What to do with Huberdeau?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Also toss in that Gaudreau contract terms that were public. Hard to justify offering Huberdeau less.



It was a copy and paste of Gaudreau's contract

If you're a GM and you are copy and pasting a contract for an entirely different player from outside the organization that you clearly have very little read on simply to save face, you aren't worth your weight in the least.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Locke

Treliving should have 'Tkachuked' him. Sign him to that $10.5Mx8 and immediately flipped him.

I think he held more value without the extension.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

If you're a GM and you are copy and pasting a contract for an entirely different player from outside the organization that you clearly have very little read on simply to save face, you aren't worth your weight in the least.

I mean they are comparable players in the same age range and everything was publicly known with Gaudreau. Why'd Huberdeau take less or a majorly different contract structure than Gaudreau?

The narrative that summer was sign or trade Huberdeau and Weegar. o waiting to see how the season goes.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Easy to say in hindsight where we know he didn't perform up to his contract but can you imagine if he put up another 90-100 point season and then walked?

It was pretty much commit to him in that offseason or trade him.

Yup there were likely three options on the table:

Sign him to that $10.5M x 8 contract (no way Walsh was taking less than what was already mentioned as the offer to Gaudreau)

or

Go into the season with the risk that you're either moving him at the deadline or he can potentially walk as a UFA.

or

Flip him right after that trade

Would have really been interesting to gauge what a team like Carolina or St.Louis that reportedly missed out on Tkachuk might have been willing to offer for Huberdeau.

But that wasn't what Edwards, Treliving, and the org wanted to do. They wanted to signal they could still compete and that they were an attractive place for players. They read the cards wrong though for sure.

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

If you're a GM and you are copy and pasting a contract for an entirely different player from outside the organization that you clearly have very little read on simply to save face, you aren't worth your weight in the least.

Huberdeau and Walsh held all the cards there, and no way they were taking less than what was publicly rumored to have been offered for Gaudreau.

Huberdeau could have forced a trade if he really wanted or just said "I'm going UFA no matter what". Remember the narrative around the time was that the Flames had to convince "Superstar Huberdeau" to come and want to stay in Calgary.

Stating otherwise is all hindsight.

[GioforPM]

There was a sizeable portion of the board that insisted that if Treliving did not extend Huberdeau prior to the season, it was an utter failure and they'd be at the same place a year later. I wasn't in a big hurry myself, but I figured he'd be extended at some point in the season. I understand why Huberdeau didn't want that (and nor did Treliving). I don't think anyone seriously considered him to be a flip.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Spurs

If true then we are in trouble and Hubredeau should never been paid close to 10.5m.

Ah...the old double-down on acting like an idiot. Good for you Spruts. Shows high intelligence. Or not.


Are you older than 12?

[bluejays]

There was a fairly large chunk of the board who wanted him signed to an extension given his previous numbers. I think a lot didn’t factor in his age and how much pressure Barkov took off him, plus the Flames style of play. All factors played into reality larger than anyone probably anticipated. A small portion of people thought he should’ve been flipped. I understand ownerships conundrum but I suspect a lot of yes men weren’t pushing back that this wasn’t a legit contender.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by bluejays

There was a fairly large chunk of the board who wanted him signed to an extension given his previous numbers. I think a lot didn’t factor in his age and how much pressure Barkov took off him, plus the Flames style of play. All factors played into reality larger than anyone probably anticipated. A small portion of people thought he should’ve been flipped. I understand ownerships conundrum but I suspect a lot of yes men weren’t pushing back that this wasn’t a legit contender.

To me, it seemed like most were Treliving haters. Remember at the time the trade was viewed as somehwat of a coup given the corner they were painted into. So amid the praise a lot said "well, sure, it seems like a great recovery trade but it means nothing unless he signs both players". I'm too lazy to look but there were quite possibly some of the same posters who now criticize the signing.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

To me, it seemed like most were Treliving haters. Remember at the time the trade was viewed as somehwat of a coup given the corner they were painted into. So amid the praise a lot said "well, sure, it seems like a great recovery trade but it means nothing unless he signs both players". I'm too lazy to look but there were quite possibly some of the same posters who now criticize the signing.

Oh. You mean 'The People Who Were Right?'

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Locke

Oh. You mean 'The People Who Were Right?'

Right about needing a long extension?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Right about needing a long extension?

No.

Right about Treliving being an idiot.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Locke

No.

Right about Treliving being an idiot.

But those people said he'd be an idiot if he didn't sign Huberdeau long term.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

But those people said he'd be an idiot if he didn't sign Huberdeau long term.

Oh no. The people who thought he should have been fired years before any of this ever transpired.

Treliving should have been fired 3-4 years ago.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Locke

Oh no. The people who thought he should have been fired years before any of this ever transpired.

Treliving should have been fired 3-4 years ago.

One doesn't supercede the other. There is a cross section who said both. That's my point.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

One doesn't supercede the other. There is a cross section who said both. That's my point.

I get it. But hey, if we want to juggle goal-posts we can do it all day.

I wanted Treliving fired a long, long time ago. He's good at certain things and absolute ass at others. He was long, long past his 'Best Before' date.

I'll admit, I'm among those who didnt realize that Huberdeau couldnt elevate his game. That he couldnt make players around him better and that he couldnt step up and be a star.

I didnt know that. In my defence, I'm not paid to know that. It is not my expertise. The people who were paid to know that, and it was their expertise...they didnt seem to know that either.

Thats where things get problematic.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by bluejays

There was a fairly large chunk of the board who wanted him signed to an extension given his previous numbers. I think a lot didn’t factor in his age and how much pressure Barkov took off him, plus the Flames style of play. All factors played into reality larger than anyone probably anticipated. A small portion of people thought he should’ve been flipped. I understand ownerships conundrum but I suspect a lot of yes men weren’t pushing back that this wasn’t a legit contender.

I wasn't big on the trade at the time, mainly because getting back an older player on an expiring deal seemed too risky. I also wasn't sold on Huberdeau to be a playoff performer and based on criticisms I read about his play over the years.

I would be lying if I said I was against the extension at the time. Not so much because I thought he was awesome, but more because of how the franchise and city would look if another premiere player shunned them. I was hoping Treliving wouldn't risk putting us in that position again.

You're right that nobody thought he would drop off that hard though. Most people thought the contract would be OK for 3-4 years, but then anchor the team later on.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Locke

I get it. But hey, if we want to juggle goal-posts we can do it all day.

I wanted Treliving fired a long, long time ago. He's good at certain things and absolute ass at others. He was long, long past his 'Best Before' date.

I'll admit, I'm among those who didnt realize that Huberdeau couldnt elevate his game. That he couldnt make players around him better and that he couldnt step up and be a star.

I didnt know that. In my defence, I'm not paid to know that. It is not my expertise. The people who were paid to know that, and it was their expertise...they didnt seem to know that either.

Thats where things get problematic.

He really should have been canned when Sutter was forced on him

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Locke

I'll admit, I'm among those who didnt realize that Huberdeau couldnt elevate his game. That he couldnt make players around him better and that he couldnt step up and be a star.

I didnt know that. In my defence, I'm not paid to know that. It is not my expertise. The people who were paid to know that, and it was their expertise...they didnt seem to know that either.

Thats where things get problematic.

Thing is the bold only started in Calgary.

He 100% made Bennett and Duclair better players and they had the best years of their career playing with him. Even Bennett had a better season in Florida playing primarily with Huberdeau than he did playing primarily with Tkachuk last season. And it wasn't that his was relying on Barkov - their last 4 seasons in Florida together they played together 45% of the time at 5v5.

He really did step up and become a star his last 3-4 seasons in Florida too. Huberdeau's 115 point season is still the highest scoring regular season in Panthers history, still more than Tkachuk's 109 last year.

What I think was missed what that he couldn't do those things in a more structured system with more of an emphasis of a 200 ft game and less reliance on generating off the rush.

Lots of focus gets placed on the linemates...and I do think we don't have a great fit at center for him, but really the bigger thing that I think isn't working with Huberdeau is more the system (that and his own confidence was shattered when he was traded and as much as he's tried to feign confidence he never regained it).

And I think the team knows that now too TBH. But I don't see them changing the system to become more of a counter-attack, high pressure, rush based offense like they played in Huberdeau's best years in Florida because the rest of the roster isn't built for that at all right now.

The weird part though is Huberdeau did it under multiple coaches in Florida too, so wasn't like it was just one coach. And even though Quenneville is a P.O.S for his part in what happened in Chicago, he's still a pretty good hockey coach that seemed to figure out how to make Huberdeau work while also having team success.

92 points in 82 games under Bob Boughner.

Played at an 92 point per 82 games in the 2 shortened COVID seasons under Quenneville.

115 points in 80 games with Brunette/Quenneville combo (but 75 games were Brunette)

So not like it was even just one coach...he was a 90 point player with three different coaching staffs in Florida. I think the most telling sign there could have been an issue was that under Gallant in a more defensive structure he didn't have amazing production. In the two full seasons with Gallant he averaged 59 points per 82 games, which really isn't far off what he's averaged as a Flame (52 points per 82). But I could see why maybe the team would have overlooked that too - those were his 21 year old and 22 year old seasons in Florida - so he was still pretty young.

In the end I think there are system and linemate opportunities to help Huberdeau, but the biggest thing is he needs to get out of his own head. You can tell he hasn't had any fun and hasn't just been playing instinctive hockey since joining the Flames. He's thinking on the ice, which leads to him being reactive instead of anticipating, and then he's a step behind. Which then magnifies the confidence issues that all started when Florida traded him to start with. Overall maybe he just needs to go get hammered the night before a game, and then just play a little guilty and stop thinking so much.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Bonded

He really should have been canned when Sutter was forced on him

Or at the very least when he declined his extension offer.

Was Sutter actually pushed on him though? It came out that Treliving talked to him about coaching the Flames previously. I know people don't like Edwards, but he seems to be a scapegoat for everything Treliving did wrong. I think it's probably a case where Edwards and Treliving were on the same page for the most part. I doubt they keep Treliving around for 9 years if he had drastically different philosophies.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It's ridiculous that people think there is something so magical about Duclair or Bennett (or Wennberg and Hornqvist the year before), that Huberdeau can't replicate anything resembling success or chemistry with anyone else on the Flames. As if guys like Lindholm, Mangiapane, Coleman, Kadri, and Backlund are just chumps compared to the aforementioned Panthers players that Huberdeau found success with.

Yeah I don't think Duclair would be the answer for Huberdeau or this team either, we'd have 2 guys who zig while the rest of the roster zags. The only thing magical was the archaic style that the Panthers were deploying which resulted in Huberdeau's offensive success and the ultimate con job that Bill Zito pulled on Brad Treliving.

I also think it's more important for the team to find a center that works with Huberdeau more so than the right winger. A lot of issues that Jonathan has would be masked by having the right center which is easier said then done I'm afraid.

So really it just comes down to Huberdeau being better. It's why I keep saying he needs to transform his game, because I don't think the team's mandate will change any time soon. Management doesn't appear to be after one-dimensional players, based on the Sharangovich acquisition. It seems like Conroy & co value 2 way guys who play the game the right way. That's why it's not surprising to see that Yegor has found success with Lindholm who basically embodies the 2 way game/positioning/playing the right way.

So hopefully Huberdeau can make a concerted effort to transform his game to better fit this team's identity.