2024-25 Huberdeau - new and improved?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Conroy might have learned.

Murray Edwards definitely has not. He's still the owner. So why would you expect different decision making?

Because he hired a different decision-maker to run the team. If Edwards were opposed to trading away the old core for futures, he would have fired Conroy two years ago for disobeying orders.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Conroy might have learned.

Murray Edwards definitely has not. He's still the owner. So why would you expect different decision making?

https://twitter.com/user/status/2011934879840092422

Like what's the whole point? If the stubborn owner doesn't care then what does what any of us think matter.

I don't expect different decision making, I observe it in their actions.

- BT consistently traded away picks including those in the first and 2nd rounds. Conroy has been accumulating picks
- BT relied on bridge deals for his key RFA players, Conroy signs the guys he believes to long deals
- BT allowed key UFAs to walk, Conroy has traded or signed them
- BT spent to the cap and was active with veteran UFAs, Conroy has stayed largely away from that

Some of that is a function of the teams being in different parts of the contention window, which you can't totally parse, but the actions suggest Conroy learned a lot from what BT did, both the good and the bad, and is making different types of decisions.

I care about actions.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I don't expect different decision making, I observe it in their actions.

- BT consistently traded away picks including those in the first and 2nd rounds. Conroy has been accumulating picks
- BT relied on bridge deals for his key RFA players, Conroy signs the guys he believes to long deals
- BT allowed key UFAs to walk, Conroy has traded or signed them
- BT spent to the cap and was active with veteran UFAs, Conroy has stayed largely away from that

Some of that is a function of the teams being in different parts of the contention window, which you can't totally parse, but the actions suggest Conroy learned a lot from what BT did, both the good and the bad, and is making different types of decisions.

I care about actions.

Pretty much all of it is a function of the team being in a different part of the contention window.

The rest is the players themselves wanting out of Calgary.

You're giving the organization much more credit than they're due. What else were they supposed to do other than trade away Lindholm, Tanev, Markstrom? Who else have they traded away? What meaningful UFAs could they have brought in to turn it around OR what meaningful pieces could they have acquired using chips they had? The answer to that IMO is as follows:

1. They haven't traded anyone away other than the players mentioned.
2. They actually gave up picks to acquire Frost and Farabee who have been extremely underwhelming that it's a trade they were better off not making.
3. There haven't been UFAs that they could have brought in to make their team meaningfully better.
4. They don't have the draft capital or prospects to acquire anyone meaningful through trade.

What was the last trade we made to acquire picks and sell our players? I can't even remember because it's been so long. The Flames actions made over the last couple of years have been because they haven't really had much other choice.

They have not traded away ANY of their pieces pre-emptively and wait until the expiration date for said player is on the horizon.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Pretty much all of it is a function of the team being in a different part of the contention window.

The rest is the players themselves wanting out of Calgary.

You're giving the organization much more credit than they're due. What else were they supposed to do other than trade away Lindholm, Tanev, Markstrom? Who else have they traded away? What meaningful UFAs could they have brought in to turn it around OR what meaningful pieces could they have acquired using chips they had? The answer to that IMO is as follows:

1. They haven't traded anyone away other than the players mentioned.

They also traded away Toffoli, Zadorov, Mangiapane, and Hanifin. Also Kuzmenko, who only came in as part of the Lindholm trade.

2. They actually gave up picks to acquire Frost and Farabee who have been extremely underwhelming that it's a trade they were better off not making.

They traded a 2nd and a 7th, plus two roster players that they did not want to keep. As it turns out, Philadelphia didn't want to keep them either. Your opinion that the trade was not worth making is just that – your opinion. Frost is a top-9 centre, a position at which the Flames were desperately short. Farabee was a cap dump, but has developed into a useful third-line player.

3. There haven't been UFAs that they could have brought in to make their team meaningfully better.

So none of the UFAs on the market would have improved the Flames, compared to the 30th-place team that they are at present? None at all? Show your work.

4. They don't have the draft capital or prospects to acquire anyone meaningful through trade.

You know there is such a thing as trading away roster players to acquire other roster players, don't you?

In the same breath, you admit that they traded away a bunch of veterans, and then say they couldn't acquire anyone meaningful through trade because they don't have the draft capital or prospects. Well, those aren't the only things you can trade. They could have traded the players themselves for other players. But they CHOSE not to.

Honestly, this is about the laziest and most fact-free argument I've seen from your side so far.