Brad Treliving needs to go

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

He just trades his players at a much lower rate than every other organization over the past 7 years, probably because he is pretty comfortable with the core that he has. Outside of trading picks he has made the Neal trade and the Hamilton + for Lindholm and Hanifin trade. After the trade with Carolina he did not really make any more major deals.

Right. And this happened because he saw the last three years as the team's window, and honestly, after the Carolina trade it certainly looked like a good bet. It sure has not worked out that way, and a lot of that has inexplicably resulted from an astonishingly precipitous drop-off of the Flames's two top forwards over the last two years.

The point is that if this is the direction of the team moving forward, then Treliving is not a bad choice to be leading it. If the question is whether "he’s the guy to negotiate replacements," then his track record makes a compelling case.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

That is one way to spin it. But it does not align at all with everything we know about the coaching change.

What do you mean? They hired Sutter as Ward was fired. What doesn’t align with everything you know?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TOfan

So which scenario do you find more plausible?

I find your suggestion hard to believe, frankly. The only indication of Treliving’s job being on the line has come from a group within the fan base. I would also bet a large portion of this group would turn on a new GM once the honeymoon period has passed, much like they have with Treliving.

The Flames are on the right track here in my mind. They brought in a young GM who they probably were expecting to learn along the way and one they could grow with and maintain some stability in the organization. Have mistakes been made. Yes, they definitely have. Are other GM’s making mistakes? Yes, they are. Is Treliving making more mistakes than his peers? Not that I can see. Is there a clear cut better individual for the job? Who? Or is it just another instance of arguing for change for the sake of change.

I still haven’t seen/read a well thought out argument as to why Treliving should be fired and the Flames would be better off for it. Most ‘reasons’ people offer up are empty critiques along the lines of ‘he hasn’t acquired an elite C’. In the not too distant past we’ve also heard; ‘he hasn’t acquired a 1G’ or ‘he hasn’t hired an elites coach’.

Treliving’s job is in the line because of the poor on ice results during his tenure and the trajectory of the big league club. Slice and dice his moves and lack thereof all you want, I just don’t see any kind of vision or progress.

Change for the sake of change. Consistency for the sake of consistency. Both empty arguments IMO.

I don’t pretend to know who all the qualified GM candidate are, but I don’t see it difficult to imagine an upgrade over what Treliving has been able to get done.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right. And this happened because he saw the last three years as the team's window, and honestly, after the Carolina trade it certainly looked like a good bet. It sure has not worked out that way, and a lot of that has inexplicably resulted from an astonishingly precipitous drop-off of the Flames's two top forwards over the last two years.

The point is that if this is the direction of the team moving forward, then Treliving is not a bad choice to be leading it. If the question is whether "he’s the guy to negotiate replacements," then his track record makes a compelling case.

He has made efforts to change the team, like just missing out on adding 5.5 million dollar a year Jason Zucker for the 2019 First Round pick at the 2019 trade deadline. Both he and the Wild were upset about that one falling through. Zucker is set to make 5.5 million through 2023 and he consistently seems to give his teams 40 points a season.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

What do you mean? They hired Sutter as Ward was fired. What doesn’t align with everything you know?

We know that Treliving hired Sutter, and we know that both parties were in talks for an extended period of time about his return to Calgary.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

We know that Treliving hired Sutter, and we know that both parties were in talks for an extended period of time about his return to Calgary.

We also know that ownership was involved. Which was my only point.

What exactly do we know about the talks that Sutter and Treliving have had?

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right. And this happened because he saw the last three years as the team's window, and honestly, after the Carolina trade it certainly looked like a good bet. It sure has not worked out that way, and a lot of that has inexplicably resulted from an astonishingly precipitous drop-off of the Flames's two top forwards over the last two years.

The point is that if this is the direction of the team moving forward, then Treliving is not a bad choice to be leading it. If the question is whether "he’s the guy to negotiate replacements," then his track record makes a compelling case.

Yeah I'm caught between the org/BT not really being to blame for thinking the team was on the right track, with some good players and results. Then they started sinking and sinking. And the fact that part of the reason they sank and sank, was the clearance bin coaches they made use of, which may have lead to the devolvement of said players.
Now they have a good coach, but the damage may have been done with the confidence of players. I mean ruining Tkachuk, Monahan, Johnny and giving away a first is pretty unforgivable.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by chedder

He is 7 years on the job and has built a team that just can't take that next step. I know every team cannot until they can but it seems this core doesn't have the skill, determination and whatever else you need to go deep in the playoffs. That is on the GM. I'm more than willing to give Sutter some time to see what he can get out of this group but I think there needs to be major lineup changes this summer. Many people believe a core shakeup was needed after the Colorado embarrassment. He could have done it then. I don't think Treliving is the guy to do it now.

Why not? Treliving has shown the ability to take big swings. The Hamilton trades. The Hamonic trade, the Lindholm/Hanifin trade, 2020 draft trades, the Lucic trade, numerous FA signings. Any level heard individual should be able to see that no GM is batting 1.00. They all make mistakes.

Take a look around the league. You could say pretty much the exact same things you’re saying for most GM’s. Go look at a Jets fan forum, don’t think you will find people trying to run Cheveldayoff out of town? How about Benning, or Wilson, or Polie, or Bergiven, or Bowman, or Kekakinen on and on and on. Don’t think there are Flyer fans saying ‘why hasn’t Fletcher traded for Johnny Gaudreau?, he’s incompetent!

It’s low hanging fruit, and on the whole, doesn’t mean much.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

He just trades his players at a much lower rate than every other organization over the past 7 years, probably because he is pretty comfortable with the core that he has. Outside of trading picks he has made the Neal trade and the Hamilton + for Lindholm and Hanifin trade. After the trade with Carolina he did not really make any more major deals.

I wish. If only he didn't acquire that defenseman on a great contract...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

We also know that ownership was involved. Which was my only point.

What exactly do we know about the talks that Sutter and Treliving have had?

Both have said on multiple occasions that this was not the the first time the Flames have considered bringing Sutter back, but that this was the first time that everything aligned to make it possible. I have always understood that to mean that Treliving has approached Sutter in the past to return to coaching, but that Sutter declined until only this year.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right. And this happened because he saw the last three years as the team's window, and honestly, after the Carolina trade it certainly looked like a good bet. It sure has not worked out that way, and a lot of that has inexplicably resulted from an astonishingly precipitous drop-off of the Flames's two top forwards over the last two years.

The point is that if this is the direction of the team moving forward, then Treliving is not a bad choice to be leading it. If the question is whether "he’s the guy to negotiate replacements," then his track record makes a compelling case.

So the guy who traded picks for players like Stone, Lazar and Hamonic has a compelling track record for being able to negotiate replacements for the current roster?

If you're saying he received good value for the pending UFA's he traded early in his tenure, I absolutely agree with you. Flames don't have many of those at the moment though, nor do I believe that's a hard part of the job. GM's love to overpay for these players at the deadline, just look at what we gave up for some of the bottom roster talent we acquired over last few years.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I wish. If only he didn't acquire that defenseman on a great contract...

I am pretty sure he means major hockey deals, which was also the point I was getting at. That is, while Treliving has unwisely moved a lot of draft picks in his tenure, his player movement has been much better. If the mandate is now to re-shape the roster by moving players, then his history for getting good returns in these sorts of deals has been pretty solid.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

So the guy who traded picks for players like Stone, Lazar and Hamonic has a compelling track record for being able to negotiate replacements for the current roster?

If you're saying he received good value for the pending UFA's he traded early in his tenure, I absolutely agree with you. Flames don't have many of those at the moment though, nor do I believe that's a hard part of the job. GM's love to overpay for these players at the deadline, just look at what we gave up for some of the bottom roster talent we acquired over last few years.

What I am saying is that Treliving has received good value for players that he has moved, and not just for his pending UFAs.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Both have said on multiple occasions that this was not the the first time the Flames have considered bringing Sutter back, but that this was the first time that everything aligned to make it possible. I have always understood that to mean that Treliving has approached Sutter in the past to return to coaching, but that Sutter declined until only this year.

So your take is that Sutter had rebuffed Treliving until now, and that was only reason he wasn't brought back earlier? And i guess ownership's involvement was more to sell Sutter on the opportunity?

I guess that's possible. Not sure I'm putting that in the everything we know category, seems like more speculation. Personally I see it more likely that ownership was involved in this decision because they didn't like what they saw happening with their organization. I am of the belief they wanted Sutter more than Treliving did, and much of what we are hearing are platitudes.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Treliving’s job is in the line because of the poor on ice results during his tenure and the trajectory of the big league club. Slice and dice his moves and lack thereof all you want, I just don’t see any kind of vision or progress.

Change for the sake of change. Consistency for the sake of consistency. Both empty arguments IMO.

I don’t pretend to know who all the qualified GM candidate are, but I don’t see it difficult to imagine an upgrade over what Treliving has been able to get done.

The Flames, the entire organization I would say, is in a much better position today than it was when Treliving took over and likely going back as far as the early 90’s. their scouting department is more robust and balanced. Their farm system is strong and they are developing NHL caliber players, 1 or 2
a year. We know longer see silly things such as ‘the Flames don’t draft Russians’. The prospect pool has very good depth albeit lacking truly elite talent (we haven’t had the good fortune to leap frog several draft spots like Dallas or Philadelphia has).

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TOfan

The Flames, the entire organization I would say, is in a much better position today than it was when Treliving took over and likely going back as far as the early 90’s. their scouting department is more robust and balanced. Their farm system is strong and they are developing NHL caliber players, 1 or 2
a year. We know longer see silly things such as ‘the Flames don’t draft Russians’. The prospect pool has very good depth albeit lacking truly elite talent (we haven’t had the good fortune to leap frog several draft spots like Dallas or Philadelphia has).

Don't disagree with much here. TOfan. I still see the organization as no better than average compared to rest of league in much of anything. Prospect depth, cap management, big league talent. Considering what Treliving started with, it should be better IMO.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I am pretty sure he means major hockey deals, which was also the point I was getting at. That is, while Treliving has unwisely moved a lot of draft picks in his tenure, his player movement has been much better. If the mandate is now to re-shape the roster by moving players, then his history for getting good returns in these sorts of deals has been pretty solid.

Fair enough. I mean, he cannot possibly do worse than Risebrough, Sutter and Feaster, so at least we should be somewhat optimistic.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

What I am saying is that Treliving has received good value for players that he has moved, and not just for his pending UFAs.

The Carolina trade was fair for both teams. The Neal and Sven trades were outright wins. That's just too small a subset of moves and non-moves to give me the same confidence you have in his ability to evaluate talent and extract value. As another poster said, he seems to suffer from endowment effect except when it comes to draft picks.

[Toonage]

There are pretty big gaps from where he traded picks away for nothing. The funny thing is there is a recent interview on the Athletic where Treliving says he doesn't like to give away picks for rentals (though will do it) and yet the track record says otherwise. He seems almost too comfortable with it.

"But, I’m not a big fan of giving up second-round picks and first-round picks for somebody that could be with you for a short period of time. For me, if you’re giving up those assets I’d always like to have more team control over the players for a longer period of time. If you’re giving up that type of asset, I just haven’t been a fan of those players walking out the door on you.

But there’s certainly times you have to do that, and it’s all about the state your team is in."

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Toonage

There are pretty big gaps from where he traded picks away for nothing. The funny thing is there is a recent interview on the Athletic where Treliving says he doesn't like to give away picks for rentals (though will do it) and yet the track record says otherwise. He seems almost too comfortable with it.

It's not the picks for rentals that is the problem per se. It is that it is picks for K-Mart crap. The mentality seems to be "well, we are sort of contenders, so we will only trade secondary picks for 'depth' help". The problem is that the picks accumulated and the players acquired were all useless. Would have been much better to do nothing or to spend more for someone that makes a significant difference...