Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-21-2021, 08:57 PM   #81
FanIn80
GOAT!
 
FanIn80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Exp:
Default

I really wish people would figure out the difference between "rumour" and "speculative conversation."
FanIn80 is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
Old 05-21-2021, 09:24 PM   #82
powderjunkie
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV View Post
Significantly since Treliving came on? I dunno about that. They had already shown the ability to draft Gaudreau, Brodie, Backlund, Ferland, Monahan, and Jankowski as "NHLers" before Treliving versus Mangiapane, Andersson, Tkachuk, Kylington, Valimaki, Dube as "NHLers" under Treliving. I'm not going to include 2014 draft since it's difficult to determine Treliving's input on it.

We certainly haven't been the team drafting guys like Bazral, Connor, Chabot, Dobson, Carlo, etc since he got here.
Brad's only had 3 drafts we can really evaluate (2015-17), plus 2014 which reeks of Burke. There's only a handful of guys drafted since 2018 that can be 'graded'.

3 years (19 picks: 6, 16, five 53-66, the rest 96+:
Tkachuk
Fox
Mangiapane
Andersson
Dubé*
Valimaki*

Kylington**
Ruzicka**
Phillips***

* = how much the jury is out...obviously the first 4 are still young, too.

Feaster 2011-2013 (19 picks (not incl. 42OA): 6, 13, 14*, 22, 28, 45, 57, 67, 75):

Gaudreau
Monahan

Kulak
Janko
Baertschi
Brossoit
Granlund (335 gp)


Sutter (2007 and 2008 -12 picks: 24, 25, 48, 70, 78, 108+)
Backlund
Brodie

Bouma

2006, 2009 are strikeouts (14 picks: 23, 26, 74+). So is 2005 (8 picks, no 2nd, two 3rds, two 5ths).

To cherry pick his next best year, you can choose:
Phaneuf, or
Prust/Pardy/Boyd/Cracknell, or
Ferland

For his whole tenure he had: 9, 23, 24, 25, 26, 39, 48, eight more 64-78, 42 more picks 87+, including two years of 9rd drafts). Fair to say his top 2 highest picks were lower, but his 3rd-7th highest were a lot higher than Brad's.



BT = 2 presumptive 1000 gamers and 4 presumptive top half of roster players and TBD

Feaster = 2 presumptive 1000 gamers and a few bottom half roster players

Sutter = 3 1000 gamers, Ferland, and a few bottom half of roster players
powderjunkie is offline  
Old 05-21-2021, 09:33 PM   #83
powderjunkie
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV View Post


By pure "talent evaluation", you can give Feaster credit for Kucherov since he was clearly identified as a guy they wanted.
Wut? They just didn't want him as much as Wotherspoon, literally 1 pick earlier? Or Granlund, 13 picks earlier?
powderjunkie is offline  
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to powderjunkie For This Useful Post:
Old 05-21-2021, 10:45 PM   #84
Calgary4LIfe
Franchise Player
 
Calgary4LIfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
He also traded 6 seconds though (if my counting is accurate).
He also traded a 1st for Cammy and then got a later one back from Tanguay - which was a downgrade I think of 8 spots.
He used the draft to re-stock the team for sure.
He also traded younger players (Dion, Kobasew, Lombardi) to try and compete.

Some of the trades he made with picks:
- 2nd for Jordan Leopold (2nd time round) who was then included for the rights to Bouw
- 1st included in the Jokinen deal (ended up being the 13th overall pick)
- 2nd included to dump Wayne Primeau (in the Stuart deal) in a deal that he got Stralman back - but then dumped him too (for a 3rd)
- 3rd for Steve Staios
- He traded a pick for Bourque but I can't find what round (though I would also say that was a very good deal)

Sutter used picks and futures to try and win now just like Brad does. And he also never got out of the 1st round after the magical run.

====
I think where the ownership direction as a negative influence is not the willingness to re-build, but how long they allowed that re-build to play out. When did they set expectation for when they wanted to be in the playoffs again and compete again? How long did they assume the re-build would take? Did that POV change when the team won a round earlier than anticipated?

The counter to that is pretty easy.


Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals, and one phantom goal away in game 6 of a Stanley Cup, vs reaching the 2nd round once in his first year as GM, and 3 total games won spread over 6 seasons.


When Treliving gets this team to make a legitimate run, I think most of us will stop criticizing the futures that he bleeds.
Calgary4LIfe is online now  
Old 05-21-2021, 10:49 PM   #85
Calgary4LIfe
Franchise Player
 
Calgary4LIfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie View Post
Wut? They just didn't want him as much as Wotherspoon, literally 1 pick earlier? Or Granlund, 13 picks earlier?

I really don't give much credit to Treliving or Feaster for the drafts personally, but I do remember Button talking about that particular draft. They had Kucherov and Gaudreau on separate lists, and felt that they could take them later in the draft. He was surprised (and upset) when Kucherov was taken, and decided to take Gaudreau with their next pick as they knew Boston had been sniffing around.


I do wonder 'what would have been' had Kucherov been selected as well as Gaudreau in that 2nd round. I bet that it would have convinced Panarin to come over the year he went to Chicago (Calgary was one of the final 4 teams that Panarin was debating over).


Perhaps the Flames would have won a cup by now.
Calgary4LIfe is online now  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
Old 05-21-2021, 11:02 PM   #86
Jiri Hrdina
Franchise Player
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe View Post
The counter to that is pretty easy.


Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals, and one phantom goal away in game 6 of a Stanley Cup, vs reaching the 2nd round once in his first year as GM, and 3 total games won spread over 6 seasons.


When Treliving gets this team to make a legitimate run, I think most of us will stop criticizing the futures that he bleeds.
Those picks were almost all traded after the cup run
Jiri Hrdina is offline  
Old 05-21-2021, 11:25 PM   #87
Calgary4LIfe
Franchise Player
 
Calgary4LIfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
Those picks were almost all traded after the cup run

Yes, I know. Sutter kept trying to feed a non-contender for 3 seasons after they stopped being a contender. Sutter's Flames were a phantom goal away from a Stanley Cup. They were then hailed as a bona fide contender for most years (and spent like one). Then he continued to spend like one trying to keep the team competitive, and eventually got fired for it. Is that fair to say?


Treliving spent even more draft capital on a perennial bubble team. His best season was his first as a GM when the Flames made it to the 2nd round. Then over the next 6 seasons he spent draft capital to win a grand total of 3 games over those 6 seasons.


How people don't want him fired is beyond me now. I don't advocate for Sutter to return to his GM duties (and he isn't interested anyway apparently), but holy heck I would rather him be the GM of this team given both of their respective track records.


You can't argue with success vs success. The time-frame between their tenures are comparable now. One made it to the cup finals and had a legit contender. Maybe - MAYBE- you can say that the Flames under Peter's first year entering the playoffs might have been considered contenders - I will definitely not argue that.


It made sense for Sutter to 'feed a proven contender' in a way, but he did it for TOO LONG. What's Treliving's excuse? I can't think of one.
Calgary4LIfe is online now  
Old 05-21-2021, 11:35 PM   #88
Jiri Hrdina
Franchise Player
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

I’m not going to change your mind about any of that but the point I was countering was this one:

riginally Posted by Aarongavey View Post
The weird part about the order from the ownership to sell draft picks to become competitive is that it only came into effect when Brad was her


This team has been mortgaging it’s future for a long time
Ain’t nothing new
Jiri Hrdina is offline  
Old 05-21-2021, 11:39 PM   #89
Jimdon
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Jimdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Airdrie, AB
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe View Post
I really don't give much credit to Treliving or Feaster for the drafts personally, but I do remember Button talking about that particular draft. They had Kucherov and Gaudreau on separate lists, and felt that they could take them later in the draft. He was surprised (and upset) when Kucherov was taken, and decided to take Gaudreau with their next pick as they knew Boston had been sniffing around.


I do wonder 'what would have been' had Kucherov been selected as well as Gaudreau in that 2nd round. I bet that it would have convinced Panarin to come over the year he went to Chicago (Calgary was one of the final 4 teams that Panarin was debating over).


Perhaps the Flames would have won a cup by now.
Iirc the reason that paladin wanted a trade was because his wife and mother in law were unhappy and wanted to live in a more metropolitan area. I don't recall Calgary ever being an option.
Jimdon is offline  
Old 05-21-2021, 11:40 PM   #90
powderjunkie
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe View Post
I really don't give much credit to Treliving or Feaster for the drafts personally, but I do remember Button talking about that particular draft. They had Kucherov and Gaudreau on separate lists, and felt that they could take them later in the draft. He was surprised (and upset) when Kucherov was taken, and decided to take Gaudreau with their next pick as they knew Boston had been sniffing around.


I do wonder 'what would have been' had Kucherov been selected as well as Gaudreau in that 2nd round. I bet that it would have convinced Panarin to come over the year he went to Chicago (Calgary was one of the final 4 teams that Panarin was debating over).


Perhaps the Flames would have won a cup by now.
Interesting; it does seem unlikely though they'd end up with all three of Sven, Kucherov, and Gaudreau when they only had 5 picks total.
powderjunkie is offline  
Old 05-21-2021, 11:42 PM   #91
Calgary4LIfe
Franchise Player
 
Calgary4LIfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
I’m not going to change your mind about any of that but the point I was countering was this one:

riginally Posted by Aarongavey View Post
The weird part about the order from the ownership to sell draft picks to become competitive is that it only came into effect when Brad was her


This team has been mortgaging it’s future for a long time
Ain’t nothing new

Ah, sorry.. I got lost in my own mind (or lack thereof of one!).


One thing that maybe nobody is talking about that is actually in the spirit of the conversation then:


The owners seemed to finally buy-into a rebuild. However, Burke is notorious for having 'no patience' in a rebuild, and has himself stated that a rebuild should only take a couple of seasons.


I wonder if it wasn't the owners, but Burke pushing that narrative? Hard to go back to 'rebuild' by the time Burke left. No way to confirm this at all of course, but (to me) it is simply another fan-driven purely speculative theory that also makes sense.
Calgary4LIfe is online now  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
Old 05-22-2021, 02:09 AM   #92
Locke
Franchise Player
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taxbuster View Post
From an ownership perspective "steady as she goes" is quite a common mantra. It's not one for "winning" anything (whether in Oil, Hockey or Cribbage) but one doesn't "lose" a tonne either. Merely staying afloat, keeping the cash rolling in. N'est-ce pas?

To win takes some degree of risk, and a risk-averse organization, which is what the Flames appear to be, isn't going far.
Right. I completely agree, which is why I think they should keep Treliving.

He can build a platform, a base. Its what he does. He doesnt seem to have the cred to take a team over the top, but this current crop seemingly isnt going anywhere at the moment.

So if you want to rebuild with a decent, semi-talented, economically balanced base team then he can do that.

The real guts come when you think you have what it takes to win it. Then you have to can Treliving and get someone who will make moves that will take your team over the top.

Frankly, I've been all for firing Treliving, but at this point that ship has sailed. If they were going to fire him they should have done it a while ago. Its too late now.

Now we're in 'scratching, clawing and praying for the last playoff spot with post-apex players' mode.

Thats not Treliving's wheelhouse. If they're adamant about going down this path then fire him. If they want to re-start this nonsense all over again then you might as well keep him.

He drafts well and negotiates really good (non-UFA) contracts. In the context of rebuilding those are good skills. But sadly, once we start experiencing success....you gotta cut him loose.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!

This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.

The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans

If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
Locke is online now  
Old 05-22-2021, 02:38 AM   #93
SoulOfTheFlame
First Line Centre
 
SoulOfTheFlame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimdon View Post
Iirc the reason that paladin wanted a trade was because his wife and mother in law were unhappy and wanted to live in a more metropolitan area. I don't recall Calgary ever being an option.



He can't be summoned to Calgary.
__________________


SoulOfTheFlame is offline  
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to SoulOfTheFlame For This Useful Post:
Old 05-22-2021, 07:07 AM   #94
btimbit
Franchise Player
 
btimbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80 View Post
I really wish people would figure out the difference between "rumour" and "speculative conversation."
Especially when they then blame the person for making up rumours when they're clearly just spitballing
btimbit is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to btimbit For This Useful Post:
Old 05-22-2021, 08:45 AM   #95
Vinny01
Franchise Player
 
Vinny01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe View Post
I really don't give much credit to Treliving or Feaster for the drafts personally, but I do remember Button talking about that particular draft. They had Kucherov and Gaudreau on separate lists, and felt that they could take them later in the draft. He was surprised (and upset) when Kucherov was taken, and decided to take Gaudreau with their next pick as they knew Boston had been sniffing around.


I do wonder 'what would have been' had Kucherov been selected as well as Gaudreau in that 2nd round. I bet that it would have convinced Panarin to come over the year he went to Chicago (Calgary was one of the final 4 teams that Panarin was debating over).


Perhaps the Flames would have won a cup by now.


I don’t know it has been made pretty clear by many on this forum it is absolutely impossible to win a cup without drafting 1st or 2nd overall a few times
Vinny01 is online now  
Old 05-22-2021, 11:02 AM   #96
powderjunkie
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny01 View Post
I don’t know it has been made pretty clear by many on this forum it is absolutely impossible to win a cup without drafting 1st or 2nd overall a few times
No, but at least once.

STL is the closest thing to an exception with Erik Johnson being 13 years earlier, and only playing there for 3 years. Zach Sanford and 1/3 of the cost for B Schenn are what was left of that trade tree. Pietrangelo at 4, but their next highest picks were 13 and 14 (Eller and Schwartz).

TBL - I guess you could say they only had 2 - Hedman, since Stamkos was injured. But they turned 3OA Drouin into Sergachev...

LAK - 2, 4 (Hickey), 5 (Schenn --> Richards), and a bunch of 11s
BOS - 1*, 5--> 2 & 9 (in the year they won the cup), 7, 8. I don't think much was left from Thornton. Seguin was nice value on an ELC, but only played 10:30 and 13/25 PO games.

DET - built before the lockout
ANA - B Ryan wasn't yet on the roster that year. 5 (Chistov - bust), 7 (Lupul), 9 (Smid)...a few more top 10 picks further back including 2OA Tverdovsky in '94 (who helped them land Selanne 1.0)


It's not impossible, but it's pretty darn unlikely.

The last 12 cup winners all had the benefit from multiple top 4 picks in one form or another.
powderjunkie is offline  
Old 05-22-2021, 11:46 AM   #97
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taxbuster View Post
From an ownership perspective "steady as she goes" is quite a common mantra. It's not one for "winning" anything (whether in Oil, Hockey or Cribbage) but one doesn't "lose" a tonne either. Merely staying afloat, keeping the cash rolling in. N'est-ce pas?

To win takes some degree of risk, and a risk-averse organization, which is what the Flames appear to be, isn't going far.
I don’t know that Treliving is unwilling to stake risks - he’s made some big trades and signings. Hamilton, Hamonic, Brouwer, Neal, Lindholm/Hanifin, Tanev, Markstrom - when he IDs a player he wants he seems to make an effort to get him and he is willing to pay a risky price. Even the trades that fell through - Kadri, Anderson, eg. he was willing to disrupt the core.

But the player evaluation for a lot of them sucked. Mainly Hamonic, Brouwer and Neal and some of the bottoms end of the roster.

It’s probably unfair to cast stones at Treliving for spending draft picks AND accuse him of being risk averse.
GioforPM is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
Old 05-22-2021, 12:40 PM   #98
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny01 View Post
I don’t know it has been made pretty clear by many on this forum it is absolutely impossible to win a cup without drafting 1st or 2nd overall a few times
It’s impossible to win without stars.

How you get those stars can vary, but you can’t win without at least two forwards who are top-10 at their positions, a goalie playing .920 minimum hockey, and you have to be top-5 in either goals for or goals against.

It certainly bolsters the argument, though, that every cup winner since Pittsburgh in 09 except St Louis and Boston have drafted top-2 at least once.

Pittsburgh: Fluery, Geno, Sid
Chicago: Kane (Toews 3rd OA)
LA: Doughty
Washington: Ovechkin (Backstrom 4th OA)

Teams rarely find a gem in the 4th round, a 4th overall and a couple 6th overalls and declare a rebuild over.
__________________
”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”

Rowan Roy W-M - February 15, 2024
GreenLantern2814 is offline  
Old 05-22-2021, 12:59 PM   #99
taxbuster
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM View Post
I don’t know that Treliving is unwilling to stake risks - he’s made some big trades and signings. Hamilton, Hamonic, Brouwer, Neal, Lindholm/Hanifin, Tanev, Markstrom - when he IDs a player he wants he seems to make an effort to get him and he is willing to pay a risky price. Even the trades that fell through - Kadri, Anderson, eg. he was willing to disrupt the core.

But the player evaluation for a lot of them sucked. Mainly Hamonic, Brouwer and Neal and some of the bottoms end of the roster.

It’s probably unfair to cast stones at Treliving for spending draft picks AND accuse him of being risk averse.
Don't disagree - but what he doesn't seem to do is risk "overpaying" (really the optics of being thought to have overpaid) for a player who may well help the team and then settles for something...else. That's the only explanation I can come up with for all the "Well, we were in on so-and-so, but ....".
taxbuster is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to taxbuster For This Useful Post:
Old 05-22-2021, 01:03 PM   #100
TOfan
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taxbuster View Post
Don't disagree - but what he doesn't seem to do is risk "overpaying" (really the optics of being thought to have overpaid) for a player who may well help the team and then settles for something...else. That's the only explanation I can come up with for all the "Well, we were in on so-and-so, but ....".
I think this is exactly what he did with Hamonic. He overpaid, knew he was doing so, and it blew up in his face. Next time, I’m guessing he’s going to be more selective in who he pursues.
TOfan is offline  
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:18 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy