Ownership and Management Perspective

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

The moneyball quote “if we play like the Yankees in here, we’ll lose to the Yankees out there” comes to mind.

Baseball lends itself to Moneyball a lot better than hockey. For one thing, goalies are both so predominantly important and so unpredictable.

But moreover, I think the Flames have been trying to play moneyball and find value for salary for a while. Except they haven’t have the ELC studs some other teams have had.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Beninho

That is kind of my point tho. The org will only do what is instructed from top down. It’s a Canadian market, seats will be filled and jerseys sold regardless. Nothing else us simpletons can do. I say that as a fan of several other unlucky/bad sports organizations. Nothing fans can do to pressure the team to go into a rebuild. Look at Vancouver.

Yeah, this is what has in effect cursed Canadian franchises. And sadly I don't see it getting better until something fundamentally changes.

[DeluxeMoustache]

JK. I was a STH for years and dumped my tix a few years ago

It’s a frustrating team. But I actually agree with Tre that they are a good team that has underperformed. Not sure how to get them to deliver

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Or rip a page out of the Tampa Bay Rays' playbook?

A franchise in a market like Calgary better have the best scouting and development team in the league. Instead we get guys like Steve Pleau.

You can’t really be a “market that cannot attract top talent” and be a “trade draft picks more than most teams and spend to the cap on the assets you get” and expect to be successful.

Under the CBA, with the exception of the NCAA loophole, you get the talent you draft for their first 8 years, 11 years if you throw them a 8 year offer after ELC. That takes young talent from roughly 19-30, or their best years. It seems painfully obvious that the play for any small market team in the NHL is to try to build through the draft. Find the right 2-3 year period, suck and try to trade existing assets for as much young capital as possible and then hope you pick the right young guys to sign to longterm contracts.

Ottawa is somewhat doing a version of that right now

Tkachuk (23) -signed through 2028
Stutzle (21) - signed through 2031
Batherson (24) - signed through 2027
Norris (23) - signed through 2030

Will it work? Who knows, but I think I would rather try that. I suspect in two years they will try to sign Sanderson through 2033 and will likely try to sign Pinto longterm this offseason.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by TheSquatch

If the best talent won't come or won't stay, ... it's maybe less about vision and more about day to day realities.

Calgary will always have some challenges. Smaller market, Canadian, western conference, and less preferential climate. These will always be hurdles to overcome, but I don't think they are major issues to overcome.

Smaller market - Some players will always strive to play in places in New York, Miami, Dallas, LA, etc... But there are only so many roster spots available. There are some players that actually don't like massive cities, so occasionally it works the other way.

Canadian - Nothing anyone can do about this, but really only an issue for attracting American players.

Western - No player really likes the additional travel, but I can't see it as a major deal breaker for turning down a lot of money. Could be a hair splitter though. Half the league deals with this one though.

Climate - Some players care more than others. Very few places with NHL teams have decent winter climates though.

Seeing both Gaudreau and Tkachuk leave really exaggerated the issue IMO. Gaudreau put in a lot of time in Calgary though, and that shouldn't be forgotten. If you take Tkachuk at face value, there was a time that he was willing to sign long term in Calgary. The Flames offered a bridge, and he took it. Huberdeau signed a long term deal, as did Weegar. Kadri was one of the most sought after UFAs, and he signed in Calgary, same with Markstrom a couple of years ago. Zadorov could have taken a different offer, but circled back to Calgary. There are also guys like Bouwmeester and Hamrlik if you want to go back further.

The things is, players also want to win and have personal success. If you look promising, it can cancel out some of the other issues.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Beninho

There was a more concrete vision until Tkachuk and Johnny bolted and Monahan’s body broke down. You can argue the trade last summer lacked vision but at the time it looked pretty good. Flames did rebuild, and the two top players that every other team in the league would try and keep left. Flames still had a good group left that had holes and made a trade that they thought could put them back in contention. It sucks it is not working but imma push back on your assertion that this team did not have a vision. Last offseason was pretty unprecedented, it’s hard to blame management for giving this group another chance to compete then to rebuild.

We saw the Gaudreau/Tkachuk eventuality years before it happened. Pretty much the day Gaudreau signed his last contract with the Flames the talk was when he'd be leaving. But the narrative turned into how Treliving was somehow blindsided by this turn of events. How is that a concrete vision even if we give Treliving the benefit of the doubt?

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

You can’t really be a “market that cannot attract top talent” and be a “trade draft picks more than most teams and spend to the cap on the assets you get” and expect to be successful.

Under the CBA, with the exception of the NCAA loophole, you get the talent you draft for their first 8 years, 11 years if you throw them a 8 year offer after ELC. That takes young talent from roughly 19-30, or their best years. It seems painfully obvious that the play for any small market team in the NHL is to try to build through the draft. Find the right 2-3 year period, suck and try to trade existing assets for as much young capital as possible and then hope you pick the right young guys to sign to longterm contracts.

Ottawa is somewhat doing a version of that right now

Tkachuk (23) -signed through 2028
Stutzle (21) - signed through 2031
Batherson (24) - signed through 2027
Norris (23) - signed through 2030

Will it work? Who knows, but I think I would rather try that. I suspect in two years they will try to sign Sanderson through 2033 and will likely try to sign Pinto longterm this offseason.

For years Chevy was doing the same thing in Winnipeg. Holding on to draft picks and for the most part, drafting really well.

[TheSquatch]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Calgary will always have some challenges. Smaller market, Canadian, western conference, and less preferential climate. These will always be hurdles to overcome, but I don't think they are major issues to overcome.

Smaller market - Some players will always strive to play in places in New York, Miami, Dallas, LA, etc... But there are only so many roster spots available. There are some players that actually don't like massive cities, so occasionally it works the other way.

Canadian - Nothing anyone can do about this, but really only an issue for attracting American players.

Western - No player really likes the additional travel, but I can't see it as a major deal breaker for turning down a lot of money. Could be a hair splitter though. Half the league deals with this one though.

Climate - Some players care more than others. Very few places with NHL teams have decent winter climates though.

Seeing both Gaudreau and Tkachuk leave really exaggerated the issue IMO. Gaudreau put in a lot of time in Calgary though, and that shouldn't be forgotten. If you take Tkachuk at face value, there was a time that he was willing to sign long term in Calgary. The Flames offered a bridge, and he took it. Huberdeau signed a long term deal, as did Weegar. Kadri was one of the most sought after UFAs, and he signed in Calgary, same with Markstrom a couple of years ago. Zadorov could have taken a different offer, but circled back to Calgary. There are also guys like Bouwmeester and Hamrlik if you want to go back further.

The things is, players also want to win and have personal success. If you look promising, it can cancel out some of the other issues.

Overpaid for every free agent with term here though (possible exception Zad). Had to, and that hamstrings the franchise.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Baseball lends itself to Moneyball a lot better than hockey. For one thing, goalies are both so predominantly important and so unpredictable.

But moreover, I think the Flames have been trying to play moneyball and find value for salary for a while. Except they haven’t have the ELC studs some other teams have had.

I don't see anything resembling Moneyball from the Flames.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by cannon7

We saw the Gaudreau/Tkachuk eventuality years before it happened. Pretty much the day Gaudreau signed his last contract with the Flames the talk was when he'd be leaving. But the narrative turned into how Treliving was somehow blindsided by this turn of events. How is that a concrete vision even if we give Treliving the benefit of the doubt?

I don’t know what happened behind closed doors, I do know this organization has a history of trading players before they should’ve. Alot of this is in hindsight, I do think the decision was hard for johnny and he probably gave management hints that he would consider. I think thats a verifiable fact at this point unless something came out that I missed. Flames were pretty awesome last year and to me it looked like they were on the cusp. We know what happened now but how could you trade Johnny last year or even the year before? We all would’ve said “what if” and “he is the new St.Louis”. He left, it does suck it did not work out but I am happy the organization did what they could to keep one the best Flames of the last 20 years.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by cannon7

I don't see anything resembling Moneyball from the Flames.

I do. They are always trying to mine cheap talent from other teams. The fact it hasn’t worked well isn’t the point.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Beninho

I don’t know what happened behind closed doors, I do know this organization has a history of trading players before they should’ve. Alot of this is in hindsight, I do think the decision was hard for johnny and he probably gave management hints that he would consider. I think thats a verifiable fact at this point unless something came out that I missed. Flames were pretty awesome last year and to me it looked like they were on the cusp. We know what happened now but how could you trade Johnny last year or even the year before? We all would’ve said “what if” and “he is the new St.Louis”.

The issue isn't whether the Flames kept/lost Gaudreau/Tkachuk. The issue is that those two were largely all the Flames had in terms of top tier talent. Treliving has been trading away futures to try to bolster a roster rather than drafting/developing one. Spending to the cap rather than paying top dollar for the best scouting/development talent available.

Unless we think the franchises that run circles around the Flames when it comes to drafting are just consistently lucky?

[Enoch Root]

The idea of 'voting with your wallet' comes.mostly from non-STHs, I suspect. The season is paid for in advance. And if you want your seats for the good years, you are somewhat obligated to wait through the bad.

I mean sure, you can throw in the towel and give up the seats, but that is an ending, not an ongoing strategy.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I do. They are always trying to mine cheap talent from other teams. The fact it hasn’t worked well isn’t the point.

Are Huberdeau, Kadri, Markstrom, Lucic, etc. the cheap talent?

Treliving can't even get depth guys right. He threw $1.3M at Rooney only to play in the minors.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

I swear some of you are just happy being mediocre.

You know the difficulties and we don't get it.

Bitching endlessly about things you know nothing about doesn't give you some "I hate mediocrity" badge of honor.

[flames_fan_down_under]

I don't know, I think as Flames fans we know a lot about mediocrity.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Are Hubredeau, Kadri, Markstrom, Lucic, etc. the cheap talent?

Treliving can't even get depth guys right. He threw $1.3M at Rooney only to play in the minors.

No, they aren’t “cheap”. You act like Moneyball eliminates all high priced players. Moneyball is mainly about stats based management choices and filling lower spots with unrecognized talent that fills statistical needs. You mention Rooney but ignore Lewis, Gilbert, Gudbranson, Ritchie, Leivo, etc. These were largely unsuccessful attempts to play moneyball. Which IMO doesn’t lend itself to the NHL.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Bitching endlessly about things you know nothing about doesn't give you some "I hate mediocrity" badge of honor.

Excusing mediocrity doesn't do you any favors, either.

And founding a web forum doesn't exactly make you "in the know", so let's not get ahead of ourselves.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

For years Chevy was doing the same thing in Winnipeg. Holding on to draft picks and for the most part, drafting really well.

The super weird thing for the Flames is they have gotten value from all the young guys they signed longterm. A lot came through trades but the general value of the young players they signed longterm is fairly constant.

Hamilton - 6 years 5.75 million - dman who on an 82 game average was about a 55 point man a year dman.

Gaudreau - 6 year deal for 6.75 million - averaged about 90 points per 82 games played

Monahan - 7 year deal 6.375 million - only one that may not have worked out but was derailed by injury. First 4 years was a 30 goal 35 assist man (roughly) over 82 games.

Hanifin - 6 years 4.95 million - has been a fairly consistent 35 point dman who is good defensively

Lindholm - 6 years 4.85 million - a complete steal, great defensively and a 70-80 point man throughout the contract

Rasmus - 6 years 4.55 million - looks like a 50 point dman who is pretty good defensively.

So almost every single time they have tried to lock young guys in longterm the contract works out. But then they add a requisite number of at best average UFA contracts, with a number that have been awful, exception being Tanev who has been great which neuters the ability of those quality longterm young contracts to work.

Guys signed longterm through their 20’s almost always perform at or above their contract value. UFA’s really struggle to perform at their contract level throughout the term of the contract, let alone exceed the value of their contract.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No, they aren’t “cheap”. You act like Moneyball eliminates all high priced players. Moneyball is mainly about stats based management choices and filling lower spots with unrecognized talent that fills statistical needs. You mention Rooney but ignore Lewis, Gilbert, Gudbranson, Ritchie, Leivo, etc. These were largely unsuccessful attempts to play moneyball. Which IMO doesn’t lend itself to the NHL.

Therein lies the rub. It's tough playing Moneyball when all you have is Steve Pleau's dartboard to guide you.