost (and I look at the zone entry problem) is probably about five goals this season from Monahan alone. That's one player!

Originally Posted by Teroy

I think his lack of production is due to his commitment to defence and having to play with Gaudreau. Trading Monahan won't change anything. If you want to change the culture of this team, trade Gaudreau.

A lot of people say Monahan should be traded because he’s not providing effort or commitment, but I agree - he’s one of the guys who seems to be trying to do things to improve his game and make the team better.

TBF I think Gaudreau looks better this year than last. I’m just concerned he is not capable of playing a different way, and he gets frustrated when his normal way is thwarted.