How long before Feaster makes a move, and WHAT does he do?

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Sakari

I think Feaster needs to develop a rebuild-on-the-fly mentality. Some may say he already has one, but I don't think he does. Trading Iginla doesn't mean this franchise is doomed to hell. It actually could improve our team without even waiting. If you trade him for someone who's proven they can play in the NHL, I guarantee this team looks better in a blink of an eye.

I agree but I think you could be very good next year without getting a proven player. Trade Iginla we will get a top 5 pick. Get a decent prospect and a first for him for once we will have assets that can be moved. If we were bad enough to get Mackinnon now we have a franchise center. Without Iginla we still would have good wingers(Hudler, Tanguay, Cams, Glencross, Sven, Lee) Plus we would have huge cap space next off season to make a run at another center

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I know. I guess that just compounds the question - is playing in the AHL sufficient experience to meet the prerequisite to be an NHL GM? Junior? NCAA?

Playing the game at all gives sufficient experience to knowing you can't move three wingers to center and not be an absolute disaster defensively.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Baertschi alone would get it done. And that would be stupid.

Baertschi + 1st > what Richards and Carter got. By far.

You're joking right? As much as I like Sven I'd rather have Schenn or Couturier, plus Voracek.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by calgARI

Playing the game at all gives sufficient experience to knowing you can't move three wingers to center and not be an absolute disaster defensively.

I get that you like to blame Feaster for all of this, but Feaster does not work alone. Feaster GM style is listeneing to his scouts, agm's, ect. He is not D Sutter.

Are you trying to tell me that Weisbrod, Conroy and Goulet also think that 3 wingers to center make sense?

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I get that you like to blame Feaster for all of this, but Feaster does not work alone. Feaster GM style is listeneing to his scouts, agm's, ect. He is not D Sutter.

Are you trying to tell me that Weisbrod, Conroy and Goulet also think that 3 wingers to center make sense?

Feaster is the guy in charge of hockey decisions so yes, I hold him responsible for the team that is assembled. And he seems to have a lot more leeway than many other GM's in that he is allowed to spend to the cap. I certainly blame Sutter for part of it but there is one center on the ice night in and night out and that is absolutely the fault of the GM not just because he can't land Richards or O'Reilly but because he won't even bring any NHL-caliber centers. Big name or bust doesn't work.

And I don't care who you are, any person with playing experience or not who thinks that three wingers playing center for a sustained period doesn't know much or doesn't know enough about the sport. As a reference point, look at well, every single professional hockey team and see how many centers they have.

[prizefighterinferno]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

The only reason for the Bruins moving Krejci in the first place would be for salary and Iginla makes $7 Million/year.

The Bruins are a top team in the league, so Krejci will have to return a young player that is already a good NHL'er if they don't want to fall in the standings. Kind of like how the Flyers got Jakub Voracek as part of the package for Jeff Carter and Wayne Simmonds for Mike Richards. Flames don't have a Voracek or Simmonds.

Iginla is UFA at season's end. It's not as though they would necessarily be picking up salary for next season.

They have Marchard, Seguin and Lucic's new deals kicking in next year at 4.5, 5.75 and 6 million, respectively, will need to re-sign Rask (who is RFA) and Bergeron, who becomes a UFA the season afterwards. It might be nice to have a guy like Baertschi on an entry level deal who is currently getting his feet wet and would be surrounded by solid two way players in Boston. Moreover, they have Khokhlachev in the pipeline at C and if Calgary's pick this year is 4-7, they could draft a Barkov/Monahan/Lindholm.

Not saying I would do it, but to write off the idea of dealing from a position of organizational strength to add a top 10 RW, a top prospect who is current playing in the NHL and a likely top 5-10 pick for a player who is UFA in 2 seasons with a 5.25 million cap hit is probably undervaluing the pieces Calgary gives up in that deal. (Not that I am trying to undersell Krejci, the guy is a stud).

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by calgARI

Burke did play, just never in the NHL. Feaster became GM of the Lightning after the core of that team was already established. Sure he made some moves to improve them but that isn't what this organization needs - it needs vision which we have never seen any evidence of from him.

Discount all you like. "Hockey guy" Paul Holmgren doesnt have a Cup. His moves also make him look like a fool. Does he get a free ride because he played in the NHL?

So Burke's resume gets the okay from you? A couple years in the AHL back in the 70s means he's enough of a hockey guy to be an NHL GM. He won a Cup, but I assume that's discounted by his predecessor's work? This notion of being a "hockey guy" is, IMO, ridiculous. Lots of successful professional GMs aren't "baseball guys", "football guys" or "basketball guys". Besides, it's not like Feaster is running the Flames without any "hockey guys" surrounding him, advising him and otherwise helping him, right?

Originally Posted by calgARI

Can't say it enough, the fact that this guy is allowing one center on the ice every night for his team indicates that he doesn't know enough about the sport. He has done some good things for sure, but this team has been built terribly even if Backlund weren't hurt.

It's quite something, I agree. I doubt very strongly this has anything to do with Feaster just being a fan with a legal education or however you put it. Again, he is surrounded by "hockey guys" and others who have years of experience in the NHL/professional sports.

You're quick to post immediately after the Flames give up a goal or offer long dissertations in the PGT, but what do you suggest? You hate when Feaster says he's trying or really, talks at all. I think it stems from him not being a "hockey guy", which, respectfully, is absolute garbage, IMO.

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Discount all you like. "Hockey guy" Paul Holmgren doesnt have a Cup. His moves also make him look like a fool. Does he get a free ride because he played in the NHL?

So Burke's resume gets the okay from you? A couple years in the AHL back in the 70s means he's enough of a hockey guy to be an NHL GM. He won a Cup, but I assume that's discounted by his predecessor's work? This notion of being a "hockey guy" is, IMO, ridiculous. Lots of successful professional GMs aren't "baseball guys", "football guys" or "basketball guys". Besides, it's not like Feaster is running the Flames without any "hockey guys" surrounding him, advising him and otherwise helping him, right?



It's quite something, I agree. I doubt very strongly this has anything to do with Feaster just being a fan with a legal education or however you put it. Again, he is surrounded by "hockey guys" and others who have years of experience in the NHL/professional sports.

You're quick to post immediately after the Flames give up a goal or offer long dissertations in the PGT, but what do you suggest? You hate when Feaster says he's trying or really, talks at all. I think it stems from him not being a "hockey guy", which, respectfully, is absolute garbage, IMO.

The proof is in the pudding. What has he done to successfully build teams? I don't like when GM's take their cause to the media because it is desperate and ineffective. What exactly does he accomplish by telling everyone he is trying? What bothers me about him talking isn't that he isn't a hockey guy, it's that his actions don't say anything resembling an actual coherent, consistent plan. He has made some really good moves which I have said over and over again, but there isn't much of a blueprint. He went after Richards 20 months ago, didn't get him and never ended up bringing in a center of any kind until yesterday except for Blair Jones who has subsequently been sent to the minors. And don't give me this, 'there are only so many top centers available' because he doesn't need to just look at established or promising top two centers to ensure there is actually more than one center on this team. If Plan A doesn't work, you better have a Plan B and he just doesn't seem to and that is not acceptable in any business.

Since Feaster has taken over, the Flames have added two centers (Jones and Horak who are both in the AHL) and let one go (Jokinen).

Saying Holmgren doesn't have a cup ignores the fact that he successfully built a team that finished at the bottom of the league and has made the playoffs every year after. I do happen to think some of his moves have been ridiculous but they have continued to be competitive and make the playoffs in large part because he stockpiles assets which Feaster has not done a very good job of during his tenure as GM. There are a lot of guys who would love to trade spots with Holmgren and I would say very few who would want to with Feaster.

And saying I am quick to post when the Flames give up a goal and in PGT insinuates I only write when things aren't going well which is absolutely untrue. I post after almost every single game no matter the result and post throughout game threads in reaction to events happening, good or bad.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I know. I guess that just compounds the question - is playing in the AHL sufficient experience to meet the prerequisite to be an NHL GM? Junior? NCAA?

I would say pro leagues, maybe at least up to the level junior/NCAA.... then again I'm not saying Feaster is not qualified to be a GM either... he's ok, he's had a few scary near-misses but nothing crippling yet.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Baertschi alone would get it done. And that would be stupid.

Baertschi + 1st > what Richards and Carter got. By far.

I'm not sure Baertschi would even get you Voracek or Simmonds.

[HELPNEEDED]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I'm not sure Baertschi would even get you Voracek or Simmonds.

Baertschi is off less value then a 1st round draft pick right now, FYI.

So you are correct, Baertschi has a lot to prove and maybe he does and maybe he does'nt.

[edslunch]

Clearly either direction is to stay competitive but also rebuild on-the-fly. They're not going scorched earth neither are they mortgaging the future. Look at their free agent pickups this year. All midcareer, underrated players who can help now but can also help for the foreseeable future.

Ryan O'Reilly situation was trying to accelerate the rebuild by getting the 2013 draft pick playing essentially two or three years earlier than they would otherwise. Helps us now doesn't mortgage the future unless of course we miss out on a top five pick.

If they continue down this path I don't see them selling assets for picks I see them selling assets for young players who can step in right away

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by HELPNEEDED

Baertschi is off less value then a 1st round draft pick right now, FYI.

So you are correct, Baertschi has a lot to prove and maybe he does and maybe he does'nt.

I'd say Baertschi is worth a little more than our 1st round pick but if we keep losing he might not be.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by jg13

If Calgary would consider moving a potential top 5 pick for o Reilly they'll consider moving gaudreau + for krejci. Krejci is the Odd man out in Boston seeing as Bergeron and Séguin are their top 2 center men. Feasters looking to make an impact NOW. Not in 3 years to see if gaudreau will pan out.

As much as Feaster looks to be trying to placate Edwards and remain in the playoff hunt, I don't think he'd trade our biggest possible future blue-chipper (not playing with the team already). As much as it seems that trading Iggy is admitting defeat, I don't think it is. If we could trade Iggy + 1st rounder + Granlund etc. for Krejci, you've got to do it. We have a glut of wingers and Iggy can be replaced on the top line by Cammy. Boston is a legit contender and Iggy would really help, and as good as Krejci is, he's their 3rd line Center.

Originally Posted by Fischy13

Feaster seemed awfully giddy when there should have been disapointment from the Av's matching the offer sheet. He has something else in his back pocket. You aren't that happy after a failed attempt. I still feel Feaster worked with Sherman to get ROR signed up, and maybe Sherman will trade Stasney to us now instead. COL can't have 3 #1 C, 2 making 6.5 mil next year, with the best of the 3 - Duchene up for contract after next year.

I'd love Stastny. But Colorado is probably PISSED. No way their going to "help" a division opponent.

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I'm not sure Baertschi would even get you Voracek or Simmonds.

[HELPNEEDED]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I'd say Baertschi is worth a little more than our 1st round pick but if we keep losing he might not be.

No man, after taking a few risk management and option classes there is no way Baertschi is worth a top 10 first, draft dependent of course.

The guys really shown very little spark this year, he's somewhat of a known commodotity, he will max out around 20g and 55pts and thats the upside.

A draft pick can swing wildly, from absolute bust to absolute gangster. Thus a draft pick is worth more.

[FlamesAddiction]

I think the fact Feaster hasn't played the game is why he has Conroy, Goulet and Weisbrod in his management team. I don't think Feaster runs things like a one-man show.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by HELPNEEDED

No man, after taking a few risk management and option classes there is no way Baertschi is worth a top 10 first, draft dependent of course.

The guys really shown very little spark this year, he's somewhat of a known commodotity, he will max out around 20g and 55pts and thats the upside.

A draft pick can swing wildly, from absolute bust to absolute gangster. Thus a draft pick is worth more.

Well, there we have it, ladies and gentlemen.

[HELPNEEDED]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Well, there we have it, ladies and gentlemen.

There we do son, do you even know what risk management is, or what an option is?

I love when you talk, cause you make me laugh.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by HELPNEEDED

There we do son, do you even know what risk management is, or what an option is?

I love when you talk, cause you make me laugh.

You're the one citing some 317 course at the U of C as a prerequisite for your knowledge of hockey player and draft pick value, somehow leading you to decide that Baertschi's upside is a 50 point player.

[Geeoff]

It would be so much better if we could bank draft picks ad infinitum instead of having to waste them on players.