Flames Identity Crisis

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Just for fun because you brought up Kyrou. Here are three 22 year old players (all 1998 birth years):

Player A:
17-18: 112 points in 71 games (WHL)
18-19: 38 points in 65 games (AHL)
19-20: 33 points in 38 games (AHL)

Player B:
17-18: 109 points in 56 games (OHL)
18-19: 43 points in 47 games (AHL)
19-20: 15 points in 16 games (AHL)

Player C:
17-18: 64 points in 40 games (WHL)
18-19: 18 points in 27 games (AHL)
19-20: 16 points in 23 games (AHL)

Player A is Matthew Phillips, Player B is Kyrou, Player C is Yamamoto.

Kyrou and Yamamoto are helping their teams in top 6 roles, yet Phillips can’t even get a game in the NHL on the Flames roster, while guys like Simon, Nordstrom, Ritchie, Robinson, etc all get multiple looks of doing nothing.

On a team that desperately needs a top 6 RW why not give Phillips a shot? Sure he’s small but you don’t know if he can adapt until he gets a shot. The skill is clearly there, and his size hasn’t hurt him at the AHL level.

Once again it’s the coach and GM just being afraid to give a young guy a shot because it might lead to a mistake.

Could not agree more on Phillips, had the opportunity to watch him a lot when I lived in Victoria and he has the potential to be a dynamic player. Hard to press in the lineup with those numbers when you are up against a Buddy Robinson or a Brett Ritchie though

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

And yet they have won zero rounds with him
I think it’s a valid example as they are similar type of dmen
Harmonic was highly regarded when acquired but his play didn’t match that reputation I will agree
I just think your comparison to the leafs, and others, are clearly engineered for your purpose
The reason the Leafs have a better team isn’t because of good gm work. It’s because they drafted franchise players with high picks and had another franchise player sign with them over anyone else. That’s it.

Same with your roster turnover point which was equally flawed in approach.

Carolina seems to have built a roster than looks like it will be consistently good for awhile and they did that with a 2nd overall, two fifths and a 7th in the last decade.

Philly is OK and they had a 2nd and two 7ths

Islanders are not bad and they have not had a top 10 pick in 6 years and will not have one this year.

Bruins seem fine and the highest they have drafted in the last 9 years is 13th.

It seems possible that a good GM can build a Stanley cup contender without high picks.

[dirk diggler]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Carolina seems to have built a roster than looks like it will be consistently good for awhile and they did that with a 2nd overall, two fifths and a 7th in the last decade.

Philly is OK and they had a 2nd and two 7ths

Islanders are not bad and they have not had a top 10 pick in 6 years and will not have one this year.

Bruins seem fine and the highest they have drafted in the last 9 years is 13th.

It seems possible that a good GM can build a Stanley cup contender without high picks.

those are great examples, think of the position the Bruins would be in if they didnt drop the ball on their 3 straight number ones a few years back. They draft Connor and Chabot for example and they are loaded.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Apart from Boston none of those teams have won anything yet
Two years ago one would have said the same thing about the Flames- they were poised to be good for a long time. Didn’t happen.
Until it happens it’s just more picking of cherries by you

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Apart from Boston none of those teams have won anything yet
Two years ago one would have said the same thing about the Flames- they were poised to be good for a long time. Didn’t happen.
Until it happens it’s just more picking of cherries by you

Nobody would have said the Flames were the same as a team that had made the conference finals, or another team that made the conference finals or a team that made it to game 7 in the second round. Any of those results would be rarefied air for the Flames. But I guess making the playoffs is similar to the results listed above in the past two years for the other 3 teams. Game 7 of the second round or beyond is a place the Flames have made once in the past 31 years.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Don't worry Jiri, Brad will be around for a longtime.

Do you think Muzzin was a better dman than Hamonic at the time of the trades?

Which team do you think was closer to winning a cup at the time of the trade?

Sadly for Flames fans, and it is an indictment you can write over and over again for Brad, the answer to question one is Muzzin was at the time undoubtedly a better dman than Hamonic and the objective answer to question two is a top 8 team is definitely closer to the Stanley Cup than a bubble team.

Usually Brad fans never put in any actual work to defend what he has done, but I am quite confident one would not be able to find a bubble team that blew as many draft picks to patch holes in their lineup as the Flames did between 16-18. A very unique approach to building a champion.

This is probably the biggest gripe I have with Treliving and it’s easily the most important. His player evaluation has cost this team a lot during his tenure. Troy Brouwer? James Neal? Travis Hamonic? Mike Stone? Mason Raymond? Brandon Boilig? Curtis Lazar? Jonas Hiller? Brian Elliott and etc etc etc. Like what was he thinking on most of these whiffs? If he had let the scouts draft more gems instead of trading a plethora of picks, this team might be in a much better spot than it is now.

I’ve always wondered if Tod Button would’ve selected Alex Debrincat had Treliving not traded our 2nd rounder for that sieve Brian Elliott. A diminutive winger with skill who already has a 40 goal scoring season under his belt seemed right up his alley. Instead we got Brian Elliott who cost us the Anaheim series in 2017 just by himself.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Apart from Boston none of those teams have won anything yet

That's completely beside the point - have to go deep to give yourself a chance to win at all, that means winning a few playoff rounds, all of which those teams have done... and we have not.

[TheSquatch]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

This is probably the biggest gripe I have with Treliving and it’s easily the most important. His player evaluation has cost this team a lot during his tenure. Troy Brouwer? James Neal? Travis Hamonic? Mike Stone? Mason Raymond? Brandon Boilig? Curtis Lazar? Jonas Hiller? Brian Elliott and etc etc etc. Like what was he thinking on most of these whiffs? If he had let the scouts draft more gems instead of trading a plethora of picks, this team might be in a much better spot than it is now.

I’ve always wondered if Tod Button would’ve selected Alex Debrincat had Treliving not traded our 2nd rounder for that sieve Brian Elliott. A diminutive winger with skill who already has a 40 goal scoring season under his belt seemed right up his alley. Instead we got Brian Elliott who cost us the Anaheim series in 2017 just by himself.

Agreed, a lot of whiffs/mistakes. And if he hadn't swung at some of those guys, people here would be saying "God Lazar was available and we didn't even try him, fire Treliving!" Most of those instances are times where a veteran was brought in hopefully to teach and lead the younger guys, and what has happened with most is that the vet has come in and done nothing on the ice, and seemingly nothing in the dressing room either.

Briar Elliot stunk. Who should he have got instead? I don't remember a big name goalie going unsigned. It's not like Treliving can do whatever he wants every year. There's holes that need filling, and you fill them as best you can.

I don't see it as dismal failure, he's tried a bunch of stuff and not much has had a huge effect. So I look at the core and see a bunch of guys I'd like to move out while they have value.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by TheSquatch

Agreed, a lot of whiffs/mistakes. And if he hadn't swung at some of those guys, people here would be saying "God Lazar was available and we didn't even try him, fire Treliving!" Most of those instances are times where a veteran was brought in hopefully to teach and lead the younger guys, and what has happened with most is that the vet has come in and done nothing on the ice, and seemingly nothing in the dressing room either.

Briar Elliot stunk. Who should he have got instead? I don't remember a big name goalie going unsigned. It's not like Treliving can do whatever he wants every year. There's holes that need filling, and you fill them as best you can.

I don't see it as dismal failure, he's tried a bunch of stuff and not much has had a huge effect. So I look at the core and see a bunch of guys I'd like to move out while they have value.

I just feel like he rushed the rebuild too quickly. Brian Burke being there obviously didn’t help either. But this team had just started rebuilding, they were not a couple pieces away from contending. Then you throw in a lot of the whiffs and mistakes and we’re even further back.

Had the Flames had the fortune of drafting a Draisaitl and Barkov instead of Bennett and Monahan, then yes, maybe this team could’ve really started to push their chips into the middle and trade for the Dougie Hamiltons of the world or a legit #1 goaltender.

What this team really needed to do in my opinion was continue building through the draft. They have an excellent amateur scouting staff, so maybe they pick a Mathew Barzal or a Kyle Connor or a Thomas Chabot in 2015. Or maybe they draft an Alex Debrincat if they don’t trade for Brian Elliott and re-sign Karri Ramo instead.

Maybe the Flames stink in 2017 and they’re able to draft a Cale Makar or a Elias Pettersson or a Nick Suzuki. Obviously these are all pie in the sky scenarios, but now this team has serious holes that can’t be patched up or repaired to push this team over the top. It almost feels like this team is what it is and we’ll be stuck in mediocrity forever which is death in the NHL. Being stuck in the middle is the worst spot you can be for any pro franchise. Too good to never draft elite franchise game changers, not good enough to even sniff the Cup.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

That's completely beside the point - have to go deep to give yourself a chance to win at all, that means winning a few playoff rounds, all of which those teams have done... and we have not.

That's fair.
The conversation though started with comparing the Leafs and Flames forward group - which I challenged as not being a fair comparison because of the advantages they've had at the draft and what not.

I do wonder if teams like Carolina and Philly will be able to continue to contend and take the next steps - as they may run into a similar problem of lacking truly elite talent.
But they've been well managed for sure.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Usually Brad fans never put in any actual work to defend what he has done, but I am quite confident one would not be able to find a bubble team that blew as many draft picks to patch holes in their lineup as the Flames did between 16-18. A very unique approach to building a champion.

On this point, I continue to believe that this organization's biggest long-term issue is they are asset poor. This has been due to the following reasons that have cut across multiple GMs
- Not trading core players in time to net appropriate value (again the most recent example being what they got from the collective group of Iginla, Bouw, Kipper, Langkow, and Regehr)
- When they have traded core players it has been to address short-term holes (e.g. Phaneuf)
- Poor drafting (e.g. the Pelech, Chucko, Irving, Nemisz string of years)
- Trading picks to patch holes (yes I agree with that)
- Lack of patience. Each re-build attempt has been undermined by trying to accelerate it

The organization is constantly robbing Peter to pay Paul instead of building up an asset base, so that when you are ready to contend you can spend some of that capital to put the team over the edge.

This franchise has needed more assets for decades, and continues to piddle them away. And again it's a pattern that I would argue dates back to the moment Fletcher left.

So why? Is it the owners lacking patience and applying pressure? Is the GMs over promising when/what they can deliver?
Is it the so-called pressure of a Canadian market? I would suggest fans in Canada would more fully understand the need for a proper re-build, yet we see each Canadian team make this mistake over and over again. The Canucks literally followed the flawed Flames blueprint to a tee!

[ah123]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

So why? Is it the owners lacking patience and applying pressure? Is the GMs over promising when/what they can deliver?
Is it the so-called pressure of a Canadian market? I would suggest fans in Canada would more fully understand the need for a proper re-build, yet we see each Canadian team make this mistake over and over again. The Canucks literally followed the flawed Flames blueprint to a tee!

I agree that the Flames are asset poor and have been trying to patch for the last 20 years (or more). I think it is a combination of owners not wanting to lose too much money, luck and (lack of) ability to attract talent to Calgary.

From a financial perspective it makes sense to try to have your team be in the playoffs every year, even if they have no chance to win a cup. The other aspect is that a rebuild is hard and does not guarantee success. The Oilers are the only Canadian team who publicly announced that they were going rebuild and we can see where they are.

So when a talent like Gaudreau falls in the Flames’ laps, the natural reaction is to fast track the team. With Calgary not being a destination market for FAs the only way to do that is to mortgage the future to make hay now.

Having said that, with no pressure to fill seats this year, I am very surprised the Flames did not trade Monahan, Gaudreau and others this past off season to try and build up their assets.

[CliffFletcher]

UFAs are almost always an overpayment. For every GM. And they know it. The reason GMs go that route is because they need to get better now rather than 2-3 years down the road. Same with trading picks. A 2nd round pick probably isn’t going to be an effective roster player (assuming you hit on the pick) for 4-5 years.

Treliving’s questionable moves have all been a result of efforts to get better immediately. So the question becomes what’s the ultimate source of impatience in this franchise? As jiri says, this trait of the franchise predates Treliving. So I’m hesitant to cast the blame there.

Treliving is far from the only GM who has to deal with this sort of impatience. Look at the Flyers. Hextall built their current roster with a patient draft and develop approach. But he was fired because the rebuild wasn’t going fast enough for his bosses. Now his replacement is enjoying the fruits of Hextall’s labours.

[Goriders]

The problem with the Flames since the Sutters left is they are a soft team. Lots of skill, but when the going gets tough they fold like a cheap lawn chair.

Too many snowflakes in their core. Just changing the coach won’t solve the root problem.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

On this point, I continue to believe that this organization's biggest long-term issue is they are asset poor. This has been due to the following reasons that have cut across multiple GMs
- Not trading core players in time to net appropriate value (again the most recent example being what they got from the collective group of Iginla, Bouw, Kipper, Langkow, and Regehr)
- When they have traded core players it has been to address short-term holes (e.g. Phaneuf)
- Poor drafting (e.g. the Pelech, Chucko, Irving, Nemisz string of years)
- Trading picks to patch holes (yes I agree with that)
- Lack of patience. Each re-build attempt has been undermined by trying to accelerate it

The organization is constantly robbing Peter to pay Paul instead of building up an asset base, so that when you are ready to contend you can spend some of that capital to put the team over the edge.

This franchise has needed more assets for decades, and continues to piddle them away. And again it's a pattern that I would argue dates back to the moment Fletcher left.

So why? Is it the owners lacking patience and applying pressure? Is the GMs over promising when/what they can deliver?
Is it the so-called pressure of a Canadian market? I would suggest fans in Canada would more fully understand the need for a proper re-build, yet we see each Canadian team make this mistake over and over again. The Canucks literally followed the flawed Flames blueprint to a tee!

I am out of thanks, but just wanted to say, fantastic post!

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

On this point, I continue to believe that this organization's biggest long-term issue is they are asset poor. This has been due to the following reasons that have cut across multiple GMs
- Not trading core players in time to net appropriate value (again the most recent example being what they got from the collective group of Iginla, Bouw, Kipper, Langkow, and Regehr)
- When they have traded core players it has been to address short-term holes (e.g. Phaneuf)
- Poor drafting (e.g. the Pelech, Chucko, Irving, Nemisz string of years)
- Trading picks to patch holes (yes I agree with that)
- Lack of patience. Each re-build attempt has been undermined by trying to accelerate it

The organization is constantly robbing Peter to pay Paul instead of building up an asset base, so that when you are ready to contend you can spend some of that capital to put the team over the edge.

This franchise has needed more assets for decades, and continues to piddle them away. And again it's a pattern that I would argue dates back to the moment Fletcher left.

So why? Is it the owners lacking patience and applying pressure? Is the GMs over promising when/what they can deliver?
Is it the so-called pressure of a Canadian market? I would suggest fans in Canada would more fully understand the need for a proper re-build, yet we see each Canadian team make this mistake over and over again. The Canucks literally followed the flawed Flames blueprint to a tee!

I would agree with most of that except the draft picks. The trading of the last core was definitely on the owners. I think the Phaneuf trade was a one off, I cannot think of another core player traded for short term parts. And Sutter was definitely bad at drafting.

But under Brad the Flames have had fewer draft selections than they have spots every year except two - 2016 when we accumulated a bunch of picks at the deadline because we sucked and last year when we would have had fewer but for the fact we traded down twice in the first round to grab two third round picks.

You compare that to the other Canadian teams and there is a significant difference.

In Montreal over the past number of seasons they have had the following number of picks: 2020 they had 8 picks including 3 in the first two rounds, 2019 they had 10 picks, 2018 they had 11 picks including 4 in the first two rounds, 2017 they had seven but they had 3 in the first two rounds. In the years before that they had fewer but were a legitimate contender in 13/14 and 15/16.

Toronto over the past number of years has had the following: 2020 they had 12 picks, 2019 they had 6 picks, 2018 they had 9 picks, 2017 they had 7 picks, 2016 they got their franchise player and had 11 picks.

I am not really sure how Toronto and Montreal, which are two much bigger hockey markets can build teams the right way but Calgary cannot. The other western teams have gassed picks like Calgary (although Calgary has gassed the most) but I am not sure they are the teams to emulated.

In the 7 drafts since Brad took over as GM, the Canadian breakdown of picks compared to what the league gives every team is as follows

Calgary - 6 fewer
Vancouver - 1 fewer
Edmonton - 4 fewer
Winnipeg - 5 fewer
Toronto - 11 more
Montreal - 4 more
Ottawa - 3 fewer

In terms of Calgary's history with draft picks, Brad's seven drafts are an anomaly compared to his predeccesors. Under Feaster it was it was 1 fewer over 3 drafts and under Sutter it was it was 3 more picks than the league allotted to him. The trading of picks to patch holes and not recovering them is a new wrinkle in Flames franchise building.

In terms of first 3 round picks under the previous 3 Calgary GM's it breaks down like this

Brad - 4 less over 7 drafts
Feaster - 1 more over 3 drafts
Sutter - 3 less over 8 drafts.

Sutter is the only one that comes close to giving up top 3 round picks but he had a top 3 goalie and a top 3 forward and actual made the Stanley Cup finals, so it is at least understandable as to why he traded future assets for current players.

I don't think they (the owners) are pressuring Brad to trade picks (unless it is a new thing) because the franchise did not have a history of doing that before. The most perplexing thing about Brad getting rid of the picks is that either he or Tod or both have seemingly figured out drafting. 15 and 16 drafts were home runs and the drafts after that it is too soon to really tell (and you would not really know because we got rid of a bunch of picks in those drafts). I will never understand that, gassing picks in a rebuild after you have demonstrated that you are figuring out how to draft.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I doubt the owners are specifying to trade picks but I can imagine that they are placing short term goals on the management team, which then would create the behaviour we’ve seen. Short term goals and thinking plus being asset poor means the gm has been driven to use what he can to plug.

It’s the entire strategy that has been wrong for decades

And again I don’t know why you continue to compare to Toronto given the advantages they’ve enjoyed.

Feaster isn’t a fair comparison as the team was actually rebuilding at the time. Indeed Sutter is a more fair comparison and he too used picks to fill holes.

[TheSquatch]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

On this point, I continue to believe that this organization's biggest long-term issue is they are asset poor. This has been due to the following reasons that have cut across multiple GMs
- Not trading core players in time to net appropriate value (again the most recent example being what they got from the collective group of Iginla, Bouw, Kipper, Langkow, and Regehr)
- When they have traded core players it has been to address short-term holes (e.g. Phaneuf)
- Poor drafting (e.g. the Pelech, Chucko, Irving, Nemisz string of years)
- Trading picks to patch holes (yes I agree with that)
- Lack of patience. Each re-build attempt has been undermined by trying to accelerate it

The organization is constantly robbing Peter to pay Paul instead of building up an asset base, so that when you are ready to contend you can spend some of that capital to put the team over the edge.

This franchise has needed more assets for decades, and continues to piddle them away. And again it's a pattern that I would argue dates back to the moment Fletcher left.

So why? Is it the owners lacking patience and applying pressure? Is the GMs over promising when/what they can deliver?
Is it the so-called pressure of a Canadian market? I would suggest fans in Canada would more fully understand the need for a proper re-build, yet we see each Canadian team make this mistake over and over again. The Canucks literally followed the flawed Flames blueprint to a tee!

Because the mandate from ownership is "Make the playoffs". Always has been. This is the result.

[TheSquatch]

Feaster came in after what most of us would call a debacle of Sutter-ian GMing, trading Jokkinen for Kotalik and then bringing Jokkinen back again, just blowing away picks like they were worthless.

And when Feaster took the reins I thought "Oh, thank God, some sanity." And in his first presser, he said the mandate from ownership was to make the playoffs. No rebuild.

Same thing Sutter said. And acted on.

Make the playoffs. Ken King was transparent about this. That's what the ownership group wants.

So the result is this teetering team, never bad enough to draft high, never good enough to beat the best (what's the Flames record in the regular season against playoff teams? It's never great. Flames poach points off of bad teams and scrape in.).

It is what it is now. A cap team with minimal genuine assets on the farm, and a pretty good team on the ice (at best), but not a world beater.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Goriders

The problem with the Flames since the Sutters left is they are a soft team. Lots of skill, but when the going gets tough they fold like a cheap lawn chair.

Too many snowflakes in their core. Just changing the coach won’t solve the root problem.

And how many Cups did the Sutter's bring the Flames? Brent didn't even make the playoffs once here. Darryl built this team right into the ground and deserved to be relieved of his GM duties. The rough and tumble Flames didn't do any better than the Treliving's snowflake Flames.