Brad Treliving needs to go

[Macman]

What's telling to me is that the Flames couldn't win 4 games in a row even once.
If they had gone on a single winning streak of 4 to 6 or more games they would have easily made the playoffs but they didn't and it's because they're just not a good enough team, blame it on whatever you like. That's on the GM to figure out.

They simply couldn't win a couple more games. But being so close they may be optimistic and looking at the glass as half full which I think is a mistake in this case.

I think it may have been during Hartley's tenure one season when the Flames were going through a rough stretch but they ended up going on a 8 game or so winning streak and it saved their season and they made the playoffs. This current group can't do it.

Darryl Sutter is a good coach and maybe fitness is an issue but I don't think those two things are what ails the Flames.

[Rutuu]

Agree with what you are saying Macman with regards to this years team and BT. What I want to see us doing is acquiring more draft capital (we should have the mindset that we need more than 7 picks in every draft moving forward for 3-5yrs)


In regards to DS: When a friend asked me whether the Flames would be better or worse next season I was 90% sure we would allow less than the 2.875 goals against we had this season and we would be closer to 5th best next year GA. That would put us on pace for 200 or less goals against next year.

As for scoring, if we scored at the same rate we did this we score 228 goals next year. Around 230 goals and 200 goals against, you can win a Stanley Cup.

Small changes can mean a big difference. With that said this franchise needs to concentrate on having the following going forward:
1. High quality management
2. High quality analytics
3. High quality EXPERIENCED coaching - even if it costs $6m / yr
4. High draft capital, we need to draft more than 7 times in the next 3 - 5 drafts

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

As for scoring, if we scored at the same rate we did this we score 228 goals next year. Around 230 goals and 200 goals against, you can win a Stanley Cup.

You can win the cup with a 30 goal differential? Well - Yes you can technically win the cup with any goal differential...But that is not a contender differential

In this years 56 games season this is the top 10 goal differential teams

Vegas 67
Colorado 64
Carolina 43
Pitts 40
Toronto 39
Florida 36
TB 34
Boston 32
Edmonton 29
Washington 28

Over the truncated season a 30 goal differential is equal to 20

Here are the teams at a 20 goal differential from this year

Winnipeg
Minny
NYR

So in your optomistic scenario where we finish top 5 in GA were are sitting in the differential of the Jets and Wild.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

You can win the cup with a 30 goal differential? Well - Yes you can technically win the cup with any goal differential...But that is not a contender differential

In this years 56 games season this is the top 10 goal differential teams

Vegas 67
Colorado 64
Carolina 43
Pitts 40
Toronto 39
Florida 36
TB 34
Boston 32
Edmonton 29
Washington 28

Over the truncated season a 30 goal differential is equal to 20

Here are the teams at a 20 goal differential from this year

Winnipeg
Minny
NYR

So in your optomistic scenario where we finish top 5 in GA were are sitting in the differential of the Jets and Wild.

A 30 goal differential alone will put you in the top half of the playoffs, so top quartile of the league. Having a defense that allows less than 200 goals makes you elite in that category and a true top 3 team on that side of the puck.

That smothering style we call playoff hockey looks a lot like a team that allows less than 200 goals in a season, and can put the puck in the net slightly better than middle of the pack.

Separate the two metrics and start going back through the NHL standings first sorting on goal diff, then on goals against and which teams can score around 230 goals. In my opinion there is a difference between a team that scores 260 goals and allows 230 vs a team that scores 230 and allows 200.

Now build through the draft so you can score 230+ goals and keep your GA down around 200 and you're an elite elite team...like Colorado this year...although there is serious skew from schedules this season.

[powderjunkie]

Recent cup winners:

Team GF GA DIFF League Avg Goals/game
TBL 287 228 59 3.02
STL 247 223 24 3.01
WAS 259 239 20 2.97
PIT 282 234 48 2.77
PIT 245 203 42 2.71
CHI 229 189 40 2.73
LAK 206 174 32 2.74

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

A 30 goal differential alone will put you in the top half of the playoffs, so top quartile of the league. Having a defense that allows less than 200 goals makes you elite in that category and a true top 3 team on that side of the puck.

That smothering style we call playoff hockey looks a lot like a team that allows less than 200 goals in a season, and can put the puck in the net slightly better than middle of the pack.

Separate the two metrics and start going back through the NHL standings first sorting on goal diff, then on goals against and which teams can score around 230 goals. In my opinion there is a difference between a team that scores 260 goals and allows 230 vs a team that scores 230 and allows 200.

The post you quoted suggests you would actually be in the 13-16 range.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

A 30 goal differential alone will put you in the top half of the playoffs, so top quartile of the league. Having a defense that allows less than 200 goals makes you elite in that category and a true top 3 team on that side of the puck.

That smothering style we call playoff hockey looks a lot like a team that allows less than 200 goals in a season, and can put the puck in the net slightly better than middle of the pack.

Separate the two metrics and start going back through the NHL standings first sorting on goal diff, then on goals against and which teams can score around 230 goals. In my opinion there is a difference between a team that scores 260 goals and allows 230 vs a team that scores 230 and allows 200.

Now build through the draft so you can score 230+ goals and keep your GA down around 200 and you're an elite elite team...like Colorado this year...although there is serious skew from schedules this season.

There is a big difference between a +30 goal differential team (even one with a good GAA) and this years Av’s team which would be close to +100 over a full season.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dissentowner]

I was browsing through some Athletic hockey podcasts and found one on the Full 60 with Craig Conroy back at the end of April. After listening to what he had to say I definitely am aboard the fire Tre train. Apparently Brad does not listen to others suggestions including Craig's and seems like a stubborn guy that has to have it his way and doesn't care what the rest of his staff think.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I was browsing through some Athletic hockey podcasts and found one on the Full 60 with Craig Conroy back at the end of April. After listening to what he had to say I definitely am aboard the fire Tre train. Apparently Brad does not listen to others suggestions including Craig's and seems like a stubborn guy that has to have it his way and doesn't care what the rest of his staff think.

LOL, if Craig actually said that on a public podcast, he must not be worried about job security.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

LOL, if Craig actually said that on a public podcast, he must not be worried about job security.

I’m gonna go way out on a limb and say I imagine there’s a lot of reading between the lines going on in that interpretation.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I was browsing through some Athletic hockey podcasts and found one on the Full 60 with Craig Conroy back at the end of April. After listening to what he had to say I definitely am aboard the fire Tre train. Apparently Brad does not listen to others suggestions including Craig's and seems like a stubborn guy that has to have it his way and doesn't care what the rest of his staff think.

That's exactly what he said? That seems strange.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I was browsing through some Athletic hockey podcasts and found one on the Full 60 with Craig Conroy back at the end of April. After listening to what he had to say I definitely am aboard the fire Tre train. Apparently Brad does not listen to others suggestions including Craig's and seems like a stubborn guy that has to have it his way and doesn't care what the rest of his staff think.

Are you able to provide a bit more context? Because if true that’s freaking wild.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Are you able to provide a bit more context? Because if true that’s freaking wild.

Conroy says when Brian was here he relied on his staff, with Brad he does it himself. With Brad he comes out of his office, tells us, and then goes back in whether we like the deal or don't it is Brad who likes to do the deals. Says they are on the outs when it comes to deals, would love to be on the action but Brad "hogs it to himself".

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I’m gonna go way out on a limb and say I imagine there’s a lot of reading between the lines going on in that interpretation.

Feel free to listen to it yourself.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Feel free to listen to it yourself.

Link it for us all.

[mikephoen]

I just listened myself, and Craig basically said that under Burke the assistants were allowed to reach out on their own to people on other teams to see what was available and talk deals, but with Treliving there is none of that. Everything goes through him, and then he tells the assistants what is going on and what is going to happen. Definitely felt like he doesn't even solicit opinions from the assistants.

Craig kind of brushed it off... but why even have assistants if you're not going to get opinions on things. I dunno, I definitely didn't like the sound of it. I've been on the fire Treliving bandwagon longer than almost anyone, so that might be colouring my opinion of it.

[mikephoen]

https://theathletic.com/podcast/22-t...0/?episode=142

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Link it for us all.

https://theathletic.com/podcast/22-t...0/?episode=142

starts around 21 min mark but the whole thing is a good listen.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Conroy says when Brian was here he relied on his staff, with Brad he does it himself. With Brad he comes out of his office, tells us, and then goes back in whether we like the deal or don't it is Brad who likes to do the deals. Says they are on the outs when it comes to deals, would love to be on the action but Brad "hogs it to himself".

Sounds like a Brad thing to do.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

I just listened myself, and Craig basically said that under Burke the assistants were allowed to reach out on their own to people on other teams to see what was available and talk deals, but with Treliving there is none of that. Everything goes through him, and then he tells the assistants what is going on and what is going to happen. Definitely felt like he doesn't even solicit opinions from the assistants.

Craig kind of brushed it off... but why even have assistants if you're not going to get opinions on things. I dunno, I definitely didn't like the sound of it. I've been on the fire Treliving bandwagon longer than almost anyone, so that might be colouring my opinion of it.

Trades are only a fraction of the job of an NHL executive team. It might help a GM to get second opinions on developing deals, but I can also see why a GM might want the negotiations themselves to be 1-on-1. I’d be curious to see how famously hardnosed GMs like Lamoriello and Yzerman handle trade negotiations.