Calgary Flames General Manager Ranking - #2

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

It's an interesting question, who is the worst GM?

Button did some good things, I thought (Conroy). At the end of the day, a lot of what he brought was part of the team that made it to the Finals in '04 but he also cost us the Cup because he bought out Martin St. Louis.

He was awful on coach hires (I'm 99% sure that Darryl Sutter being hired was over his head). The way he handled the Marc Savard situation was brutal as well. And Giguere for what was essentially Mika Elomo was terrible, too.

Coates brought in St. Louis, brought in Giguere, brought in Savard. He had a ton of good pieces in place that Button just flushed down the toilet.

Risebrough was strapped financially but essentially took what was a Cup-winning team and sewered them right down to nothing.

Maybe his only good move was trading Gary Leeman for Brian Skrudland, but then he let Skrudland go in the expansion draft. You could perhaps make an argument Nylander/Patrick/Zalapski for Suter/Ranheim/Drury was decent asset management. He traded Robert Svehla to Florida for next to nothing, Sergei Makarov for even less than that and the Gilmour/Leeman trade is awful even if you take Gilmour and Leeman out of it.

So I would say Risebrough is the worst. Button second worst.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

There's tiers here.

Fletcher

Tre
Sutter
Coates

Burke
Feaster
Risebrough

Button

In those tiers you can make Arguements for each.

I'd probably drop Risebrough down to the tier with Button, but I agree with this mostly.

I'm also not sure I'd even include Burke. He was just an interim GM between firing Feaster and hiring Treliving. He made only 3 trades and didn't oversea a draft, not enough there to have him listed as a GM IMO

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

It's an interesting question, who is the worst GM?

Button did some good things, I thought (Conroy). At the end of the day, a lot of what he brought was part of the team that made it to the Finals in '04 but he also cost us the Cup because he bought out Martin St. Louis.

He was awful on coach hires (I'm 99% sure that Darryl Sutter being hired was over his head). The way he handled the Marc Savard situation was brutal as well. And Giguere for what was essentially Mika Elomo was terrible, too.

Coates brought in St. Louis, brought in Giguere, brought in Savard. He had a ton of good pieces in place that Button just flushed down the toilet.

Risebrough was strapped financially but essentially took what was a Cup-winning team and sewered them right down to nothing.

Maybe his only good move was trading Gary Leeman for Brian Skrudland, but then he let Skrudland go in the expansion draft. You could perhaps make an argument Nylander/Patrick/Zalapski for Suter/Ranheim/Drury was decent asset management. He traded Robert Svehla to Florida for next to nothing, Sergei Makarov for even less than that and the Gilmour/Leeman trade is awful even if you take Gilmour and Leeman out of it.

So I would say Risebrough is the worst. Button second worst.

You can't talk about Button and not mention the Savard trade. That guy could have been Iggy's #1C, his running mate. I mean you have an elite playmaking C and a sniper RW both the same age, and he traded him for a guy who had never played an NHL and never would play an NHL game.

How many more 50 goal seasons does Iggy have with a set up guy like Savard as his C all those years?

Combine that with St.Louis and Giguere, he really pushes hard for the worst.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

It's an interesting question, who is the worst GM?

Button did some good things, I thought (Conroy). At the end of the day, a lot of what he brought was part of the team that made it to the Finals in '04 but he also cost us the Cup because he bought out Martin St. Louis.

He was awful on coach hires (I'm 99% sure that Darryl Sutter being hired was over his head). The way he handled the Marc Savard situation was brutal as well. And Giguere for what was essentially Mika Elomo was terrible, too.

Coates brought in St. Louis, brought in Giguere, brought in Savard. He had a ton of good pieces in place that Button just flushed down the toilet.

Risebrough was strapped financially but essentially took what was a Cup-winning team and sewered them right down to nothing.

Maybe his only good move was trading Gary Leeman for Brian Skrudland, but then he let Skrudland go in the expansion draft. You could perhaps make an argument Nylander/Patrick/Zalapski for Suter/Ranheim/Drury was decent asset management. He traded Robert Svehla to Florida for next to nothing, Sergei Makarov for even less than that and the Gilmour/Leeman trade is awful even if you take Gilmour and Leeman out of it.

So I would say Risebrough is the worst. Button second worst.

For me it is Button. As you outline, he really miss-managed some key situations and wound most of the good work that Coates had done. Boy - if they had just given Coates more time, what could have been.

I also look at the draft record and Riser's wasn't bad.
91 - blew the first rounder, but McCarthy was a solid 3rd rounder. The rest isn't great
92 - Fantastic. Stillman was a greaet pick at #6, putting up over 1000 games. But he found NHLers in Svehla (then given away), Bouchard and Hoglund.
93 - Blew the first, but found German Titov way down in the 10th.
94 - No home runs but a series of solid picks with Dignman, Clark, and a couple of other lessers.
95 - Denis Gauthier was a very solid pick at #20, and Wilm at #150 is good too.

His draft issue is a lack of home run picks but he did find players throughout various rounds.

Button
2000: Blew with with Krahn. Solid pick w/ Stoll who didn't sign. Moen is a good pick too I suppose.
2001: Kobasew is an ok pick at 14. Found Moss at #220
2002: Nystrom at #10 just isn't a good pick, though that first round ain't great overall. Lombardi at #90 is a home run. McBackup at #176 is also solid


So I guess overall the draft records are similar.
I still put Button as the worst.

The real shame of Riser's GM tenure is that it soured the memory of him as a player and his overall place in the franchise history. He would be remembered more fondly as a player if he wasn't such a terri-bad GM.

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

You can't talk about Button and not mention the Savard trade. That guy could have been Iggy's #1C, his running mate. I mean you have an elite playmaking C and a sniper RW both the same age, and he traded him for a guy who had never played an NHL and never would play an NHL game.

How many more 50 goal seasons does Iggy have with a set up guy like Savard as his C all those years?

Combine that with St.Louis and Giguere, he really pushes hard for the worst.

Button by far the worst. Riser was a newbie and rushed into the position. Button had far more experience than Riser and as such needs to be held to a higher account. To muff up on St. Louis, Giguere and Savard as bad as he did is telling for someone with an eye for talent.

Riser at least got another gm job. Button has been on tv since.

[Crown Royal]

I really hate saying a GM blew it drafting a guy like Krahn because prior to injury issues derailed his development, he actually looked like pretty good pick. His numbers with LV in the ECHL were great, his numbers with Lowell were fantastic, he struggled while on loan to San Antonio. When we finally got our own AHL club again, Krahn was very good, he was a top goalie in the AHL in his first year as a starter (3rd in GAA, 10th in Sv%), putting up slightly better numbers than this kid with the Iowa Stars, Mike Smith.

Then the injuries screwed everything up.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

I really hate saying a GM blew it drafting a guy like Krahn because prior to injury issues derailed his development, he actually looked like pretty good pick. His numbers with LV in the ECHL were great, his numbers with Lowell were fantastic, he struggled while on loan to San Antonio. When we finally got our own AHL club again, Krahn was very good, he was a top goalie in the AHL in his first year as a starter (3rd in GAA, 10th in Sv%), putting up slightly better numbers than this kid with the Iowa Stars, Mike Smith.

Then the injuries screwed everything up.

It's also worth noting that there wasn't much drafted around him.
next 5 picks:
Mikhail Yakubov: 53 games
Pavel Vorobiev: 57 games
Alex Smirnov: 52 games
Ron Hansey: 1132 games
Vaclav Nedorost: 99 games
Artem Kryukov: 0 games
Marcel Hossa: 237 games
Alexei Mikhnov: 2 games

Even the two picks before:
7: Lars Jonsson: 8 games
8: Nikit Alexeev: 159 games

So from picks 8 - 17 basically there was one NHLer selected in Hainsey.

That's a brutal draft. Awful. So even if he had not picked Krahn, it was unlikely that he would have picked someone meaningful.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

It's also worth noting that there wasn't much drafted around him.
next 5 picks:
Mikhail Yakubov: 53 games
Pavel Vorobiev: 57 games
Alex Smirnov: 52 games
Ron Hansey: 1132 games
Vaclav Nedorost: 99 games
Artem Kryukov: 0 games
Marcel Hossa: 237 games
Alexei Mikhnov: 2 games

Even the two picks before:
7: Lars Jonsson: 8 games
8: Nikit Alexeev: 159 games

So from picks 8 - 17 basically there was one NHLer selected in Hainsey.

That's a brutal draft. Awful. So even if he had not picked Krahn, it was unlikely that he would have picked someone meaningful.

Yeah, I noticed that too. No disrespect to Scott Hartnell, but when you do a redraft and he's a top 5 pick, and the new #1 OA was a 7th rounder it is not a good draft lol

[Lanny_McDonald]

I really don't know how Treliving gets the support he does. There is something seriously wrong with this team and Treliving doesn't appear to have any idea what that is. If he would look at his budget and player salaries it is staring him squarely in the face. Treliving should not be this high. Recency bias must be coming into play.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

For me it is Button. As you outline, he really miss-managed some key situations and wound most of the good work that Coates had done. Boy - if they had just given Coates more time, what could have been.

I also look at the draft record and Riser's wasn't bad.
91 - blew the first rounder, but McCarthy was a solid 3rd rounder. The rest isn't great
92 - Fantastic. Stillman was a greaet pick at #6, putting up over 1000 games. But he found NHLers in Svehla (then given away), Bouchard and Hoglund.
93 - Blew the first, but found German Titov way down in the 10th.
94 - No home runs but a series of solid picks with Dignman, Clark, and a couple of other lessers.
95 - Denis Gauthier was a very solid pick at #20, and Wilm at #150 is good too.

His draft issue is a lack of home run picks but he did find players throughout various rounds.

Button
2000: Blew with with Krahn. Solid pick w/ Stoll who didn't sign. Moen is a good pick too I suppose.
2001: Kobasew is an ok pick at 14. Found Moss at #220
2002: Nystrom at #10 just isn't a good pick, though that first round ain't great overall. Lombardi at #90 is a home run. McBackup at #176 is also solid


So I guess overall the draft records are similar.
I still put Button as the worst.

The real shame of Riser's GM tenure is that it soured the memory of him as a player and his overall place in the franchise history. He would be remembered more fondly as a player if he wasn't such a terri-bad GM.

All very good points. I think what makes Button's draft record all the more bad is that when he came in he was touted as a draft guru (and continues to be such for TSN) but he just wasn't good with the Flames.

[Strange Brew]

My gut reaction is Riser was the worst. People have laid out some good facts and data on this, but my emotional reaction is that he oversaw the disintegration of a still very good team. Whereas Button was bad, but he started with less.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

My gut reaction is Riser was the worst. People have laid out some good facts and data on this, but my emotional reaction is that he oversaw the disintegration of a still very good team. Whereas Button was bad, but he started with less.

And he did it so quickly.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

No doubt Treliving wins this round, for the same reason Brodie voted as one of the franchise's all time great defensemen over HOFers and a guy that nearly won a Norris and a Calder while playing here.

I suppose Ward to be considered one of the all time great coaches too.

Yikes.

Recency bias is a thing for sure. So too is nostalgic bias. Both are in play.

I'm probably guilty of the nostalgic bias over the recency bias myself but I'd have Treliving in round three of this. I'm certainly not doing that for any other reason other than I think he's better than the rest of the list.

[Bingo]

Not sure we can hang Krahn on Button either, I think that was part of the agreement with Dallas that he couldn't be at the team's table and involved until after the first round. Now did he make the pick any way? That could be argued.

I see being a general manager as a process that has a decent percentage of just blind luck. I'm not attributing every bad decision to bad luck, or good decisions to good luck - I think their feel and system is the greatest barometer, but a good decision can go horribly wrong, and a bad one great with how players develop.

To me it's the feeling I get.

I absolutely hate it when the guy in charge of my team is a person I have little faith in. You just feel lost. Risebrough had that when I was younger. Button was a sexy hire, but had a lot of things go wrong making you feel he was over his head. Jay Feaster just didn't seem to have a plan and was flailing.

I thank god Burke came in and creating a shiv between ownership and the hockey ops group. And I'm glad he hired Treliving. He's made mistakes, he's done a lot of things right, but overall I trust his process driven method to get better and better if you let him see it through. As a face of the franchise he exudes professionalism and confidence. I worry less about knee jerk, fan pleasing moves that set the team back for decades.

But that doesn't mean I think he's perfect. None of them have been.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yikes.

Recency bias is a thing for sure. So too is nostalgic bias. Both are in play.

I'm probably guilty of the nostalgic bias over the recency bias myself but I'd have Treliving in round three of this. I'm certainly not doing that for any other reason other than I think he's better than the rest of the list.

I’m definitely guilty of nostalgia bias. I remember when I enjoyed watching the team the most and judge those associated with it more favorably in these types of exercises. But I also feel there is some correlation to team success within that.

BT does also get one benefit here that no one else does, as fans can anticipate some sort of future success for which he would appropriately be considered responsible for. All the other guys, save Fletcher, were fired.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

...That team was deep and were very strong. Meddling ownership made Sutter turf Keenan. That was a shame, it was not on the GM.

Is that a fact? As I recall the decision to replace Keenan was very closely connected to Sutter's eagerness to get his brother behind the Flames bench. I would like to see more information about this.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Seriously can some people provide some pro BT arguments that don't include talking about RFA contracts?

It's a poll that BT won but the arguments are very weak it's mostly about why others don't deserve to be 2. Where's the convincing BT arguments?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Seriously can some people provide some pro BT arguments that don't include talking about RFA contracts?

It's a poll that BT won but the arguments are very weak it's mostly about why others don't deserve to be 2. Where's the convincing BT arguments?

My arguments would be
- Strong RFA performance
- Generally a positive trader, with a small number, but notable exceptions.
- Draft performance has been strong in my view.

Arguments against are
- Poor UFA performance and management of cap as a result
- Perhaps guilty of trying to accelerate the re-build, resulting in premature shedding of picks
- Poor coach selection.

Which is why he's #3 on my list (behind Fletch and Coates)

[Strange Brew]

BT's trades are interesting and I do see a pattern. He has had some good trades, no argument. And some brutal ones. What I see is a guy most comfortable trading away

-pending UFA's (early in his tenure). These were more auctions than trades, and he got good value
- draft picks
- players that don't want to be here (Hamilton, Neal, Fox, Baertschi) and who are "unreachable" (Ferland)

So players that aren't here, or are on their way out. Is he guilty of falling in love with his own players? He's rumored to have floated guys like Hanifin but it's difficult evaluating trades that haven't happened.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

My arguments would be

- Strong RFA performance

- Generally a positive trader, with a small number, but notable exceptions.

- Draft performance has been strong in my view.



Arguments against are

- Poor UFA performance and management of cap as a result

- Perhaps guilty of trying to accelerate the re-build, resulting in premature shedding of picks

- Poor coach selection.



Which is why he's #3 on my list (behind Fletch and Coates)

Thanks for the response, truly. I wasn't seeing enough of that. More people running others down and BT seeming to get it by default or something.

His RFA contracts are great, I will admit

His trades outside of the Hamilton ones are nothing really special. I guess it was actually pretty good work trading Glencross and Russell. I was fully on board with him then. He lost me after Hamonic.

Draft performance is acceptable so far. The team is young and has graduated it's fair share of players. Imagine what could've been with more picks though?

I guess I'm just not seeing his vision for the team. I dont see how this group elevates to the next tier. We needed a 1C out of our rebuild and to take the next step. We still need a 1G. Our 3 best forwards are wingers and our best player is 36. We are kind of a mess right now. Not what I envisioned in 2014.