Ownership and Management Perspective

[CaptainCrunch]

I give the Flames owner ship group credit as it evolves. Since we got the cap this group has said spend to the cap, but we want a competitive team that competes for a playoff spot. that's the bar.

I assume that the Flames ownership doesn't want tear downs and long rebuilds. We've seen that the Calgary fan base is incredibly fickle. A lot of people will say, yeah I'm a draft and trade addict, tear down and rebuild. But the fact is that as much as we deny it, this isn't a elite fanbase. And that's with no insult.

The Owners figure that if we go with a mega youth movement and it struggles that attendance in this city will drop like a stone.

So that floats at the back of their minds.

We also have to remember that the Flames are hopeful for that new building that will increase and stabalize their revenue stream. Without the playoff revenue, this isn't exactly a massively profitable franchise, it gets by. So that playoff revenue is hugely important.

So the question is, where is the Flames ownership's ire going to settle on at the end of the year. These aren't dumb owners, and they're certainly not out of touch with what's going on.

They can look at the stone like drop in the goaltending. The low shooting percentage, and ask the question is it the core group of players? Is it the coaches, is it the GM that messed this up.

On paper at the start of the year, Treliving came out of an off season looking like the golden boy.

The question when the serious questions is what the hell happened here? Was Brad stupid? Are we going to resign him. Can we get a new GM that can run a quick competitive reset of the core?

We know the owners love Sutter, they always have local farm boy folk hero and hard ass coach done good. But I doubt they're going to make him a GM again. They're not dumb.

If they decide not to resign Tre, then the interview question is what's the quickest reset here, who do we absolutely keep and who do we move on because the goal is the playoffs and that revenue in the playoffs.

I do think we're going to see an active off season on the edges of this team.
I do think that they won't resign Tre and the GM that they hire will have a very specific goal. Competitive, playoffs. no teardown and here's your budget.

[Zoller]

Flames had a 2-3 year window at the start of this season.

Year 1 may has been rough but they might be willing to see how year 2 and 3 go before blowing it up.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The ownership/management perspective is years in the making, it is not something that just came about this year. 5 first round picks in the last 8 drafts. 7 second round picks in the last 8 drafts. Six third round picks in the last 8 drafts. This team has consistently for almost a decade traded futures to win now. They have not won anything in that time. The desire to plan for tomorrow in my opinion has way more to do with what has happened in the last 8 years than it does with what happened this year.

The Flames have zero NHL prospects on the backend under the age of 22 outside of Poirier who would not be considered a top prospect in any other org.

They have three legit NHL forward prospects under 22.

The cupboards are pretty bare compared to every other team and that was an organizational decision from the last 8 years. The desire to improve that situation has little to do with this iteration of the team.

Compared to every other team?
No not really. Bottom third for sure but there are worse

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by chedder

My criticism wasn't that at all. Vladar was playing well going into the all-star break. He should have been given the leash to see if it could continue right after. Instead Markstrom is given the net back. Timing means something and playing the guy who has the confidence when he has it is a better plan than hoping the other guy gets it back.

He played more than 50% of the games in the two weeks leading up to the All Star break putting up a .893 sv% over that time and played the second game back and put up a .882.

He had every opportunity to take the next in February and he has a .831sv% to show for it. Seems like that’s on the player.

[really?]

Seeing a lot of interesting perspectives on the board, good to see a higher degree of reason as opposed to emotion. As I consider all of the comments, I find myself thinking about the trade for Jarome Iginla and ask myself if current leadership would make that deal. My conclusion is no. The Flames are at a different point as that squad was clearly not competitive, so perhaps it was easier for that group to make such a decision.

Knowing what we know now, that was a good deal for both sides, but personally I love it from the Flames perspective. It worked out great, but there was still a high degree of risk in taking Jarome as the primary asset in the deal. The mindset required the team to live with a risk of failure, while only hoping for a significant reward. The current leadership would likely value the present asset over the future, albeit more risky return, which ultimately minimizes the possibility of such an astounding return. Had Jarome Iginla been only an ordinary player, the deal was a fail, but we know that wasn't the case, and that version of the Flames needs to be applauded for living with that risk.

Not saying this would be on the table, but I think a similar scenario in the present would be if say, Buffalo, was offering the 12th pick this year, plus a lesser player, say Tyson Jost, would the Flames jump? To some that may not seem like much, but that's likely a type of future oriented deal that might be on the table at the draft. I would do it unless Lindholm was signed to an extension by that time, but if the current group was determined to move Lindholm by the draft, I believe they would be seeking a greater present return. Time will tell as absent a cup this season, changes are afoot, but I just find the initial Iginla trade as a point of interest in contemplating the current philosophy of ownership/management.

[chedder]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

He played more than 50% of the games in the two weeks leading up to the All Star break putting up a .893 sv% over that time and played the second game back and put up a .882.



He had every opportunity to take the next in February and he has a .831sv% to show for it. Seems like that’s on the player.

He gave the team points in every game he played from Nov 29th to the break (23 points vs Marky's 12 in same period). There's no reason he shouldn't have played that next game out of the all star break. He was about to set a team record for consecutive points and the coach sits him. That must be great for confidence. Coach's head games aren't working this year.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by chedder

He gave the team points in every game he played from Nov 29th to the break (23 points vs Marky's 12 in same period). There's no reason he shouldn't have played that next game out of the all star break. He was about to set a team record for consecutive points and the coach sits him. That must be great for confidence. Coach's head games aren't working this year.

This is a good example of what I’m talking about. Blaming Sutter for “head games” is ridiculous.

Vladar sat plenty of times while he was in his way to setting a record for consecutive points. In fact, when he played consecutive games during that streak, he also always played worse with each consecutive game (only exception being a .880 performance that followed a .875, both terrible).

When he played 3 games in a row in December, he played worse in the second game and even worse in the third. His performance in consecutive games seems to be good reason not to play him in consecutive games, no? Especially when Markstrom was actually playing better in the two weeks leading up to the All Star break, right? If you’re riding the better goaltender coming out of the break, the choice was Markstrom.

And the point streak doesn’t mean anything because plenty of those points were gained despite Vladar. Vladar played better in November sporting a 1-3-1 record than he did in December where he sported a 3-0-2 record, so you really have to look at more than the game result to understand how a goaltender played.

Blaming Sutter’s “head games” or suggesting he ruined his confidence isn’t based on any observable reality whatsoever.

[BigFlameDog]

This is going to sound a little strange but as a family that had a really bad pregnancy I wonder if that could be a part of it with Markstrom? Obviously I know nothing and I'm probably just thinking it because lived it. Was barely productive at work and I wasn't trying to stop NHL shooters. Even with the help they could afford it would be a burden.

And before anyone pulls out the Rig of Fire video, there was some whiskey self medicating after everyone was in bed, with me at the time too.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Compared to every other team?
No not really. Bottom third for sure but there are worse

I don’t think I said they were 32nd, but sure somewhere between 22-30 is where they stand.

I suspect most of the teams that may have a worse prospect list have had significant playoff success vis-vis the Flames. The general frustration is not about just this season, that was my main point.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You're half right. Yes, the STHs are their primary audience. But if you think STHs are 'are happy to just have a night out', then I think you are mistaken. Everyone wants the team to be successful, including STHs, and I would argue them even more so. Everyone is frustrated.

Where I think you have it wrong (along with many others on this board, and CGY12 in this thread) is that tearing it down last week isn't the only rational or sensible path. Yes, we all want to see a plan that is more cup-focused, and less 'make the playoffs' focused. But that doesn't mean that all of that change needs to happen immediately and in a panic. That change needs to be a long-term commitment, and it has to permeate into all of their decision making. That doesn't happen overnight.

Somewhere in between of hold the line and tear it down would have been the best path. No scorched earth, but coming to terms with pieces that won’t be here long term and opening up some room for the next wave of talent. Those decisions need to be made regardless because of cap and the climbing salaries of Huby and Weegar.

Toffoli, Backlund, those should have been seriously explored IMO. Coming to terms with that direction less than 2 days before the deadline, when first round picks were flying around, would have been something that made a lot of sense.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

This is going to sound a little strange but as a family that had a really bad pregnancy I wonder if that could be a part of it with Markstrom? Obviously I know nothing and I'm probably just thinking it because lived it. Was barely productive at work and I wasn't trying to stop NHL shooters. Even with the help they could afford it would be a burden.

And before anyone pulls out the Rig of Fire video, there was some whiskey self medicating after everyone was in bed, with me at the time too.

It wouldn’t be surprising if his concerns with his wife’s pregnancy effected his play. But the Oilers series last year is when Markstrom’s cracks started to show and I don’t think his wife was pregnant then. Let’s hope he’s in a better state of mind now that his child and his wife are both healthy

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

Somewhere in between of hold the line and tear it down would have been the best path. No scorched earth, but coming to terms with pieces that won’t be here long term and opening up some room for the next wave of talent. Those decisions need to be made regardless because of cap and the climbing salaries of Huby and Weegar.

Toffoli, Backlund, those should have been seriously explored IMO. Coming to terms with that direction less than 2 days before the deadline, when first round picks were flying around, would have been something that made a lot of sense.

Backlund and Toffoli have been their best forwards this year. You remove them and you've sunk next season. Or worse - they get replaced with UFA signings in the summer.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

Somewhere in between of hold the line and tear it down would have been the best path. No scorched earth, but coming to terms with pieces that won’t be here long term and opening up some room for the next wave of talent. Those decisions need to be made regardless because of cap and the climbing salaries of Huby and Weegar.

Toffoli, Backlund, those should have been seriously explored IMO. Coming to terms with that direction less than 2 days before the deadline, when first round picks were flying around, would have been something that made a lot of sense.

My questions with stuff like this are:

- who says they didn’t explore moving Toffoli/Backlund?
- why was this trade deadline (where teams generally gear up for the playoffs, less so for the next season) so important, especially given the lack of forwards with term moved?
- why wouldn’t guys like Toffoli/Backlund have more value to teams building for next year in the offseason, or more value to teams building for the playoffs next TD as expiring contracts?

I think it’s easy to say “they should’ve done _____” but I haven’t seen many reasons why it had to be now vs later nor any evidence they didn’t try to do anything.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

My questions with stuff like this are:

- who says they didn’t explore moving Toffoli/Backlund?
- why was this trade deadline (where teams generally gear up for the playoffs, less so for the next season) so important, especially given the lack of forwards with term moved?
- why wouldn’t guys like Toffoli/Backlund have more value to teams building for next year in the offseason, or more value to teams building for the playoffs next TD as expiring contracts?

I think it’s easy to say “they should’ve done _____” but I haven’t seen many reasons why it had to be now vs later nor any evidence they didn’t try to do anything.

Yeah the arm chair complaints without knowing what was offered land hollow.

Throw an "if" in there.

If the Flames were offered 4 first round picks for Toffoli and said no they're idiots!

I can get on board with that.

But they likely valued the players that would return 1sts (if they were even available) more than drafting 28th and waiting four years for a 50% bet.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I don’t think I said they were 32nd, but sure somewhere between 22-30 is where they stand.

I suspect most of the teams that may have a worse prospect list have had significant playoff success vis-vis the Flames. The general frustration is not about just this season, that was my main point.

Well you said this:
The cupboards are pretty bare compared to every other team

But fair on the main point. I just think the Flames prospect pool isn't as bad as some thing. I think it was 21st from the Athletic. Their ranking is on the strength of a pretty good top 4 prospects, and they will add I think a new #1 prospect in this draft.

But yes you should either have more success or a better pipeline. Lack of success and a not great pipeline isn't where you want to me.

We agree on the overall

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

My questions with stuff like this are:

- who says they didn’t explore moving Toffoli/Backlund?
- why was this trade deadline (where teams generally gear up for the playoffs, less so for the next season) so important, especially given the lack of forwards with term moved?
- why wouldn’t guys like Toffoli/Backlund have more value to teams building for next year in the offseason, or more value to teams building for the playoffs next TD as expiring contracts?

I think it’s easy to say “they should’ve done _____” but I haven’t seen many reasons why it had to be now vs later nor any evidence they didn’t try to do anything.

You’re right, I don’t know they didn’t put these guys on the market. Their names were not out there at ALL though, which is unusual, and the sense from the media insiders was the flames were shocked at the outcome of their season and awaiting results as late as the Leafs game for their deadline approach.

So nothing definitive, but the vibes coming out of the flames camp were those options were not seriously explored.

I don’t understand the ‘term’ piece with these players as reasons they weren’t moved. How many times have we heard Treliving say he doesn’t believe in acquiring rentals? Is he alone in the league in this thinking, or perhaps that is also attractive for other teams who are being asked to move futures/picks? Especially with reasonable cap hits, the extra term for these players is a plus.

[Pipty]

At this point we already know we ain't got no chance. I would have been happy with giving Backlund and Toffoli at 50% retention for a 1st or 2nd to an Oilers competitor to make sure they don't win. I would #### block them the next 2 years of their biggest window to win. The last thing I want to see is them winning a cup, plus would be great to see Backlund win.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah the arm chair complaints without knowing what was offered land hollow.

Throw an "if" in there.

If the Flames were offered 4 first round picks for Toffoli and said no they're idiots!

I can get on board with that.

But they likely valued the players that would return 1sts (if they were even available) more than drafting 28th and waiting four years for a 50% bet.

I’m not pretending to know what was offered.

My point is, there will need to be cap casualties this off-season anyway. Some hard roster decisions are coming. This would have been an opportune time to get in front of those decisions, create some flexibility, and get some assets in a heck of a draft, even if they’re picks in the latter end of the first. Those will be the same picks they’re offered next year regardless.

[Goriders]

From what I saw of this team this season. Players were given multiple opportunities in numerous situations to take the bull by the horn and run with it to improve their standing.

Outside of Toffoli, Tanev, Backlund, Dube, Pelletier, Duehr, Gilbert they pretty much all shot the bed.

Lindholm, Anderson, Lewis and Zadorov also have had good seasons and showed up each game.

But Huberdeau, Mangiapane, Markstrom, Vladar, Hanifin, Kadri, Ruzika, Weegar, Coleman, Lucic should all buy big mirrors in the offseason and spend a lot of time looking into them. You’re getting paid millions of dollars to play hockey. The people that are paying you want production in return. Not excuses.

The fans do too.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Backlund and Toffoli have been their best forwards this year. You remove them and you've sunk next season. Or worse - they get replaced with UFA signings in the summer.

Coronato is a piece that is top-6 ready.

You have Dube that could slide into the middle, Zary in the waiting, not to mention a very likely top 10 pick (especially with those guys gone) that would be close to NHL ready.

Better futures and more cap flexibility for what I’d wager is a team that finishes close in standings to the stay the course version.