The team needs a shakeup. what to do?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

He also said Elliott is playing small, something I noticed too.

His poor play is all in his head. Which means it can be fixed. Use the equipment change as a 'reset' maybe.

Yet I heard another analyst say Elliot plays better when he uses a deeper crouch, and that's what he was doing in the 1-1 game against the Oilers and in the first period against the Leafs. You can go crazy listening to these guys.

I agree it's mostly in his (and Johnson's) head. Same goes for the whole team right now.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yet I heard another analyst say Elliot plays better when he uses a deeper crouch, and that's what he was doing in the 1-1 game against the Oilers and in the first period against the Leafs. You can go crazy listening to these guys.

I agree it's mostly in his (and Johnson's) head. Same goes for the whole team right now.

You look smaller when you're too far back in the net.

[IgiTang]

Craig Button on Thats Hockey 2nite was going all out at the Flames.. In a round about way and directly.

First he was commenting on Babcocks identification of using Gardiner in the wrong spot after Reilly went down and how he paired Gardiner with Zaitsev and it clearly didnt work.

Saying he mixed up all his pairs to accommodate one player and that was a mistake. The very next game he went back to Gardiner with Carrick as they have been steady all season and put Zaitsev with Marincin and they have been solid.
He then finished by saying, coaches need to stick with what works.. or something along those lines.

Later in the show, says Flames fans may wanna tune out here as they traded Baertschi and Granlund for cents on the dollar and heres Baertschi with 2 goals and Granlund with game winner and have been 2 of the biggest reasons why the nucks are in a playoff spot.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

Craig Button on Thats Hockey 2nite was going all out at the Flames.. In a round about way and directly.

First he was commenting on Babcocks identification of using Gardiner in the wrong spot after Reilly went down and how he paired Gardiner with Zaitsev and it clearly didnt work.

Saying he mixed up all his pairs to accommodate one player and that was a mistake. The very next game he went back to Gardiner with Carrick as they have been steady all season and put Zaitsev with Marincin and they have been solid.
He then finished by saying, coaches need to stick with what works.. or something along those lines.

Later in the show, says Flames fans may wanna tune out here as they traded Baertschi and Granlund for cents on the dollar and heres Baertschi with 2 goals and Granlund with game winner and have been 2 of the biggest reasons why the nucks are in a playoff spot.

Thus why Brad Treliving might be sitting here without a contract extension. He's done some good things, but he's also given up a lot of good players for nothing to show for. Giving up Baertschi, Granlund, Byron and etc for players who aren't helping out the big club right now does not help out Brad's case. Those 3 players right now are big impacts for their respective teams and the fact that we lack depth on the wings right now looks like poor asset managment and poor scouting.

[LiquidX]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Giving up Baertschi, Granlund, Byron and etc for players who aren't helping out the big club right now does not help out Brad's case. Those 3 players right now are big impacts for their respective teams and the fact that we lack depth on the wings right now looks like poor asset managment and poor scouting.

food for thought I guess - but I don't see any of those players having "big impacts" if they're still on the flames...

baertschi 5'11 - LW - 26 points - traded for 2nd rounder (Rasmus Anderson)
Byron 5'9 - LW/C - 28 points - walked

-- neither one of these guys would be playing above gaudreau or tkachuk. Johnny is having a terrible season - it's not secret - but 100% of the time I would want him on the ice over either of these guys. Doubly so for tkachuk.

It could be argued that maybe we could shuffle someone to RW but at best they're both still undersized and we'd get rolled by any team with heavy board play, and would still be slotted behind frolik, brouwer, and versteeg.

Granlund 6'0 - C - 20 points - traded for hunter shinkaruk
-- where would he slot in? definitely not above monahan or backlund..
best he could hope for is 3rd line.. He's probably the most appealing of the bunch - but would you rather have him dressed in a 3rd line role or develop bennett?

In short.. this is all crying over spilled milk.
Let it go - these guys were not the answer when they were on the flames, and if they're the answer now, the flames are in far worse trouble than any of use could imagine.

I don't think moving on from these guys was a wrong decision at all - we took back more than we gave away, and we're moaning about guys who are on pace for an average of around 30-35 points by the end of the year - if they're the mistakes that cost treliving his job, we have real issues in management.

As for poor asset management - that's easy to say when 2/3 guys we picked up in these trades are still in the AHL - but they're having good years there, developing at a good pace, and likely at least shinkaruk sees time with the flames next year. True, they're still the equivalent of magic beans, but to say trading guys who had no spot on the team for them is poor asset management is a good bit of hyperbole. If the canucks, and habs had any depth at all they would likely be looking to move on from these guys too.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by LiquidX

food for thought I guess - but I don't see any of those players having "big impacts" if they're still on the flames...

baertschi 5'11 - LW - 26 points - traded for 2nd rounder (Rasmus Anderson)
Byron 5'9 - LW/C - 28 points - walked

-- neither one of these guys would be playing above gaudreau or tkachuk. Johnny is having a terrible season - it's not secret - but 100% of the time I would want him on the ice over either of these guys. Doubly so for tkachuk.

It could be argued that maybe we could shuffle someone to RW but at best they're both still undersized and we'd get rolled by any team with heavy board play, and would still be slotted behind frolik, brouwer, and versteeg.

Granlund 6'0 - C - 20 points - traded for hunter shinkaruk
-- where would he slot in? definitely not above monahan or backlund..
best he could hope for is 3rd line.. He's probably the most appealing of the bunch - but would you rather have him dressed in a 3rd line role or develop bennett?

In short.. this is all crying over spilled milk.
Let it go - these guys were not the answer when they were on the flames, and if they're the answer now, the flames are in far worse trouble than any of use could imagine.

I don't think moving on from these guys was a wrong decision at all - we took back more than we gave away, and we're moaning about guys who are on pace for an average of around 30-35 points by the end of the year - if they're the mistakes that cost treliving his job, we have real issues in management.

As for poor asset management - that's easy to say when 2/3 guys we picked up in these trades are still in the AHL - but they're having good years there, developing at a good pace, and likely at least shinkaruk sees time with the flames next year. True, they're still the equivalent of magic beans, but to say trading guys who had no spot on the team for them is poor asset management is a good bit of hyperbole. If the canucks, and habs had any depth at all they would likely be looking to move on from these guys too.

You're not wrong in some of your assessments. But the fact we decided to waive Paul Byron instead of anyone else (i.e. Bollig, Jooris and etc.) is one of the biggest mistakes Treliving has made IMO and it goes against Treliving as a GM. Baertschi situation is what it is, he asked to be moved and we accommodated and drafted a potentially good player in return. Granlund should've been kept and tried out on the wing though as he clearly had a lot of shortcomings as a center but had some tantalizing attributes for a winger. I don't see anything from Shinkaruk that makes me think he'll ever be a full time NHLer. In fact, Mangiapane and Linden Vey has potential to pass him at this point. For the record, I'm in favor of re-signing Brad Treliving, but just echoing the sentiments from Craig Button because he's not wrong and the criticism is fair game.

[LiquidX]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

You're not wrong in some of your assessments. But the fact we decided to waive Paul Byron instead of anyone else (i.e. Bollig, Jooris and etc.) is one of the biggest mistakes Treliving has made IMO and it goes against Treliving as a GM.

if waiving a guy who would not have a spot on our team is the worst thing he does, I think we'll be ok. We're talking about a 27 yo tiny winger who has only ever topped 20 points twice in his career. He isn't the second coming of martin st. louis - he's a marginal nhl player who skates fast.

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Granlund should've been kept and tried out on the wing though as he clearly had a lot of shortcomings as a center but had some tantalizing attributes for a winger.

again.. where is he going to play. 3rd line at best. we have depth at c and lw (which would be his natural wing). Again.. expressing this amount of remorse for moving on from a player you can't easily fit into your lineup is a waste of energy. Where would he play on the flames - with his whopping 20 points? We currently have 6 forwards with better stat lines than him - conveniently 2c, 2lw, 2 rw -- he would be lucky to fit on the 3rd line - and he wouldn't stick there anyway. He has a great shot but not much else.

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

I don't see anything from Shinkaruk that makes me think he'll ever be a full time NHLer. In fact, Mangiapane and Linden Vey has potential to pass him at this point.

That's fair I guess.. he is only 22 years old and has only played 15 NHL games.. It's probably hard to get a real feel for whether or not anyone is going to be a full time nhl player at this stage in their career - however 17 points in 21 AHL games is not a bad start. Not everyone can bust into the league at 18.

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

For the record, I'm in favor of re-signing Brad Treliving, but just echoing the sentiments from Craig Button because he's not wrong and the criticism is fair game.

I'd argue that if the criticism is being applied based on these 3 players... it's pretty weak criticism with just as much evidence saying he did a good job moving pieces that don't fit for pieces that have a better chance of fitting -- and if they don't.. then maybe he moves on from them next year too.. either way - all 3 players are hardly players to be concerned about. I can't see anyone getting fired over 3 such players, and if he is even on thin ice over them, we have much bigger issues in HQ.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

You're not wrong in some of your assessments. But the fact we decided to waive Paul Byron instead of anyone else (i.e. Bollig, Jooris and etc.) is one of the biggest mistakes Treliving has made IMO and it goes against Treliving as a GM. Baertschi situation is what it is, he asked to be moved and we accommodated and drafted a potentially good player in return. Granlund should've been kept and tried out on the wing though as he clearly had a lot of shortcomings as a center but had some tantalizing attributes for a winger. I don't see anything from Shinkaruk that makes me think he'll ever be a full time NHLer. In fact, Mangiapane and Linden Vey has potential to pass him at this point. For the record, I'm in favor of re-signing Brad Treliving, but just echoing the sentiments from Craig Button because he's not wrong and the criticism is fair game.

If that's one of the biggest mistakes he's made since being here, then BT is likely one hell of a GM.

[Frequitude]

If I were to do anything I'd fire Gulutzan. Nothing to do with losing streaks, slow starts or records. He just gives me an air of Dallas Eakins. It sounds like he thinks he's the smartest person in the room whenever he speaks and has that same ***-don't-stink smug look on his face.

Am I getting petty, probably. I just can't imagine giving my all for a guy who comes across like that.

[ResAlien]

I know it's been asked before and apologies if I missed the answer but what about GG other than "I hate his stupid face" makes him Dallas Eakins?

[Toonage]

The hair.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

I know it's been asked before and apologies if I missed the answer but what about GG other than "I hate his stupid face" makes him Dallas Eakins?

I intentionally stayed away from hair and face type comments.

I honestly mean the smug "I'm the smartest guy I know" way he speaks. Its just the way he comes across the TV to me. That type of person bugs me and I can't imagine ever busting my butt for him.

Who knows, maybe he's completely different and well respected in the room and players would run through a wall for him. It just doesn't seem that way.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

I intentionally stayed away from hair and face type comments.

I honestly mean the smug "I'm the smartest guy I know" way he speaks. Its just the way he comes across the TV to me. That type of person bugs me and I can't imagine ever busting my butt for him.

Who knows, maybe he's completely different and well respected in the room and players would run through a wall for him. It just doesn't seem that way.

Well we obviously know that's not happening. I don't have anything personal against him but he's simply not proven he can be anything more than a very average/mediocre head coach. There were no indications he could be more than that in Dallas and to date this season nothing that points to him being able to take this team where ownership wants it to go. The team hasn't exactly looked inspired for a majority of this season. It's just hard to imagine that things are going to be better under him.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

I intentionally stayed away from hair and face type comments.

I honestly mean the smug "I'm the smartest guy I know" way he speaks. Its just the way he comes across the TV to me. That type of person bugs me and I can't imagine ever busting my butt for him.

Who knows, maybe he's completely different and well respected in the room and players would run through a wall for him. It just doesn't seem that way.

He comes across just as condescending as Eakins did. I think the comparison is starting to stick.

[Toonage]

Honestly I see a team that has difficulty playing how he wants for long stretches (where a goaltender isn't covering their mistakes) and he's sapped the team of their greatest strength, their speed.

So we have square pegs, round holes, and cement shoes.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

There sure is a #### tone of panic, and talk about how fundementally broken this young team is to it's core considering we currently sit in a playoff spot at the All Star break. That's with a ridiculously slow start to the season.

I get it, yes, when you account for the games in hand we are likely just on the outside looking in, and yes the play has been inconsistent, but what did we really expect? Is this team really as broken as we are making it out to be, do we really need to be throwing lifeboats over the edge?

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

There sure is a #### tone of panic, and talk about how fundementally broken this young team is to it's core considering we currently sit in a playoff spot at the All Star break. That's with a ridiculously slow start to the season.

I get it, yes, when you account for the games in hand we are likely just on the outside looking in, and yes the play has been inconsistent, but what did we really expect? Is this team really as broken as we are making it out to be, do we really need to be throwing lifeboats over the edge?

I agree the hyperbole is quite high and rampant. The reality is though, we have seen the majority of the players on this team and what they are capable of in the last two years. This year seems like a step back. Statistically, we are probably pretty even, but the level of play, especially from the core is what is lacking.

So far, this year things have been very off and very difficult to watch. In order for us to secure a playoff spot a different trajectory must start happening after the break. So let's hope for that. The boat isn't sinking but the lifeboats will be out after we miss the playoffs.

[wired]

Sit the stars for at least one game.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by LiquidX

Byron 5'9 - LW/C - 28 points - walked

-- neither one of these guys would be playing above gaudreau or tkachuk. Johnny is having a terrible season - it's not secret - but 100% of the time I would want him on the ice over either of these guys. Doubly so for tkachuk.

It could be argued that maybe we could shuffle someone to RW but at best they're both still undersized and we'd get rolled by any team with heavy board play, and would still be slotted behind frolik, brouwer, and versteeg.

Just looking at stats, it doesn't seem like a big loss, but Byron brought character and fire to the team. So did Hartley. Even Russel with the constant shot blocking. I'm not saying they all needed to stay, but losing some people from a group does more than affect stats.

Personally, I kind of like it when the Flames actually play with fire. As a fan, I want to cheer for the team regardless of whether or not they win the cup. Two years back I didn't expect any success but they we're super fun to watch. Now, they play a better possession game, but they aren't nearly as fun for me as a fan.

Treliving has made good rational moves with the team, but the team doesn't have the same character as it did a couple of years ago. Rational is fine as a manager, but passion is a more critical minimum to me as a fan.

[Kunny01]

This team isn't going anywhere for another 5 years.