I would hope the Flames see one or two seasons where teams like the Panthers this year or Montreal in 2021 as once in a generation runs that cannot be relied on to be repeated. But I agree, I expect the Flames (Edwards) to instead use this as empirical evidence to re-affirm their approach to building a hockey team.
It makes sense to me why this team has wild swings from season to season. Whether its roster composition, coaching, development - this organization has never taken a long-term approach to winning and I don't think it will start now.
And yes, there are fears you get stuck into loop of darkness like Edmonton and Buffalo - but I also think few people would argue that these organizations have had the absolute worst management groups in the sport.
Even Detroit that is considered to be a well run organization, with a star GM, is now up to a 7 year drought.
Ottawa is at 6.
Anaheim at 5.
Again I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, just outlining why it's probably a hard argument to win with ownership. Best you can do is somehow take a more balanced and forward looking approach, without uttering the word Re-build.
To me Dallas is the model. And that also underscores why drafting is so important. They've been able to move to a new core that seems like it can compete with few high picks (Heiskenen the notable one) but they drafted REALLY well outside of high picks. That's the only way you can pull it off. Which means have to become more valuable to this franchise.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
I would hope the Flames see one or two seasons where teams like the Panthers this year or Montreal in 2021 as once in a generation runs that cannot be relied on to be repeated. But I agree, I expect the Flames (Edwards) to instead use this as empirical evidence to re-affirm their approach to building a hockey team.
It makes sense to me why this team has wild swings from season to season. Whether its roster composition, coaching, development - this organization has never taken a long-term approach to winning and I don't think it will start now.
And yes, there are fears you get stuck into loop of darkness like Edmonton and Buffalo - but I also think few people would argue that these organizations have had the absolute worst management groups in the sport.
I think to Jiri's point, you've made the assumption the owners can (or are willing) to afford the year over year hit to earnings (and they are massive) missing the playoffs, and more importantly, having a rebuilding team would have. It's one thing to say over the course of 10 years, strategy X works out better. But if you can't afford the first 5 years, that strategy isn't available to you.
Each year that goes by, it looks to me like the empirical evidence suggests, the just get in strategy is actually quite effective. Florida barely made it this year. Vegas missed it last year. Dallas has been on multiple long runs in the past 5 years (and poor performances) and so on. The swings from darling to dog house for franchises in this league, literally change from one year to the next.
The cap era has brought on pretty good parity, meaning the difference between champ and out of the playoffs it truly the slimmest of margins right now. It's easy to disqualify the info that doesn't back up our position with quips like: Montreal's run and Florida's run were once in a generational, and Edmonton and Buffalo are the worst managed teams. But that's not looking at the empirical evidence, that's seeing what you want to see to validate a hypothesis. I'm guessing the empirical evidence would actually prove, both rebuilds and consistent re-tools (keep trying just to get in) have likely rendered pretty similar results, especially in the last decade, but maybe not?
Even Detroit that is considered to be a well run organization, with a star GM, is now up to a 7 year drought.
Ottawa is at 6.
Anaheim at 5.
Again I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, just outlining why it's probably a hard argument to win with ownership. Best you can do is somehow take a more balanced and forward looking approach, without uttering the word Re-build.
To me Dallas is the model. And that also underscores why drafting is so important. They've been able to move to a new core that seems like it can compete with few high picks (Heiskenen the notable one) but they drafted REALLY well outside of high picks. That's the only way you can pull it off. Which means have to become more valuable to this franchise.
They've done well, but IIRC not too long ago people here mocked all of their long term veteran contracts. They got some real found moneyh with Robertson and Oettinger all in one year - it was like they traded for two additional first rounders in the end result. Mind you, aside from them and Hintz a couple years before, you have to go back to Kinglberg and Benn to find a guy they drafted that turned out to be an impact player (for them - Nikushkin blossomed later).
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
They've done well, but IIRC not too long ago people here mocked all of their long term veteran contracts. They got some real found moneyh with Robertson and Oettinger all in one year - it was like they traded for two additional first rounders in the end result. Mind you, aside from them and Hintz a couple years before, you have to go back to Kinglberg and Benn to find a guy they drafted that turned out to be an impact player (for them - Nikushkin blossomed later).
Goes to show what a couple of home run picks like that can do.
Same with Boston with Bergeron and Pasta.
So you need to maximize the number of bullets you have in the chamber, because if you can get a guy like that, it's a game changer for a franchise.
Without Robertson and Oetinger Dallas is probably commencing an extended re-build of their own with no end in sight.
Even Detroit that is considered to be a well run organization, with a star GM, is now up to a 7 year drought.
Ottawa is at 6.
Anaheim at 5.
Again I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, just outlining why it's probably a hard argument to win with ownership. Best you can do is somehow take a more balanced and forward looking approach, without uttering the word Re-build.
To me Dallas is the model. And that also underscores why drafting is so important. They've been able to move to a new core that seems like it can compete with few high picks (Heiskenen the notable one) but they drafted REALLY well outside of high picks. That's the only way you can pull it off. Which means have to become more valuable to this franchise.
In Dallas' case it helps a lot that they were able to:
1. Add a key secondary player in Pavelski at a very reasonable price due to having a desirable market, and
2. Not have all that young talent force their way out to go play somewhere else
Don't think that's a model that works for a feeder market like Calgary, and certainly not with so much money already locked up in untradeable, long-term deals. Going scorched earth and growing a new, young core together like they were able to do in the post-Iginla era is pretty much the only option this team has to get back to contender status. There is no re-tooling this roster, in this city, to a cup.
The Following User Says Thank You to mrdonkey For This Useful Post:
I'm not sure if that Math checks out when you see teams that are in the midst of LOOOOONG playoff droughts with not certainty over when it will end.
And then you have a final four this year who are all "get in and see what happen" teams.
- A team that finished behind the Flames point wise
- A team that missed the playoffs last year
- A team that executed a full re-tool without a deep re-build
- A team that has had very few high draft picks.
Not saying it's the right approach or the one I would take, but certainly these playoffs would have done little to change the mind of the Flames that "get in and see what happens" isn't valid.
There are a lot of variables, the key will be having a good plan and making the most of the teams strengths. Not playing top guys when they need a goal or playing guys in situations or positions that are counterproductive. Need to play to win if they want to get in. Scoring goals can take some pressure off the goaltenders to play a perfect game.
One of the biggest things the captain has to do is get the coaches message to the players. They clearly want the collaboration to run from GM to coach to captain to players. Not sure if Backlund would have the same level of support for the coach that Rasmussen would, all other factors aside.
I remain a supporter of the systems that Sutter had in place and I believe he cares about his players. I kind of take the Lucic comments as gospel. I understand many don’t feel that way.
But I appreciate that we now have a coach in place who will have a less combative approach to dealing with the media. I had second hand embarrassment every press conference and I long stopped listening. A whole bunch of coaches have had success in the NHL and no reason to believe Huska can’t be one.
I'm eager to see what type of tweaks and changes are made to the system.
Playing faster and putting value on the puck was a theme and allowimg our goalies to see some shots.
The defensive breakdowns trying hard to chase the puck to suppress shots often led to a breakdown on the first shots the goalies would see.
Offensively when you talk about allowing are skilled players to play and value the puck we won't be firing shots on net to pump up shot volume. Holding onto the puck making plays and forcing the goalie's to move.
Power play is going to be interesting.
The biggest change though and hearing Conroy say it a few times our top players being double shifted and not sitting on the bench with 2 minutes to go. 14-15 minutes a night that includes pp time was laughable.
Interesting listening to Ryan Leslie on with Eric Francis today. Leslie really focused on Kadri’s first season and how much he disagreed with Sutter and how much it impacted Kadri.
“They’re not even entertaining the idea of a rebuild” said Leslie…that’s a bit confusing to me. If Lindholm doesn’t want to sign and Hanifin is being traded…seems like a confused mandate.
Interesting listening to Ryan Leslie on with Eric Francis today. Leslie really focused on Kadri’s first season and how much he disagreed with Sutter and how much it impacted Kadri.
“They’re not even entertaining the idea of a rebuild” said Leslie…that’s a bit confusing to me. If Lindholm doesn’t want to sign and Hanifin is being traded…seems like a confused mandate.
Hopefully, they are at least thinking of retooling.
__________________
"There are no asterisks in this life, only scoreboards." - Ari Gold
Interesting listening to Ryan Leslie on with Eric Francis today. Leslie really focused on Kadri’s first season and how much he disagreed with Sutter and how much it impacted Kadri.
“They’re not even entertaining the idea of a rebuild” said Leslie…that’s a bit confusing to me. If Lindholm doesn’t want to sign and Hanifin is being traded…seems like a confused mandate.
What did he disagree with?
Only two things come to mind with Kadri they asked him to reign it in and his linemates.
High level of play.
Always willing to stand up and talk about the team.
Has a great relationship with Huska.
Listen to the points that Huska made.
Andersson will not be afraid to go to the coaching staff about the room and what players are thinking. Conversely he trusts and respects Huska so he will have no problem going to his teammates about the message the coaching staff has for the team and what needs to happen.
Andersson should be a long term core piece to this team.
Both Conny and Huska made this point. Neither indicated that the flashiest guy on the ice (uh....Connah....we pointing at YOU) makes the best C. The best Communicator does...because that's the whole point...leadership both on and off the ice. A buffer between players and coaches/management.
Elliote saying he won't say no to Tanguay until it's a no just doesn't know how a lateral move works. Also said maybe Savard.
Emphasis on they really want to change how we attack from that shot volume approach.
Yeah, noted that Iggy and Conroy think highly of Tangs.
Generally teams don’t get in the way of promotions. So if Tangs is an assistant, giving him more money and the associate coach title would likely result in Detroit saying “okay…if that’s what you want, go for it”. Largely I don’t think you see teams get in the way of coaches if want to move on.
