Calgary Flames General Manager Ranking - #1

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I don't like the Hamonic deal but it isn't anywhere near top 5.



Here are some of the more horrific deals

- Gilmour

- Phaneuf

- Mullen

- Regehr

- Jokinen for Higgins+Kotalik

- Bouwmeester

- Stralman

- Lydman

- Savard

- JS Giguere

- Reinhart



With Hamonic they overpaid for a player - but they got a guy who at least contributed for 3 years. There are far worse deals.

How much did Hamonic really contribute to winning? In my mind they lit those picks on fire.

Some of those other trades arent fair to compare because of the asset's value at the time. A 1st is gold. Didn't even lotto protect it.

It was as bad as any trade where premium assets were given away for nothing.

Lots of the trades you listed weren't premium assets at the time or came when their impact could be absorbed better.

Crawl. Walk. Run


The baby was just learning how to crawl and BT thought it was time to run the 100m sprint. Context is everything. It was an absolutely needless and crippling for a rebuilding team.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Lindholm isn't even a full time C, why is even brought up? He was tried there out if desperation. He's a much better winger. If BT thinks this is good C depth, we are screwed.

2009 had 3 elite (or close to) 2Cs and a AHL level player.

2020 has an elite 2C. An elite 3C. An elite 4C. And a RW people want to classify as a C. I mean he was passable in that role but he is an elite RW. Play him top line and watch 25+ goal 65-75 point seasons roll in with excellent two way play. Or play him 2C and watch him turn into a generic 2C who gets like 50 points.

2009 would kick the #### out of 2020 if they were to somehow play. It wouldn't even be close. Much more complete team.

Lindholm was not tried at C out of desperation. It was to give the team another look, Lindholm was drafted as a C... it is not some foreign position to him. IMO Lindholm is actually our best C.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Lindholm was not tried at C out of desperation. It was to give the team another look, Lindholm was drafted as a C... it is not some foreign position to him. IMO Lindholm is actually our best C.

This. He’s 100% our best centre.

He’s just also our best RW, and we have zero other options there.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Lindholm was not tried at C out of desperation. It was to give the team another look, Lindholm was drafted as a C... it is not some foreign position to him. IMO Lindholm is actually our best C.

Lots of guys are drafted as C's. Lindholm is a much better winger at the NHL level imo. Backlund was playing remarkably badly which helped prompt the switch imo. Looking for a different look, sure, but there's a reason for that. I think Tkachuk and Lindholm are actually our two best forwards, but they are wingers, which is unfortunate. Gaudreau is our best offensive talent but he is pure 1way, same with Mony.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

If Elias Lindholm, a RW, is our best C after 6 years of re-building, it is definitely time for a new GM. I mean, come on. Lindholm is my second or third favorite on the roster but that is not good. He is a SC contender's 3rd or 4th best FORWARD. If he is our answer to 1C, we literally have no hope of winning anything. It is the most important position on the team.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Lots of guys are drafted as C's. Lindholm is a much better winger at the NHL level imo. Backlund was playing remarkably badly which helped prompt the switch imo. Looking for a different look, sure, but there's a reason for that. I think Tkachuk and Lindholm are actually our two best forwards, but they are wingers, which is unfortunate. Gaudreau is our best offensive talent but he is pure 1way, same with Mony.

If we had better RW depth Lindholm would be playing at C full time, and it wouldn't be long before he was our 1C, IMO.

Monahan isn't a pure 1way. At least not in the way you're suggesting; he is much more defensively responsible than Gaudreau.

This is the first iteration of the Flames that I can remember (didn't follow in the 80s when they had Nieuwy and Gilmour) that actually has good C depth. Sure the team in 09 was pretty good, probably more well-rounded and we had Iggy and Kipper. Our C depth was not good, and it was something I remember complaining about and I recall lots of fans complaining about. It is definitely not the position we should be nostalgically looking back on.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Lindholm isn't even a full time C, why is even brought up? He was tried there out if desperation. He's a much better winger. If BT thinks this is good C depth, we are screwed.

2009 had 3 elite (or close to) 2Cs and a AHL level player.

2020 has an elite 2C. An elite 3C. An elite 4C. And a RW people want to classify as a C. I mean he was passable in that role but he is an elite RW. Play him top line and watch 25+ goal 65-75 point seasons roll in with excellent two way play. Or play him 2C and watch him turn into a generic 2C who gets like 50 points.

2009 would kick the #### out of 2020 if they were to somehow play. It wouldn't even be close. Much more complete team.

Lindholm took more faceoffs last year than anyone for the Flames on the 08-09 squad not named "Craig Conroy." Why shouldn't he be in the conversation when "19 games Olli Jokinen" is in the conversation and he took more faceoffs than "underrated elite 2C Daymond Langkow"?

The advanced stats also work in his favour, Langkow was gifted nearly 60% offensive zone starts, Lindholm splits time 50/50. Langkow played a boatload on the powerplay and nothing shorthanded, while Lindholm actually handles shorthanded duties.

Lindholm is a better player and better center than Langkow, easily. And he does it both defensively and offensively. His ability at RW should be an added bonus, not take away from his ability as a center.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

If Elias Lindholm, a RW, is our best C after 6 years of re-building, it is definitely time for a new GM. I mean, come on. Lindholm is my second or third favorite on the roster but that is not good. He is a SC contender's 3rd or 4th best FORWARD. If he is our answer to 1C, we literally have no hope of winning anything. It is the most important position on the team.

He's not a RW. He's a C who can play RW. I'm not arguing that we are cup contenders - we clearly aren't. Our C depth is better now than it was in 09... that is the argument.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

How much did Hamonic really contribute to winning? In my mind they lit those picks on fire.

Some of those other trades arent fair to compare because of the asset's value at the time. A 1st is gold. Didn't even lotto protect it.

It was as bad as any trade where premium assets were given away for nothing.

Lots of the trades you listed weren't premium assets at the time or came when their impact could be absorbed better.

Crawl. Walk. Run


The baby was just learning how to crawl and BT thought it was time to run the 100m sprint. Context is everything. It was an absolutely needless and crippling for a rebuilding team.

Which ones? Most of those assets had real value that wasn't extracted.
I don't know what it means to say the "impact could be absorbed" because it wasn't. It killed the asset base over time in a consistent and steady manner.

Hamonic was a top 4 dman for this team for 3 years. Again I don't like the deal - but they at least acquired a player that played up the line-up.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Really?

Gladly?

I'll be the first to admit that no GM gets it 100% right. It just isn't that kind of job. But if a guy makes terrible trades they have to net out against the good ones when it comes to team building.

Getting Kiprusoff was an amazing deal, and I loved the Langkow deal as well. I thought Sutter was a genius until well he wasn't. Not sure what happened at the end but a lot of damage was done.

Isn’t that what I’m saying though? Assessing the good and the bad and see where they net out? Doesn’t mean you like the bad parts, they are just part of the analysis.

I’m happier and had more enjoyment as a fan with the Sutter tenure than the Treliving tenure thus far. All things considered even acknowledging the poor state of the hockey organization when Sutter left, for which he is responsible.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by VilleN

If we had better RW depth Lindholm would be playing at C full time, and it wouldn't be long before he was our 1C, IMO.

Monahan isn't a pure 1way. At least not in the way you're suggesting; he is much more defensively responsible than Gaudreau.

This is the first iteration of the Flames that I can remember (didn't follow in the 80s when they had Nieuwy and Gilmour) that actually has good C depth. Sure the team in 09 was pretty good, probably more well-rounded and we had Iggy and Kipper. Our C depth was not good, and it was something I remember complaining about and I recall lots of fans complaining about. It is definitely not the position we should be nostalgically looking back on.

Jokinen- 60-75 point player at time of trade, 2 years removed from 90 point player status. Monahan 60-65 point player, 1 year removed from 82. Very similar guys imo. Neither are good two way and both are big, strong sniping C's
Langkow- 50-60 point player, really good-great 2way. Makes Backlund look like a clear step back. Too bad about that neck injury.
Conroy- 40-50 point player, good-great two way, a little dated but put up a good year. Conroy Moss Glencross was a much better 3rd line than what we trot out there now, a line that has Derek Ryan on it.
Boyd-who cares, the top 3 is solid enough. Boyd was a tweener but lets not act like was any worse than a guy like Jankowski. Maybe a little worse but not enough to impact winning significantly imo

Monahan is better than Johnny defensively but he's not good imo. Below average when you compare to the average 1C. Compare him to an O'Reilly and it is laughable. To think we could've had O'Reilly. O'Reilly/Monahan is cup worthy.

Maybe you are right about Lindholm. He may be this team's top C. But he is NOT a 1C. Monahan/Lindholm or Lindholm/Monahan will win you nothing imo.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Jokinen- 60-75 point player at time of trade, 2 years removed from 90 point player status. Monahan 60-65 point player, 1 year removed from 82. Very similar guys imo. Neither are good two way and both are big, strong sniping C's
Langkow- 50-60 point player, really good-great 2way. Makes Backlund look like a clear step back. Too bad about that neck injury.
Conroy- 40-50 point player, good-great two way, a little dated but put up a good year. Conroy Moss Glencross was a much better 3rd line than what we trot out there now, a line that has Derek Ryan on it.
Boyd-who cares, the top 3 is solid enough. Boyd was a tweener but lets not act like was any worse than a guy like Jankowski. Maybe a little worse but not enough to impact winning significantly imo

Monahan is better than Johnny defensively but he's not good imo. Below average when you compare to the average 1C. Compare him to an O'Reilly and it is laughable. To think we could've had O'Reilly. O'Reilly/Monahan is cup worthy.

Maybe you are right about Lindholm. He may be this team's top C. But he is NOT a 1C. Monahan/Lindholm or Lindholm/Monahan will win you nothing imo.

Jokinen/Langkow/Conroy won us nothing. I'm not sure the point of saying Monahan/Lindholm will win you nothing. That's irrelevant.

[Strange Brew]

I think some of those trades you’re mentioning Jiri has assets that were distressed at the time. The Hamonic trade was an unforced error with a GM on the other side widely considered one of the worst ever in the NHL.

Top 5 bad trades all time for the Flames? Unfortunately that’s a dubious list, maybe we should have a poll.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by VilleN

He's not a RW. He's a C who can play RW. I'm not arguing that we are cup contenders - we clearly aren't. Our C depth is better now than it was in 09... that is the argument.

I’d say it’s the other way around. This team prefers him at RW and I really don’t consider him part of the C depth. I’d take the 09 team at that position personally.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Which ones? Most of those assets had real value that wasn't extracted.
I don't know what it means to say the "impact could be absorbed" because it wasn't. It killed the asset base over time in a consistent and steady manner.

Hamonic was a top 4 dman for this team for 3 years. Again I don't like the deal - but they at least acquired a player that played up the line-up.

He played in the top 4. Poorly. He wasn't a true top 4 dman. He's a more physical version of Kris Russell. The team was at a crucial stage in the rebuild. We needed those picks, we could've just signed a ufa like Hamhuis or Campbell and it would've made no difference. Except we would've added a Dobson level guy in my scenario.

Trades like Lydman, Stralman, Reinhart, Gigure, Regehr are examples of bad trades but didn't tip the apple cart. Lydman was gone with Phaneuf coming in. More value was needed probably but that was after the lockout and the flooded ufa market. Look what Pronger fetched. Reinhart did not hurt the team, it was a bad trade though for sure. Stralman would've been a 6D in Calgary. Giguere was nothing at the time, probably wouldn't have developed in Calgary knowing this franchise. Mullen was thought to be over the hill. The team received a couple picks that they wasted, it was a bad deal but the team was still solidly top 3/5 in the league after. Agree on Savard, Gilmour, Phaneuf, I feel Hamonic is just a notch below. It was assets for nothing, just like those deals. Bouwmeester was pretty bad too, maybe it needs to be there but it worked out to a 1st, a 2nd that were wasted and Cundari. How much more do you expect? Regehr was a cap dump. He looked close to done but had a couple acceptable years left. Was pretty meh a year or two later.

A lot of trades you listed describe why the team has been so middling but they weren't deathblows like Gilmour, Phaneuf, Savard, Hamonic were. Savard might be the worst of the bunch really.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

If Elias Lindholm, a RW, is our best C after 6 years of re-building, it is definitely time for a new GM. I mean, come on. Lindholm is my second or third favorite on the roster but that is not good. He is a SC contender's 3rd or 4th best FORWARD. If he is our answer to 1C, we literally have no hope of winning anything. It is the most important position on the team.

Hard to blame Treliving for Bennett not working out, as he should be our #1C right now. Unfortunately that's how it goes sometimes, I don't think there is a person in hockey that would have passed on Sam at 4th OA.

Who knows, if Treliving hadn't just been hired right before that draft, maybe the Flames take Point somewhere in the 2nd or 3rd round instead of the big Burke-like plugs they did mostly take because in the drafts since the Flames have been gambling more on skill and upside than BIG and STRONG with picks like Mangi, Dube, Fox and Phillips, etc.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Hard to blame Treliving for Bennett not working out, as he should be our #1C right now. Unfortunately that's how it goes sometimes, I don't think there is a person in hockey that would have passed on Sam at 4th OA.



Who knows, if Treliving hadn't just been hired right before that draft, maybe the Flames take Point somewhere in the 2nd or 3rd round instead of the big Burke-like plugs they did mostly take because in the drafts since the Flames have been gambling more on skill and upside than BIG and STRONG with picks like Mangi, Dube, Fox and Phillips, etc.

Basically that boils down to life not being fair. But he had a chance to trade for a 1C in O'Reilly, and he chose not to or wasn't included in negotiations or felt the ask was too high. I personally think they could have beaten that offer fairly easily and he should be a flame today. It made so much sense. O'Reilly would've been the perfect ying to Monahan's yang.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Basically that boils down to life not being fair. But he had a chance to trade for a 1C in O'Reilly, and he chose not to or wasn't included in negotiations or felt the ask was too high. I personally think they could have beaten that offer fairly easily and he should be a flame today. It made so much sense. O'Reilly would've been the perfect ying to Monahan's yang.

This has been brought up before, and it bears repeating...

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I get the instinct to pillory specific managers or teams for not acquiring a given player in a trade or via UFA, but in actuality I don't think this is fair. In this instance we could put together a hypothetical package that either looks as good as St Louis's was for O'Reilly, but even if we assume that certain pieces and players were of the same value in the mind of Treliving, it is also still impossible to simultaneously read the mind of Buffalo's GM. For all we know, Botterill was fixated on acquiring Tage Thompson over whatever equivalent prospect Treliving might have offered; to that end, it could also be the case that Treliving was determined to retain his 2019 first-round draft pick, and it is not difficult to fault him for this given what had just transpired in the 2018 draft when NYI walked away with Noah Dobson, and the Flames were left without a pick until #105.

There are certainly enacted decisions for which the Flames should be faulted, including James Neal's UFA deal. However, the non-acquisition of Ryan O'Reilly is not one of them.

The reason the Flames's depth at centre is shallower than we all would have liked cannot be pinned on the fact that O'Reilly was traded to St Louis and not to Calgary. If this is your measure of failure, then I would think that D. Sutter deserves even more of your ire for balking at the idea of trading Regehr for Joe Thornton.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Basically that boils down to life not being fair. But he had a chance to trade for a 1C in O'Reilly, and he chose not to or wasn't included in negotiations or felt the ask was too high. I personally think they could have beaten that offer fairly easily and he should be a flame today. It made so much sense. O'Reilly would've been the perfect ying to Monahan's yang.

Oh my don't get me started on ROR moving and the Flames not getting him haha. Preaching to the choir

I scratch my head at that. If he talked to the Sabres, which I assume he did, I wonder what the ask was? I also wonder if they still thought Bennett might surge ahead as well so they looked at their depth chart of C's...

Monahan
Lindholm (just acquired)
Backlund
Bennett (couple flat years but still just 21)
Janko (just 23 and had just potted 17 goals as a rookie)

..and thought yeah we'd like ROR but the cost is too high and we should be OK at C.

If so, whoops....

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Oh my don't get me started on ROR moving and the Flames not getting him haha. Preaching to the choir

I scratch my head at that. If he talked to the Sabres, which I assume he did, I wonder what the ask was? I also wonder if they still thought Bennett might surge ahead as well so they looked at their depth chart of C's...

Monahan
Lindholm (just acquired)
Backlund
Bennett (couple flat years but still just 21)
Janko (just 23 and had just potted 17 goals as a rookie)

..and thought yeah we'd like ROR but the cost is too high and we should be OK at C.

If so, whoops....

The O'Reilly trade is a weird one to evaluate in retrospect. Of course, it looks like a genius move for St. Louis from here, but through most of the season the deal looked like a serious bust as the Blues scraped the bottom of the Standings for the first several months. A coaching change and a new goaltender completely turned their fortunes around in a way that is difficult to explain because of how much these two changes impacted the entire roster.

It's also why I think it would be a mistake to write off the current Flames roster after a twelve-month period of disappointment which was also tied to a coaching problem.