[News] Feaster and Weisbrod relieved of duties. Burke will hire a new GM

[nik-]

Gauthier is not a pick I would have liked, but it wasn't horrible. Biggs was not a good pick at all, from day one it was the wrong choice.

[getbak]

Here's the interview Burke did with the Fan in Toronto where he talks about not seeing eye-to-eye with Weisbrod (right near the beginning of the clip): http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_deman...-Interview.mp3

[Ashasx]

I just don't want to see a yes man brought in. Even though I didn't like a lot of things Weisbrod was involved in (Jankowski, Kanzig, etc.), he did bring a different perspective to the mix.

Teams with management that agree on everything are doomed to perpetual mediocrity. We need a GM/AGM to challenge Burke and not be afraid to speak his mind. If that's why Weisbrod was let go, that is a little disappointing.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by UKflames

Not picking on Greenlantern but this statement just about sums up how I have seen the last few days. It is amazing how so many people are turning the reasons why they hate Feaster into a positive to love Burke.

In this example it is okay for Burke not to be doing the drafting, and to leave that to the team around him, but where Feaster has done this it is his fault that we have drafted badly (in some peoples opinion) over the last couple of years, not the team around him. So in next years draft none of it will be Burkes fault, regardless of what neanderthal goon we draft, it will be the people around him, can't wait to hear that excuse.

We all knew that we had a smallish team coming into this season but it was year one of the rebuild, these things do take time. We were not going to suddenly create out of thin air a brand new hard hitting, high IQ, 200ft game, amazingly skilled team, everyone here was on board with the change wouldn't happen over night. Now that Feaster has been fired it is his fault that we didn't change the team overnight, he should have just traded for for all of the other teams top players, that is what Burke apparently is going to do.

I think some peoples love of Burke is clouding their judgement on how he is going to pull off this swift one season rebuild and it starts with shifting out a lot of the prospects that we were excited to see develop.

Look at this Burke team from the recent past:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary

Not a single player over 100 PIMs. Colton Orr played the year in the AHL. This idea that we're going to be a team full of goons just isn't true. When the Leafs hired Carlyle that's when they became goon central (or at least dress 2 goons a night central).

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Teams with management that agree on everything are doomed to perpetual mediocrity. We need a GM/AGM to challenge Burke and not be afraid to speak his mind. If that's why Weisbrod was let go, that is a little disappointing.

There is no evidence or reason to believe that is the case so why would you even speculate or be concerned about it at all?

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I just don't want to see a yes man brought in. Even though I didn't like a lot of things Weisbrod was involved in (Jankowski, Kanzig, etc.), he did bring a different perspective to the mix.

Teams with management that agree on everything are doomed to perpetual mediocrity. We need a GM/AGM to challenge Burke and not be afraid to speak his mind. If that's why Weisbrod was let go, that is a little disappointing.

Make no mistake, Burke is leading the team. There is absolutely zero chance someone that has differing philosophies will be hired. Whoever it will be, will be of the same philosophy and mind towards direction that Burke is.

No, we don't want a "yes" man, but Burke is the boss and he is hiring someone to handle aspects of the job that he is not as proficient in. You can absolutely book it that whoever gets hired, if at any point Burke issues an instruction, that instruction gets followed.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by strombad

Make no mistake, Burke is leading the team. There is absolutely zero chance someone that has differing philosophies will be hired. Whoever it will be, will be of the same philosophy and mind towards direction that Burke is.

No, we don't want a "yes" man, but Burke is the boss and he is hiring someone to handle aspects of the job that he is not as proficient in. You can absolutely book it that whoever gets hired, if at any point Burke issues an instruction, that instruction gets followed.

So, a yes man.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by strombad

Make no mistake, Burke is leading the team. There is absolutely zero chance someone that has differing philosophies will be hired. Whoever it will be, will be of the same philosophy and mind towards direction that Burke is.

No, we don't want a "yes" man, but Burke is the boss and he is hiring someone to handle aspects of the job that he is not as proficient in. You can absolutely book it that whoever gets hired, if at any point Burke issues an instruction, that instruction gets followed.

Following a similar strategy or philosophy doesn't mean they have to agree on everything... it shouldn't.

Burke sets the long term goals for this team. We know that. But the GM needs to know when to step in and say something when your team is about to draft Michael McCarron over somebody like Shea Theodore or Adam Erne. Some picks you know are bad from the outset... that doesn't mean you follow through and make a poor draft selection for the sake of following your "strategy".

If all our new GM does is follow the "to-do" list Burke writes out every morning, then we are in trouble. It's as simple as that.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Following a similar strategy or philosophy doesn't mean they have to agree on everything... it shouldn't.

Burke sets the long term goals for this team. We know that. But the GM needs to know when to step in and say something when your team is about to draft Michael McCarron over somebody like Shea Theodore or Adam Erne. Some picks you know are bad from the outset... that doesn't mean you follow through and make a poor draft selection for the sake of following your "strategy".

If all our new GM does is follow the "to-do" list Burke writes out every morning, then we are in trouble. It's as simple as that.

Of course they shouldn't agree on everything, but if you look at what Burke is looking for, then your concerns are unfounded.

You keep bringing up drafting, and Burke has explicitly said he is looking for someone with high draft credentials. He is specifically looking for someone that will fill in the areas where he is not as proficient.

Either way, your concerns are unfounded. If Burke was the GM, we wouldn't be in trouble, so Burke hiring a guy to follow orders and bring his own talents to the table doesn't qualify us as being "in trouble".

[Enoch Root]

Feaster and Weisbrod shared a philosophy... did they agree on everything?

It is a pointless and boundless concern. The guys on the reported lists are not yes-men with no personal opinions or desires to be have input into an organization

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Feaster and Weisbrod shared a philosophy... did they agree on everything?

It is a pointless and boundless concern. The guys on the reported lists are not yes-men with no personal opinions or desires to be have input into an organization

I think it was more of a case where Weisbrod was Feaster's guy, and Feaster just took his word on all things drafting and scouting.

[trackercowe]

Still can't believe Feaster took Jankowski over Maatta; that was a huge mistake, and most of us knew it would be. Might be the biggest mistake that he ACTUALLY made during his tenure.

[trackercowe]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Biggs: The poster boy of Burke-style draft picks. Currently 3 points in 22 AHL games. Leafs fans cannot stand him and have already labeled him a bust. If he's lucky, he might play 15 NHL games in callups during his 4th line AHLer career.

To be fair on the Biggs pick it's not like there seems to be many stellar picks taken after the 22nd spot. Only Saad taken 43rd has shown anything as of yet. Sure a couple of them might turn out to be that much better, but you can't be so certain about that yet.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2011e.html

It's kind of hard to find a blue chipper among the bunch when there aren't many to be had.

[J epworth]

Originally Posted by trackercowe

Still can't believe Feaster took Jankowski over Maatta; that was a huge mistake, and most of us knew it would be. Might be the biggest mistake that he ACTUALLY made during his tenure.

Ya, I still have hope Jankowski ends up being a solid pick, and going into the draft I wanted Maatta or Girgensons, both who we could have got with that 14th overall pick. I know we could have still gotten Maatta with that 21st pick, but you have to look at that draft as getting Jankowski and Seiloff, not just Jankowski. I'm very high on Seiloff and hope he ends up just as good or at least similar career to Maatta, then if Jankowski comes through at all it's still a win for Calgary.

Girgensons however looked pretty awesome yesterday in Buffalo and made me sad all over again that we missed out on picking him.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by trackercowe

To be fair on the Biggs pick it's not like there seems to be many stellar picks taken after the 22nd spot. Only Saad taken 43rd has shown anything as of yet. Sure a couple of them might turn out to be that much better, but you can't be so certain about that yet.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2011e.html

It's kind of hard to find a blue chipper among the bunch when there aren't many to be had.

Well, the 2nd round pick Toronto traded with their own 1st (from Boston) to move up became John Gibson, the top goalie prospect in the NHL...

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Husky

Maybe the Flames website is misleading but I feel like the "get bigger" issue is overblown.

Stempniak, Cammalleri, Russell, Baertschi and Hudler are the only guys below 6'. Depending on who you consider the rest of the team players the avg looks to be about 6.1'....I don't see this small. On the guys below 6', most likely 2 are gone (Stempniak and Cammalleri) and will be replaced by bigger guys.

Other than Gaudrea, we really haven't drafted a small guy either in the last 4 or so years too.

So if you agree that the bulk of our team is below average and average sized players then yes, we are small.

You are right in that we could easily deal a few of our small/average forwards this trade deadline.

Big trade deadline for us. Should be even more exciting with Burke potentially in charge.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Big trade deadline for us. Should be even more exciting with Burke potentially in charge.

I think we'll see a lot of moves for picks and picks at the deadline. But Burke's big splash will be the draft. I think he'll have his sights fixed firmly on Ekblad.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by getbak

Here's the interview Burke did with the Fan in Toronto where he talks about not seeing eye-to-eye with Weisbrod (right near the beginning of the clip): http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_deman...-Interview.mp3

Thanks for the link, just wondering if there's a part 2? The interview cuts off right when Burke is going on a rant about how teams are selfish with their skilled players. I want to hear where he was going with that.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Well, the 2nd round pick Toronto traded with their own 1st (from Boston) to move up became John Gibson, the top goalie prospect in the NHL...

Sure, that happens. However, do you really expect it? Is it fair to actually expect it?

Start at about 5 years ago (in order to give as much time for prospects to develop and make the show, and get a 'read' as to how they contribute in the NHL), and stop as far back as you wish.

Now, count how many 1st line talent (blue-chip) forwards there are selected after the 15th spot in the draft. There DEFINITELY ARE some, but they are scarce. Count them up.

Now count up all the players selected in the first round after the same 15th position, and count how many were busts. Less than 50 games in the NHL sound fair? 100? Zero? Doesn't matter. You will start to see how difficult it is to find these blue-chip players in the bottom half of the 1st round, much less in the outlying rounds.

Sure, most drafts produce a few notable players in the latter rounds. You have your goalies especially, whose future success seems to be dependent on anything but draft positioning, and you have your late blooming defencemen who are harder to scout apparently.

However, do you really believe yourself when you think that Gaunce and Gauthier are terrible picks? At that point, a team is looking for warm bodies.

I have no idea where Moon got his info on Gauthier from, but from everything I read and saw, Toronto drafted him to become their future 3rd line shutdown center. That is what they are hoping for, and that is (as far as I know) what the fans expect with him. Nobody in Van is saying that Gaunce is going to be a fixture in the top 6 either. Are you implying these are terrible picks?

Go back and look at the draft. You will see that some drafts barely produce a strong start 6 lineup (3 forwards, 2 defence and 1 goalie). That is what makes the 2003 draft so special, was the amount of talent still being drafted into the 2nd. Compare that with the year prior (2002) and see how many great players you can hope to find. Sure, there have been decent ones from the 2002 draft picked after #15, but few. Many (like Alexander Steen) are just making a name for themselves. Jiri Hudler was one of the best picks at less than .5ppg or so over his NHL career (though he is also exploding now with a new team).

Heck, 6 of the top 12 picks in '04 have either never played in the NHL, or no longer play in the NHL. That is 50% in that draft in the first top 12 picks.

If you are suggesting that the Flames should be drafting a blue-chippers past the top 15 picks, you need to really familiarize yourself with the last 20 drafts and see how difficult and unrealistic those expectations are.

You might as well just say "Datsyuk was selected in the 7th round. I don't see why the Flames aren't selecting future HHOFs in the late rounds.!".

There has been many goalies with much better records in their draft years than Gibson. The consensus was that Kidd was better than Brodeur too, but we know how that was played out. Point is, you can't point to a blue-chip prospect you unearth in the 2nd rounds and later, or point at prospects who are almost a sure thing to make it into the NHL (Gaunce and Gauthier) and say they are terrible picks.

Organizationally, you almost need to find a few of those later picks and have them as 'home runs', but you can't expect a team to do so with any regularity in the slightest.

[FAN]

Burke not seeing eye to eye with Weisbrod is the most interesting thing to me. I wonder what really happened? Could it be that Weisbrod was disappointed in his role given that he had quite a bit of authority under Feaster? I know people have principles and my guess is that Weisbrod wasn't quite willing to work with Burke since Weisbrod didn't quite buy into what Burke was trying to do? I understand that you want your management team to be on the same page, but when you're an assistant or a scout you generally adjust to what your boss wants. This is Weisbrod's 4th NHL team and given his background in scouting you would think that Weisbrod can adjust and work with his new boss. I guess Weisbrod had bigger aspirations and he wasn't willing to work for a boss whose philosophy differs from his.

Originally Posted by strombad

Make no mistake, Burke is leading the team. There is absolutely zero chance someone that has differing philosophies will be hired. Whoever it will be, will be of the same philosophy and mind towards direction that Burke is.

No, we don't want a "yes" man, but Burke is the boss and he is hiring someone to handle aspects of the job that he is not as proficient in. You can absolutely book it that whoever gets hired, if at any point Burke issues an instruction, that instruction gets followed.

And what aspect might Burke not be proficient in? A lot of posters here who liked Feaster assume that a GM hires assistants to perform work that they are not particularly good at. That's simply not always the case. This isn't Burke's first NHL job. He has experience in pretty much all aspects of the business. What he wants is a sounding board and talented hockey people to surround himself with. Not guys like Jay Feaster.

As for having the same philosophy. You got to share the same ideals and similar ideas. It doesn't mean you have to see eye to eye on everything. Burke and Nonis didn't see eye to eye on everything but they are good friends and long-time colleagues. Burke has always brought in his own guys, but I don't believe he has really fired any of the management staff or head scouts he inherited in each of his stops until now. So let's not cast Burke as a guy who is hard to work with. Obviously if Feaster and Weisbrod couldn't get on the same page as Burke that is their fault because Burke is their boss.