[News] Flames hire Treliving as GM

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by New Era

I wanted a young guy as well, but I wanted a young guy from a winning organization. There's the rub for me. Phoenix has been a middling team that plays a style of hockey everyone on this board hates with a passion. They have had no success in any shape or form and don't look like a team with much of a future. If the team is an extension of its management, this move bothers me. I like the direction the Flames were headed. They have developed a stable of good young prospects in a very short period of time. They play an exciting brand of hockey. There is a future here. I don't want a guy who learned how to build a 7th-11th place team to work his magic and build the Flames in that image. That is my fear and why I will take a wait and see attitude.

What did we hear for the past decade about the Flames from fans and media outside the city? That "the Flames can't score goals" and "play boring hockey". Some of that actually has merit for the Darryl Sutter coached teams but the bottom line is that when the team wins fans don't seem to notice the style of play nearly as much. The Flames were an extremely boring team to watch for years to outside fans but most of us never cared because the team was winning games and competing hard.

It's all about playing to your team's strengths and Darryl Sutter did that as does Dave Tippet as the Coyotes simply don't have elite scoring depth. The long term plan I'm sure is to collect and groom talented players so the team can dictate a more offensive style of game but if you don't have the overall team skill to pull it off you become the Oilers or Leafs that can't win unless their goaltenders are standing on their head. I am totally fine with the team playing a close to the vest style of play as long as they are competing hard and have a chance at winning games.

As for the other statement Treliving never learned to build a 7th - 11th team nor did he not learn how to make a 1st to 3rd team. All he did with the Coyotes is try his very best to help ice the best team possible based on the budget and resources he was given to work with. Honestly can you say with a straight face the NHL was going to give him the resources to sign the top UFA's over the summer or make blockbuster deals where the Coyotes were bringing in a guy with a big contract? Heck how many players probably have the Coyotes on their NTC list due to their tenuous situation in Phoenix? I'm willing to be a lot. I really think you need to be a little more open minded here and give the guy a chance before you write him off and call him a guy that has only learned to built 7th - 11th teams.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Phoenix had league ownership - basically could only spend the bare minimum to keep the franchise going and made the playoffs in the extremely tough Western Conference in 3 out of the last 5 years and just missed out in the past two (probably would have made it this year if not for Smith's injury). That is pretty impressive given the restraints they had.

As for the whole 'puppet' thing - Its going to be a group effort just like every franchise in the world. Feaster would have discussed his moves with Burke (or King before that), Weisbrod, etc, Sutter would have discussed with King. The entire point of having this structure is to have franchise stability in the event the GM doesn't work out.

Burke isn't going to sit there and tell Treliving who to draft in the 4th round, but he's also not going to sit in his office all day twiddling his thumbs and looking at spreadsheets of business operations.

Yeah, the comments about "being a puppet" are getting really annoying.

I'm not sure why it's so hard for people understand that hockey management is changing. Burke/Linden/Shanahan's roles are to be the puppet masters. They're the boss. It's not "meddling", it's their job.

The GM is there to do the President's leg-work. It's collaboration, but ultimately the GM's boss is the President of Hockey Ops. Burke's job is to insulate the GM from answering directly to the business side.

This is Brian Burke's hockey team, and Burke has chosen Treliving to built it for him.

Originally Posted by New Era

I wanted a young guy as well, but I wanted a young guy from a winning organization. There's the rub for me. Phoenix has been a middling team that plays a style of hockey everyone on this board hates with a passion. They have had no success in any shape or form and don't look like a team with much of a future. If the team is an extension of its management, this move bothers me. I like the direction the Flames were headed. They have developed a stable of good young prospects in a very short period of time. They play an exciting brand of hockey. There is a future here. I don't want a guy who learned how to build a 7th-11th place team to work his magic and build the Flames in that image. That is my fear and why I will take a wait and see attitude.

It's not like they sat down and decided "okay, let's be the 7th team this year - build it!". Hell, if that were mindset then I think we ought to be pretty damn excited that we have a GM that is able to attain his exact goal. The reality is though, the hope in the hiring is of course that Treliving is no longer resource-starved. He did a great job without having resources - he helped build a team that had some measure of success inspite of their constraints. So that's where the Flames and Burke step in and give him the resources he lacked in Phoenix.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

...doesn't that also point to the probability that Treliving will be that puppet GM that people were afraid was going to be hired? How much autonomy will the guy have if Burke is going to prevent him from making mistakes? That seems to say Burke has final approval of all moves and decisions, leaving Treliving to do all the work and Burke to give the royal decree to make a move, then take the credit or have a scapegoat. That is the situation I didn't want to see develop and really hope this is not the case.

You seriously are lacking any kind of imagination that most people require in order to reconstruct real-life situations from fragments of information. Others have already plainly stated that the new management structure will most likely work as a collective intelligence, but it probably needs to be demonstrated more explicitly. Consider the following scenarios:

Scenario #1 Brad Treliving approaches Brian Burke and informs him of a type of player he would like to make a trade for, and whom from the Flames roster he believes they can move to acquire said player. He would probably provide some examples of this sort of player from various teams who might be available, and Burke would respond positively, and tell him to go ahead and work out a deal.

In this scenario, Treliving is acting and thinking independently, and then sharing his ideas and plans with his boss—not merely to get his approval, but also to be sure that Burke is appraised of what is going on. This is no different than how most high-end management structures function.

Scenario #2 Treliving approaches Burke with a problem that he is having in resolving a scouting disagreement about a given player that is taking place between his scouts. He has an instinct for what should be done, but would like to also get his boss's take before making a decision. Again, thinking and acting independently, but also working within a management structure that includes his boss in the decision making process.

Scenario #3 Treliving has worked out a trade with another team for a prospect, and informs Burke. Burke is not keen on the idea and would prefer that Treliving not follow through with the deal. Treliving responds with information about the situation that Burke has either not considered or was simply unaware of. If Treliving is convincing, then Burke should respond by offering his approval, even despite his earlier misgivings.

Scenario #4 Treliving has worked out a transaction, and is about to complete it, and informs Burke of what is going on. Burke responds, wanting him to not follow through, and explains by way of a similar scenario from his own past experience which did not work out well. Once Treliving understands some of the real-world day-to-day details within said situation that he was previously not privy too, he now understands why this is a bad idea, and follows his boss's advice from experience.

Lesson learned, crisis avoided, and everyone is better for it. While Treliving is still thinking independently, he is insulated from making a poor decision bred from inexperience, and has the added benefit of learning on the job without suffering the consequences of a mistake.

The point here is that there is ALOT of "grey area" in what we know about the new management structure, and should absolutely not construct our scepticism on the presumption of such black-and-white distinctions between our own ideas of "autonomy" and participation within a complex management structure.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

...I don't want a guy who learned how to build a 7th-11th place team to work his magic and build the Flames in that image. That is my fear and why I will take a wait and see attitude.

Given that virtually every report from every hockey expert and observer, and from every person presently working in professional hockey has been overwhelmingly positive with regards to Treliving, I must conclude that this concern of yours is practically irrelevant.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by fotze

But when a team wins a Stanley Cup, every member of the organization from janitor to Jonathan Toews is presented with a Cloak of Winningness. From that point forward they are deemed a winner and their winning ways can be transferred to all who come in contact with them. This winningness ability can not be acquired by any other means than the Cloak.

If winning the cup mattered as experience the Oilers would be 180 degrees in the standings every year.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I really think you need to be a little more open minded here and give the guy a chance before you write him off and call him a guy that has only learned to built 7th - 11th teams.

That's why I said "That is my fear and why I will take a wait and see attitude." A wait and see attitude. Seems as open minded as you can get? I haven't decided I like the guy or dislike the guy, so I will wait and see how he does before passing judgement. Yet I need to be more open minded?



Treliving could do better, he could do worse, or he could emulate what he did in Phoenix. Spin what he did any way you like, but the Coyotes were a 7th-11th place team, which isn't that much more than the Flames were under Sutter. I am hoping for a lot more than that. Hopefully the combination of Burke, Treliving and the new AGM will take the team to a level of success we haven't seen in a couple of decades. But again, I'll wait and see what happens before deciding if Treliving was the right guy for the job.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by New Era

That's why I said "That is my fear and why I will take a wait and see attitude." A wait and see attitude. Seems as open minded as you can get? I haven't decided I like the guy or dislike the guy, so I will wait and see how he does before passing judgement. Yet I need to be more open minded?



Treliving could do better, he could do worse, or he could emulate what he did in Phoenix. Spin what he did any way you like, but the Coyotes were a 7th-11th place team, which isn't that much more than the Flames were under Sutter. I am hoping for a lot more than that. Hopefully the combination of Burke, Treliving and the new AGM will take the team to a level of success we haven't seen in a couple of decades. But again, I'll wait and see what happens before deciding if Treliving was the right guy for the job.

The coyotes won their division 2 years ago and made the 3rd round of the playoffs so your 7-11 place is not correct

[Aarongavey]

I totally agree that Treliving will not be a puppet, this is the new management structure in the NHL. I just hope that he is a smarter hockey man than Burke, maybe he can even make some trades rather than just hold on to Feaster's team for dear life.

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by New Era

That's why I said "That is my fear and why I will take a wait and see attitude." A wait and see attitude. Seems as open minded as you can get? I haven't decided I like the guy or dislike the guy, so I will wait and see how he does before passing judgement. Yet I need to be more open minded?



Treliving could do better, he could do worse, or he could emulate what he did in Phoenix. Spin what he did any way you like, but the Coyotes were a 7th-11th place team, which isn't that much more than the Flames were under Sutter. I am hoping for a lot more than that. Hopefully the combination of Burke, Treliving and the new AGM will take the team to a level of success we haven't seen in a couple of decades. But again, I'll wait and see what happens before deciding if Treliving was the right guy for the job.

7th-11th is damned impressive for a franchise which had severe financial restraints. The fact that Treliving spent the better part of a decade making a dead broke franchise even remotely competitive is a pretty important factor. Phoenix could/should be a perennial bottom-feeder but it isn't.

Fair enough to take a wait-and-see viewpoint though.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Given that virtually every report from every hockey expert and observer, and from every person presently working in professional hockey has been overwhelmingly positive with regards to Treliving, I must conclude that this concern of yours is practically irrelevant.

Well, plan the parade route!

I would think that after all we have been through in the past couple of decades we would stop crowning every new hire as the savior and every guy fired as a loser. I guess not. I guess I just need "more imagination" to see into the future where higher ups don't meddle into the affairs of their subordinates or guys will talk a good game, over promise and under-deliver. Because the club hasn't had a problem with any of those things in the near past. As opposed to actually waiting to see what this guy does, and if he is worthy of the glowing reviews, I should succumb to group think and proclaim this a brilliant hiring or an abject failure. Sorry, I'll remain on the fence with guy. I say let him do something to prove his worth before deciding if he was the right guy for the job.

[BurningSteel]

This sis good news. But it is getting to complex. What I want ti know is does this mean non stop pop?

[bubbsy]

adding the hockey ops VP (or whatever the role is called) seems like a viable approach to a management structure where traditionally your GM (strictly a hockey guy) is making hockey decisions, but then having to justify that to management/ownership (non-hockey folks) that likely need to see things in a more business-case model (ie. ROI, etc).

Putting a buffer in between, that has some level of experience on both sides of the coin, can speak both languages (to hockey/non-hockey manager types) seems reasonable.

As far as "meddling/puppet" stuff goes... i think you miss the point of the structure if you fear this. There is NO WAY any NHL franchise blindly gives a GM the keys to do anything he pleases. Big decisions, where big pay-cheques are being moved in/out, always have to have approval/concensus from the higher ups. That is how any business works. The key difference now is that the concensus is not just the GM and Ken King/edwards (non-hockey guy), but the GM reports to an experienced NHL exec, so the knowledge base used when making hockey decisions should be that much better.

having more hockey guys at the table to make a decision = Good thing

having hockey decisions made by a combination of hockey and non-hockey guys = not so good thing, and can be bad when the non-hockey guy with $ on the table has a more weighted vote than the hockey guys at the table.

[lifetime_flamesfan]

my only concern right now with Burke hiring Treliving, is the fact that he apparently only interviewed Treliving and no one else. I would have like Burke to interview a couple of candidates before hiring someone.

[bubbsy]

if this was the guy he was targetting from the beginning, then having more interviews doesn't seem that important. Once he was given the greenlight to interview, burke probably knew he had his guy, assuming they spoke the same language and had synergies on their views on how a successful team is built.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by Flames89

This is my one concern as well.

I don't have this same feeling. I think Burke will steer him in the right direction. Besides, Hartley is coaching, not Treliving.

Hearing him and Burke talk, it sounds like they are aware of what wins in the west and I don't see them moving toward a different style under Hartley anyway.

The Flames playing style this past season was fun, it was faster than in previous years, filled with enthusiasm from the youth injection into the lineup.

When was the last time the Flames received a standing O at the end of a period besides this year? Even when losing games, no way the management regresses and changes Hartley's coaching style.

I guess we will see.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by lifetime_flamesfan

my only concern right now with Burke hiring Treliving, is the fact that he apparently only interviewed Treliving and no one else. I would have like Burke to interview a couple of candidates before hiring someone.

This isn't like a regular business. Burke knows a little something about each of the candidates I am sure. I bet he had informal interviews and phone conversations with others but really targeted Trevliving. I see no issue with this process.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If winning the cup mattered as experience the Oilers would be 180 degrees in the standings every year.

The City of Cloaks.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by New Era

Well, plan the parade route!

I would think that after all we have been through in the past couple of decades we would stop crowning every new hire as the savior and every guy fired as a loser. I guess not. I guess I just need "more imagination" to see into the future where higher ups don't meddle into the affairs of their subordinates or guys will talk a good game, over promise and under-deliver. Because the club hasn't had a problem with any of those things in the near past. As opposed to actually waiting to see what this guy does, and if he is worthy of the glowing reviews, I should succumb to group think and proclaim this a brilliant hiring or an abject failure. Sorry, I'll remain on the fence with guy. I say let him do something to prove his worth before deciding if he was the right guy for the job.

Its fair to not crown him as a great GM before he's done anything. But he's got good credentials and was apparently a candidate for other jobs (interviewed with Buffalo, request from another team for an interview). This isn't picking a guy off a scrapheap that no one else wanted (MacTavish, Feaster). It might not work but at least at this point it looks like a reasonable hire who has a good chance to succeed.

[Chingas]

Originally Posted by New Era

Well, plan the parade route!

I would think that after all we have been through in the past couple of decades we would stop crowning every new hire as the savior and every guy fired as a loser. I guess not. I guess I just need "more imagination" to see into the future where higher ups don't meddle into the affairs of their subordinates or guys will talk a good game, over promise and under-deliver. Because the club hasn't had a problem with any of those things in the near past. As opposed to actually waiting to see what this guy does, and if he is worthy of the glowing reviews, I should succumb to group think and proclaim this a brilliant hiring or an abject failure. Sorry, I'll remain on the fence with guy. I say let him do something to prove his worth before deciding if he was the right guy for the job.

I'm pretty sure that the poll only asks whether we like the hire or not. It does not ask, "are you 100% sure that Brad is going to be our Savior?" I would like to think that all of the over 500 people that have voted will have to wait to see whether this was the correct choice. That being said, we are not daft for having a opinion on the hire at this point in time.

[Poe969]

I'm happy we have someone before the draft but I don't know nearly enough abiut this guy to say I'm happy about it or not. I'm just happy they have a GM.