[Rumour] Friedman: UPD: Flames looking for a winger pref with edge and maybe a goalie

[Bingo]

I still don't the Gulutzan is a mistake thing ... very odd to me.

Most metrics suggest an improved team. The standings clearly suggest they are a better team.

I guess it comes down to key players having off seasons, ... some see it as a coach wrecking them, but I just don't. Most of the players in question save for maybe Brodie, are struggling offensively which is the most individual non-coaching side of hockey. The instinct, the bounces, the guy feel of where to go and when to shoot. It's off. The powerplay is better which boost numbers, but they've come up flat.

I see it more like good young players that were allowed to freelance too much are now being re-set back to a style that is sustainable in winning NHL hockey games.

[dammage79]

Some players don't fit into a specific coaching system either. Which is where I think we're at with some of our players. Gullys system may be better overall but some of the more creative players are suffering inside that system.

Personally, I think I preferred the the system Brodie, Gaudreau Bennett and other succeeded in more. Because they sure as heck are the team leaders in gullys game.

Perhaps it's a first year prolonged adaptation of the new system for these guys but it isn't pretty.

Give me those heart attack games from the Hartley regime. Over the mostly bumbling possession game of gulutzan.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Terrible decision by the organization if that is true. Gio contract was considered a big win at the time considering he was looking for Subban money and term. The goalie situation has been a downfall but he got a lot of praise for his summer acquisitions at the time. Also Elliott and Johnson is a big upgrade on Hiller and Ramo.

Treliving took over a decent situation but has only had 3 seasons to try and build a winner. The team made the playoffs once and is improving this year compared to last year. Gulutzan looks like a mistake but he should be allowed to correct that before he is fired.

I don't understand how quickly some of the fans on here forgive Treliving for his moves being good "on paper".

You don't give an investment banker an pass cause the logic in his investments was good "on paper" but he lost all of your money....

The goaltending issue specifically. Clearly the managements talent evaluation skills need some work.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Far too many things to comment on, but generally, the idea that the Flames aren't giving the kids a chance is a joke. Who has shown that they deserve to be given a chance but are being held back?

I think that Granlund was very much held back and was not given the right opportunity. The guy was a scorer all throughout his career, produced in Finland, produced at the WJCs, produced int he AHL.

With the Flames, he was always relegated to 3rd or 4th lines roles under Hartley. I commented a lot during that period of what a waste of Granlund it was. He was a small skilled player being wasted on a grinding line. The kid has a great shot and high offensive acumen, yet Hartley never gave him a serious chance on a scoring line or on the powerplay. He'd get the odd shift with offensive players, but would always get demoted back to a "checking type" line. I was very adamant last year that the Flames should be grooming Granlund to replace Hudler's role and felt his skillset would fit on the powerplay and even on the RW with Monahan and Gaudreau. For whatever reason, Hartley never saw Granlund's offensive tools and skills.

There is still doubt, even amongst Canuck fans about whether Granlund is a legit top 6 forward; however, Canuck fans do recognize Granlund's ability as a shooter and his hockey sense to be in position to score goals.

I feel the Flames are going through the exact same thing right now with Shinkaruk. A guy who has produced throughout junior and the AHL and has the skillset to be a top 6 forward, but for whatever reason, under Gulutzan, he really hasn't been given the right opportunity. When he was up earlier in the year, they put him on the 3rd or 4th lines. He didn't get any powerplay time. It was Granlund all over again. Why develop a player as a top 6 in the AHL, and then call him up to be a 3rd/4th line grinder? And of course, when he inevitably fails at this role, you lose faith in him as a prospect and ship him out.

They've tried all these plugs opposite Gaudreau and Monahan now, and no one has clicked or sparked them. Why not try the top 6 forward that you've been grooming in the AHL? Of all the options available to the Flames to play with Gaudreau and Monahan, who most resembles Hudler? I'd say it's probably Shinkaruk.

I know what the arguments against Shinkaruk are. People will say he didn't produce when he was called up earlier this season. Again, I go back to the right opportunity. Play him the same way you would play him in the AHL. Use his for the role he is suppose to fill. Don't use him as a grinder, because he will fail. Don't expect Shinkaruk to score goals while playing on the 4th line in order to earn better opportunity. Give him a legitimate opportunity to succeed in the role that he is suited for. Play him with Gaudreau and Monahan for 10 games. Play him on the powerplay for 10 games.

[GettinIggyWithIt]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

The team 10 points ahead of us in the standings with a younger roster?

Younger roster? How?

Arguably the Oilers actually got better by getting more experienced players to complement McDavid and Draisaitl. Maroon and Lucic are 28. Talbot is 29. Sekera is 30.

The number of key young players that the Oilers have (McDavid, Draisaitl, Larsson, Klefbom) are similar to the Flames (Tkachuk, Monahan, Gaudreau, Hamilton). Sure - you can add Nurse, Benning and even Nugent-Hopkins if you like but I think we can all agree that the latter haven't made significant impacts for the Oilers.

If you want to be honest about the difference - it's McDavid plain and simple and maybe better goaltending from Talbot.

It's not just about age, youth or any one factor. The difference between the Flames and those 10 points is probably more consistent goaltending, and McDavid - not the lack of younger players on the roster. And, arguably, their FA signings and trades have produced better than ours.

[Enoch Root]

Using average age as an argument, without context, is just silly.

Two teams could have the exact same average age, but one has all young players in their core, with older players on the fourth line, in net etc, meanwhile the other team has a very old core, with young players on the 4th line etc.

The Flames' 11 oldest players are:

Engelland 34.9
Wideman 33.9
Giordano 33.4
Stajan 33.2
Elliott 31.9
Brouwer 31.5
Smid 31.1
Versteeg 31.1
Johnson 30.7
Frolik 29.0
Bartkowski 28.7

Who among that group is part of the plan moving forward?

Giordano, Brouwer and Frolik, with an outside chance at Versteeg, and maybe one of the goalies

The core is all young.

To try and argue that the team isn't young is just being obtuse.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I still don't the Gulutzan is a mistake thing ... very odd to me.

Most metrics suggest an improved team. The standings clearly suggest they are a better team.

I guess it comes down to key players having off seasons, ... some see it as a coach wrecking them, but I just don't. Most of the players in question save for maybe Brodie, are struggling offensively which is the most individual non-coaching side of hockey. The instinct, the bounces, the guy feel of where to go and when to shoot. It's off. The powerplay is better which boost numbers, but they've come up flat.

I see it more like good young players that were allowed to freelance too much are now being re-set back to a style that is sustainable in winning NHL hockey games.

I think there are pretty obvious reasons for the struggles of the individual players:

Gaudreau - he's not being protected out there and he is probably still feeling the effects of the broken hand/finger. Even after he came back and scored all those points, he was still mishandling the puck a lot. He had the confidence during that period, but he wasn't the same with the puck. Right now, he lacks confidence and he just looks scared of being slashed and hit.

Monahan - he's not that far off his usual pace but what has hurt his production is Gaudreau's struggles. Gaudreau is Monahan's playmaker, if Gaudreau struggles, so will Monahan.

Bennett - produced well while playing the LW with Backlund and Frolik. He is now playing centre, a tougher position with greater responsibility. Why is it surprising that he is struggling more than last year?

Brodie - he's not playing on the side that he prefers to and he's has been saddled with Wideman all year. Again, why are his struggles surprising to anyone?

Giordano - we knew he would regress as he aged. Too bad for Gulultzan, the regression started in his first year. He's also not on the first powerplay. Seems reasonable to expect fewer goals if he's not on the A powerplay unit.

I think there are legitimate reasons for the struggles of the core guys. Like Bingo said, the system "looks" better, and the record and advanced stats support this.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by 868904

Granlund and Shinkaruk...

Granlund was not held back, he got to the point where he was waiver eligible. And, as has been said 100 times on these boards, the fact that he is getting top 6 minutes with the Canucks does not change the fact that he would not crack the top 6 with the Flames.

The fact that they traded him to a team that was willing to give him a spot, is an argument AGAINST the claim that the Flames hold players back.

Shinkaruk has had multiple chances to earn himself an NHL spot. He has failed to so so each time. And so far this year in Stockton, he has done nothing to earn the next chance.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Brodie nor Backlund are "young" players. Gaudreau and Monahan are in their prime at this point. That leaves Hamilton, Bennett, and Tkachuk. Two high draft picks and a player where another team took all the development risk.

The Flames might have a pretty young core, but they are not a young team. The average Forward line age or D-pair age is NHL average or older. How many lines can you name that are a young line? I can name Gaudreau-Monahan-X and even then the X is in his 30s most of the time. Compare that to the players flanking rookie Auston Matthews, 23 year old rookie Connor Brown and 24 year old rookie Zach Hyman for some perspective on what actually consistutes "young" in today's NHL. And that's a good Leafs team, I'd bet on them to beat us in a playoff series despite their youth.

...

The team 10 points ahead of us in the standings with a younger roster?

I am confused why 22 year-old Monahan and 23 year-old Gaudreau are "in their prime" but 23 year-old Brown and 24 year-old Hyman are not? Is it simply because of games played?

The reason Edmonton is ahead of us is due to McJesus, and only due to McJesus.

Also, according to James Mirtle, average age based upon opening night had us at 20th oldest, while Ed. was 28th oldest, with a difference of 1.4 years. Toronto was 29th oldest, .1 year younger than the Oilers.
http://mirtle.blogspot.ca/2016/10/20...eight-and.html

Quant Hockey had our average age based upon games played at 26.617, (21st oldest - aka 10th youngest) while Ed. was 26.12, (25th oldest - aka 6th youngest). Half a year difference. Leafs were at 25.6 (27th oldest - aka 4th youngest), and another half-year difference.
http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_Ave...php#TeamCharts

According to SportingCharts.com, the average age of Cup winning teams over the last 48 years is 27.2, but only 3 teams in the last 18 years are under that average (2011-12 Kings, 2009-10 Blackhawks and 2012-13 Blackhawks).
https://www.sportingcharts.com/artic...ing-teams.aspx

What's my point? Hell if I know, but it seems we're not that far off these "amazing young teams" in Ed. and T.O., and I would suggest we'll get closer in age as we get better, and as players like Wideman (and some of those listed by Enoch) move along.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

My mistake, I had it in my mind that Brodie already turned 27.

Either way, this was our blue in the last game:

32-23
26-33
28-33

That is not a young blue line in any way. An the one player younger than Brodie is a player the Bruins took a chance on, as they are doing right now with 19 year old Brandon Carlo. Would Brandon Carlo be a Calgary Flame or back in Junior if the Flames drafted him? I think the latter.



I have no problem with Wideman at present, actually. he's a serviceable four/five who has his bad games and his okay games. He's old AF though, with no replacement in sight as there is no way Andersson will get an opportunity to be our 6 or 5 next year no matter how well he plays.



The coach plays the players on the roster that the GM gives the coach.



Brodie nor Backlund are "young" players. Gaudreau and Monahan are in their prime at this point. That leaves Hamilton, Bennett, and Tkachuk. Two high draft picks and a player where another team took all the development risk.

The Flames might have a pretty young core, but they are not a young team. The average Forward line age or D-pair age is NHL average or older. How many lines can you name that are a young line? I can name Gaudreau-Monahan-X and even then the X is in his 30s most of the time. Compare that to the players flanking rookie Auston Matthews, 23 year old rookie Connor Brown and 24 year old rookie Zach Hyman for some perspective on what actually consistutes "young" in today's NHL. And that's a good Leafs team, I'd bet on them to beat us in a playoff series despite their youth.



Will be repalced by who, exactly? More third-rate veterans, pushing the endless cycle of too much cap space into mediocre roster filler that prevents teams from ever being truly competitive. Knowing Treliving he will bring another underwhelming player whose team considers him an expendable cap casualty (think Alzner) and this cycle will continue.



The team 10 points ahead of us in the standings with a younger roster?

I have to address the last comment regarding the Oilers first. I feel that comment really hurts the credibility of your entire arguement even though it is a drive by. Are you that much of a "what have you done for me lately type of guy?" The Oilers are where they are today because they won a lottery for the single best player to enter the draft in a decade. In his second year he probably wins the Hart trophy. The Oilers had a decade of sucking. Look at their other 3 first overalls that were rushed. Nuge is a 40-60pt 2nd/3rd line C. Taylor Hall is a fairly steady first line player, and Yak is almost out of the league. Look how awful Draisaitl was when rushed and had to be sent back to junior after 40 games. They are ahead of us because of McDavid and Chia got it right with Talbot.

Now you are stating 22-23 years old is a players prime? Might as well let Jankowski go as he is post-apex.

I think the biggest issue I have with your stance is you blame Treliving for a coaches decision. If Gulutzan wanted Andersen or Kylington on the team they would be here. All season he could have played Kulak and sat Wideman he chose to sit Kulak.

I do feel that Huska needs to go because 2 years ago the Flames had a fairly highly regarded prospect pool. Poirer, Wotherspoon, Culkin, Kulak, Shinkaruk have not shown much progression. 2 years ago Jooris had a camp that forced the Flames to keep him. Treliving moved Glencross because Hartley wanted a spot for Ferland. Right now there isn't that player on the farm. Jankowski might deserve a look but personally I think it is better he centre the top line down in the AHL while the Flames focus on Bennett's development on the 3rd line in the NHL.


It is obvious you hate Treliving and Burke you have made that clear. I just disagree that we have the pieces on the farm team that are being held back. This is a farm team that is 1-12-1 in their last 14. I look at Pascall and Treliving to take a hard evaluation of Huska and Gulutzan to determine if these are the coaches they want to develop their players. This is also on the players to do what Gaudreau, Jooris, Ferland, Bennett all did during points of the 14-15 season and what Monahan and Tkachuk did in their rookie years. Force the organization to keep you with the big club. Shinkaruk, Kulak, Wotherspoon have failed in that regard. Hathaway has broken through this year as well but it is on Gulutzan to play him over Bouma and Chaisson

[Enoch Root]

The Flames will get younger as soon as some more prospects step up and crack the lineup

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

If you look at Treliving's tenure, the Bollig, Setoguchi, Chiasson, Brouwer, Raymonds he has brought in simply haven't definitively done enough to keep prospects playing well, out of the lineup, other than "being veterans" and put on a pedestal solely for that reason.

Playing in the minors is a grind as it is, but knowing that you won't get a chance has to be absolutely draining, which I'm sure explains why Baertschi and Reinhart wanted out and why Poirier/Arnold and co have managed to produce less and less every year. It's not even a character or toughness thing, it's human nature to need a carrot in front of you. Optics matter to these kids.

snip

Reality is, this team isn't as young as we claim it is. The Leafs are a young team. The Flames? Our top line is carried by a polished veteran (Backlund). Our entire blue line right now has only one player younger than 27 (Hamilton, who is an early bloomer that made the NHL at age 19). Many teams ahead of us in the standings are younger on a whole - Columbus, Ottawa, Toronto, Edmonton and their success is not by chance.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I have no problem with Wideman at present, actually. he's a serviceable four/five who has his bad games and his okay games. He's old AF though, with no replacement in sight as there is no way Andersson will get an opportunity to be our 6 or 5 next year no matter how well he plays.

Brodie nor Backlund are "young" players. Gaudreau and Monahan are in their prime at this point. That leaves Hamilton, Bennett, and Tkachuk. Two high draft picks and a player where another team took all the development risk.

The Flames might have a pretty young core, but they are not a young team. The average Forward line age or D-pair age is NHL average or older.

Dealing with the bolded first, that is blatantly false. The Flames are ranked 20th in the league in terms of age (meaning they are the 11th youngest team in the NHL). That's including 3 guys that are likely to be off the team next year: 34 year old Deryk Engelland, 33 year old Dennis Wideman, and 31 year old Ladislav Smid. Not to mention both goalies are 30 and I'd be surprised if both or either are brought back next year.

The only player from the core that would be considered in his "prime" years is Brodie, and he's still definitely young since the average age in the NHL is 27.3 years old. Backlund is still relatively young, but pretty much league average now in age.

I object to the idea that the veterans are placed on pedestals. They're given a chance to succeed and fill a hole that a rookie wouldn't be capable of filling adequately. Most of these guys were reclamation projects and were designed to be place holders so that they could be jettisoned the moment a younger player looked like they were capable of doing a better job in that place. The young players didn't for the most part, and that's why they stayed on the team. When they were replaceable, they were ejected. Setoguchi sent to the farm. Raymond was bought out. Bollig sent to the farm. Chiasson will work his way out of the lineup. I know you hate Brouwer, so I won't even bother with that one. Point is, this team has needed a LOT of place holders over the years since the farm was in such bad shape.

You have no idea how the club views Andersson, so your statement is a bit of a reach, but chances are he'll need at least one more season in the minors...like most defensemen not drafted in the 1st round do. However, if he impresses in camp, he'll probably be given a chance, the same way Kulak was given a chance 2 years ago and this year as well. What he does with that chance is up to him, but I'd rather he make the bulk of his mistakes in the minors than on a club trying to compete for the Stanley Cup.

And lastly....holy hell, are you actually talking about Max Reinhart like he was destined to be an NHLer? He was a 3rd round pick, and the vast majority of those picks never even play games in the NHL. He had a decent minor league career, but he was never good enough to warrant staying in the NHL, despite callups of 24 games over 3 seasons. He went to another franchise and they didn't see any more in him either. He's now playing in the German league putting up a little more than 0.5 points per game. Baertschi? That's been discussed to death, and he had a LOT of opportunity in the NHL. Poirier's regression is on him and nobody else. He has been given games in the NHL to give him some sort of "carrot", but he's not put the work into his game that he needs to. Arnold never looked good as a pro, and some guys just aren't cut out for the next level. Not a big deal when you're talking about a 4th round pick.

You seem to be obsessed with youth as the only way to be successful, but while there are examples of the Oilers (which is dubious because they are overly reliant on one young player), there are plenty of other examples of age and experience making teams successful. The Stanley Cup finalists from one year ago are the two oldest clubs in the league: San Jose-1, Pittsburgh-2. BTW, Ottawa is the 8th oldest team in the league. They aren't exactly young.

There are plenty of examples of young teams that are good, and a lot more that are bad. There are examples of old teams that are great, and others that are flat out horrible (Colorado, Dallas).

There's no correlation with youth and success. You need to have some GOOD youth to be successful into the future, and the Flames have that. How successful they are is a crapshoot, and it will likely depend on how they construct a team going forward after some of the rebuild veterans are off the team.

[dino7c]

The Oilers won FOUR ####ing draft lotteries...Flames have never picked above four in franchise history

Yes they are terrible at developing prospects

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I have to address the last comment regarding the Oilers first. I feel that comment really hurts the credibility of your entire arguement even though it is a drive by. Are you that much of a "what have you done for me lately type of guy?" The Oilers are where they are today because they won a lottery for the single best player to enter the draft in a decade. In his second year he probably wins the Hart trophy. The Oilers had a decade of sucking.

They won a lottery, but they still have many tier-3 roster spots filled out by secondary youth, guys like Klefbom, Nurse, Benning, Cagiulla, Slepychev, Davidson, and Khaira instead of the monotony of unmotivated veterans. They have had many up-and-down callups from their farm throughout the year, keeping everyone motivated to be at the top of their game.

Look at their other 3 first overalls that were rushed. Nuge is a 40-60pt 2nd/3rd line C. Taylor Hall is a fairly steady first line player, and Yak is almost out of the league. Look how awful Draisaitl was when rushed and had to be sent back to junior after 40 games. They are ahead of us because of McDavid and Chia got it right with Talbot.

Was Nuge ever going to be anything else? Hall was a success. And Yakupov probably would have busted one way or another as he is dumb as bricks. That leaves Draisaitl, who as a rookie was given the same B.S. treatment Bennett is getting right now as a second year player asked to sink or swim with 4th line grinders like Chiasson and Brouwer who give the puck away on the cycle every opportuntiy. If Draisaitl's development is an example of being Oiler-esque then I don't really see the issue, as Draisaitl is a pretty damn effective first-line center.

At some point you have to drop the "Oilers do it all wrong" attitude when their team is set up for long term success. They're a good team and that's with a guy as talented as Puljujarvi still developing in the minor leagues.

"What have you done for me lately"? What exactly have they done that the Flames haven't? Be less of a 9th place team and get better talent in the first round as a result? Nothing worse than 9th place, which is the Brent Sutter slash Glen Gulutzan sweet spot.

Now you are stating 22-23 years old is a players prime? Might as well let Jankowski go as he is post-apex.

22-31 is a safe range for forwards' prime. Gaudreau and Monahan are in their third and fourth NHL seasons respectively. Even if you want to say Hartley stunted their development, it's reasonable to say they are expected to be leaders of this team at this point in their careers, which means the "youth" excuse is hyperbole.

I think the biggest issue I have with your stance is you blame Treliving for a coaches decision. If Gulutzan wanted Andersen or Kylington on the team they would be here. All season he could have played Kulak and sat Wideman he chose to sit Kulak.

There is no coach in this league who wants to play prospects. Few coaches have much long term vision. Management's job is to get the youth into the lineup. Do you believe a coach like Joel Quennville wanted to play Nick Leddy or Dustin Byufuglien or Andrew Shaw when they were young? You think Darryl Sutter wanted to play Jake Muzzin? Did Babcock want to play a young Tomas Tatar? Management's job is to put the best roster on the ice, the coach's job is to play it. If management gives a coach a veteran roster, the coach will play the veterans. Look at Grossmann. Did Glen Gulutzan sign Niklas Grossmann? No, but he was given the opportunity to play him by the management that did.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by polak

I don't understand how quickly some of the fans on here forgive Treliving for his moves being good "on paper".

You don't give an investment banker an pass cause the logic in his investments was good "on paper" but he lost all of your money....

The goaltending issue specifically. Clearly the managements talent evaluation skills need some work.

Treliving went out and acquired a goalie that just took his team to the third round and was a league leader in save % for 5 years and got that guy for a 2nd round pick. On top of that he is only paid $2.5M and the commitment is only 1 year. Then instead of sticking with Ortio he goes out and signs a backup who played 45 games last year with a .920 save % and only has to commit 1 year at $1.7M. Not a bad strategy and it is better than last year no question. Not good enough going forward but the good news is no long term commitment and the chance to improve the situation in the next 10 days or over the summer.

He doesn't deserve to be fired over this.

When Treliving traded Glencross, traded for Hamilton and traded Russell those were 3 massive wins and the Flames hadn't won 3 trades of that size since the Daryl days.

Never are there going to be nothing but wins but the wins outweigh the losses to date. His moves the summer of 2015 look great. Hamilton is a 23 year old top pair, top 10 in D scoring, with the size, and mobility teams covet. Frolik was a great UFA signing and is a huge part of the top 6 and PK. The Backlund contract is also proving to be a steal and the Gio deal could have been far worse. Brent Burns might get a Hart nomination this year but is 32 and will satstt an 8 year $8M per deal next year. That is what he would have gotten on the open market. How do you not sign him to that deal?

Flames could have held off on the Gio contract and traded him at the deadline for a 1st, and a prospect or 2 but then the Flames do not hold a playoff spot today or they would have gone out in free agency after a guy like Demers or Goligoski and paid him Wideman money to be half the Dman Gio is today. Look at the Bouwmeester trade to see how that type of return could wind up being absolutely nothing

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

They won a lottery, but they still have many tier-3 roster spots filled out by secondary youth, guys like Klefbom, Nurse, Benning, Cagiulla, Slepychev, Davidson, and Khaira instead of the monotony of unmotivated veterans. They have had many up-and-down callups from their farm throughout the year, keeping everyone motivated to be at the top of their game.



Was Nuge ever going to be anything else? Hall was a success. And Yakupov probably would have busted one way or another as he is dumb as bricks. That leaves Draisaitl, who as a rookie was given the same B.S. treatment Bennett is getting right now as a second year player asked to sink or swim with 4th line grinders like Chiasson and Brouwer who give the puck away on the cycle every opportuntiy. If Draisaitl's development is an example of being Oiler-esque then I don't really see the issue, as Draisaitl is a pretty damn effective first-line center.

At some point you have to drop the "Oilers do it all wrong" attitude when their team is set up for long term success. They're a good team and that's with a guy as talented as Puljujarvi still developing in the minor leagues.



22-31 is a safe range for forwards' prime. Gaudreau and Monahan are in their third and fourth NHL seasons respectively. Even if you want to say Hartley stunted their development, it's reasonable to say they are expected to be leaders of this team at this point in their careers, which means the "youth" excuse is hyperbole.



There is no coach in this league who wants to play prospects. Few coaches have much long term vision. Management's job is to get the youth into the lineup. Do you believe a coach like Joel Quennville wanted to play Nick Leddy or Dustin Byufuglien or Andrew Shaw when they were young? You think Darryl Sutter wanted to play Jake Muzzin? Did Babcock want to play a young Tomas Tatar? Management's job is to put the best roster on the ice, the coach's job is to play it. If management gives a coach a veteran roster, the coach will play the veterans. Look at Grossmann. Did Glen Gulutzan sign Niklas Grossmann? No, but he was given the opportunity to play him by the management that did.

Okay so the Oilers are having a good 60 games and that is enough to excuse the last 10 years? Also my point on Draisaitl is he was rushed, they sent him back to juniors, started him in the AHL and he got his callup and never looked back. In the same line of thinking the Flames gave Shinkaruk a chance last year and he looked decent. He was the first callup in November this year and was pretty mediocre. He got another shot and did nothing with it and his numbers are decent but not spectacular on the Heat for a 3rd year pro.

Gaudreau and Monahan are paid to be top players on the team and Monahan wears a letter so yes they are expected to be key guys. That doesn't erase they are 22 and 23 respectively. I am not sure how old you are but regardless of ones position in their career at 22/23 you will still view life and the world differently when you are 30+. Their age hast changed just because they are prospect aged and paid like front line stars. They are both suffering from the new contract slump but I don't expect this season is the new norm and they will both be better in the future.

A little coincidental that 3 of the veterans brought in over this season that took spots from guys have ties to the head coach. Grossman, Chaisson, Bartkowski all have a history with Gulutzan so don't pretend that is all on Treliving. Grossman was quickly let go, Chaisson could be waived at any time Gulutzan wants and Bartkowski was brought in for expansion purposes.

Was signing Versteeg a mistake because Poirer or Shinkaruk couldn't grab a spot that was available to them all camp? The Flames created opportunities this fall and the prospects didn't respond.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Granlund was not held back, he got to the point where he was waiver eligible. And, as has been said 100 times on these boards, the fact that he is getting top 6 minutes with the Canucks does not change the fact that he would not crack the top 6 with the Flames.

Shinkaruk has had multiple chances to earn himself an NHL spot. He has failed to so so each time. And so far this year in Stockton, he has done nothing to earn the next chance.

I really don't recall seeing Granlund on the powerplay in Calgary, and as I noted in my original post, he only saw spot duty with guys like Gaudreau, Monahan, Hudler. At the WJCs and in the AHL, Granlund scored lots as the RW option on the powerplay, he never saw that opportunity in Calgary. Now I can understand using Gaudreau and Hudler over Granlund in those situations, but after those two, who else had that kind of skillset? Mason Raymond? David Jones?

As for Shinkaruk, he got one regular season game as a Canuck. Last year in Calgary, he had a decent run with Gaudreau and Monahan and didn't look out of place. This year when he was in Calgary, stuck on the 4th line and no powerplay time. How is that multiple chances to earn himself an NHL spot? Why not call up John Gillies and put him on RW next to Monahan and Gaudreau? It's the same stupid logic of calling up Shinkaruk and putting him on the 4th line.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by polak

I don't understand how quickly some of the fans on here forgive Treliving for his moves being good "on paper".

You don't give an investment banker an pass cause the logic in his investments was good "on paper" but he lost all of your money....

The goaltending issue specifically. Clearly the managements talent evaluation skills need some work.

It's the GM job to 'play the game on paper'. Afterwards, it's up to the guys he brought in to do their job. The Stone trade today is a perfect example. Clearly Wideman is a failure and singlehandedly has the ability to lose us games. The Flames are desperate for a solid #4 D to play alongside Brodie so solidify that spot.

Young. Has a big shot. Can play both special teams. Is pretty physical and is a good passer. So BT goes out and gets someone who fits that bill, all for a very cheap price that clearly looks like a win. Stone seems to fit the billing, wouldn't you say? Almost all of CP and the rest of the hockey world is seeing this as a positive move for the Flames. The GM has done his part.

Now imagine Stone completely bombs and we miss the playoffs because he ends up being something dumb like a -20 his tenure here. That's 100% on the player. 100%. So how is it BT's fault if Stone suddenly becomes worse the Wideman? The GM went out and did exactly what the fans and organization demanded. No different then when he went out and got the league leader in save % from last season. No one was expecting Elliott to flunk out like he did. But you can't put that on the GM. Short of going and getting Price, a GM who can get your team the league leader in save % did his job. What happens on the ice afterwards, is the player's doing.

If BT was giving away high lottery picks and regular NHL players for guys like Elliott or Stone, then yes I'd be more concerned. But he's getting what appears to be good players for dirt cheap. A top pairing guy like Hamilton. One of the top goalies last season in Elliot. A solid top 4 guy in Stone. All gotten for cheap and most people agreed the price was good at the time.

I just have a hard time blaming BT when he's doing his job, and doing it well. He wins trades, plain and simple. It's up to the human beings he brings on board to do their part. Like they have proven to be able to do in the past.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Jankowski - first year, but developing
Klimchuk - finding it this year, needs to stay on the path
Magiapane - first year
Anderssen - first year
Kylington - young and developing
Shinkaruk - has had a look, not lighting it up
Gillies - missed last year, needs to play
Poirier - seems to have lost it, hasn't deserved a promotion
Kulak - has had looks, hasn't seized it
Wotherspoon - see Kulak

Only one I'd argue that should have been on this team all year is Shinkaruk. It's to the point where I've pretty much accepted that I'm wrong about him though, as I feel like I've liked what I've seen out of him at the NHL level, but I seem to be in the small minority there.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Only one I'd argue that should have been on this team all year is Shinkaruk. It's to the point where I've pretty much accepted that I'm wrong about him though, as I feel like I've liked what I've seen out of him at the NHL level, but I seem to be in the small minority there.

I agree with all of this. Even the part where I'm obviously wrong about what Shinkaruk can do at the NHL level.