Brad Treliving needs to go

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I never said he was, I said the team that made the second round was basically a team made up of his players, which it was. Outside of Hiller, Treliving added no difference makers to that roster. The team has never obtained the lofty heights of game 5 in the second round in the 5 playoffs after that year as Brad increasingly put his stamp on the team. We shall see if we can make game 5 or beyond of the second round this year (hopefully we will) and the ghost of the incredible 2015 run can be put to bed. I also expressed a hope that we could set the bar higher than making the playoffs. I do not think I ever said Feaster was a genius.

Gee, Treliving made no adds in 2014-15? Maybe because they were sellers.

Beating the 2014-15 Canucks with in 7 games was fun, and winning one game against the Ducks was OK, but I wouldn’t call it “incredible”. The win was like the rest of the season - lucky.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Gee, Treliving made no adds in 2014-15? Maybe because they were sellers.

Beating the 2014-15 Canucks with in 7 games was fun, and winning one game against the Ducks was OK, but I wouldn’t call it “incredible”. The win was like the rest of the season - lucky.

Come on. A lucky season? 80 games of luck? You really think that?

[Hot_Flatus]

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.

The problem is that the lineup is completely flawed. Half of the forwards are comprised of players that can't handle the puck in traffic, can't snipe a goal, and players who typically shy away from physical play.

There is not a single true trigger man or shooter that can make things happen. Gaudreau's single best option is a garbage man (Monahan) who is useless outside the blue paint, and Bennett who can't even process what to do on the ice with skill players.

This is on the GM 100%. If the team is supposed to be successful by committee, you've got to at least assemble a deep team of competent players to do it.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Come on. A lucky season? 80 games of luck? You really think that?

You don’t?? They were routinely outplayed in most games but were opportunistic and would score on a rush chance after being pinned in their zone for a while.

The luckiest thing that happened to them was getting the paper tiger Canucks team in the first round. Any other team in the west would have likely smashed them like the Ducks did. All season long we heard about how their play was unsustainable and low and behold they improve their roster over the summer yet finish bottom 5 in 2016

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Come on. A lucky season? 80 games of luck? You really think that?

Yes. Essentially a PDO outlier. Obviously not every game because there was Edmonton and AZ in the division, but they were consistently outshot and out chanced and yet they won at about the same rate as the 06-07 Flames who had Iggy with 94 points, Huselius, Tanguay, Langkow, Reg, Lombardi, all under 30 and in their prime years, Phaneuf in his second year playing with Hamrlik, Yelle, Conroy, etc contributing, Kipper throwing out .917%.

Those Flames finished 2 points in the POs based on a a few improbable come from behind wins, just ahead of the Cup Champs who had a horrific year.

The regression they suffered the next year supports the notion they got lucky.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

What Feaster did do was trade the 14th pick in 2012 so he could move down and get Mark Jankowski. This team looks a little different with Tom Wilson, Teuvo Teravainen or Tomas Hertl (or Vasilevsky but who knows with goalies). Hell it looks better with Cody Ceci or even Zemgus.

I'm generally a results oriented guy, but philosophically/big-picture I think it could have been a shrewd way to launch a rebuild, in the sense that you are taking a potential #1C who you expect to emerge a few years later than most (along with your hopefully really high picks in the next few years).

Goalies are a wildcard (obviously Vasi would have been great, but ultimately they are still a bit easier to find than #1Cs). The rest are all really nice complimentary players who certainly could have helped (especially with a butterfly effect that might have prevented Brouwer/Neal signings), but I'm not sure any of those guys dramatically change the fortunes of this team (except maybe Hertl).

Obviously it failed miserably, but that was also a weird draft (maybe worst ever top 10, and best ever 11-20)

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Come on. A lucky season? 80 games of luck? You really think that?

Didn't involve a ton of comeback wins (often in the final minutes)? Whether lucky or not is the right word, I suspect that team was near the bottom of the league in time leading games, vice versa...

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

You don’t?? They were routinely outplayed in most games but were opportunistic and would score on a rush chance after being pinned in their zone for a while.

The luckiest thing that happened to them was getting the paper tiger Canucks team in the first round. Any other team in the west would have likely smashed them like the Ducks did. All season long we heard about how their play was unsustainable and low and behold they improve their roster over the summer yet finish bottom 5 in 2016

Yes - Hartley's system was protect the middle of the ice in the d zone with emphasis on blocking shots. Turn those blocks into quick ups. Stretch passes for quick strikes but lot's of creativity with defense in the offensive zone.

I remember one game against SJS: Hudler, Gaudreau and Brodie making beautiful plays with their passing and weaving.

Giving the perimeter to gain possession allowed easy entries and passive play. Teams could find soft areas for point blank chances or those blocks didn't happen or you get deflected pucks into your net. Bad things happen when you just allow teams to fire shots at you.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

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.

Feel free to think that way, but there is not an impact player in the minor league system. We have at best support players and even that is a stretch. This "outperforming narrative" is an interesting one because it is based on junior and college performance and not against real competition. You don't know what you have until the kids turn pro. All the circle jerking going on over Parsons was a great example, when the advice was to pump the breaks and see what you have when he plays against men. So far, we don't have a hill of beans. Junior or college means nothing, pro performance is everything and that's when you can tell whether you have a player on your hands. Our minor league teams are short at every position. You can't argue that.

As for players promoting through, who is going to be the Andrew Mangiapane or Dillion Dube from the next draft class? We should no be in the 2017 class and seeing someone other than our first rounder promote through based on what you're suggesting. Again, this is where the gap in the system begins to show. No second or third round picks, so we have to hope for a long shot or a free agent to step in. The long shots aren't holding up, so it will have to be Mackey or Gawdin to earn a full time gig. The jury is still out. How about the 2018 class? Who is going to filter in there. Again, the hole in the system gets a little larger. That is the point of understanding the draft and development cycle. It was the ignorance of that cycle that lead the Flames to mothball their minor league operations when Sutter was GM, they just didn't have qualified bodies to fill out rosters. That hurt the team in the long run as the stream of talent all but dried up. So it is very important to keep an eye on the system and make sure you continue to funnel talent into that pipeline. Tre allowed for that hole to develop over two consecutive drafts, which is a problem.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by New Era

Feel free to think that way, but there is not an impact player in the minor league system. We have at best support players and even that is a stretch. This "outperforming narrative" is an interesting one because it is based on junior and college performance and not against real competition. You don't know what you have until the kids turn pro. All the circle jerking going on over Parsons was a great example, when the advice was to pump the breaks and see what you have when he plays against men. So far, we don't have a hill of beans. Junior or college means nothing, pro performance is everything and that's when you can tell whether you have a player on your hands. Our minor league teams are short at every position. You can't argue that.

As for players promoting through, who is going to be the Andrew Mangiapane or Dillion Dube from the next draft class? We should no be in the 2017 class and seeing someone other than our first rounder promote through based on what you're suggesting. Again, this is where the gap in the system begins to show. No second or third round picks, so we have to hope for a long shot or a free agent to step in. The long shots aren't holding up, so it will have to be Mackey or Gawdin to earn a full time gig. The jury is still out. How about the 2018 class? Who is going to filter in there. Again, the hole in the system gets a little larger. That is the point of understanding the draft and development cycle. It was the ignorance of that cycle that lead the Flames to mothball their minor league operations when Sutter was GM, they just didn't have qualified bodies to fill out rosters. That hurt the team in the long run as the stream of talent all but dried up. So it is very important to keep an eye on the system and make sure you continue to funnel talent into that pipeline. Tre allowed for that hole to develop over two consecutive drafts, which is a problem.

Well you may have doubts about the present guys, but the kids in the system from Feaster’s drafts have largely left the league. Johnny, he struck gold on, and Monahan was a no brainer who anyone would have taken. But the rest is a pile of nothing now. Kulak is still playing regularly and that’s about it. I guess he gets credit for Brossiot as well.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by New Era

Feel free to think that way, but there is not an impact player in the minor league system. We have at best support players and even that is a stretch. This "outperforming narrative" is an interesting one because it is based on junior and college performance and not against real competition. You don't know what you have until the kids turn pro. All the circle jerking going on over Parsons was a great example, when the advice was to pump the breaks and see what you have when he plays against men. So far, we don't have a hill of beans. Junior or college means nothing, pro performance is everything and that's when you can tell whether you have a player on your hands. Our minor league teams are short at every position. You can't argue that.

As for players promoting through, who is going to be the Andrew Mangiapane or Dillion Dube from the next draft class? We should no be in the 2017 class and seeing someone other than our first rounder promote through based on what you're suggesting. Again, this is where the gap in the system begins to show. No second or third round picks, so we have to hope for a long shot or a free agent to step in. The long shots aren't holding up, so it will have to be Mackey or Gawdin to earn a full time gig. The jury is still out. How about the 2018 class? Who is going to filter in there. Again, the hole in the system gets a little larger. That is the point of understanding the draft and development cycle. It was the ignorance of that cycle that lead the Flames to mothball their minor league operations when Sutter was GM, they just didn't have qualified bodies to fill out rosters. That hurt the team in the long run as the stream of talent all but dried up. So it is very important to keep an eye on the system and make sure you continue to funnel talent into that pipeline. Tre allowed for that hole to develop over two consecutive drafts, which is a problem.

The gaps in the system are because Feaster left the prospect cupboards stocked with crap. Tre spent far to much on Hamonic but some of the other moves wouldn’t have been necessary if feaster had been able to draft some player that could graduate into those rolls that needed filling. The only thing that feaster left the team was cap space . We got nothing out of the assets he traded.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Reider and Mangiapane both on the same line was a huge mismatch given our "along the walls" breakout strategy.

They need to re-examine this. I'm sure you and guys like DeluxeMoustache etc have pointed out how tunnel vision it is and doesn't use all the ice. Weak side d! Need to use that.

18-19 CGY was breaking out great and making plays. Very creative and to the strengths.

You can have Lindhom at center (I don't think the offense was because Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm) plus Monahan, Backlund and
Bennett but need more creativity in the break out and attack. Get the defense active in the offensive zone. Hanifin!

They need movement and creativity use all the ice and make plays. Flow and Go!

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Come on. A lucky season? 80 games of luck? You really think that?

Go watch AC's video of comeback wins that season...it's actually ridiculous how lucky they were. Couple of those go the other way and no playoffs.

[stone hands]

Its honestly strange to see people who legitimately think the hartley era flames were truly good. watching chris russel and dennis wideman block shots for 55 minutes every night and winning off of a josh jooris goal on the one rush that period was neither fun nor a sustainable. that playoff run felt so incredible because of how improbable it was, and it was in no way a blueprint for longterm success

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

Feel free to think that way, but there is not an impact player in the minor league system. We have at best support players and even that is a stretch. This "outperforming narrative" is an interesting one because it is based on junior and college performance and not against real competition. You don't know what you have until the kids turn pro. All the circle jerking going on over Parsons was a great example, when the advice was to pump the breaks and see what you have when he plays against men. So far, we don't have a hill of beans. Junior or college means nothing, pro performance is everything and that's when you can tell whether you have a player on your hands. Our minor league teams are short at every position. You can't argue that.

If this is true, then I don't see that you have anything at all to complain about. You know no better than I do what the long term projection is for any of the Flames prospects. If the Flames are short at positions, it has a lot to do with how many young players they have been consistently graduating to the NHL on an perennial basis.

As for players promoting through, who is going to be the Andrew Mangiapane or Dillion Dube from the next draft class? We should no be in the 2017 class and seeing someone other than our first rounder promote through based on what you're suggesting. Again, this is where the gap in the system begins to show. No second or third round picks, so we have to hope for a long shot or a free agent to step in. The long shots aren't holding up, so it will have to be Mackey or Gawdin to earn a full time gig. The jury is still out. How about the 2018 class? Who is going to filter in there.

I see no reason at all to conclude that players like Phillips, Ruzicka, Pettersen and Zavgourodniy will not possibly replicate what Mangiapane or Dube have done. You don't know. I don't know, but I have no complaints about what I have seen from them thus far.

Again, the hole in the system gets a little larger. That is the point of understanding the draft and development cycle. It was the ignorance of that cycle that lead the Flames to mothball their minor league operations when Sutter was GM, they just didn't have qualified bodies to fill out rosters. That hurt the team in the long run as the stream of talent all but dried up. So it is very important to keep an eye on the system and make sure you continue to funnel talent into that pipeline. Tre allowed for that hole to develop over two consecutive drafts, which is a problem.

I understand the draft and development cycle just fine, thanks. But unlike you, I have a sense of perspective that gravitates with a little more nuance than your hair-on-fire insistence that the team's system is hot steaming garbage. I agree that the Flames don't have the best developmental system in the NHL, but it is very far from the trackless wasteland that you have described above. Like I said before: IT'S FINE; not great; not terrible. The reason it is not great is precisely because of the hole you identified, but the reason it is not terrible is because the scouts have done a solid job of making the most of the picks they have had to work with.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

The gaps in the system are because Feaster left the prospect cupboards stocked with crap. Tre spent far to much on Hamonic but some of the other moves wouldn’t have been necessary if feaster had been able to draft some player that could graduate into those rolls that needed filling. The only thing that feaster left the team was cap space . We got nothing out of the assets he traded.

No need to trade for Hamonic if we drafted Theodore over Poirier.

To be fair though there is no need to sign James Neal if the Flames drafted Nylander/Ehlers but having said that Bennett was the consensus pick

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Gee, Treliving made no adds in 2014-15? Maybe because they were sellers.

Beating the 2014-15 Canucks with in 7 games was fun, and winning one game against the Ducks was OK, but I wouldn’t call it “incredible”. The win was like the rest of the season - lucky.

They only played 6 games against the Canucks.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

No need to trade for Hamonic if we drafted Theodore over Poirier.

To be fair though there is no need to sign James Neal if the Flames drafted Nylander/Ehlers but having said that Bennett was the consensus pick

The draft full of 1st rounders was weird - they struck out on all but Monahan but there was really only Burakovsky that panned out well around the Poirier/Klimchuk picks. Arguably Theodore but I’m not sure how well he does away from Vegas. The Janko pick is a lot more disappointing given the players they could have had.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Boreal

They only played 6 games against the Canucks.

Right.

[Petert]

I would take Hartley's hockey over the boring crap from Gulutzan and Ward any day, ok, maybe minus the 2nd season Hiller part.
Keep in mind that's also part Treliving's faults too with the whole 3 goalies situation.

It's funny watching people still screaming "unsustainable" hockey Treliving style, and apparently we have been soooooo successful with Treliving "sustainable" hockey?
Fact, Hartley actually got a system in place to suit our players, and we had the most success since 04.
The same cannot be said for every single coach afterwards who were all brought in by Treliving.

Winning a round in playoffs, 18 goals Sam Bennett matter, "sustainable hockey" my ass.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Petert

I would take Hartley's hockey over the boring crap from Gulutzan and Ward any day, ok, maybe minus the 2nd season Hiller part.
Keep in mind that's also part Treliving's faults too with the whole 3 goalies situation.

It's funny watching people still screaming "unsustainable" hockey Treliving style, and apparently we have been soooooo successful with Treliving "sustainable" hockey?
Fact, Hartley actually got a system in place to suit our players, and we had the most success since 04.
The same cannot be said for every single coach afterwards who were all brought in by Treliving.

Winning a round in playoffs, 18 goals Sam Bennett matter, "sustainable hockey" my ass.

In fact, Hartley had less regular season success than any of the coaches afterwards. Great, he won a series. At the end of the day, 3 more PO games won than Ward. Who probably wished he was playing Vancouver and Eddie Lack and not Khudobin/Bishop and the team that went to the finals.