[News Roundup] Garbage bag day: Monahan had 4 surgeries!

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Agreed, my question is when do you believe was fair for consistent playoff appearances to start for BT given what he had when started, right away, last year, this year?

You've gone from him needing to have built a contender by now to incremental improvements with consistent playoff appearances being your bench mark of success for him during the course of this convo, so I'm just not clear how badly he's crapped the bed in your eyes.

I would expect a period of adjustment of a few years to make moves etc. By year 4 I would think an expectation of a playoff contender would be reasonable. I’m not talking about Stanley cup contender, I don’t think that will happen for many years if at all.

[Timbo]

Would you then expect improvement to be fully linear?

I expect to see peaks and valleys with hopefully improvement growth on a collective average.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If the Calgary and Detroit stay where they are with draft picks this year, the red wings will have drafted more times in the last 2 drafts than the Flames have in the last 3.

Who's going to be a contender sooner?

How about you take a stab at this one?

I'd take our *young* core over theirs 10 times out of 10 at present.

That's honestly a ridiculous question.

And why do you keep mentioning number of draft picks like it's a discussion ender? There are countless examples of perennial bottom feeders who draft in high numbers (and high in the draft) all the time and continue to suck.

[Enoch Root]

And you can't just look at draft picks without including the fact that the Flames acquired Hamilton and Homonic from those picks. They have to be included in the talent list that the Flames acquired over the period.

From the last 3 drafts, the Flames have:

Hamilton, Hamonic, and Tkachuk (which is fantastic on its own), plus:

Valimaki, Fox, Andersson, Kylington, Dube, Parsons and Mangiapane as solid prospects.

If you get two NHLers per draft, you're doing really well.

[dammage79]

Still think the Hamonic trade could have been held off one more year. Hindsight being 20/20 like it is, the package of picks could have potentially played into a current trade of say one Erik Karlsson.

I know who I would rather have.
Either way, whats done is done and personally I just have to accept that. Do I think Hamonic is a bad player? Not at all. Do I think he has a part to play in the Flames future success? Yes, to an extent. Just don't think he's a key component that his trade value should dictate.

still as of today I would much rather have the ammunition of picks walking into this draft .

As for Treliving. I think it's fair to ask where they are now vs where they were when he came in. I think it's fair to say treading water is pretty much it. Not worse but not much better either save the jackpot hit on Tkachuk.

The coaching hire IMHO set the team back. EDIT: Set the team back to treading water status rather than a positive direction towards sustained success.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Angelino

Being bad or good is subjective. The facts are he has had 4 years in charge and I don’t really see improvement in the outlook of the franchise, just continued futility. Incremental improvement over the 4 years even if somewhat small would be welcomed.

If you’re happy with the state of the franchise that’s great! I’m just tired of watching 1st round exits and/or other teams in the playoffs year in and year out.

You haven't seen any improvement in the outlook of the franchise in the last 4 years? Confusing. In that time we managed to draft Tkachuk, acquire Hamilton other among things.

Seems like you're just being overly pessimistic. The Flames have a lot of very, very good young players. The outlook of the franchise is pretty good IMO. They aren't that far from being a contender. The line between playoff contenders and teams barely missing the playoffs is not a large one in this league.

The longterm outlook of this team is better than its been in the past 20+ years of me watching the team. Treliving has the organization in the best position in terms of valuable young assets that its ever had in the past 20 years.

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

You haven't seen any improvement in the outlook of the franchise in the last 4 years? Confusing. In that time we managed to draft Tkachuk, acquire Hamilton other among things.

Seems like you're just being overly pessimistic. The Flames have a lot of very, very good young players. The outlook of the franchise is pretty good IMO. They aren't that far from being a contender. The line between playoff contenders and teams barely missing the playoffs is not a large one in this league.

The longterm outlook of this team is better than its been in the past 20+ years of me watching the team. Treliving has the organization in the best position in terms of valuable young assets that its ever had in the past 20 years.

All this improvement and still out of the playoffs. Hoping for some more improvement in the future.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Angelino

All this improvement and still out of the playoffs. Hoping for some more improvement in the future.

Over the time period you are looking at the Flames and Jets have made the playoffs the same amount of times
Evaluating the gm based on one seasons results isn’t enough

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Over the time period you are looking at the Flames and Jets have made the playoffs the same amount of times
Evaluating the gm based on one seasons results isn’t enough

Not really judging him on one year. I’m looking at the last 4 and don’t really see much improvement personally.

Not sure where the Jets came into the argument. I’m more concerned with Calgary making the playoffs, drafting well, managing assets better and not being irrelevant amongst other things.

I think a good move would be to try and find a coach that can manage the assets the franchise currently has.

[activeStick]

I agree with the poster that noted that you need to include Hamilton and Hamonic in the list of players produced from the draft considering they were traded away for multiple picks. Hamilton, to me, is a clear win as he's a top 2 dman in the NHL and still very young. Hamonic's play last year didn't justify what was given up, but his contract is a factor here given how low it is, which allows the Flames flexibility.

I also can see where Angelino is coming from though. Results are what matter the most and the Flames haven't been able to get over the line and be at the very least, a playoff team every year.

[DeluxeMoustache]

In terms of impact, the verdict is still out on Treliving. Considering the expectations coming in, I think he does not compare favourably to his predecessors.

Sutter had a young team that had a really great winger, but little in the way of expectations. He made immediate impact as GM, and it was obviously tied to the tenure he had as coach and the visibility that gave him in to the team. Nailed the goaltending requirement. Immediate transition from 7 years out of the playoffs to Stanley Cup finalist and afterwards several annual playoff appearances. The scouting grew under his watch.

Feaster was brought in after Sutter’s core had run its course, and his brother hire was falling short. Feaster was brought in to blow it up (positioned as letting the core have a last go at it, but pretty much to change the old guard). He did this, spent his year letting the vets try, then blew it up, and the team quickly had an identity. Hockey ops grew more, key pieces of the core were put in place. Move away from big Western Canadian boys to speed and hockey IQ. He did this all in only 3 years. Did the dirty work.

Treliving came in when the dirty work was done, saw an early playoff round win with the team Feaster left, and has really not accomplished anything further on the ice. In 4 years. You can argue they are better on paper, or that they have a good and deeper set of prospects.

His GG hire was because the team had, as it was positioned, gone as far as it could under Hartley. That is one of his major stamps on the club. Not looking so good at all.

I don’t know. What is disturbing is that Sutter had a pedigree, certainly with success as a coach. Feaster, for what it is worth, had a Cup on his resume and brought in a coach with a Cup as well, who has won at many levels.

Enter BT, who is a first time GM, learning on the job, and he hires a guy to coach who has potential but really not much of a resume. Sometimes I think it makes sense that a new GM is comfortable with a coach that is no threat to him for political reasons. It does not give me confidence.

Maybe they thought that the presence of Burke made it ok to make this some kind of internship franchise for the inexperienced to cut their teeth.

I don’t know. 4 years is I guess a short time to assess the impact of a guy learning on the job. Wasn’t too long for the other guys to have impact

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Angelino

All this improvement and still out of the playoffs. Hoping for some more improvement in the future.

Well apparently you're just looking at the standings. Yes we haven't really improved in the standings.

But you said outlook. A team with Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Backlund, Giordano, Hamilton, Brodie, Hamonic, Ferland, Jankowski, Bennett plus young prospects like Gillies, Rittich, Valimaki, Andersson, Kylington, Fox, Dube has a good long term outlook.

Not many pieces have to be added to that core IMO. Personally I think having a good coach would've led to a big improvement in the standings.

But yeah, just keep focusing strictly on the standings in judging Treliving. A team's future outlook is dictated strictly by the standings one year isn't it? Or perhaps how young the core is, the nice price most of them are signed for is a big factor? Seems like you're looking at things through a pretty narrow lens.

Treliving has assembled the biggest collection of valuable young players and prospects we've had in the last 20 years of me following the team. Subjective opinion of course but seems as valid or moreso than your standings argument.

[chedder]

So, if it's the best collection of young players and prospects in 20 years, the coach has to be the problem then. Correct? It has to be obvious to everyone, management included, that GG has to go. This will be the move (or non-move) that will defineTreliving as Flames GM.

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well apparently you're just looking at the standings. Yes we haven't really improved in the standings.

But you said outlook. A team with Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Backlund, Giordano, Hamilton, Brodie, Hamonic, Ferland, Jankowski, Bennett plus young prospects like Gillies, Rittich, Valimaki, Andersson, Kylington, Fox, Dube has a good long term outlook.

Not many pieces have to be added to that core IMO. Personally I think having a good coach would've led to a big improvement in the standings.

But yeah, just keep focusing strictly on the standings in judging Treliving. A team's future outlook is dictated strictly by the standings one year isn't it? Or perhaps how young the core is, the nice price most of them are signed for is a big factor? Seems like you're looking at things through a pretty narrow lens.

Treliving has assembled the biggest collection of valuable young players and prospects we've had in the last 20 years of me following the team. Subjective opinion of course but seems as valid or moreso than your standings argument.

Winning is the main thing that counts. You don’t get participation awards for collecting a nice group of potential that isn’t winning. Amongst those you’ve mentioned not all were acquired by Treliving. A lot of the major pieces were acquired in other regimes. Some of the players mentioned I don’t think are that great at all (Gillies, Rittich, Bennett, Hamonic, Ferland). Great potential, no playoffs.

My argument on Trelivings ability also involves his drafting, coaching selection, and asset management. All have led to the same annual golf course outing during the playoffs for Calgary. They may have the most promise in the last 20
years but that could also be fans seeing the prospects through rose colored glasses.

What to do about it? I don’t think firing Treliving is needed yet. I think Trelivings fate will rest on how his next coaching selection goes. I think a better coach and better investment in scouting might help the situation markedly.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by chedder

So, if it's the best collection of young players and prospects in 20 years, the coach has to be the problem then. Correct? It has to be obvious to everyone, management included, that GG has to go. This will be the move (or non-move) that will defineTreliving as Flames GM.

I think the coach is a problem. And also the fact that some of the pieces we have are extremely young. Bennett, Jankowski, Tkachuk and our prospects have not peaked yet.

So I think part of the improvement can come from getting a better coach. Part of it comes from adding a bit more offensive depth. And part of it will come from a continued maturation of guys like Tkachuk, Bennett, Jankowski. Having guys like Valimaki, Andersson, Kylington and Fox in the pipeline enables Treliving to trade a top 4 defenseman this summer or next to round out the roster.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Angelino

My argument on Trelivings ability also involves his drafting, coaching selection, and asset management. All have led to the same annual golf course outing during the playoffs for Calgary.

I'm sure no one will disagree about coaching, asset management is very subjective and debatable, but harping on drafting is laughable.

The four years of Treliving's tenure is way, way too short lived at this point to be concluding anything about drafting under him. If anything, I like the drafting in the last few years a lot but we're several years away from being anywhere near making a fair and measured call on that with how long it takes players to develop and determine their worth at the NHL level.

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

I'm sure no one will disagree about coaching, asset management is very subjective and debatable, but harping on drafting is laughable.

The four years of Treliving's tenure is way, way too short lived at this point to be concluding anything about drafting under him. If anything, I like the drafting in the last few years a lot but we're several years away from being anywhere near making a fair and measured call on that with how long it takes players to develop and determine their worth at the NHL level.

I think his drafting record is ok not that great. Of course there needs to be time to see how the players actually develop. Not a fan of Mason McDonald, Hunter Smith picks. But I am interested to see how the others develop. I disagree with the asset management aspect of his regime. Too many picks spent on assets that are not difference makers (Lazar, Hamonic). I did like the Hamilton trade however.

I think by the time we find out what some of the prospects truly are we may have a new GM.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Angelino

I think his drafting record is ok not that great. Of course there needs to be time to see how the players actually develop. Not a fan of Mason McDonald, Hunter Smith picks. But I am interested to see how the others develop. I disagree with the asset management aspect of his regime. Too many picks spent on assets that are not difference makers (Lazar, Hamonic). I did like the Hamilton trade however.

I think by the time we find out what some of the prospects truly are we may have a new GM.

As I said, I realize you disagree on the asset management part, but that's very subjective and debatable. I think opinion on here would be largely split about that.

But you can't agree there hasn't been enough time to evaluate his drafting record and then list it as a slight against him. You can take any GM's drafting over the last four years and pick a few selections you don't like. Aside from that we just don't have enough time and perspective to even begin to judge his drafting. It's just not possible to do so with any subjectivity.

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

As I said, I realize you disagree on the asset management part, but that's very subjective and debatable. I think opinion on here would be largely split about that.

But you can't agree there hasn't been enough time to evaluate his drafting record and then list it as a slight against him. You can take any GM's drafting over the last four years and pick a few selections you don't like. Aside from that we just don't have enough time and perspective to even begin to judge his drafting. It's just not possible to do so with any subjectivity.

I did say in my last post there needs to be more time to evaluate some of the picks he has made. I haven’t been impressed with Trelivings ability overall which includes many aspects. However, I also do not think it’s prudent to fire him yet. His fate rests with the next coach he hires. If he stays with Gulutzan next year I would wager Treliving will be gone by the end of next year.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Angelino

I haven’t been impressed with Trelivings ability overall which includes many aspects.

I understand that, as you've said it multiple times now.


What I'm saying is that when you start taking things that can't possibly be held against him yet - like drafting - adding it to your list of grievances... it starts to seem like a more unbalanced and biased take.

Seeing as he took over a team in the early stages of a rebuild that still features a core of young players who aren't finished products, I think much of what you're taking issue with stems from impatience and such a harsh overall judgement is very premature. Just my opinion.