[Barn Burner] Boomer: "You were wrong"

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by Naitix

Were Flames even that good last year? Outside of the first line, none of the lines really did that much. I think last year could have been as disastrous as this year but Lindholm line decided to be the best line in the league and carried the team.

Like I do not think this vs last year is much different for 90% of the players, it's just that last year we got carried by Lindholm line

The Flames were that good last year yes. If you get the same production as we are getting out of our 2nd and 3rd lines but also have a very good top line, that's a good hockey team. That's exactly how most good teams are built.

[Saqe]

The Flames were really good in the regular season last year. But again in the playoffs, they didn't look that good even against Dallas who were not a very good team. And then against the Oilers, probably an unpopular opinion but they looked outmatched, it wasn't just Markstrom.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Don't tell me we haven't tried a scorched earth rebuild. We did it within the last 10 years. It was ugly. I have no appetite to do that again when we have the talent we currently do with some very prime years left.

I have to disagree with you Cali. That was not scorched earth. That was a lame attempt at kickstarting a rebuild, but petered out quickly. Scorched earth is trading away anything of value and investing in draft picks and player development. The Flames have never done this. Feaster tried to get the ball rolling, but was kicked to the curb before he had a chance to really get the system restocked. That is the earmark of a real scorched earth rebuild, is having multiple 1st rounders and multiple extra picks each year for three or four years in a row, so you build depth and critical mass in the system. Sutter gutted the system when he was GM and Feaster started us in that direction, but the Flames never really did invest in collecting picks and building mass. Iginla forced their hand but they never really committed to it, selecting only six and then five players in subsequent drafts when they should have been collecting picks, not trading them away.

[Vedder]

Dark days when we are re-casting used car salesman Jay Feaster as some sort of saviour that never was.

He was a complete embarrassment. Jankowski bloviation, ROR incident, best player out of the NHL Roman Cervenka. We might have gone down the road of full scorched rebuild under him, but it only would have unintentional due to complete incompetence.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Don't tell me we haven't tried a scorched earth rebuild. We did it within the last 10 years. It was ugly. I have no appetite to do that again when we have the talent we currently do with some very prime years left.

We did one season. We traded Iggy and Bouwmeester (for terrible returns as we were managed terribly). Our GM blew the additional draft picks we got on bad selections (which…when you’re a poorly managed team with no plan isn’t much of a surprise). The one thing Feaster did right was not spend free agent money that summer - but the Flames went right back to doing it the following summer.

That GM was then let go, and the very next season we went right back into handing out cash in free agency. Our new management team also openly laughed at the idea of rebuilding through the draft - they would mock the very concept of it at STH events.

The Flames did not do a planned rebuild. They managed themselves into oblivion, and then did everything they could as fast as they could to get back into the mushy middle.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

How does ownership react if we continue this trajectory into next year and the Flames continue to spin their wheels under the same strategy? And ticket sales start to drop, and retail sales start to drop?

Do we see a fundamental realization that what they are doing is not a plan for long term success?

Or do we see some sort of panic trade, hiring, or firing to try to do anything to win short-term and try to regain fan interest?

This is a real concern. If we don't make the playoffs or we have another short run, will next season be rinse and repeat? Monahan MT and Sam Bennett are guys we drafted, but they are no longer here. I would say from having some good pieces we have taken a step back. Our goaltending came in a little too late for the previous core. We just have to hope that management has some confidence in the young guys coming up the pipeline because outside of that we don't appear to have a lot in the way of a plan. We should have played the young guy's this season and went for a higher draft pick. Backlund isnt getting any younger, Lindholm hasn't really fit with the new guys coming in. I think trying to make the playoffs was a poor plan this season and it likely sets us back rather than supporting a bigger picture.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I think you can safely say that is a Flames mentality, not just a Sutter mentality.

Rhett is bang on - this organization hasn’t built ####. They’ve been a garbage organization for 30+ years.

This organization takes its fans for granted, that’s for damn sure.

Finally listened this morning.

Rhett, at the start of the playoffs last year many pundits including the TSN panel picked the Flames to win the Stanley Cup.

There was massive excitement in these parts going into Round 1.

[Psytic]

Put Sutter into a Special Advisor role rather than firing him so it’s not wasted salary and ownership is more okay with it. Hire Andrew Brunette to coach. Get a new goalie coach. Try to get someone that can play with Huberdeau whether it’s Duclair or the other guys that have already been mentioned. If none of that makes any improvement pull the plug. I agree with Pinder Huberdeau probably isn’t going to work with Sutter.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

We did one season. We traded Iggy and Bouwmeester (for terrible returns as we were managed terribly). Our GM blew the additional draft picks we got on bad selections (which…when you’re a poorly managed team with no plan isn’t much of a surprise). The one thing Feaster did right was not spend free agent money that summer - but the Flames went right back to doing it the following summer.

That GM was then let go, and the very next season we went right back into handing out cash in free agency. Our new management team also openly laughed at the idea of rebuilding through the draft - they would mock the very concept of it at STH events.

The Flames did not do a planned rebuild. They managed themselves into oblivion, and then did everything they could as fast as they could to get back into the mushy middle.

A rebuild doesn't stop because you sign UFAs. No team stops signing UFAs, what. We were clearly still rebuilding for longer than 1 year.

The revisionism about that rebuild is very strange. It was actually fine. Do you think that because they signed Raymond and Bollig and Engelland it didn't happen. It didn't spiral into a Edmonton or Buffalo-esque decade of hell. The core that emerged was good. Being upset about what happened with the key players in that core later is a different conversation

[Major Major]

Love the show but their relationship with the flames success is a little bit transparent. When they are down, they get fired up and it gets a little bit dramatic. It is click city in their line of work, so I get it. When the team is up, they talk about food, gambling and getting drunk. They are hyper averse to becoming an Oilers like media fan club, which I get from Boomer's history with that org. So when the flames are rolling, they say stuff like, "there's nothing to talk about." No wonder they forget about the good teams we've had, they spent all their energy actively ignoring them.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by saillias

A rebuild doesn't stop because you sign UFAs. No team stops signing UFAs, what. We were clearly still rebuilding for longer than 1 year.

The revisionism about that rebuild is very strange. It was actually fine. Do you think that because they signed Raymond and Bollig and Engelland it didn't happen. It didn't spiral into a Edmonton or Buffalo-esque decade of hell. The core that emerged was good. Being upset about what happened with the key players in that core later is a different conversation

I think the problem with the rebuild was that the Flames didn't accept maybe three years of top 3-5 draft picks, which helps a lot. Selling off guys like Iggy for picks and prospects only gets you what top temas (like Boston or Pittsburgh) at the time have to spare, and draft picks at the end of the list. You need top 3 to get elite blue chip guys. Calgary picked 4th in 2014, 6th in 2016. They got all excited in 2015 and traded the pick but it was only mid-first anyway.

If they commit to sucking, in those years following Iggy's trade they might have drafted McDavid 2015 (or even Barzal). Makar or Heiskenan instead of Val in 2017.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Saqe

The Flames were really good in the regular season last year. But again in the playoffs, they didn't look that good even against Dallas who were not a very good team. And then against the Oilers, probably an unpopular opinion but they looked outmatched, it wasn't just Markstrom.

This is some revisionist history for sure. The Flames dominated most of the 7 game series against Dalllas but went up against an all world goaltender. Dallas has made very few changes to their roster and sit in 1st place today.

Flames also coughed up 2 goal leads in 2 losses against Edmonton. Some bad goaltending cost them games they would have won. They also rebounded from some terrible goals against and came back from 3-0 on the road to tie it but couldn’t get the go ahead. Edmonton dominated 1 game of the series and the rest was a toss up.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by saillias

A rebuild doesn't stop because you sign UFAs. No team stops signing UFAs, what. We were clearly still rebuilding for longer than 1 year.

The revisionism about that rebuild is very strange. It was actually fine. Do you think that because they signed Raymond and Bollig and Engelland it didn't happen. It didn't spiral into a Edmonton or Buffalo-esque decade of hell. The core that emerged was good. Being upset about what happened with the key players in that core later is a different conversation

The UFA stuff was more just an accumulation of small or moderate mistakes that added up, but it was first round picks going out the door already by 2015 that showed lack of patience and shouldn’t have happened. Nobody knows what they would have done at the draft table with more picks, but guys like Barzal could have been in red today.

Monahan and Bennett not reaching their ceiling could be the biggest detriment to the success of the rebuild. But overall those Hartley years didn’t hurt me that much as a fan, I’d gladly tolerate it again if it meant a new batch of young franchise players to cheer for.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This is some revisionist history for sure. The Flames dominated most of the 7 game series against Dalllas but went up against an all world goaltender. Dallas has made very few changes to their roster and sit in 1st place today.

Flames also coughed up 2 goal leads in 2 losses against Edmonton. Some bad goaltending cost them games they would have won. They also rebounded from some terrible goals against and came back from 3-0 on the road to tie it but couldn’t get the go ahead. Edmonton dominated 1 game of the series and the rest was a toss up.

Is this a mistake? This was the game that Calgary won (they let Edmonton back in but Calgary was the better team).

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack

Monahan and Bennett not reaching their ceiling could be the biggest detriment to the success of the rebuild. But overall those Hartley years didn’t hurt me that much as a fan, I’d gladly tolerate it again if it meant a new batch of young franchise players to cheer for.

Agree! I was a season ticket holder those years and loved going to games.

I find it easier to get attached to Flames drafted and developed players rather than FAs and incoming trades.

That said, Flames passed on a rebuild last summer. We are probably 4-5 years away from the next one.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by saillias

A rebuild doesn't stop because you sign UFAs. No team stops signing UFAs, what. We were clearly still rebuilding for longer than 1 year.

The revisionism about that rebuild is very strange. It was actually fine. Do you think that because they signed Raymond and Bollig and Engelland it didn't happen. It didn't spiral into a Edmonton or Buffalo-esque decade of hell. The core that emerged was good. Being upset about what happened with the key players in that core later is a different conversation

Yeah, you generally do stop signing UFAs to address gaps in your roster. You just accept the gaps/play young players.

Summer 2014: Signing Hiller, Raymond, and Engelland a few months after becoming GM isn't something a rebuilding team does. Neither is trading a 3rd for Bollig. The Flames should have been outright tanking through roster construction this season and trading away players throughout the season, and they didn't. Snuck into the playoffs and beat a weak Canucks team and completely missed a year at the draft (2015). A rebuilding team does not miss a year at the draft in what is effectively "Year 1" of the rebuild.

Summer 2015: He went and signed Frolik and spent oodles of futures on Dougie Hamilton. Not bad moves - but not patient rebuilding moves either.

Summer 2016: Spent more futures on Brian Elliott - and if rumours are to be believed, the Flames also almost spent their 2016 1st on Ben Bishop. Zero patience.

Summer 2017: Blew his friggin wad on Travis Hamonic

None of his moves in his first few years were done with a patient approach. It was a rush. Early on he did do some smart rebuilding moves like moving out Glencross, Russell, Baertschi and Hudler to be sure - but all that really did was counter-balance some of his spending of other futures.

There was zero patience shown in the construction of the last "era" of the team - just like there was zero patience shown in constructing this team (blowing a 1st to move Monahan to sign a 32 year old Kadri - no patience).

This team did not undergo an actual rebuild. Feaster made two bad trades with Iggy and Bouw, and then Treliving came in and instantly turned the dial back up. In no way am I blaming Treliving for what he did - because it was undoubtedly exactly what the owners/Burke hired him to do. It was a bad approach though.

The team being as turdy as they are this season should actually be a blessing. They should retain salary on and get a kings ransom for Hanifin, Lindholm, and Backlund right now. Grab whatever extra picks you can in the 2023 draft...but nothing they've ever done has shown that they will or that they think "big picture".

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

We did one season. We traded Iggy and Bouwmeester (for terrible returns as we were managed terribly). Our GM blew the additional draft picks we got on bad selections (which…when you’re a poorly managed team with no plan isn’t much of a surprise). The one thing Feaster did right was not spend free agent money that summer - but the Flames went right back to doing it the following summer.

That GM was then let go, and the very next season we went right back into handing out cash in free agency. Our new management team also openly laughed at the idea of rebuilding through the draft - they would mock the very concept of it at STH events.

The Flames did not do a planned rebuild. They managed themselves into oblivion, and then did everything they could as fast as they could to get back into the mushy middle.

Serious question, how long should they have been terrible for in order to be a "proper rebuild"? They drafted 6th, 4th, traded a 1st pick to get young and talented Hamilton, and 6th to build a core. That was Monahan, Bennett, Hamilton, and Tkachuk. They tried to rebuild with a bunch of 1st round picks in that first year, but they whiffed on both Poirier and Klimchuk. It happens. Part of the issue was that we had a joke of a GM kicking off the rebuild. It's not like they didn't try, they just had bad people in place when it happened.

Had Bennett turned out as good as his draft position, or at least figured it out in Calgary, and if Monahan hadn't injured his career into oblivion, we would have had a fantastic core to build on. Add in the home run pick in Gaudreau and this team was set up with a proper bottoming out rebuild. In those same drafts we also picked up Andersson, Kylington, Mangiapane, Dube, and Fox. That's 10 great core players that would have grown together at the right time. How many more players do you need to make a good core?

If we had it your way we would have been drafting top 3 for 10 years straight just to do it the way you all think it needed to be done. It didn't work out, and sometimes that happens, but to think we didn't try to bottom out to get high draft picks and rebuild through young talent is 100% bull####. If you believe that I cannot take your opinion on anything else seriously.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think the problem with the rebuild was that the Flames didn't accept maybe three years of top 3-5 draft picks, which helps a lot. Selling off guys like Iggy for picks and prospects only gets you what top temas (like Boston or Pittsburgh) at the time have to spare, and draft picks at the end of the list. You need top 3 to get elite blue chip guys. Calgary picked 4th in 2014, 6th in 2016. They got all excited in 2015 and traded the pick but it was only mid-first anyway.

If they commit to sucking, in those years following Iggy's trade they might have drafted McDavid 2015 (or even Barzal). Makar or Heiskenan instead of Val in 2017.

It's that. Championship teams aren't built by dismantling a competitive team. It just doesn't happen that way.

But once you are a bad team, you commit to building through drafting and development until the point where you are a contender. Then maybe you trade away some futures.

Some blame the one Hartley season for fooling the team's management into thinking they were a contender. Kid of sad if true. Maybe they felt they had to capitalize on Gaudreau's seasons while his AAV was moderate but even that seems wrong. His AAV as a percent of the cap isn't much different today than when he signed his second deal.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Serious question, how long should they have been terrible for in order to be a "proper rebuild"? They drafted 6th, 4th, traded a 1st pick to get young and talented Hamilton, and 6th to build a core. That was Monahan, Bennett, Hamilton, and Tkachuk. They tried to rebuild with a bunch of 1st round picks in that first year, but they whiffed on both Poirier and Klimchuk. It happens. Part of the issue was that we had a joke of a GM kicking off the rebuild. It's not like they didn't try, they just had bad people in place when it happened.

Had Bennett turned out as good as his draft position, or at least figured it out in Calgary, and if Monahan hadn't injured his career into oblivion, we would have had a fantastic core to build on. Add in the home run pick in Gaudreau and this team was set up with a proper bottoming out rebuild. In those same drafts we also picked up Andersson, Kylington, Mangiapane, Dube, and Fox. That's 10 great core players that would have grown together at the right time. How many more players do you need to make a good core?

If we had it your way we would have been drafting top 3 for 10 years straight just to do it the way you all think it needed to be done. It didn't work out, and sometimes that happens, but to think we didn't try to bottom out to get high draft picks and rebuild through young talent is 100% bull####. If you believe that I cannot take your opinion on anything else seriously.

Treliving gets hired in April 2014.

2014: Don't sign Hiller, Engelland, or Raymond. Trade away what you can to add additional picks in the 2014 draft before it happens. During the season, continue to sell off what you can. Still probably draft Bennett, but hopefully a few more good picks...but the draft that year was so bad for the Flames it's hard to think of this season as any but a wasted draft (MacDonald, Smith, Hickey. The scouts certainly sucked at this draft (Burke's direction?). With this direction, in 2015 maybe you're picking near #1 and #2 (McDavid/Eichel), but who knows. That should have been the aim though.

2015: Don't sign Frolik, don't acquire Hamilton. Hopefully you're picking a few additional times. In 2016, hopefully you still pick Tkachuk but maybe you're also in that Matthews conversation.

2016: Don't acquire Elliott. Also, *clears throat* Don't !@#$ing sign Troy !@#$ing Brouwer.

There's your three years.

Target a three year window. The Flames should have had a focused rebuild in 2014/2015 + 2015/2016 + 2016/2017.

With some draft lottery luck, maybe it doesn't go that long - but the Flames never gave themselves that opportunity.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

It's that. Championship teams aren't built by dismantling a competitive team. It just doesn't happen that way.

But once you are a bad team, you commit to building through drafting and development until the point where you are a contender. Then maybe you trade away some futures.

Some blame the one Hartley season for fooling the team's management into thinking they were a contender. Kid of sad if true. Maybe they felt they had to capitalize on Gaudreau's seasons while his AAV was moderate but even that seems wrong. His AAV as a percent of the cap isn't much different today than when he signed his second deal.

Hartley wouldn't have had the success he did had the Flames constructed the roster to suck though. Should not have signed Hiller, Engelland and Raymond - without those three and with some selling off of players in-season that playoff run never happens.

The Flames need to define what they view as a "competitive team" to better align with "Championship quality". Their entire approach has always been "get in the playoffs no matter what". They should be modelling themselves after teams that consistently show up in the later rounds of the playoffs.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Is this a mistake? This was the game that Calgary won (they let Edmonton back in but Calgary was the better team).

Not game 1 but 1 game which happened to be game 3 the Flames were never in that game