Brad Treliving needs to go

[Reign of Fire]

I apologize, Treliving didn't select Monahan. But my point still stands, maybe he should have gotten rid of him long time ago.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Still not putting the blame on the actual people not executing on the ice.

Im pretty sure just a mere 5 weeks ago i could go back and find refrain after refrain that would go something like

"Its ownerships fault for cheaping out on coaching"

"if theses guys had an elite coach, they would realize their potential"

"Ward/Peters/Gulutzan arent even AHL level coaches".

Yet, they are worse than ever with that addressed.

Again...multiple coaches....same thing...but you know, put the blame upstairs.


Sure, get rid of BT, Conroy, Pascall, whomever I fully understand that argument but it wont make a lick of difference without changing personnel on the ice.

Put it this way, which scenario do you think would produce better results?

Change the GM but bring back the same group?

or

Change a chunk of the group and come back under the existing GM?

Answer that honestly and its obvious where the biggest issues lie.

I get that some, maybe most will say, change both.

The issue there is that any new guy (outside the org anyhow) will need time to get into his position and do his own evaluation of what he has to work with, what he sees fits his vision, and then identifying others around the league he can realistically obtain via trade with the guys he decides are no longer pieces here. That would take months if they did it now. Longer if they make the change after the season.

Maybe there is someone whom they have already contacted and asked to be ready in case they make a change who has that kind of grasp on the team that would shorten those timelines?


So realistically, we are at the point of changes in the GM spot or on the actual roster, but not likely both unless its to bring someone in to blow it up and start over. That simply is not happening even if it may be the right thing to do.

Two things why player change is WAY more likely

1) BT in year 1 of his new deal

2) New coach hired a month ago on a 3 year deal

The other solution is to fire BT and let Sutter GM the team until such a time he has re-shaped the roster in his image. You game for that?

Or

Murray Edwards and fellow owners decide that they are willing to eat millions and millions of existing contracts, hire more people to replace those fired for millions and millions more, blow up the team to make them very bad coming off an entire calendar year of minimal revenues, all while planning to move to a new stadium in 3 years.

Great post.

I have also been saying this for a while, if Treliving were to be shown the door, his predecessor would in all likelihood take the first year to 'see what he has'. I would bet there would be no immediate change. Hiring a new GM just delays the inevitable of breaking this team up. I am sure Treliving is already having several discussions on what to do and who is going where.

I makes almost no sense, at all, at this point to change the GM.

[Red]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I see a lot of this now. I didn’t then. And it still doesn’t answer who he was trading these guys to and for what.

Everyone generalizes. No one can get specific. It’s pretty easy to say “the team Treliving built sucks”. But no one can really say what he should have done, and when, and how. I get that success matters and he bears the consequences. If he’s fired, I’m not fussed. I don’t think any other GM does much better, if at all.

You want specifics for what he should have traded Monahan for in 2017?

Is this a serious post?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

I apologize, Treliving didn't select Monahan. But my point still stands, maybe he should have gotten rid of him long time ago.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Pinder has been on air saying the Flames have been shopping him since last deadline.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

look at the players the Flames dumped and replaced in 2006 after their 2004 exceeded expectations year and playoff run. Selling high made them into an expected playoff team for 5 years

They were a decent team the first year after the lockout. After that they sucked - first round knockouts every year until they didn’t make it in year 5. Sure they made the POs but that’s because Sutter kept spending on late 20s veterans. You think brining in Tony Amonte, Langkow, Darren McCarty, Kristian Huselius, Cale Hulse and Byron Ritchie was the way to go? Getting rid of Conroy, Lydman, Neimenen, Gelinas and Clark was smart?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Pinder has been on air saying the Flames have been shopping him since last deadline.

Is this part of the Wizard’s plan?

Brodie was pretty well aware he wasn’t a priority here

Do the same for all of the skilled players?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I wouldn't waste your energy arguing against a scenario that exactly no one is suggesting.

It's entirely a debate about who should be the one making the necessary changes.

He explained that a new guy almost certainly means fewer immediate changes.

Originally Posted by nik-

After the 2019 playoffs it was pretty apparent that this core had failed. So any of them, and multiple of them.

How many examples did Treliving need to realize that this wasn't going to work? People here were seeing it and we're just fans. Did he have to wait until it was totally 100% obvious? He needed it to be that blatant? Now their trade values are essentially half.

We'll never know whether BT wanted to or did pursue this course of action. Ownership may have balked. Nearly every owner in the league would be involved in that decision.

Or BT may have explored the returns available and determined that it wasn't the best way to meet his mandate.

The period where it was a reasonable and feasible idea was really Dec 2019-Feb 2020 (or maybe 2017-18 season).

Trading stars is tough...if it leaks everything gets messy.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I see a lot of this now. I didn’t then. And it still doesn’t answer who he was trading these guys to and for what.

Everyone generalizes. No one can get specific. It’s pretty easy to say “the team Treliving built sucks”. But no one can really say what he should have done, and when, and how. I get that success matters and he bears the consequences. If he’s fired, I’m not fussed. I don’t think any other GM does much better, if at all.

I was pushing hard to trade JG before the last TDL, but obviously I have no idea what the market for him actually was. I think the last TDL and off-season were a crossroads where the team could have re-tooled and extended their window. I'm not sure whether BT wanted to explore that path, but I'm pretty sure the owners didn't.

I don't necessarily mean to make excuses for BT. I think his contract negotiations also play into this...he would have been selling his accomplishments and a plan to put the team over the top in the short-term. Even though the evidence in front of our eyes changes, it would probably would have been tough to backtrack on that. Or, he may have believed his own hype.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

You want specifics for what he should have traded Monahan for in 2017?

Is this a serious post?

Sure - it was so obvious (and it’s not just Monahan). Except I never said 2017. But go on.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Why would a new GM bring back the same players?

I am unsure whether I agree with transplant on this, but I could see a new GM taking a year to evaluate what is here.

[Reign of Fire]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Monahan really hinges on what's going on with him. If there's an injury that can be corrected, then you would be foolish to trade him now at his lowest value. If however the player is just declining or has injuries that can't be corrected - get what you can.

Either he's always injured, or he's just not that good.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

He explained that a new guy almost certainly means fewer immediate changes.





We'll never know whether BT wanted to or did pursue this course of action. Ownership may have balked. Nearly every owner in the league would be involved in that decision.

Or BT may have explored the returns available and determined that it wasn't the best way to meet his mandate.

The period where it was a reasonable and feasible idea was really Dec 2019-Feb 2020 (or maybe 2017-18 season).

Trading stars is tough...if it leaks everything gets messy.




I was pushing hard to trade JG before the last TDL, but obviously I have no idea what the market for him actually was. I think the last TDL and off-season were a crossroads where the team could have re-tooled and extended their window. I'm not sure whether BT wanted to explore that path, but I'm pretty sure the owners didn't.

I don't necessarily mean to make excuses for BT. I think his contract negotiations also play into this...he would have been selling his accomplishments and a plan to put the team over the top in the short-term. Even though the evidence in front of our eyes changes, it would probably would have been tough to backtrack on that. Or, he may have believed his own hype.

I actually also wouldn’t have minded a Gaudreau trade then or at least in the off season. I thought the Konecny deal looked OK to me. Mostly because the contract conditions were making his trade value decrease a lot more than normal.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

I apologize, Treliving didn't select Monahan. But my point still stands, maybe he should have gotten rid of him long time ago.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Maybe he should have traded him for Mackinnon.

[Bingo]

121 pages now ...

I don't know where you all get the energy to say the exact same thing every two days.

[sa226]

I don't know if it's just my forward bias, but I don't want to see too many changes on the back end. I just don't see it is a major issue with the team.

It's always been the forwards for me. The lack of commitment to not blowing the zone, on the transition. Gap control issues have largely been on the forwards for inconsistent backchecks in the neutral zone. Even when the team was at its best, forward of the redline the forwards were really successful at pressuring the opposition transition and creating turnovers, but if the opposing players made it past the redline, the puck pressure from the forwards dropped off, putting a ton of pressure on the defense to read whether they should step up or back off. The lack of commitment from the forwards really exposed issues in the Flames at defending against speed. Especially when gained in the neutral zone. Colorado feasted on that.

Long story short, aside from a reduced workload for Gio, I don't want to see too many changes to the defense. If you move Hanifin and/or Anderson those are 2 big cost control pieces to replace. Hopefully Anderson continues his growth, and guys like Mackay and Kylington can take a step.

The forwards however need an extreme makeover.

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Bingo

121 pages now ...

I don't know where you all get the energy to say the exact same thing every two days.

Would you like your site to have less content? lol.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by zamler

Would you like your site to have less content? lol.

No it's good for business.

Just bad for the grey matter.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I am unsure whether I agree with transplant on this, but I could see a new GM taking a year to evaluate what is here.

I think everyone in the hockey world knows how broken this team is, there's no way anyone would take a year to evaluate.

If the GM was changing I think they'd be hired with the clear mandate to get to work as well.
They'd also be told to communicate closely with Sutter on what we have and what should get moved.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Why would a new GM bring back the same players?

Almost exclusively when a GM is newly hired, he takes time to make an evaluation of his players both through interviews and watching them for a period of time to determine who does and doesnt fit his vision for the team.

That cannot happen after the season.

I said at the time that Sutter was hired and BT was not canned, that it meant he (BT) was staying on past the off season. If that change was to happen it almost had to happen when Darryl came in to give his replacement the time to make those evaluations...take the team through the TD and able to have his information for the draft when bigger deals are more likely to happen. Nevermind time to get together with the scouting staff and formulate their approach with all that stuff.


So a new GM may make a couple minor moves/signings here and there but really unlikely to dig into the core players. Which is something that HAS to happen with this group with contract statuses and all the other stuff going on with this club.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

No it's good for business.

Just bad for the grey matter.

Just don't read the thread and welcome the activity.

[Reign of Fire]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Maybe he should have traded him for Mackinnon.

So if Treliving can't create options, he should get a pass?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk