Brad Treliving needs to go

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Jim Rutherford is pushing 70 years old.

It would likely be Pascal, Conroy or maybe someone like Gillis who seems desperate to get back into the league.

What has Kekalainen done to be considered that much better than Treliving? Jim Nill was on the firing block prior to the Stars surprise run last year. Sweeny took over a team that was one season removed from a SCF appearance.

Nill made Rick Bowness HC and that alone would have, at the time, made CP howl in indignation.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If you would have told me 3 years ago that Sean Monahan and Johnny Gaudreau shouldn't be 2/3 of a top line I wouldn't have believed you. It just hasn't worked.

I reject this notion. When we found them an all star rw that line was a top 5 line in the league. 1 season of coaching turbulence and down years by all three involved players lies in between then and now, and this season Johnny-Mony have proven to be our 2 best offensive players still... and yet the best player they've had on their wing has been Bennett.

I am not sure I disagree with the remainder of your thoughts here, but I just reject the notion that Gaudreau-Monahan- ??? can't equal a viable top line in the league. We just have to make ??? a worthwhile player.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Jim Rutherford is 70-years-old, and just walked away from the Pittsburgh Penguins. I think it is highly unlikely that he ever goes back to work again.

Dean Lombardi hasn't worked for three years, despite there being twelve management changes in the NHL since he was dismissed by LA. Either he has no interest in going back to work, or he is being very selective about his next position, and I very seriously doubt that ends up being in Calgary.

You're drawing your own conclusions.
For Rutherford, ppl above him were going to tie his hands and in his opinion it was better to quit. He has not retired.

Lombardi was apparently on Oilers shortlist before Holland got hired. I'm guessing people probably would've said the same about Holland that he's 65 and won multiple cups, no need to go to Edmonton at this stage of his career.

The two biggest management personalities in the NHL imo are Brian Burke and Lou Lamoreillo and one of them came and worked for the Flames.

There are only 32 GM jobs in the NHL and at any given time less than 10 are available. Offer money and autonomy and they'll come.

[Jacks]

Name 3 GM’s that walked into a worse situation specifically when taking over a team in a rebuild?

I'm not going back and researching what every GM inherited, and why qualify that statement with "team in a rebuild"?


Look at the most recent GM's.
Hextal - been on the job for less than a month, maybe he turns it around but the Pens are on the decline.
Armstrong - Coyotes are a disaster, he was left a huge mess.
Zito - Don't really follow Florida, looks like they are doing well. Have at least one huge bad contract.

Adams - Buffalo is a dysfunctional team and has bad contracts.


NJ and Vegas are pretty good situations.
MIN is treading water and pretty much sucks.
Holland walked into a mess in EDM.
Yzerman walked into Holland's mess in DET.



Treliving walked into a team with no large contracts, tons of cap space, lots of draft picks and some good/great young players to start with. Pretty good way to start.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

One thing people are totally not giving Trelviing enough credit for is the Flames' drafting approach under him.

Many draft models have the Flames right at/near the top in terms of the value they've been able to get based on where they've drafted since Treliving took over.

I hate what he's done in terms of consistently trading away mid-round picks for garbage depth, but on the draft floor, he's done excellent

Treliving seems legitimately good at both identifying player talent and handling player contracts.

His Achilles' heal is the issue with coaching.

Either Treliving needs to hire a good coach and then focus on players and contracts, the Flames need to hire a new POHO who can help Treliving make those changes, or Treliving needs to go.

Out of those options, just replacing Treliving and changing the whole leadership group would be least desirable.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I get the frustration that fans have with Treliving, but I have long maintained that it is shortsighted. Without getting into it, I think that five years is an impossibly short window in which to build a team—it only works if everything goes exactly right. I think Treliving's situation is then complicated by the fact that this he was a first-time GM when he was hired in Calgary. Like in any job, it takes time to learn, and I think at the time that most people were happy to see Treliving forge his craft with a rebuilding team. Unfortunately, the unexpectedly good on-ice results in his first year on the job altered the mandate from his employers, and it probably convinced him to push forward prematurely.

He has certainly made mistakes—the most glaring of which has been his coaching selections. But at this point I find myself much more comfortable with Treliving continuing at the helm than I am with his likely replacement. Something I have always appreciated about Treliving is a willingness to own his own mistakes, and to work hard to correct them. I think that he understands what is wrong with the group, but for a variety of reasons—several of which are beyond his control—has been unable to see that through. I would prefer to see him continue to work towards playing out this group, and I am intrigued at the prospect of how he would handle a proper rebuild, in view of the mistakes that he made the first time around.

For those who are eager to see Treliving dismissed, I would ask what you expect to happen as a result? Because I am quite certain that his replacement would not be an improvement. Most likely, he would be another rookie GM learning on the job, and making mistakes along the way. The Flames have invested in Treliving as much as they have in anyone; I think there is some value in seeing how the return on that investment plays out in the long run.

Why is this?

IMO seven years is more than enough time to evaluate a GM's performance, he is now one of the longest tenured GM's in the league.

I wouldn't expect a new GM to yield immediate results, I just want someone to get us going in the right direction. I don't agree with those who add up Treliving's moves and then use that as a basis to evaluate his performance. Because just as important are all the things that he hasn't done during his tenure.

As other have said very well, he stepped into a healthy situation for a new GM. And the lack of progress for the big league club over seven years speaks for itself.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I reject this notion. When we found them an all star rw that line was a top 5 line in the league. 1 season of coaching turbulence and down years by all three involved players lies in between then and now, and this season Johnny-Mony have proven to be our 2 best offensive players still... and yet the best player they've had on their wing has been Bennett.

I am not sure I disagree with the remainder of your thoughts here, but I just reject the notion that Gaudreau-Monahan- ??? can't equal a viable top line in the league. We just have to make ??? a worthwhile player.

You see Gaudreau and Monahan as consistent "on my back boys" number one line candidates?

They've disappeared for two straight playoff seasons.

They are some of the most sheltered players on the team.

You can reject my notion, but I'm going to reject your rejection.

Top line core players don't need to be sheltered, and tend to show up in the biggest games. I'm not slagging the duo, they're excellent hockey players, but they've become second line and powerplay guys more than play driving complete first line "contending team" forwards.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Why is this?

IMO seven years is more than enough time to evaluate a GM's performance, he is now one of the longest tenured GM's in the league.

I wouldn't expect a new GM to yield immediate results, I just want someone to get us going in the right direction. I don't agree with those who add up Treliving's moves and then use that as a basis to evaluate his performance. Because just as important are all the things that he hasn't done during his tenure.

As other have said very well, he stepped into a healthy situation for a new GM. And the lack of progress for the big league club over seven years speaks for itself.

He walked into a team that had missed the playoffs 5 years in a row and hadn’t won a series in a decade or a division in 8 years. In his 7 years they will have made the playoffs 4-5 times, won a round, and had the best regular season in 30 years. I don’t know if I call that a lack of progress?

I also think it is likely they give Conroy a shot as he has been in management for 10 years being groomed by the org. Most companies prefer to promote from within vs going outside for a hire so I agree with Text that the next guy coming in will be another rookie

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

...The bottom line is the minor league system is a mess and is the midst of a crash. We are about to feel the pinch of the 2017 and 2018 drafts where we were short on top picks and haven't been able to filter players into the system. Those are two straight years where we were limited on picks is going to hurt, especially when the majority of those players selected were small. That 2018 draft saw us draft five players, and only one of them was over six feet. This is the reality we face and no spin is going to change that. Its one of the reasons Treliving has been aggressive in the college free agent market. We need the bodies even if they are very long shots to make it to the NHL.

I think you are totally wrong about this. I agree that the Flames had a hole in their system as a result of a shortage of picks, but unlike you, I think they have done a very good job compensating for it. The kids playing in the minors look just fine, and there is a pretty high number of prospects that have outperformed their draft positions from the last several years. The college free agent and prospect-depth acquisitions have also been pretty solid. Mackey and Gawdin have played NHL games, and Johannes Kinvall was one of the best defensemen in the SHL before suffering a long-term ankle injury.

I think the system is fine, especially considering what the Flames have had to work with. They continue to graduate players to the NHL every year; those players continue to impress.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You see Gaudreau and Monahan as consistent "on my back boys" number one line candidates?

They've disappeared for two straight playoff seasons.

They are some of the most sheltered players on the team.

You can reject my notion, but I'm going to reject your rejection.

Top line core players don't need to be sheltered, and tend to show up in the biggest games. I'm not slagging the duo, they're excellent hockey players, but they've become second line and powerplay guys more than play driving complete first line "contending team" forwards.

I see Gaudreau+Monahan as roughly equivalent to a "Kane" or "Malkin" line on their respective teams. Probably not your "top" line (Which would have been Saad-Toews-Hossa or x-Crosby-x) but certainly an important line.

I've always seen "3M" as our top line to be honest, especially the last couple of years with Mangiapane in place of Frolik. Backlund had a rough series in 2019 but I felt the bigger issue that year was Peters getting outcoached. Last year, Tkachuk was injured, and Ward bizarrely thought the solution was to put Reider on that line, which was a massive failure. I'd even rather have seen Lucic or Jankowski line up on Backs' LW, as Reider and Mangiapane both on the same line was a huge mismatch given our "along the walls" breakout strategy.

They've disappeared for two straight playoff seasons.

I think both times their RW Lindholm disappeared with them. They produced when in the playoffs when Bennett was up on the line. I also look back to the 2017 playoffs and thought that line with Ferland had a strong series despite the lack of production - they just ran into insanely good goaltending.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I get the frustration that fans have with Treliving, but I have long maintained that it is shortsighted. Without getting into it, I think that five years is an impossibly short window in which to build a team—it only works if everything goes exactly right. I think Treliving's situation is then complicated by the fact that this he was a first-time GM when he was hired in Calgary. Like in any job, it takes time to learn, and I think at the time that most people were happy to see Treliving forge his craft with a rebuilding team. Unfortunately, the unexpectedly good on-ice results in his first year on the job altered the mandate from his employers, and it probably convinced him to push forward prematurely.

Agree with your post, and I've always felt that the bolded is the root of the failure. A failure to manage up by Burke/BT.

It seems to be Burke's MO that he's tried to replicate since orchestrating the crapshoot cup win in Anaheim. I don't mean to diminish the accomplishment...a cup is a cup, but those first few coming out of the lockout were a bit of a crapshoot as the league reset itself.

He signed Niedermayer, Selanne, and Carlyle coming out of the lockout and they ran to conf. finals that year. Then he traded for Pronger to put them over the top the next year. Getzlaf, Perry, Giguere/Bryz were already there, along with general institutional memory from a cup run 2 years pre-lockout. Lots of other great moves, and Burke deserves lots of credit, but I'd argue it was an exception to the general rule of how to build a cup contender, and the hardest to find pieces were already in place for him (#1C, #1G).


In both TOR and CGY, it seems he went straight to pushing them over the top, even though they weren't anywhere near ready, and it wasn't as easy to acquire Niedermayers, Selannes, or Prongers...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Why is this?

IMO seven years is more than enough time to evaluate a GM's performance, he is now one of the longest tenured GM's in the league.

I wouldn't expect a new GM to yield immediate results, I just want someone to get us going in the right direction. I don't agree with those who add up Treliving's moves and then use that as a basis to evaluate his performance. Because just as important are all the things that he hasn't done during his tenure.

As other have said very well, he stepped into a healthy situation for a new GM. And the lack of progress for the big league club over seven years speaks for itself.

I have said for some time now that I think the turnover of GMs in the NHL is too high, and I think you answered your own question: Seven years is definitely enough time to evaluate, and to judge whether the Manager has the team moving in the right direction. I guess where you and I differ is in our evaluation vs. results: they are not there on the ice, but I like what Treliving has been working toward. It is happening slower than I would have hoped, but I think he sees pretty clearly the problems with the team, and I like the way he has tried to address these issues; I like the way that he evaluates players, and I tend to like the players that he targets; I like that he owns his mistakes and works to correct them.

And this is the bottom line I keep coming back to: who is the best person to improve the team? Right now, I don't see a better option than Treliving for the Flames. While I am not convinced that high-profile figures like Lombardi and Rutherford are realistic options, I also don't believe they provide any improvement.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

When Feaster was fired the only thing Burke could bring himself to say he did well was to clear the decks of contracts. He didn’t have a high opinion of his prospects or any trades.

Well Burke did clear the decks in Toronto so they could start their rebuild, so they have that in common. Of course, that was helped by the Kessel trade and the Ron Wilson extension. Some interesting Burke facts: he was the first Toronto GM since Gord Stellick (1989) to not make the playoffs in his tenure as Leafs GM and the first GM who was GM for more than one year to not make the playoffs in franchise history.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

He walked into a team that had missed the playoffs 5 years in a row and hadn’t won a series in a decade or a division in 8 years. In his 7 years they will have made the playoffs 4-5 times, won a round, and had the best regular season in 30 years. I don’t know if I call that a lack of progress?

I also think it is likely they give Conroy a shot as he has been in management for 10 years being groomed by the org. Most companies prefer to promote from within vs going outside for a hire so I agree with Text that the next guy coming in will be another rookie

Well he won a round with Feaster’s team. The top scorer on that team that was not on the Feaster team the year before was Mason Raymond. The other pieces he added were Englland and Bollig up front and Hiller in net. But he has made the playoffs 3 out of the next 5 seasons with this year TBD. I think it would be a stretch to give him too much credit for that first year, given the small amount of changes he made (adding a 1A goalie, a top 9 forward, a top 6 dman and a pressbox popcorn muncher).

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

He walked into a team that had missed the playoffs 5 years in a row and hadn’t won a series in a decade or a division in 8 years. In his 7 years they will have made the playoffs 4-5 times, won a round, and had the best regular season in 30 years. I don’t know if I call that a lack of progress?

I also think it is likely they give Conroy a shot as he has been in management for 10 years being groomed by the org. Most companies prefer to promote from within vs going outside for a hire so I agree with Text that the next guy coming in will be another rookie

Sure, its progress to move from terrible to moderately competitive. But at the outset of the rebuild what was the goal? To build a team capable of making the playoffs more frequently, but rarely get past the first round? That's not much different than the entire history of the franchise.

The bar is always set so low for this team. The rebuild should've been the path to building a contender. You can't guarantee a Stanley Cup, but it would be nice to see a team that could at the very least make noise in the playoffs and look like they had a shot at it for a few seasons. It doesn't look like that has materialized with this rebuild, and Treliving has overseen the majority of it.
Look I like a lot of what he's done too. But the results I think most fans are hoping for just haven't been there. He's running out of time for this iteration of the Flames to get it done.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have said for some time now that I think the turnover of GMs in the NHL is too high, and I think you answered your own question: Seven years is definitely enough time to evaluate, and to judge whether the Manager has the team moving in the right direction. I guess where you and I differ is in our evaluation vs. results: they are not there on the ice, but I like what Treliving has been working toward. It is happening slower than I would have hoped, but I think he sees pretty clearly the problems with the team, and I like the way he has tried to address these issues; I like the way that he evaluates players, and I tend to like the players that he targets; I like that he owns his mistakes and works to correct them.

And this is the bottom line I keep coming back to: who is the best person to improve the team? Right now, I don't see a better option than Treliving for the Flames. While I am not convinced that high-profile figures like Lombardi and Rutherford are realistic options, I also don't believe they provide any improvement.

I wouldn't use results for a simple pass/fail judgment of Tre, but the time has shown that there are things he's good at and things he isn't good at. He's good with player talent and contracts. He's inadequate with coaching.

Knowing those things about him after seven years, there should be action taken to address his weaknesses. That could come from Tre, in the form of making a different kind of coaching hire. Or, it could come from ownership, either by forcing Tre into a situation to hire a better coach, hiring a new boss for Tre to work with him on sorting out the problem, or replacing Tre.

Despite never having been a big fan of Tre, I agree with you that just replacing him is probably the worst option for the team. Then again, leaving him to continue as is without his weaknesses being addressed is another bad option.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I'm not going back and researching what every GM inherited, and why qualify that statement with "team in a rebuild"?


Look at the most recent GM's.
Hextal - been on the job for less than a month, maybe he turns it around but the Pens are on the decline.
Armstrong - Coyotes are a disaster, he was left a huge mess.
Zito - Don't really follow Florida, looks like they are doing well. Have at least one huge bad contract.

Adams - Buffalo is a dysfunctional team and has bad contracts.


NJ and Vegas are pretty good situations.
MIN is treading water and pretty much sucks.
Holland walked into a mess in EDM.
Yzerman walked into Holland's mess in DET.



Treliving walked into a team with no large contracts, tons of cap space, lots of draft picks and some good/great young players to start with. Pretty good way to start.

The statement “why in a rebuild” is to try and make an apples to apples comparison. Comparing situations where a GM didn’t need to tear a team down or try and keep winning which is why most of those examples are so simple to pick apart.

Hextal - not a rebuild and has one of the best players of all time on his roster

Armstrong- easily the best example as he is in a horrible market with brutal owners and is a complete mess

Zito- Barkov, Huberdeau, Ekblad all in their prime is a great starting point

Adam’s- Jack Eichel, Rasmus Dahlen, Dylan Cozens, plus several other high end young pieces. Franchise center and Dman with some bad contracts trumps a clean slate

Holland - Walks into McDavid and Draisaitl sporting 7 and 6 years left on their contracts when he joins. Would you rather have 2 Hart winners locked up long term with some bad contracts or would you rather have a clean slate?

Yzerman basically had the same setup as Treliving in Calgary. Worse veterans but a clean cap sheet and recent high picks

Guerin in Minny is a pretty bad spot as well

I agree Treliving walked into a good spot for a GM. Wideman was a bad contract but he had a career year for one season which happened to be Treliving’s first season. Matt Stajan was also a bad contract with 4 years of term so right there we have over $8.5M in bad deals that he inherited. He still took over a team that was 1.5 seasons into a rebuild, that watched their previous stars leave for nothing, and guided that team to the playoffs for 4 of 6 seasons when the previous 2 regimes missed the playoffs 5 years in a row.

I don’t believe Treliving has created any kid of mess like you proclaimed and my only gripe with him has been the coaching hires. He has made some bad trades but name a GM that hasn’t?

[PepsiFree]

I don't really buy the tenure argument as something to use against Treliving, or even something that we can point to and say "see, we know what he is."

These things aren't really a straight line, some things take time and hockey even from a management level is heavily about luck and the right things going right at the right time. Who is available when you want to make a move? Who do you have that others want or who wants to come here? It's never just a one-sided decision. You can sewer a team in a couple years. You can make zero gains, sure, but I don't think a single person can honestly say Treliving hasn't moved this team in the right direction and improved it since he arrived. Nobody. You can also pretty reasonably say that the pieces we have contain a ton of potential for improvement or for value in acquiring other pieces.

We have a bonafide starting goaltender for the first time since Kipper. We have a solid backup as well. We currently have center depth, and even though the "elite #1" isn't here, having Monahan, Lindholm, and Backlund down the middle is so much further ahead than we were 5-10 years ago. We have some great wingers in Gaudreau and Tkachuk. We have promising young guys like Mangipane, Dube, Andersson, and Valimaki. When good players like Brodie exit, we are able to attract good players to replace them like Tanev.

Bennett not working out hurt us. Not a single drafted goaltender working out hurt us. But that's life.

There have been some bad contracts and coaching choices that haven't worked out. Hard to fault Treliving for Peters, that could have still worked out for us, but oh well. Coaching might be the one thing that Treliving just has not gotten right, but that doesn't mean he won't.

You look at a guy like Poile. He took over an expansion team. It took him 5 years to make the playoffs, 12 years to win more than 2 games in the playoffs and get to the second round, and 18 years to get to the Cup Final. The progression wasn't linear. Once they made the playoffs, they still had bad years and missed them completely. They made the final and are struggling again 2-3 years later.

I don't know, long winded, but it feels like everyone's barometer of success is the Blackhawks or the Penguins, or to have the kind of empty hope that the Oilers have (shiny toys with zero success to show for it), and for middle-market type teams without multiple elite talents, that just not the way it usually goes. I wouldn't be sad if Treliving exits. I'm not going to say "he just needs more time" because he's had a decent amount of time. But what he's done in that time frame is also enough for me, and I expect if he sticks around the team will continue to get better and the problems that exist will be addressed, as he has done since he got here. Sometimes I do want him fired and changes to be made, but that's only because I love drama and I find the unknown and unexpected more entertaining. They could literally trade the entire team for picks and fire everyone, and I would be excited because it would entertain me. That doesn't mean it's smart.

So, I don't know. I don't see any good reason to fire Treliving. People keep trying to give them, but they're just short sighted imo. People keep naming guys like Rutherford or Conroy who would replace him, but there's little reason to think guys like that would come here (Rutherford) or improve the team (Conroy), at least not any more reason than thinking Treliving can still get us to the final.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Sure, its progress to move from terrible to moderately competitive. But at the outset of the rebuild what was the goal? To build a team capable of making the playoffs more frequently, but rarely get past the first round? That's not much different than the entire history of the franchise.

The bar is always set so low for this team. The rebuild should've been the path to building a contender. You can't guarantee a Stanley Cup, but it would be nice to see a team that could at the very least make noise in the playoffs and look like they had a shot at it for a few seasons. It doesn't look like that has materialized with this rebuild, and Treliving has overseen the majority of it.
Look I like a lot of what he's done too. But the results I think most fans are hoping for just haven't been there. He's running out of time for this iteration of the Flames to get it done.

I agree he is running out of time but the clock is still ticking. We are not talking about our best players being 30+ with the exception of Gio and newly acquired Markstrom. I get that people are down on this team but I believe they are a good team that has been playing badly.

I posted this in the Monahan thread but I don’t think our top young players were able to hit the ceilings they appeared to have when they were much younger and what they appeared to have up until the Super Bowl in 2019 (the day the bye week started that season).

Let’s see what happens the rest of the season because a playoff miss or another first round embarrassment then I am likely with those that want the change now. I am going to wait and see how the rest of this year plays out.

I have also said this in countless threads but there are so many people on this forum who simply choose to not care or understand how terrible our market is. A small, cold city in the middle of Western Canada. You get the fishbowl lifestyle of a major market but without the bright lights of a big city. Tons of travel, and the worst facility in the league. Honestly to hope to build a consistent contender a ton of luck is needed and there hasn’t been a Canadian team to be able to do that since the 09-13 Canucks.

[Jacks]

I can't quote you with Firefox.

He walked into a team that had missed the playoffs 5 years in a row and hadn’t won a series in a decade or a division in 8 years.

Not sure what the previous years have to do with it?
The team went from badly declining with an aging core (GM fired) to a full on rebuild (with GM fired). Obviously they hadn't been good or he never would have been hired in the first place. Prior years mean nothing though because that mess had already been cleaned up and he was handed a fairly clean slate to start with.

In his 7 years they will have made the playoffs 4-5 times, won a round, and had the best regular season in 30 years. I don’t know if I call that a lack of progress?

They made the playoffs 4 times and won one round. The first time they made the playoffs, and won a round, it was entirely Feaster's team and coach. Here are the moves Trelving made between being hired and the end of the 2014-15 playoffs.
Traded a 3rd for Bollig
Traded Drew Shore for Corban Knight
Traded Glencross for a 2nd and 3rd
Traded Baertschi for a 2nd
2 good moves, 1 bad move and 1 meh move. None of them had anything to do with the playoffs that year.
That year was the best results of Treliving's tenure and he had almost nothing to do with it.

Since then the record is:
2015-16 - missed playoffs
2016-17 - swept in 1st round
2017-18 - missed playoffs
2018-19 - lost in 5 games 1st round
2019-20 - won play-in round against the wounded Jets, beat in 1st round by Dallas in 6.

Hardly a record to be bragging about.


Edit: Anyway, have to get some work done now.