Are you of the belief Tre can make this team into a winner? If not, keeping him because of what could be worst is a horrible idea and destined to keep us on the same path as the last 30 years.
If you want to argue you believe Tre can build a Stanley Cup winning it's one thing, but being worried we shouldn't change GM's because "Someone could come in who is worst" is a horrible way to make decisions.
But with the Flames top brass, you are probably correct they would screw it up
I would say I am at a point where I would like to see drastic changes to the players on the team but also want to see what happens when things go back to normal and the team has a full year of Sutter behind the bench. To be honest I am not even sure that is what I want but we all know that with Sutter here there is no rebuild on the horizon for next year.
I was definitely a pro Treliving guy until this year but I am firmly on the fence right now. I do believe he has no option but to make core altering moves this offseason so while he has been aggressive but not able to close deals in the past I think he makes something big happen this summer.
Ultimately I am okay with the organization giving Treliving and Sutter one more opportunity to push this team forward and if they miss the playoffs again next season and with only one year left on their contracts you move on and rebuild.
The Following User Says Thank You to Vinny01 For This Useful Post:
Most people were satisfied and still quite optimistic after the first 450 of those. Radically changing that opinion after 56 games is knee jerk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krynski
I really don't understand trading away any of those assets 2 seasons ago. Who knew they were time sensitive?
1. Gio was a Norris defenseman 2 years ago (okay, I can understand a little time sensitive)
2. Gaudreau had 99 pts 2 years ago, at 25 years old
3. Monahan was an 82 pt center 2 years ago, at 24 years old
4. Tkachuk had 77 pts as a 21 year old winger
Everything was pointing in a positive direction, with young talent, skill, not to mention that the Flames finished 1st in the west.
You don't break up a core that is performing considerably above average, unless there are significant concerns.
Thoroughly dismantled by Avs. Of course you keep that group together, but the first half of the next season was further evidence of mediocirty.
Lots of people say "you can't trade them after finishing 1st, but then COVID ruined the next off-season". And that's fair to an extent, but it ignores the existence of Jan-Mar 2020 as an opportunity for change.
The Peters fiasco made it tough to assess things, but it was clear that something wasn't right. I suspect the plan was to support the group (Bort, Gus) for one more shot with big changes to follow unless the group took a big step forward. They took a babystep forward, but the environment hindered substantial change. C'est la vie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h
Are you of the belief Tre can make this team into a winner? If not, keeping him because of what could be worst is a horrible idea and destined to keep us on the same path as the last 30 years.
If you want to argue you believe Tre can build a Stanley Cup winning it's one thing, but being worried we shouldn't change GM's because "Someone could come in who is worst" is a horrible way to make decisions.
But with the Flames top brass, you are probably correct they would screw it up
Do you think a new GM can make this team into a winner?
IMO we're in hail-mary territory here; I think the odds are very slightly better with BT than an unknown, but I'm pretty sure it's futile either way.
Even if ownership decides it's time to go the "Rangers letter" route (unlikely), I doubt we get a great GM to come until the tear-down is well underway.
The Following User Says Thank You to powderjunkie For This Useful Post:
Who's hiring the new GM? They got Burke to do it last time. Do we trust Edwards/Bean more?
Lombardi - age 63; unclear if he'd want to come here
Futa - age 53; apparently his greatest strengths are amateur scouting/drafting. I'd be all for it if ownership wants to rebuild.
Gorton - age 53; good experience with BOS and NYR. Seems to have been involved in convincing Dolan/Sather to send "the letter" (of course we have no idea who advocated for it). Is CGY a likely next destination after BOS and NYR???
Tallon/Rutherford = 70+
Who else is out there?
Mike Gillis (lol)
Paul Fenton
Ray Shero
Tim Murray/Jason Botterill/Nonis/Chiarelli
Greg Sherman
Joe Nieuwendyk
Garth Snow
Or some of the new guys that are rumoured?
There are more seats than competent GMs.
The only two I'm pretty certain would be an upgrade are Lombardi and Gorton. Given their prior teams, I'm not convinced they'd be keen to come here.
Fenton/Shero/Futa? I just don't see much difference from Tre.
That's fair enough, but IMO it ignores the reality of our ownership.
Dubas and Shanahan might be available soon!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JobHopper
The thing is, my posts, thoughts and insights may be my opinions but they're also quite factual.
This team needs a head to toe culture revamp. It won't happen with Sutter.
More likely there will be some tweaks and then a push to win in the next two years followed by a complete rebuild. That's what it looks like to me. There is no way Flames are not seeing out Sutter's contract, and he is not here to start a long term project.
I don't see BT going anywhere until his contract is done.
We get two more years of this core pushing for the prize, then a 3-4 year rebuild just in time for a young exciting team to play in our new arena.
The Following User Says Thank You to Badgers Nose For This Useful Post:
Like a said before with fans being conditioned to losing that I don't think some fans realize how bad this organization has been. This is one of the worst organizations in the NHL and some fans are scared of taking a chance to get better. It's crazy.
They certainly have not been great and I agree we should not accept mediocrity but saying this is one of the worst organizations in the NHL is hyperbole and not backed up by recent history. I compared season rankings and playoff series wins for the last decade and the following teams definitely have had less success than the Flames. This ranking was based on adding up yearly overall place in standings since 2010-2011 season then minus 5 for each playoff series win and an extra -20 for Stanley Cup winners so lower points is better.
31). Buffalo (280) - No playoffs, consistently bottom 20 and no playoff series wins.
30). Edmonton (242) - Not good for most of the decade. Have managed one playoff series win since 2011.
29). New Jersey (230) - Consistently bottom 20 although they did have a playoff run in 2012 with 3 series wins.
28). Ottawa (220) - They have had a few ok seasons but for the most part have ended up much lower than the flames in the overall standings. They do have 3 playoff series wins so a tiny bit more playoff success.
27). Arizona (216) - OK in 2011 and 2012 but since they have consistently been in the lower half of the standings. Do have 3 playoff series wins but two of those were back in 2012.
The Flames (194) ended up ranking 23 so definitely in the lower half although there were a bunch of teams clustered around their points total like the Leafs (184) and Jets (183). It is a bit depressing that they basically have had one very good regular season in the last 10 years and a lot of mediocre years where they either barely miss playoffs or barely squeak in and very little playoff success. It was a bit eye opening to be honest but that said I'd call them one of the worst of the mediocre teams. Buffalo and Edmonton have to take the title as the worst NHL organizations in the last decade based on the amount of success they have had.
Penguins (-32), Boston (-1) and Washington (12) were the top three for reference sakes and all Stanley Cup winners in last decade were in the top 7 so I think the formula used is a fairly decent metric.
Staying on topic I do think Trevling should be given one last chance. Most of his trades and signings seemed like a good idea at the time and drafting has been very good despite not having very high draft picks. I'm hoping he does shake things up this summer though and then if that doesn't work burn it all to the ground including him.
The Following User Says Thank You to CASe333 For This Useful Post:
Just my thought, in previous years BT tried to build a team what he has with these core players and tried to fill holes and also tried to find a coach that fits his team and system what he believe that his team should play.
But now Sutter came /may be owners choice/ and I hope Sutter will help BT to adjust his thoughts and plans about what team will succeed in the season and in the playoffs and help him to revalue his players and make necessary changes to the roster and also to sign or to trade players that fits Sutter's system and team.
In other word, BT needs to build a championship team, not build around the players what he has before or now.
They certainly have not been great and I agree we should not accept mediocrity but saying this is one of the worst organizations in the NHL is hyperbole and not backed up by recent history. I compared season rankings and playoff series wins for the last decade and the following teams definitely have had less success than the Flames. This ranking was based on adding up yearly overall place in standings since 2010-2011 season then minus 5 for each playoff series win and an extra -20 for Stanley Cup winners so lower points is better.
31). Buffalo (280) - No playoffs, consistently bottom 20 and no playoff series wins.
30). Edmonton (242) - Not good for most of the decade. Have managed one playoff series win since 2011.
29). New Jersey (230) - Consistently bottom 20 although they did have a playoff run in 2012 with 3 series wins.
28). Ottawa (220) - They have had a few ok seasons but for the most part have ended up much lower than the flames in the overall standings. They do have 3 playoff series wins so a tiny bit more playoff success.
27). Arizona (216) - OK in 2011 and 2012 but since they have consistently been in the lower half of the standings. Do have 3 playoff series wins but two of those were back in 2012.
The Flames (194) ended up ranking 23 so definitely in the lower half although there were a bunch of teams clustered around their points total like the Leafs (184) and Jets (183). It is a bit depressing that they basically have had one very good regular season in the last 10 years and a lot of mediocre years where they either barely miss playoffs or barely squeak in and very little playoff success. It was a bit eye opening to be honest but that said I'd call them one of the worst of the mediocre teams. Buffalo and Edmonton have to take the title as the worst NHL organizations in the last decade based on the amount of success they have had.
Penguins (-32), Boston (-1) and Washington (12) were the top three for reference sakes and all Stanley Cup winners in last decade were in the top 7 so I think the formula used is a fairly decent metric.
Staying on topic I do think Trevling should be given one last chance. Most of his trades and signings seemed like a good idea at the time and drafting has been very good despite not having very high draft picks. I'm hoping he does shake things up this summer though and then if that doesn't work burn it all to the ground including him.
Thanks for putting in the time but you just went back a decade while my comments were in regards to the organization over the last 30 years. Add two more decades and I'm pretty positive the Flames will rise higher than 23rd.
Oilers, Panthers, and Coyotes are the only teams I'm sure have been worse.
Sabres have had a terrible decade, but their 90's and first 6 years of cap era were better than Calgary.
Otherwise, I think it's a reasonable discussion to be had comparing to Blue Jackets, Wild, Thrashers/Jets, Leafs...maybe Senators and Islanders. IMO we are basically tied for 4th worst.
The Flames had some darn good regular seasons in the 90s and even right after the 04-05 lockout. The 92-93 team for example, had some really good players. Fleury had 100 pts, Reichel had 40 goals, they had Roberts, Newy, Suter, Macinnis, Makarov, Otto. But every POs it was just one thing or another.
Buffalo, now, they’ve made the finals once in the last 30 years, just like Calgary. And they’ve had a handful of other post-round one appearances. But they’ve been out of the POs for 10 years now, and only were in round one the couple years before that. And before that were out as well for a couple years. And their finals appearance was down to having Hasek.
The Flames had some darn good regular seasons in the 90s and even right after the 04-05 lockout. The 92-93 team for example, had some really good players. Fleury had 100 pts, Reichel had 40 goals, they had Roberts, Newy, Suter, Macinnis, Makarov, Otto. But every POs it was just one thing or another.
Buffalo, now, they’ve made the finals once in the last 30 years, just like Calgary. And they’ve had a handful of other post-round one appearances. But they’ve been out of the POs for 10 years now, and only were in round one the couple years before that. And before that were out as well for a couple years. And their finals appearance was down to having Hasek.
Like I said, I think there's at least room for debate there. If we set it at 10 years, it's a no brainer.
Back up to cap era (16ish years) and they have a President's Trophy and back to back conference finals (going to game 7 against the Canes). 2 other playoff appearances (out in 6 and 7).
CGY = 1 division win (4th in conference), then 8 seed, 7 seed, and 5 seed. At least they went to game 6 (x2) and game 7 (x2). We have 4 additional playoff appearances with 1 series win and 1 great regular season.
So in cap era it's 2 deep playoff runs (and 2 others) vs. 1 series win and 7 others. Toss-up.
Rewind to 1990 and our cinderella runs on the back of great goalies cancel each other out (right down to controversial goals in game 6). Both teams had a few sporadic playoff misses.
BUF had 3 straight years around the bubble before the lost season (tough division; 5th in div. but 9th, 10th, and 12th in conference). 5 series wins from 1990-2001 (excluding the SCF run). And of course 10 years of total suck.
CGY had 5 years of bubble or worse recently and 7 years of suck before (though never as bad as BUF). A bunch of playoffs, but no series wins.
Tally since 1990:
BUF = 16 playoff misses, 12 series wins: 1 SCF, 3 ECF. Out twice in 5 games round 1.
CGY = 16 playoff misses, 5 series wins (+ play-in): 1 SCF. Swept twice, out in 5 once.
Of course if we rewind 1 year further we win the ultimate prize.
Last edited by powderjunkie; 06-01-2021 at 07:01 PM.
Ultimately I am okay with the organization giving Treliving and Sutter one more opportunity to push this team forward and if they miss the playoffs again next season and with only one year left on their contracts you move on and rebuild.
The only problem with this is if we end up just missing the playoffs, or get bounced quickly in the first round again, then we get no value for Gaudreau or Giordano. Also, after next year they have to qualify Tkachuk for a big number. I fully expect some improvement next year just due to having a legit coach but they need to improve a lot.
Worst case scenario they make the playoffs next year with just enough margin that Treliving uses up more draft picks to buy rentals. At the same time he extends his UFA's and we are stuck in the same cycle for 4 or 5 more years.
Treliving really needs to pull a rabbit out of his hat to turn this around. If he can land a #1 centre, extend Johnny at a reasonable cap hit, get Monahan and Hanifin back healthy + get a rebound out of Tkachuk and Markstrom then the team could be a contender. It's not impossible but it's a lot to ask.
The thing is, all those other teams were able to sell hope at some point. Realistically, those teams should be better, they've got young amazing players but they're just run poorly. The Flames haven't got any young elite players AND they're run poorly. You can never tell from year to year if they're going to be out of the playoffs or a bubble team. There haven't been any years when you could look at the roster before the season and say they were a contender or even a for sure playoff team. Yet every year they seem to have the same plan: make the playoffs at any cost because anything can happen...but anything doesn't happen, the same thing happens. No playoff success and a mid teens pick.
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Poe969 For This Useful Post:
The thing is, all those other teams were able to sell hope at some point. Realistically, those teams should be better, they've got young amazing players but they're just run poorly. The Flames haven't got any young elite players AND they're run poorly. You can never tell from year to year if they're going to be out of the playoffs or a bubble team. There haven't been any years when you could look at the roster before the season and say they were a contender or even a for sure playoff team. Yet every year they seem to have the same plan: make the playoffs at any cost because anything can happen...but anything doesn't happen, the same thing happens. No playoff success and a mid teens pick.
I will admit that on paper, I thought the Flames looked pretty good at the start of the year, minus the usual things (no elite 1C etc) but the team just didn't manage anything at all.
The only problem with this is if we end up just missing the playoffs, or get bounced quickly in the first round again, then we get no value for Gaudreau or Giordano. Also, after next year they have to qualify Tkachuk for a big number. I fully expect some improvement next year just due to having a legit coach but they need to improve a lot.
Worst case scenario they make the playoffs next year with just enough margin that Treliving uses up more draft picks to buy rentals. At the same time he extends his UFA's and we are stuck in the same cycle for 4 or 5 more years.
Treliving really needs to pull a rabbit out of his hat to turn this around. If he can land a #1 centre, extend Johnny at a reasonable cap hit, get Monahan and Hanifin back healthy + get a rebound out of Tkachuk and Markstrom then the team could be a contender. It's not impossible but it's a lot to ask.
I am not okay with them coming back with the same team next year so big decisions need to be made. By no means should the Flames be in a scenario where they may lose Gaudreau for nothing and a decision on him needs to be made this summer.
If there is little to no movement happening this summer then bring in a new GM to take his time to make changes. I think Treliving remaining will result in bigger roster changes as he simply won’t triple/quadruple down on this roster and I think trades will happen.
I think we see one of Gaudreau or Tkachuk traded this offseason. I am starting to think it will be Tkachuk who carries the value to potentially land a number 1 centre.
The Following User Says Thank You to Vinny01 For This Useful Post:
