Brad Treliving needs to go

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think we know with some level of certainty that ownership and management were not entertaining the idea of moving Monahan and/or Gaudreau at the TD. And quite frankly, I disagree that this was tbe right time to do it. Young players with term are almost never traded at the TD because these sorts of deals are always more complex, requiring more active NHL players involved. The best time to have traded them was last offseason, but the flat cap and the pandemic no doubt badly interfered with any efforts to do so. They can still be moved this summer, although in there will also be the obstacle of a NTC to contend with.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Gaudreau is the exception potentially here.

Players have been moved recently when they have 1.5 years left on their deal at the trade deadline since it get's people two playoff runs.

Duchene got a huge haul in that scenario.

Tampa paid a lot for Barclay Goodrow, and Blake Coleman because of that last year.

[transplant99]

When does JG's limited NTC kick in?

If its July 1 (or whatever equivalent this year is) then you dont have to worry about destination limits if they deal him at the draft...which is when the vast majority of big deals happen.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

When does JG's limited NTC kick in?

If its July 1 (or whatever equivalent this year is) then you dont have to worry about destination limits if they deal him at the draft...which is when the vast majority of big deals happen.

Yes, he can be moved anywhere at any time now to the 2021 draft as long as it’s before the UFA window.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Maybe. That would be an odd decision for a group of business people. Turn down significant cash savings because you don't like the timing of payments in year 1.



I'd say more likely they didn't like having Neal's cap hit around for 8 years.

I would say the actual cash savings and cap relief provided by the Lucic trade was probably most attractive. I am guessing that owners were not thrilled about paying $23 m for an empty roster space, and instructed Treliving to find a better solution.

Again, I don't think this is a situation that has to result in straining the relationship between owners and the GM. I guess you are right that it could have, but this is nothing but speculation on your part.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Gaudreau is the exception potentially here.



Players have been moved recently when they have 1.5 years left on their deal at the trade deadline since it get's people two playoff runs.



Duchene got a huge haul in that scenario.



Tampa paid a lot for Barclay Goodrow, and Blake Coleman because of that last year.

This only works if teams are willing to accept futures in exchange, and also to forego a run at the playoffs. I also think that the flat cap and 14-day quarantine period also makes these types of deals nearly impossible this year.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Treliving is a good GM and would thrive under a team that already has their core with a franchise center (or D) player. We just don’t have that here.

This is a weird assertion. What exactly are you suggesting, here?


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is a weird assertion. What exactly are you suggesting, here?


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

That we don’t have a franchise center or D?

[genetic_phreek]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

That we don’t have a franchise center or D?

so whos fault is that?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

That we don’t have a franchise center or D?

Okay? So, how does that change under a different GM?

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Look at the playoffs under Sutter's first couple years in L.A. and who the top producers were.

11-12 (Won Cup): Kopitar, Brown, Doughty, Richards, Williams, Carter
13-14 (Won Cup): Kopitar, Williams, Carter, Gaborik, Brown, Doughty

Don't get it twisted, there was a lot of skill on those teams. Guys like Carter, Gaborik, even Williams weren't seen as great defensive forwards prior to Sutter.

Sutter's success though was getting these skilled guys to buy into a system that maybe limited their counting numbers, but made them better 200ft players overall while still being effective offensively.

That's what Sutter is trying to do here too.

I just don’t think the Flames have the roster for a Kings approach. Jeff Carter is big and (at the time) fast. Gaborik was fast. Williams was always a highly coachable two-way player. Doughty was a Norris candidate d-man just entering his prime. The Flames core just isn’t comparable.

Even looking at the ‘04 roster, a lot of those ‘pluggers’ were fast. Nieminen, Donavan, Clark. It’s a big ask to expect guys like Monahan and Tkachuk to play a style unsuited to their skillset. I don’t see how this team plays Sutter style hockey consistently without an overhaul of the roster.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by genetic_phreek

so whos fault is that?

Not everything has to have fault and blame.
Most teams get a franchise player via the draft and high picks.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This only works if teams are willing to accept futures in exchange, and also to forego a run at the playoffs. I also think that the flat cap and 14-day quarantine period also makes these types of deals nearly impossible this year.

Shouldn't affect things if they decide to move Gaudreau. If he goes to a Canadian team no quarantine, pretty sure there aren't any quarantine restrictions going to the States from Canada either. Any player coming here from the States would need to quarantine but if we are trading Gaudreau then we are probably out of it anyway.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Not everything has to have fault and blame.
Most teams get a franchise player via the draft and high picks.

Yup.

GM'ing is a combination of knowledge/timing/aggressiveness and luck.

James Neal is a perfect example...even if you think with hindsight that there was a possibility he might start fading...there is not a person alive that would have predicted how far he was to fall from one season to the next.

Then you look at Gio...never drafted but developed into a Norris winner and playing 15 years of NHL hockey.

This club has never ever drafted top 3. Yet even during the heydays, they had all the elements required including 2 franchise type C's, multiple wingers who punched above their draft status and two Norris type guys on defense and a G taken in the 3rd round.

Obviously some guys are better than others but there is so much that goes into having success. Including completely random things like injuries, players battling addiction or mental health issues that no one knows about, or coaches being complete asshats 12 years before you hire them.

BT has many good check marks on his resume, and he has some really bad ones as well. I certainly understand the sentiment to see someone else move into his spot, but the reality is that simply wont happen at this point in time. Year one of his extension, no ticket revenue, team just put in a guy behind the bench that has zero desire to work through a tear down and rebuild (which is what a change in that seat likely means) and clearly likes a lot of the pieces already here.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Yup.

GM'ing is a combination of knowledge/timing/aggressiveness and luck.

James Neal is a perfect example...even if you think with hindsight that there was a possibility he might start fading...there is not a person alive that would have predicted how far he was to fall from one season to the next.

Then you look at Gio...never drafted but developed into a Norris winner and playing 15 years of NHL hockey.

This club has never ever drafted top 3. Yet even during the heydays, they had all the elements required including 2 franchise type C's, multiple wingers who punched above their draft status and two Norris type guys on defense and a G taken in the 3rd round.

Obviously some guys are better than others but there is so much that goes into having success. Including completely random things like injuries, players battling addiction or mental health issues that no one knows about, or coaches being complete asshats 12 years before you hire them.

BT has many good check marks on his resume, and he has some really bad ones as well. I certainly understand the sentiment to see someone else move into his spot, but the reality is that simply wont happen at this point in time. Year one of his extension, no ticket revenue, team just put in a guy behind the bench that has zero desire to work through a tear down and rebuild (which is what a change in that seat likely means) and clearly likes a lot of the pieces already here.

well said, and should serve as a sobering dose of reality for those clamoring to see Treliving dismissed. Sorry, ain't happenin'.

Baring a catastrophic meltdown, Treliving isn't likely to go anywhere for at least the next year to year and a half. I do think though that the seat is getting warm, I will acknowledge that. I think his success/demise is now tied to what happens this offseason and the on-ice results that follow. He has some chips he can use to adjust the roster. In relatively short order he will have to play those and see where they fall.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Yup.

GM'ing is a combination of knowledge/timing/aggressiveness and luck.

James Neal is a perfect example...even if you think with hindsight that there was a possibility he might start fading...there is not a person alive that would have predicted how far he was to fall from one season to the next.

Then you look at Gio...never drafted but developed into a Norris winner and playing 15 years of NHL hockey.

This club has never ever drafted top 3. Yet even during the heydays, they had all the elements required including 2 franchise type C's, multiple wingers who punched above their draft status and two Norris type guys on defense and a G taken in the 3rd round...

I think it is important to note that it is difficult to compare eras in part because of how different the Draft is today than it was in the 1970s and '80s. Back then the Flames were able to exploit the vacuum of insight in the American collegiate system and European leagues, and were able to select Nieuwendyk in the second round and Loob in the ninth(!) as a result. I think the Draft is simultaneously not as difficult and more difficult today because there are no longer these sorts of gaps in the collective knowledge of the NHL. Wildcards continue to persist because these are human beings who are prone to all sorts of unpredictable factors that will help or hinder their development. But I think by and large there are fewer surprises at the draft because of how much more data everyone is accessing. Sure, the Flames could get lucky and turn a #17 pick into a top-line centre one day, but that is not likely. The only sure way to get this player is to have a top-two or top-three pick in hand, and to have it at the right time.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think it is important to note that it is difficult to compare eras in part because of how different the Draft is today than it was in the 1970s and '80s. Back then the Flames were able to exploit the vacuum of insight in the American collegiate system and European leagues, and were able to select Nieuwendyk in the second round and Loob in the ninth(!) as a result. I think the Draft is simultaneously not as difficult and more difficult today because there are no longer these sorts of gaps in the collective knowledge of the NHL. Wildcards continue to persist because these are human beings who are prone to all sorts of unpredictable factors that will help or hinder their development. But I think by and large there are fewer surprises at the draft because of how much more data everyone is accessing. Sure, the Flames could get lucky and turn a #17 pick into a top-line centre one day, but that is not likely. The only sure way to get this player is to have a top-two or top-three pick in hand, and to have it at the right time.

Only 2 Flames 1st rounders on that team - Roberts and Macinnis (12 and 15 OA). Loob and Sutter = both 9th rounders! Patterson, Macoun and Otto undrafted.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think it is important to note that it is difficult to compare eras in part because of how different the Draft is today than it was in the 1970s and '80s. Back then the Flames were able to exploit the vacuum of insight in the American collegiate system and European leagues, and were able to select Nieuwendyk in the second round and Loob in the ninth(!) as a result. I think the Draft is simultaneously not as difficult and more difficult today because there are no longer these sorts of gaps in the collective knowledge of the NHL. Wildcards continue to persist because these are human beings who are prone to all sorts of unpredictable factors that will help or hinder their development. But I think by and large there are fewer surprises at the draft because of how much more data everyone is accessing. Sure, the Flames could get lucky and turn a #17 pick into a top-line centre one day, but that is not likely. The only sure way to get this player is to have a top-two or top-three pick in hand, and to have it at the right time.

Yet we continue to see guys fall way down and become stars.

We see guys taken 1st overall that never figure it out.

Everyone has more data, yes, but no one knows the variables.

Its all to do with projecting 18 yo kids into the future.

Not just skill development but their maturity, mental capabilities and desire. Some are satisfied getting that eye popping first cheque and never really strive for more. Other guys, money is just not a factor on their own desires.

Just such an incomplete science.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

That we don’t have a franchise center or D?

I've always found these truism's to be a little weak. 'You can't win without an elite C', 'You can't win without a _____(fill in the blank)'.

In the late 90's you couldn't win without an elite goaltender, then the Blackhawks won with Niemi. Nowadays you can't win without an elite center, then the Blues won with ROR and Schenn. What about the blueline? You can't win without a 25min a night minute munching stud who contributes in all areas, then the Penguins won back to back with the often injured Kris Letang and Justin Schultz.

Point being, winning can take countless forms. There is no guaranteed recipe Saying this team can't win because it is missing 'X' doesn't mean a whole lot. Building a championship caliber team is far more complicated and nuanced.

(Side note: was ROR considered elite before the Blues won, or is he now considered elite because they won? which came first? And is he still elite? is he a top 5 C in the league? top 10? what about Vegas, a legitimate contender, who is their 1C?)

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

But a buyout typically saves real money, in exchange for long term cap implications. Not sure what you mean by immediate cost in this case. The only reason against a Neal buyout is the dead cap money, right? Which is an awfully big reason.

No, it's dead real money, too.

A Neal BO would have cost $15.3M and given an 8 year cap it of 1.915. So that's $15.3M for 15.3M against your cap (at a somewhat palateable 1.9M over 8 years). But you still need to fill a roster spot, so the cap impact is really 2.6 for those first 4 years where the player would otherwise be on your roster. $18M total cap impact/8years.

Lucic was owed $19M total salary for the 4 years. The Oilers will pay $3M of that. So that Flames are on the hook for a similar $16M as a Neal buyout.

As it's played out, Lucic's probably been at least a 3M+ player these last 2 years, and should be a 2M+ for the last 2 years, so in the grand scheme Flames are overpaying by ~$6M cash, and around 2.75, 2.75, 3.75, 3.75 in 'dead' cap space (~13M cap impact over 4 years). And a 3rd round pick. And our rival has 750k dead cap.


The trade has turned out better from both a cash and cap perspective. Admittedly, I didn't like the trade at the time, albeit for several other reasons, and I'll gladly eat crow that it has worked out in our favour.

[GioforPM]

If Treliving had bought out Neal, that cap hit would have bugged us for 8 years. Like how the Canucks are still paying Luongo.