Calgary Flames General Manager Ranking - #1

[Lanny_McDonald]

This is a no brainer. Fletcher without a doubt. His track record was incredibly hard to match. Who goes next is going to be tough.

Doug Risebrough was handed a championship team and ran it into the ground because of the changing economics of the game. He was caught in a very tough situation with falling revenues and a shrinking dollar. He had to watch stars lineup to leave the organization.

Al Coates was handed the reigns and did his best to right the ship. He had nothing in the system and had no money to work with. I thought he did a pretty good job for what he had to work with, but the Young Guns never amounted to anything.

Craig Button was the worst. No management skills and no vision. Was supposed to be this great judge of talent but never showed it. Poor drafting and even worse trades. Ruslain Zainullin is a name that continues to live on and is on the Flames reserve list, almost 20 years after the deal that lost us our last great setup centerman.

Darryl Sutter was a mixed bag. He came in and was a great coach, but as a GM he was borderline terrible. Completely gutted the system and left it bereft of prospects. Was a guy that lived in the moment and had no plan. I would rate him just ahead of Button.

Jay Feaster was handed a #### sandwich and took a really big bite. He did everything he could to turn this boat around, much of it unheralded and acknowledged. He restocked the farm system and did what he could to improve the team. The thing that will stand out in people's minds will be the fact that he had to trade Jarome Iginla. I wonder if Feaster would be remembered better if Ignila didn't nix the Boston deal and instead forced a bad return on the GM in a last minute deal?

Brian Burke is going to be popular even though he really did nothing for this team. He was a figure head and made others do the dirty work knowing it wouldn't stick to him. Loved his outspokenness, but wasn't a fan of his work.

Brad Treliving is a work in progress. Middling is the best I can say about Brad. Great at UFA negotiations. Terrible at UFA signings. Meh at college signings. Drafting has been mediocre at best. Trades have been a mixed bag, especially because he bleeds picks like a hemophiliac in razor blade factory.

So Fletcher then a bunch of meh. Probably have to go with Coates (no win situation but provided a plan), Feaster (no win situation but restocked the system), Burke (didn't do much damage himself), Treliving (still a work in progress), Sutter (kept us competitive for a short period), Riseborough (blew up a good thing), and then Button (the dark ages). Man, that was tough.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Feasters hands were tied by the owners, so his record is marred by that.

He left the organization in much better shape than he inherited it.

He was likely a better GM than Sutter, who was terrible.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Better at drafting, terrible at trading. Feaster is still near the bottom of the list. Treliving has been pretty decent, but it's far and away Fletcher.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

That doesn't answer my question, that just gives the final outcome which we all already know. Poor drafting may be the cause, from everything I have ever heard it sounds like Sutter deferred to scouts after the first round. Yet currently with with the same head of scouting, more scouts added to the mix, and an actual development system in place, our picks after round 1 are massively improved. The cause of those results could very easily be scouting and development.

Your lists also go to show how much worse drafting was back in that era, the fact you listed the next 4 picks in the first round in 5 of those drafts and 9 of 20 names listed were also busts is pretty telling IMO. In addition, all but Dion were picks in the bottom third of the 1st round, compare that to after Sutter, where the drafting is often said to pretty good, we have had 4 picks in that range, 2 were busts, Poirier and Klimchuk, 1 is one of the most criticized players on our team for not being good enough in Janko, the other is far too soon to tell anything in Pelletier.

Is drafting in the first round really improved? Or it a product of having higher picks? Because the only first rounders to turn into much of anything were top 10 picks in Monahan and Tkachuk. Is the drafting in subsequent rounds better? or is it the result of higher picks in those rounds and having a lot more picks in rounds 2 and 3?

Since I do have time, maybe I will look at this further and break it down more.

It's hard to compare 1st round performance because of the factors you mention. But I generally use a basis where I look at who was picked, and who was picked immediately after (next 5 picks) to assess if the selection was strong or not.
It's hard to know the component parts of why the drafting sucked under Sutter (lack of budget, lack of development, etc) but ultimately the buck stops with him.

When I look at BT the record is incomplete as many players are still in development phase, but I think you can look at a number of mid-late round hits as a sign of improved performance: Rasmus Andersson (53), Oliver Kylington (60), Andrew Mangiapane (#166!), Adam Fox (#66), Dillon Dube (#56).
And then you have a collection of prospects tracking in positive ways since their draft: Dustin Wolf, Emilio Pettersen, Dmitry Zavgorodiny, Martin Pospisil, Adam Ruzicka, Matthew Phillips.
Only a fraction of those will hit, but they tracking the right way.

BT's biggest problem has been lack of picks to let his scouting team go to work.

[troutman]

Cliff built an amazing team. That collection of players should have won more Cups with the right coach.

[FlamesAddiction]

This is a lot harder to judge than players as depending on the time period, GMs have had difference levels of freedom, resources and expectations.

Al Coates for example, was really handcuffed at the time and I am sure he would have gotten better results if there was a salary cap and not an economic climate that forced the team to dismantle. I am not sure anyone could have done better.

[EastCoastFlamesFan]

Quick Answer is Trader Cliff, hands down. Tre is in 2nd place and you guys are on one if you think Sutter was a better GM.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

It's hard to compare 1st round performance because of the factors you mention. But I generally use a basis where I look at who was picked, and who was picked immediately after (next 5 picks) to assess if the selection was strong or not.
It's hard to know the component parts of why the drafting sucked under Sutter (lack of budget, lack of development, etc) but ultimately the buck stops with him.

When I look at BT the record is incomplete as many players are still in development phase, but I think you can look at a number of mid-late round hits as a sign of improved performance: Rasmus Andersson (53), Oliver Kylington (60), Andrew Mangiapane (#166!), Adam Fox (#66), Dillon Dube (#56).
And then you have a collection of prospects tracking in positive ways since their draft: Dustin Wolf, Emilio Pettersen, Dmitry Zavgorodiny, Martin Pospisil, Adam Ruzicka, Matthew Phillips.
Only a fraction of those will hit, but they tracking the right way.

BT's biggest problem has been lack of picks to let his scouting team go to work.

For the record, I'm not saying Sutter should be #2 or anything on the GM list, I am just trying to point out that despite his flaws he might be getting underrated as a GM. In the end his tenure as GM was the second most successful one in terms of on ice product and considering what he inherited, I'd argue that is pretty damn good.

Also, I agree that Treliving's looks good so far in terms of drafting.

I am currently breaking down draft picks by GM, I will break it down picks into intervals of 10 (1st OA-10th OA, 11-20.. etc). I'll then total and average games games played per pick in that range. I will also compile a list of trade and UFA signings by each GM and post the results without commentary.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by New Era

TI wonder if Feaster would be remembered better if Ignila didn't nix the Boston deal and instead forced a bad return on the GM in a last minute deal?

The trade at the time looked better from Boston, but would not have amounted to much either:
Matt Bartkowski, Alex Khokhlachev and a conditional 2013 first round pick

The only way things would have improved is if Khokhlachev, who seemed to have some talent, would have had more of an opportunity in Calgary and done something with it.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

For the record, I'm not saying Sutter should be #2 or anything on the GM list, I am just trying to point out that despite his flaws he might be getting underrated as a GM. In the end his tenure as GM was the second most successful one in terms of on ice product and considering what he inherited, I'd argue that is pretty damn good.

Also, I agree that Treliving's looks good so far in terms of drafting.

I am currently breaking down draft picks by GM, I will break it down picks into intervals of 10 (1st OA-10th OA, 11-20.. etc). I'll then total and average games games played per pick in that range. I will also compile a list of trade and UFA signings by each GM and post the results without commentary.

I think Sutter's success as a GM was largely due to:
- The work of the previous GM (to get Iginla and Regehr)
- Having an elite head coach (himself)
- Trading for Kipper

The final one is probably the most important move he made, and he deserves credit for that.
I evaluate GMs not just on the basis of on-ice results, but if they are effective in building and maintaining the asset base of the organization.
In this regard I think he failed.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm going with Coates for 2nd place. He was stuck in the middle of a power struggle in an era where the Flames were one of the most undesirable destinations in the league unable to keep or sign key players. Despite that he made some key acquisitions the set the table for the 2004 cup run.

[Roof-Daddy]

I sure hope most of the Fletcher voters are picking Tre next. No way should Sutter be considered the 2nd best GM in Flames history IMO. Not with his draft record and the way he lost his marbles at the end.

The best move he ever made was trading for Kipper, but wasn't there a story once about how Kipper wasn't even the goalie he wanted from San Jose?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The trade at the time looked better from Boston, but would not have amounted to much either:
Matt Bartkowski, Alex Khokhlachev and a conditional 2013 first round pick

The only way things would have improved is if Khokhlachev, who seemed to have some talent, would have had more of an opportunity in Calgary and done something with it.

I don't blame Feaster on that one. Iginla should have been traded earlier to maximize the return, but I am not sure he had to the support from the owners or the fan base to do it.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I sure hope most of the Fletcher voters are picking Tre next. No way should Sutter be considered the 2nd best GM in Flames history IMO. Not with his draft record and the way he lost his marbles at the end.

The best move he ever made was trading for Kipper, but wasn't there a story once about how Kipper wasn't even the goalie he wanted from San Jose?

My first instinct was to select Treliving #2, but I think Estrada and New Era have both made really good points about Al Coates. That is where the difficult choice is for me.

[Freeway]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The draft record under him is awful and created an asset deficit for the organization that it is still digging out from.
Can't ignore that.

I will take your aging veteran with a bad contact and give you a second round pick in return (x12).

[Bingo]

Sutter as a GM had all of great, good, bad and terrible.

The way it all finished has always had me wondering if there was something going on behind the scenes that we didn't know about ... pressure to win from ownership? An owner demanding certain players traded ... honestly don't know.

His Kiprusoff trade was great ... Langkow trade solid. Somehow landed Stralman out of dealing Primeau and then just gave him away. His work at the deadline in 2004 was on point in adding more grit and making the team harder to play against.

But those two days in early 2010 were borderline insanity.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't blame Feaster on that one. Iginla should have been traded earlier to maximize the return, but I am not sure he had to the support from the owners or the fan base to do it.

Remember that trade deadline when he came out on a telecast (game) and said it was likely they were selling.

The next day he picked up Freddie Modin.

I think Feaster was pushed around a lot.

I think Brian Burke was key in severing those ties and giving hockey ops the relative freedom to make decisions again.

[Red Slinger]

Fletcher obviously had the most success but he didn't have to deal with the small market conditions of the 90's, the salary cap, early free agency and the huge influx of international players (other than Priakin, Makarov, Loob, etc.). I think it's a lot harder to do the job now than it ever was.

[Monahammer]

Jury is still out on Tre- I am not sure we should include him in these rankings as his body of work is not complete nor really advanced enough to determine success.

Aside from Cliff Fletcher it is a pretty dismal list, and likely explains why our club has been mostly mediocre (outside of Iginla and Kipper carrying us on their back) for the last 30 years.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

My first instinct was to select Treliving #2, but I think Estrada and New Era have both made really good points about Al Coates. That is where the difficult choice is for me.

He traded for Dave Gagner to center Iginla and mentor him which was a genius trade as both players topped 20 goals and Iginla had a nice 50 point rookie season. As hard as he tried to keep Gagner he couldn't match the $2.3 million/season offer from the Panthers which was such a shame because without Gagner centering him Iginla regressed in that 2nd season. I don't think any Flames GM ever had to work under those types of circumstances of having to dumpster dive to build a roster and despite that he managed to trade for, draft, or sign the following players;

Iginla
D. Gagner
Regehr
Stillman
M. Savard
A. Cassels
D. Morris
M. Nylander
J.S. Giguere
V. Bure
M. St. Louis

Little doubt to me if he had the wealth of resources that Sutter and Treliving did he could have done better.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

He traded for Dave Gagner to center Iginla and mentor him which was a genius trade as both players topped 20 goals and Iginla had a nice 50 point rookie season. As hard as he tried to keep Gagner he couldn't match the $2.3 million/season offer from the Panthers which was such a shame because without Gagner centering him Iginla regressed in that 2nd season. I don't think any Flames GM ever had to work under those types of circumstances of having to dumpster dive to build a roster and despite that he managed to trade for, draft, or sign the following players;

Iginla
D. Gagner
Regehr
Stillman
M. Savard
A. Cassels
D. Morris
M. Nylander
J.S. Giguere
V. Bure
M. St. Louis

Little doubt to me if he had the wealth of resources that Sutter and Treliving did he could have done better.

.....and then along came Button