Brad Treliving needs to go

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Scouting staff?

They didn’t ‘spot him’

The GM’s handpicked coach had the GM bring him in.

Do tell.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Do tell.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Are you joking?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Odd thing to cherry pick. We are talking about #1 Cs

Just because Phaneuf wasn’t a bust doesn’t take away from the fact that Getzlaf clearly had a better career and is something the Flames haven’t been able to draft

Why don’t you get back to the mystery of evaluating Derek Ryan?

I’m just picking the cherries from the cherries you already picked

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Are you joking?

No, I am eager to hear the story you have to share about how Bill Peters convinced Brad Treliving to sign Derek Ryan. It is sure to be a doozy; I know how much you like to make things up as you go.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

No, I am eager to hear the story you have to share about how Bill Peters convinced Brad Treliving to sign Derek Ryan. It is sure to be a doozy; I know how much you like to make things up as you go.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

I’m not sure what you are going for here

Tre confirmed that Peters brought intel on the player, and Peters coached Ryan in Spokane and then Carolina

This is well known

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Exactly. Understanding stuff like that, which we don't, would help pinpoint the specific problems to be solved.
Did the analytics department support signing Ryan but not Brower? Or did they support both?
How is the input from scouts, analytics and other sources of information used to make decisions?

The pro scouting is atrocious. Why? Fans on the forum knew that Hamonic's analytics had cratered and he was no good, but the Flames didn't? I am curious how those decisions are made because it seems almost every decision has been wrong. Is it because the scouts suck? The analytics? Does the GM set out the wrong parameters for his staff? It seems, whatever the issue is, it is the GM's fault because either he doesn't understand what players thrive in the modern game or he hires poorly...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I’m not sure what you are going for here

Tre confirmed that Peters brought intel on the player, and Peters coached Ryan in Spokane and then Carolina

This is well known

You have strongly implied that it was a decision made without consultation with the scouting and analytics dep't.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You have strongly implied that it was a decision made without consultation with the scouting and analytics dep't.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Sorry. I’m frankly not interested in entertaining this

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I’m not sure what you are going for here

Tre confirmed that Peters brought intel on the player, and Peters coached Ryan in Spokane and then Carolina

This is well known

This was common knowledge - he was Peters' son from Spokane and Peter's wanted him here...

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Odd thing to cherry pick. We are talking about #1 Cs

Just because Phaneuf wasn’t a bust doesn’t take away from the fact that Getzlaf clearly had a better career and is something the Flames haven’t been able to draft

Why don’t you get back to the mystery of evaluating Derek Ryan?

You are completely missing the point. The Flames shouldn’t have had to luck out by getting a 1C from deeper in the draft. They chose 4th. And they haven’t had a chance to draft a 1C since. Not from the picks they had, not from the picks they traded. The only possible argument is Barzal, but you have to assume (a) they could tell after 1 game in the regular season and 11 games in the POs that Sam wasn’t going to pan out, (b) they didn’t want Hamilton that much, (c) they would have picked Barzal and not (like Boston) some other guy.

Since then, zero chances at a 1C. In 2016 they wanted PLD, but he was gone. They took Tkachuk, and there’s no stud Cs after that pick. None after Valimaki the next year. No one from 2018 from Calgary’s pick on has made an impact anywhere.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I’m not sure what you are going for here

Tre confirmed that Peters brought intel on the player, and Peters coached Ryan in Spokane and then Carolina

This is well known

Treliving also said they had interest in acquiring Ryan the season prior to hiring Peters.

[Strange Brew]

I’m struggling with the scapegoating of Treliving notion that has now been thrown around. Is he not in charge of hockey operations? If the implication is that ownership have pressured him into building a contender sooner at the expense of long term success, well he’s kind of failed at that too. He certainly gets the player salary budget to do what he wants. And they generally have at least two head coaches on the payroll at any time.

Wanting to do a deeper dive into what has gone wrong is great and all but I’m not sure what information is missing in order to assess what the current GM has accomplished in 7 years.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Treliving also said they had interest in acquiring Ryan the season prior to hiring Peters.

What, writing history after acquiring him?

Right, what’s he going to do, publically give the new coach credit over his scouts?

We are all smarter than that here

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Exactly. Understanding stuff like that, which we don't, would help pinpoint the specific problems to be solved.
Did the analytics department support signing Ryan but not Brower? Or did they support both?
How is the input from scouts, analytics and other sources of information used to make decisions?

You could probably add Curtis Lazar to that group... I am not sure what check box list they use but like Brouwer and Neal, Curtis was another miss.

"Nice guy" seems to be the common theme over hard the working player!

Losing Byron over Raymond, head scratcher! Does scouting and BT value the "diamond in the rough" over the hard working player?

Maybe this is why we are in a mess, they are using a poorly defined criteria?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by TOfan

So if Paul Byron stays, what does that mean for the Flames today? Are they challenging the Leafs for top spot? Obviously there’s no telling. The point being, these are relatively minor decisions. They’re also similar moves made by, arguably all GM’s across the league. Brad Treliving isn’t the only GM buying out players or waiving others.

Originally Posted by TOfan

Sure, we can quibble over PTO’s, waived players, and 4th liners on one year league min contracts but, again, all GM’s play these cards. Are we going to be talking about how good Tobias Rieder was on his one year two way deal 4-5 years from now? Goes both ways. Not too sure why we cling onto the ‘mistakes’.

But let’s be straight, it’s the core that is the issue.

It's indicative of a horribly flawed/rushed philosophy with the rebuild.

Anything like this is a butterfly effect that's impossible to predict. Kinda like trading a 35OA pick early in a rebuild for a single year Elliott goaltending. Do we pick Kyrou or Debrincat who fill that elusive RW? Probably not, but maybe we use some of those assets in trades instead of chasing shortcuts.

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

He’s been a colossal disappointment and he’s absolutely a big reason the Flames aren’t where they want to be. This could all be stated in the Sam Bennett thread, but I can’t even bump that thread anymore with all the overly sensitive Sam Bennett fans who may have to finally come to terms with what he actually is instead of blaming everything and everyone else.

Any rebuild predicated on an 18yo becoming a 22 yo superstar is failure.

I think it's clear to all that Bennett's ceiling is simply not what we hoped. But I think it's fair to wonder how much his development was pooched by the rushed rebuild and a team trying to run before it could walk.

Leon got sent back down. Couturier took yeeeeeears to blossom. Olli Jokinen's first four years were way worse than Bennett's. Ryan Strome showed promise in his 21yo season but it took 5 more years before he exceeded 35 points. Playing C in the NHL is hard...lots of high picks take a long time to figure it out...most don't get asked to be swiss-army-knives to patch holes on flawed rosters.

Expectations were simply out of whack for the reality of 4OA picks, which are closer to a coin flip than a sure thing.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

What, writing history after acquiring him?

Right, what’s he going to do, publically give the new coach credit over his scouts?

We are all smarter than that here

Well yes, Treliving is also a liar. Why should we take him at his word?

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

You could probably add Curtis Lazar to that group... I am not sure what check box list they use but like Brouwer and Neal, Curtis was another miss.

"Nice guy" seems to be the common theme over hard the working player!

Losing Byron over Raymond, head scratcher! Does scouting and BT value the "diamond in the rough" over the hard working player?

Maybe this is why we are in a mess, they are using a poorly defined criteria?

I don’t think James Neal has a reputation of being a ‘nice guy’.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by TOfan

I don’t think James Neal has a reputation of being a ‘nice guy’.

It was just a generalization that we are not picking right type of player. We are getting "nice guys" and "lazy players" over the hard worker. Brouwer, James Neal and Curtis were all talk (nice guys) when they first arrived and no substance. All appeared to be BT type of guys (not players) when brought in.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

It was just a generalization that we are not picking right type of player. We are getting "nice guys" and "lazy players" over the hard worker. Brouwer, James Neal and Curtis were all talk (nice guys) when they first arrived and no substance. All appeared to be BT type of guys (not players) when brought in.

Neal absolutely did not have a nice guy rep on or off the ice.

[keenan87]

Can a mod please add a poll to this thread? I would love to know where everyone sits on keeping or getting rid of Treliving (I assume some are unsure).