Ownership and Management Perspective

[zamler]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

I swear some of you are just happy being mediocre.

You know the difficulties and we don't get it.

Originally Posted by Bingo

Bitching endlessly about things you know nothing about doesn't give you some "I hate mediocrity" badge of honor.

Is there some history I don't know about? Your response is way disproportionate to say the least.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by zamler

Is there some history I don't know about? Your response is way disproportionate to say the least.

Everyone is frustrated because not only are the flames bad now, the medium and long term future look very bleak. Expensive aging overpaid veterans that we're stuck with for a decade in some cases. Few prospects. No young elite players - which is what you need to win in this league.

[gamesaver]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

This is just so annoyingly vague. What “clear direction” do you want? We’ve had several editions of young teams over the last 30 years. None worked out. Our most recent version, included elite talent that the Flames had drafted their selves. The direction was forward with them. They chose to leave Calgary. Both of them. That happened 8 months ago….

Clear direction: We want to hold onto our core, that is Mark Giordano, Johnny Gaudreau, Sean Monahan, Matthew Tkachuk, Mikael Backlund. We firmly believe this is a contender core, despite some up and down years. Therefore we are protecting Gio at expansion draft, even if it means losing a player who may have been ahead of him in the depth chart. We will do our best to re-sign these players, ever if it means drastically overpaying them. But we are going to keep them.

OR

We are moving away from this core. We don't see enough consistency in this itiration of Calgary Flames. Too many up and down years, many coaching changes leading to pretty much same mediocre results after some time. We won't be protecting our captain, we will be looking to move Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Monahan so they don't walk away for free. We will be looking to start a rebuild or re-tool if you will in this insanely stacked draft year talent-wise.

Everything else is going to lead to this exact dumpster-fire we are obserbing right now. And I have not even included the fact they hired Sutter for this - a short term taskmaster, who will eventually lose the room no matter what.

[gamesaver]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The rational path is: breathe, evaluate over the summer, make any changes you determine are necessary/valuable, and give it one more year. If things don't work out, the team will have a boatload of pending UFAs to trade, and launching a rebuild will make a lot of sense, as opposed to being forced, like it would have been if they rushed into it over the last 2 weeks.

The problem with this approach is you are going to lose value on assets you have over time. Is it possible Huberdeau is going to find his game next year under Sutter and return as a point per game player? Well it is possible, but is it probable? It isn't. So in span of two years, you have lost a value of 100+ points, 24 years old in Tkachuk into 40+ points player that is 30+ years old in Huberdau, costing 10 million a year. What about Markstrom, does he bounce back? Is it probable he will turn back into 91%+ goalie? If not, what is his value then? What about Kadri, is he showing signs of being able to turn it around?
All these questions are pending, and if those answers are negative, one year from now you are in so much worse position than today. Asking for patience and hoping for the best can lead into a total disaster. And it is more likely to happen than the miraculous turnaround, all things considered.
I believe as many others the team has missed a prime time for rebuild last summer, but closing eyes and hiding from the reality is gonna make it ever worse. It's like sitting on a sinking titanic and saying "Let's wait a couple minutes and if we are drowning by then, maybe we have a problem.."

[Ferarri]

Just wanted to add one more thought to my original point. A lot of fans on this board and I assume in the community have said they are willing to accept a re-build and are willing to grow through the pains of starting over.

How long does fan patience last though? In the short term a 2-3 year re-build would most likely be palatable as optimism for the future continues to build. Picks and prospects continue to develop and fans have something to look forward to.

However, what happens if it doesn’t go as expected? Maybe after 3 years the picks have shown very little and potentially labelled as busts. Does the fan support continue to resonate? I find a lot of people place a ton of emphasis on first round picks. But for the assets we have, these are probably going to be late round firsts at best. In the Jarome Iginla and Bouwmester trade that amounted to Poirier and Klimchuk. Not much else needs to be said about that.

So if these are the drafting returns we get then the finger starts to point again. Conversations about how the organization is incompetent at picking talent and developing talent get louder. Comparisons to other teams in similar situations begin to occur and the spiral continues.

There is only so much losing that fans are willing to accept. Let’s be honest, being a season ticket holder is a commitment. It’s often cold and snowy, food and drinks are incredibly expensive and the added cost of parking or transportation. Patience will only last for so long and really who wants to go to the games where the home team is always losing. It sucks the enjoyment out, is painful to watch and not fun. Money is tough to come by for many people and paying for an inferior, boring and losing product gets stale really fast especially when there are other entertainment options.

People will say that it’s different, that re-building brings that pain and is worth it in the end. The payoff is greater than the risk. But if you want a real example of how they can backfire then look no further than the Calgary Flames.

In the late 90’s this team was a disaster and was constantly losing. Also no exciting picks to energize anyone. What was the result? Fans staying away from games and a season ticket drive to save the franchise (that nearly didn’t make it). It wasn’t until Ken King and Sutter joined, and an 04 Stanley cup run that really rejuvenated the fan base.

So back to the philosophy of being an owner, are you willing to accept that risk? I get that circumstances are MUCH different with the salary cap era and creating a more equal playing field for small market teams, but the risk of losing turns people away.

I lean towards the re-build approach as a fan and am willing to be patient, but I get why an owner would not. Nobody wants to lose money and I don’t care if your company makes thousands or millions. These owners are no different. Some will argue that billionaires shouldn’t be all they concerned if profits are down for a few seasons, but that’s completely unjustifiable. Nobody goes into a business to lose money.

Also, I’m willing to bet that a very small percentage of owners in this league prioritize a Stanley cup over profit. Sure, there could be a select few that have a burning desire to win at all costs for the prestige, but I’m willing to bet most want revenue. A Stanley cup is icing on the cake, because you guessed it, a longer run generates more cash.

[GGG]

I think from an owner perspective they are getting the actions they want just not the results.

The goal being - Maintain teams which will sell regular season tickets and generate the odd playoff revenue.

In that mind set in the off season they had two choices after Gaudreau didn’t resign. Tank or try to get competing assets. The flames executed an impressive set of asset swaps to ice a competitive team and extend the window by 2-3 years.

Then goaltending fell apart so the team isn’t competitive so you hold your draft capital and see what you can do next year.

Is the owners strategy correct? Probably. The teams viability is vendors taking clients to games. If the casual person isn’t interested in going the advertising budgets will go elsewhere. Is it optimum for winning cups? No

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Yet you have made a "dink comment" claiming another poster knows nothing.
Have enough self-awareness to know you're the one being checked, hombre.

Way to double down.

NONE of us know what was offered or turned down. None of us. Wasn't an attack on anyone.

Saying judging a trade deadline without knowing what actually was offered is a waste of time.

I certainly didn't suggest to anyone that they thought they were high and mighty for owning a website.

You're the ass man. Wear it.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by zamler

Is there some history I don't know about? Your response is way disproportionate to say the least.

Yep

[Kasi]

Eh the profits from gate receipts is not the reason that owning sports team is lucrative. The reason it’s lucrative is the same reason that owning property is good. It’s because you can literally do nothing and the asset increases in value. Plenty of sports franchises have crappy attendance and yet still sell for way more than they were bought for years earlier.

To me an owner getting hung up on a couple home games or some season ticket holders is kinda pointless. The goal should be to win titles since that will do the most to bump the teams value.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by saillias

Is it no longer in vogue or is it just that everyone does it now so it's no longer an edge. it's more if you don't do it you suck? I don't follow baseball that closely but that's what it looks like to me

Yes that’s a better pay to put it. It’s not cutting edge anymore.

[chedder]

Imagine if Treliving is extended as GM and he fires Sutter because he didn't want him in the first place.

Not that this will happen. I think Treliving just won't be offered an extension and we'll get a Sutter collaborator for a GM.

If there's truth to the 'lost the room' rumours, it'll be a long 2 seasons.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Way to double down.

Uh huh.

Originally Posted by Bingo

NONE of us know what was offered or turned down. None of us. Wasn't an attack on anyone.

You don't know that. You're the one making assumptions here. I'm sure there are people who frequent this board who know exactly what was offered and turned down.

Originally Posted by Bingo

Saying judging a trade deadline without knowing what actually was offered is a waste of time.

No one has been doing that. Instead this thread has been about how this team has been managed the past eight years. If you think it is a waste of time, maybe just skip over it?

Originally Posted by Bingo

I certainly didn't suggest to anyone that they thought they were high and mighty for owning a website.

No, that was me.

Originally Posted by Bingo

You're the ass man. Wear it.

Maybe take a break from CP for a bit? Just an idea.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Maybe take a break from CP for a bit? Just an idea.

Only one personal attack in this whole topic. Came from you.

Not sure I'm the one that needs a break.

[madmike]

The sad reality is the Flames haven’t been a true Cup contender since the early 1990s. That’s 30+ years at this point.

They caught lightning in a bottle in 2004, but that was a one-off shot. You’d think ownership would realize by now that their existing model doesn’t work, but for whatever reason they keep banging their heads agains the wall and hoping for the best.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by gamesaver

The problem with this approach is you are going to lose value on assets you have over time. Is it possible Huberdeau is going to find his game next year under Sutter and return as a point per game player? Well it is possible, but is it probable? It isn't. So in span of two years, you have lost a value of 100+ points, 24 years old in Tkachuk into 40+ points player that is 30+ years old in Huberdau, costing 10 million a year. What about Markstrom, does he bounce back? Is it probable he will turn back into 91%+ goalie? If not, what is his value then? What about Kadri, is he showing signs of being able to turn it around?
All these questions are pending, and if those answers are negative, one year from now you are in so much worse position than today. Asking for patience and hoping for the best can lead into a total disaster. And it is more likely to happen than the miraculous turnaround, all things considered.
I believe as many others the team has missed a prime time for rebuild last summer, but closing eyes and hiding from the reality is gonna make it ever worse. It's like sitting on a sinking titanic and saying "Let's wait a couple minutes and if we are drowning by then, maybe we have a problem.."

Huby was well over ppg in the previous 4 seasons. I'd say it's more likely than not that he gets back around there, regardless of the coach. Tkachuk and Gaudreau each put up triple digits under this same coach.

Kadri is delivering statistically exactly as should be expected (unless you were dumb enough to expect a repeat of his outlier season). It's probably more frustrating to watch than expected.

Markstrom is a much bigger question mark. But that's true of nearly every goalie in the league. Vasi, Shesterkin, and maybe Saros/Oettinger/Hellebuyck/Ullmark/Sorokin are about the only guys you can feel like 99.9% confident in. But I bet at least one of those guys "sucks" next year, too (though unlikely to JM's depths this year). Even Shesterkin's numbers plummeted further this year than you'd ever expect.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by madmike

The sad reality is the Flames haven’t been a true Cup contender since the early 1990s. That’s 30+ years at this point.

They caught lightning in a bottle in 2004, but that was a one-off shot. You’d think ownership would realize by now that their existing model doesn’t work, but for whatever reason they keep banging their heads agains the wall and hoping for the best.

The Flames should have won 2 cups in the 80's. 2004 was a total fluke...AND it was in. The rest of the script to date is mediocre at best. That's it....your Calgary Flames.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by gamesaver

The problem with this approach is you are going to lose value on assets you have over time. Is it possible Huberdeau is going to find his game next year under Sutter and return as a point per game player? Well it is possible, but is it probable? It isn't. So in span of two years, you have lost a value of 100+ points, 24 years old in Tkachuk into 40+ points player that is 30+ years old in Huberdau, costing 10 million a year. What about Markstrom, does he bounce back? Is it probable he will turn back into 91%+ goalie? If not, what is his value then? What about Kadri, is he showing signs of being able to turn it around?
All these questions are pending, and if those answers are negative, one year from now you are in so much worse position than today. Asking for patience and hoping for the best can lead into a total disaster. And it is more likely to happen than the miraculous turnaround, all things considered.
I believe as many others the team has missed a prime time for rebuild last summer, but closing eyes and hiding from the reality is gonna make it ever worse. It's like sitting on a sinking titanic and saying "Let's wait a couple minutes and if we are drowning by then, maybe we have a problem.."

We missed the opportunity to turn Gio into an asset.
We missed the opportunity to turn Brodie into an asset.
We missed the opportunity to turn Gaudreau into an asset.
We missed the opportunity to turn Tkachuk into a young asset to rebuild around.
We missed the opportunity to cash in on Mangiapane after a 35 goal season.
Now, we're in the process of squandering the remaining value in Lindholm and Hanifin.
This organization has zero foresight. Instead of having assets and cap flexibility for the rebuild we have huge boat anchor contracts in Huberdeau, Kadri, Weegar. We have no young skilled players on the way and any young talented players we do have are going to either get massive raises or leave.

[KenHouston]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That's a dink comment.

Never have I ever claimed to know more than anyone.

Check yourself.

Dink is a nice word Bingo.

@Cannon7 - been here over 20 years. The man running this place has never acted in any manner other than being a fan first, and second a journalist. Never an insider or anything else. The time and money he has spent is appreciated and loved my most of us.

I don't post much but I troll and I know everything he has ever posted so please take that stuff elsewhere.

@Bingo - many blessings and thank you!!

KH

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Hackey

We missed the opportunity to turn Gio into an asset.
We missed the opportunity to turn Brodie into an asset.
We missed the opportunity to turn Gaudreau into an asset.
We missed the opportunity to turn Tkachuk into a young asset to rebuild around.
We missed the opportunity to cash in on Mangiapane after a 35 goal season.
Now, we're in the process of squandering the remaining value in Lindholm and Hanifin.
This organization has zero foresight. Instead of having assets and cap flexibility for the rebuild we have huge boat anchor contracts in Huberdeau, Kadri, Weegar. We have no young skilled players on the way and any young talented players we do have are going to either get massive raises or leave.

Ownership traded assets for a rebuild for current competitiveness. Edmonton took years be around as mediocre but with elite talent. Buffalo missed out on the lottery ball and got what should have been still almost as good talent but didn’t. The concept that rebuilding is easy is flawed. So yes we are reaching the end of a window that didn’t peak the way we wanted due to injury and Bennot not being Draisaitl.

But I think you are mistaken when you say the ownership has zero foresight. I think the ownership does have foresight, it just has a different goal then you. Ownerships goal is clearly not do everything possible to maximize the probability of championships of the next 30 years. Instead it’s to maximize the number of years the hockey team is worth watching. That difference of goal explains all of the above actions.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Ferarri

Just wanted to add one more thought to my original point. A lot of fans on this board and I assume in the community have said they are willing to accept a re-build and are willing to grow through the pains of starting over.

How long does fan patience last though? In the short term a 2-3 year re-build would most likely be palatable as optimism for the future continues to build. Picks and prospects continue to develop and fans have something to look forward to.

However, what happens if it doesn’t go as expected? Maybe after 3 years the picks have shown very little and potentially labelled as busts. Does the fan support continue to resonate? I find a lot of people place a ton of emphasis on first round picks. But for the assets we have, these are probably going to be late round firsts at best. In the Jarome Iginla and Bouwmester trade that amounted to Poirier and Klimchuk. Not much else needs to be said about that.

So if these are the drafting returns we get then the finger starts to point again. Conversations about how the organization is incompetent at picking talent and developing talent get louder. Comparisons to other teams in similar situations begin to occur and the spiral continues.

There is only so much losing that fans are willing to accept. Let’s be honest, being a season ticket holder is a commitment. It’s often cold and snowy, food and drinks are incredibly expensive and the added cost of parking or transportation. Patience will only last for so long and really who wants to go to the games where the home team is always losing. It sucks the enjoyment out, is painful to watch and not fun. Money is tough to come by for many people and paying for an inferior, boring and losing product gets stale really fast especially when there are other entertainment options.

People will say that it’s different, that re-building brings that pain and is worth it in the end. The payoff is greater than the risk. But if you want a real example of how they can backfire then look no further than the Calgary Flames.

In the late 90’s this team was a disaster and was constantly losing. Also no exciting picks to energize anyone. What was the result? Fans staying away from games and a season ticket drive to save the franchise (that nearly didn’t make it). It wasn’t until Ken King and Sutter joined, and an 04 Stanley cup run that really rejuvenated the fan base.

So back to the philosophy of being an owner, are you willing to accept that risk? I get that circumstances are MUCH different with the salary cap era and creating a more equal playing field for small market teams, but the risk of losing turns people away.

I lean towards the re-build approach as a fan and am willing to be patient, but I get why an owner would not. Nobody wants to lose money and I don’t care if your company makes thousands or millions. These owners are no different. Some will argue that billionaires shouldn’t be all they concerned if profits are down for a few seasons, but that’s completely unjustifiable. Nobody goes into a business to lose money.

Also, I’m willing to bet that a very small percentage of owners in this league prioritize a Stanley cup over profit. Sure, there could be a select few that have a burning desire to win at all costs for the prestige, but I’m willing to bet most want revenue. A Stanley cup is icing on the cake, because you guessed it, a longer run generates more cash.

Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Hanifin, Mangiapane, Andersson, would all bring back solid returns. Gio, Brodie, Backlund, Markstrom, could have all brought back decent returns. The opportunity was there. So when you suck for 3 years and add your own top picks and add in those returns you likely have a pretty decent team in a short period of tike.. This idea that it might not work or will fans be on board never makes sense to me. The product we have and have been getting hasn't been much better majority of the time. Detroit had more wins than us. Montreal has 1 less. Vancouver has 2 less. We're not missing much. I'll take a young team with hope over an old slowly declining team.