Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski
I liked Darryl but this point is debatable. He was stubborn in player type (though eventually he did change the draft strategy with Backlund) ie Pelech, Chucko, JD Watts,etc because he wanted to play one way:
The defenceman would start behind his net, skate to center and fire it in. I watched Bouwmeester do it (and Doughty too). Straight line hockey and all he wanted were straight line players.
Trading second round picks etc. I don't like bringing these up because I loved the 04 run - how that team competed, it was incredible.
But to say he was excellent... He did change the culture and expectations so I give him a lot of credit.
|
Well, he wasn't perfect. I don't think he should be immortalized into the HHOF as a builder, or even be considered as Calgary's best GM of all time (Cliff Fletcher has that tied-up with his cup).
I am not sure he wanted to just play that one way, however. Look at Tanguay, Cammalleri (small), Huselius - all the 'soft skill' type of players. That's who he brought-in as players while as a GM. He also traded and courted Bouwmeester, who was by any definition a 'soft' defencemen physically, but a great puck mover with skill.
I think the focus on his drafts initially were two-fold:
1) The Flames had a tiny scouting department when he took over - he started expanding it once he became the GM, but I think he was also handicapped as he was a first-time GM. I notice when GMs move around, the often bring in scouts with them from previous stops who they trust. Darryl didn't really have this, but he did a good job expanding that capacity on the Flames, and together with Todd Button, started to better identify what types of prospects to draft - i.e. character, high IQ as prioritizations.
2) Players didn't want to play here.
He focused a lot on the WHL - both from a scouting resource need and the fact that players like Drury just wanted out. Even journeymen weren't 'happy to be here'.
Jay Bouwmeester was not a straight-line player IMO. He played that way under Brent Sutter, who turned everyone into a straight-line player. That was Jay's most unproductive years, and I thought he was a terrible defencemen for those 3 years. Hartley comes in, and Jay suddenly starts looking like a fantastic and creative defencemen again - scored 6 goals in 33 games with the Flames that last year (on pace for his Florida goal scoring numbers), in comparison with 3, 4 and 5 goals in full seasons under Brent.
Why did Darryl hire Brent?
I think it was an overreaction to Keenan. Keenan's teams were not defensively sound teams. He didn't really have 'systems'. He just got players to play well. "You make this much, so you play on this line, and you better be doing this well". That's Keenan. He had Calgary's best rosters IMO, and they should have been having way more success in the playoffs than they did.
So Darryl sees the issues on this team defensively, and wants a coach that can play a more defensive game. He also made the mistake of letting Cammalleri walk as well (which in hindsight, exasperated part of the problem to come).
Brent Sutter's system was stifling (and oddly reminiscent now of Geoff Ward's system). That's when the wheels really started flying off. That combination of 'stifling system' was compounded with the loss of offensive players (namely Cammalleri, who Darryl thought priced himself out, but was hyper-focused on fixing the continuous defensive lapses this team developed).
I didn't have an issue with those 2nd round picks being traded for good players - I thought most of those were very good deals all things considered. Didn't win them all, but I thought right up until the Phaneuf/Jokinen trades just days apart, he was a solid trader.
I guess it really is how you look at things. I try to measure if a GM is good or not in a few different ways. One way is off of pure success - did he win a cup? Did he go far in the playoffs at least? That's an obviously heavily weighted consideration.
The other things I look at are stuff like: "Is this team better off from his time as GM"?
- Expanding the scouting
- FINALLY convincing the owners to spend on having their own AHL team to control
- Identified what kind of prospects to draft (started under him, according to Todd Button)
- Most of all, he made the team relevant again after an entire decade of being an afterthought in the NHL.
He wasn't perfect, and he wasn't Cliff Fletcher. He also unfortunately lost his reputation and his job because of some overreactions on his part from coach-to-coach, and making the wrong choices in coaches. That knee-jerk trade near the end of his era was also an 'unforgivable' offence, and eroded all the trust that he had, and was the start of the 'Laughingstock Flames'. He deserved to be fired, and eventually he was, but I do think the things that he did do right provided a lasting legacy here in Calgary that Feaster reaped (though Feaster to his credit continued to add to the scouting department).
Point is, he did a lot of good in Calgary while he was a GM - mostly good, actually. He put this team back on the map, and a place that players wanted to be in again. His largest mistakes I thought were his choices of coaching staff, and I am worried that Treliving is going to follow in Sutter's footsteps.
