Make the Playoffs Mandate for Next Year

[Enoch Root]

Flames will finish 30th next year, and will be big sellers at the deadline again. I am not whining, just stating an opinion - and I am totally fine with it (as long as they are making good decisions and moving in the right direction)

[nik-]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Absolutely, I totally agree with that!

But you don't build that division title and contender over night. A team on the way to that probably sees the playoffs as a goal first. Nothing wrong with that at all.

I know the previous failed approach has people edgy and nervous so I'll chalk it up to that... but nothing Feaster said today was wrong.

It wasn't "wrong" it was just completely unnecessary and likely impossible. So why put that lead balloon out there? If you're going to demand the players play hard and that's "what you meant" then say that. Don't say your mandate is to make the playoffs. Especially after we just wasted three years chasing that dragons tail with a team with more talent on it.

I don't 100% recall, but I don't think the reporter even asked him anything that direct, it seems that Feaster just offered it up and it just blew up on him. Is that correct? Does anyone remember the question leading up to that?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by nik-

But again, demanding professionalism and compete from your players isn't the same as having a mandate to make the playoffs. It's a ridiculous statement, and to repeat it is just silly.

Yep. No need to even say the word 'playoffs'.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by flames_fan_down_under

Did anyone actually listen to what he said? Does everyone just extrapolate and draw conclusions that fit their views?

Here is exactly what he said:



then speaking of the summer he says :



So the goal as an NHL organisation is to make the playoffs every year. That to me is likely the goal of every single other NHL team as well is it not? This to me doesn't signal shortsightedness or eyeing a 1 year rebuild its just a GM saying that losing is not OK. Which really is a pretty innocuous statement IMO.

When you write it out exactly as it was said it all looks very reasonable but that certainly isnt what I heard. Amazing how the brain works.

The phrase Madate to make the playoffs bugs me though

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yes. But early success does scare me.

Looking back, do you think now that the 2004 cup run was somewhat detrimental to the team? Yes the run was fun, yes they won their only division title the following season but that team got blown apart so fast and assets given away for players like Stuart, Jokinen, Tanguay, Cammellari etc...

We could have drafted Fowler!! (I know I know)...

Dude... come on. We were at the end of not making the playoffs for seven years. The 2004 run was great. The Flames won the division the year after that and people thought they were contenders.

They didn't capitalize and tried to hang onto that for too long, that's the downfall. 2004 was great, I can't believe anyone would spin it any other way.

[nik-]

The '04 run saved this team. Management clinging to a miracle was the detriment.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Dude... come on. We were at the end of not making the playoffs for seven years. The 2004 run was great. The Flames won the division the year after that and people thought they were contenders.

They didn't capitalize and tried to hang onto that for too long, that's the downfall. 2004 was great, I can't believe anyone would spin it any other way.

Oh it was great but the aftermath, there just seemed to be a lot of turnover and draft picks traded away, unless my memory is shady.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by nik-

It wasn't "wrong" it was just completely unnecessary and likely impossible. So why put that lead balloon out there? If you're going to demand the players play hard and that's "what you meant" then say that. Don't say your mandate is to make the playoffs. Especially after we just wasted three years chasing that dragons tail with a team with more talent on it.

I don't 100% recall, but I don't think the reporter even asked him anything that direct, it seems that Feaster just offered it up and it just blew up on him. Is that correct? Does anyone remember the question leading up to that?

Feaster's a talker man. I know that doesn't answer anything but the guy loves to talk. I totally agree with you, he would be better served just letting what he does speak for him.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Feaster's a talker man. I know that doesn't answer anything but the guy loves to talk. I totally agree with you, he would be better served just letting what he does speak for him.

This is what I don't get, how does a lawyer, who's a talker, just misread situations so badly with his comments. Additionally, if you let something out like that in the presser, and it's taken the wrong way, why continue to repeat it? Just adjust your comments to what you "really meant" and stop saying it.

[MolsonInBothHands]

Originally Posted by nik-

The '04 run saved this team. Management clinging to a miracle was the detriment.

... And turning the page on that core, that era, is progress, and deserves credit. Yes I know it's late, but that is better than never.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

I don't see why thinking playoffs is a bad idea.

For one: Losing mentality. Can't have guys like MacKinnon stepping in next year to a team that's aiming at a second lottery pick, and getting used to that 'minset' right off the bat. Very bad effect on young players.

For two: Why the hell not? Wouldn't you rather be Ottawa than Edmonton? The Sens looked to be exactly where we are now 2 years ago, and they seem to be doing alright, if I'm not mistaken. If we pick our three 1st picks right, then it should establish a solid core to move forward with, (including Sven, Brodie). It shouldn't take us eight or nine 1sts over a couple years to get it right. Draft effectively with the multiple picks you have in the extra deep draft and make it count.

Why does a rebuild have to have a minimum 2-3 year time period? If these pick become impact players and we can push for an 8th seed next season with the mix of vets and kids, then can't we keep at it and actually start to draft and develop well like the San Jose's Detroits and Nashvilles, rather than expect to be another Columbus or Edmonton?

I'm sorry, but I don't object to a winning mentality. That is definitely a massive mistake that the Oilers organization made. Along with not putting enough quality veteran leaders on their team to shelter and mentor the younger players as they made the transition.

Pathetic development tactics by them. I'm glad that it appears we'll be attempting to take a different route.

There is no minimum time period required.

However, there is a certain amount of assets required. And the Flames simply don't have the assets for a quick rebuild.

Three firsts is awesome, but in all likelihood, only one of them will make the team next year.

Add Baertschi, the lottery pick, Horak, Bouma and maybe Reinhart and Breen to this team, along with a couple UFAs and is there a rational hockey fan alive that thinks that team could make the playoffs?

I am not trying to be a Debbie Downer here, but our D and our goaltending next year is going to be less than stellar

Nothing wrong with a little patience and sticking to a plan

[nik-]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

... And turning the page on that core, that era, is progress, and deserves credit. Yes I know it's late, but that is better than never.

Yup, there are no time machines and they're doing what they can now, which is great, but they need to realize that this is not going to be a one year turnaround. We don't have a Karlsson, Spezza and Anderson waiting in the wings to pick up the slack.

[flylock shox]

The Flames' goal over the next calendar year should be to draft well; bring up their youth to the big club and give them a chance to grow together; acquire free agents who are either (a) on short term contracts, and/or (b) fit the pre-peak mandate for the future; play hard every night and do their best for the fans.

If, by some miracle, they can make the playoffs with this formula then even better.

[Yakbutter]

Has a team ever really "decided" to do a complete blow up style rebuild? There are a few instances where teams have decided to sell off some parts while they knew they were not going to make the playoffs. Ottawa last year and phily a few years back come to mind.

I see a lot of posts with people saying something along the lines of "AHA I told you! the flames should of traded Iginla and Kipper 2 years ago when their value was the highest!". But I can't think of any team that has basically said "ok our core is now 32 years old time to blow it up and start from scratch."

All of the teams that have been forced to "blow it up" basically had to be forced into it. Namely the oilers in 2009, 2000ish penguins, 2005 blackhawks. None of these teams had the intention of taking the scorched earth approach they basically ended up being managed into the ground and being forced to draft high.

People like to criticize the flames for not blowing it up sooner, but there are not really any cases of teams willingly going into the basement for draft picks.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There is no minimum time period required.

However, there is a certain amount of assets required. And the Flames simply don't have the assets for a quick rebuild.

Three firsts is awesome, but in all likelihood, only one of them will make the team next year.

Add Baertschi, the lottery pick, Horak, Bouma and maybe Reinhart and Breen to this team, along with a couple UFAs and is there a rational hockey fan alive that thinks that team could make the playoffs?

I am not trying to be a Debbie Downer here, but our D and our goaltending next year is going to be less than stellar

Nothing wrong with a little patience and sticking to a plan

I'm not expecting it to be a quick rebound at all, but stranger things have happened. What if Wotherspoon and Cundari also step up and prove to be ready. (Feaster and co. say Cundari could be up with the Flames before this season is even done) What if Ramo/Berra prove to be able to bail out this team while it suffers through its inevitable hiccups. Another year of development from Backlund, who looks to be on a steady climb production-wise. Baertschi could break out at any moment, and a guy like MacKinnon could be good enough to be effective right off the bat.

And what about UFA signings (a guy like Khudobin) or cap-relief trades with teams that will be against it coming into next season? Too many factors.

There could be a lot more alterations to the current roster when 13/14 rolls around. Maybe they actually put together a roster that can gel under Hartley and compete.. crazier things have happened.

I personally think a 2-3 season rebound is more realistic, but we'll see.

[Mathgod]

Feaster could pay big money for UFAs on short term deals... have them structured so that the contracts are off the books once the upswing begins.

[Yakbutter]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

I'm not expecting it to be a quick rebound at all, but stranger things have happened. What if Wotherspoon and Cundari also step up and prove to be ready. (Feaster and co. say Cundari could be up with the Flames before this season is even done) What if Ramo/Berra prove to be able to bail out this team while it suffers through its inevitable hiccups. Another year of development from Backlund, who looks to be on a steady climb production-wise. Baertschi could break out at any moment, and a guy like MacKinnon could be good enough to be effective right off the bat.

And what about UFA signings (a guy like Khudobin) or cap-relief trades with teams that will be against it coming into next season? Too many factors.

There could be a lot more alterations to the current roster when 13/14 rolls around. Maybe they actually put together a roster that can gel under Hartley and compete.. crazier things have happened.

I personally think a 2-3 season rebound is more realistic, but we'll see.

People are just pessimistic (with good reason) because it's been so long since a young player drafted/acquired by the flames has come out of nowhere and proven to be a player.

But you're right, there should be lots of spots open on the roster in the next few years and hopefully some of feaster's draft picks can come in sooner than later.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Yakbutter

Has a team ever really "decided" to do a complete blow up style rebuild? There are a few instances where teams have decided to sell off some parts while they knew they were not going to make the playoffs. Ottawa last year and phily a few years back come to mind.

I see a lot of posts with people saying something along the lines of "AHA I told you! the flames should of traded Iginla and Kipper 2 years ago when their value was the highest!". But I can't think of any team that has basically said "ok our core is now 32 years old time to blow it up and start from scratch."

All of the teams that have been forced to "blow it up" basically had to be forced into it. Namely the oilers in 2009, 2000ish penguins, 2005 blackhawks. None of these teams had the intention of taking the scorched earth approach they basically ended up being managed into the ground and being forced to draft high.

People like to criticize the flames for not blowing it up sooner, but there are not really any cases of teams willingly going into the basement for draft picks.

Then why not be the first? If an unplanned, "managed into the ground" rebuild can work (as it has for Pit/Chi/Tor and maybe Edm), then is it a stretch to believe that a pre-planned, carefully managed rebuild could also work?

[dino7c]

bring in some UFAs and trade them at the deadline

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

I'm not expecting it to be a quick rebound at all, but stranger things have happened. What if Wotherspoon and Cundari also step up and prove to be ready. (Feaster and co. say Cundari could be up with the Flames before this season is even done) What if Ramo/Berra prove to be able to bail out this team while it suffers through its inevitable hiccups. Another year of development from Backlund, who looks to be on a steady climb production-wise. Baertschi could break out at any moment, and a guy like MacKinnon could be good enough to be effective right off the bat.

And what about UFA signings (a guy like Khudobin) or cap-relief trades with teams that will be against it coming into next season? Too many factors.

There could be a lot more alterations to the current roster when 13/14 rolls around. Maybe they actually put together a roster that can gel under Hartley and compete.. crazier things have happened.

I personally think a 2-3 season rebound is more realistic, but we'll see.

Yeah, absolutely. It could all come together and that would be great. It's happened before.

But it isnt likely and all I want is for the Flames to not make stupid, impatient decisions, trying to make it happen.