Flamesfan101

I've hemmed and hawed about posting this, but I've decided to give it a shot for a few reasons. Firstly, I've been a lurking on these boards for years and it would be an understatement to say that I find the different perspectives shared here to be very valuable. Reading the posts over the years has not only given me a better appreciation of the team and the game, but it has helped me better define my own views on things. I bring this up because, even though I've only just reactivated my account, I have definitely noticed all of the technical issues that seem to have taken over the boards in the last few months (login problems, decrease in users, etc.). It seems the existence of the boards has become a bit precarious. This precariousness worries me because I really value the opportunity the boards offer - its pretty cool that us fans can collectively interact around a shared interest in this way. And unlike other boards, I find the dialogue here to be particularly constructive; it feels like a legitimate community. While this community might not be the biggest in terms of sheer numbers, it is exceptionally engaging, respectful and reasonable in its approach. That's saying a lot given the way internet conversations tend to go these days. To my way of thinking, these boards are a worthwhile endeavour, and I would hate for them to disappear due to technical issues or a perceived lack of interest. I imagine any other lurkers out there - I'm sure they exist! - would feel similarly. So I guess what I'm saying by making this post is that I have a keen interest in these boards and I want to see them thrive. While I can't imagine that anyone within CSEC actually follows these boards very closely (if at all), this post will at least add one more active user to the stats. Secondly, I wanted to make a post because the team is clearly at a crossroads. Like many of you, I've had a hard time making sense out of this season, the direction of the team, and the short- to medium-term goals of this organization. Perhaps writing something down will help me straighten out my thoughts. With all of that being said, I will start by saying that I really like Brad Treliving. I think he is a very good general manager, and by all accounts, an even better person. Sure, he made his mistakes, but I think that on balance, he brought this club leaps and bounds ahead of where it was. I dare say he even changed the way the organization thinks/operates. I think the whole thing about him not getting along personally/professionally with Sutter is overblown. I honestly think that any differences between the two of them can be summarized as two people having different visions for the team. On the one hand, Sutter wants a big, veteran team that thrives on possession, shot volume and cycling the puck. On the other hand, Treliving looked at the most recent game against Colorado and understood that there was no way this iteration of the team is going to win a seven game series against the Avs - the Flames are just too slow and lumbering. I think Treliving therefore wanted a bit more of a hybrid team (i.e. still possession-oriented, but faster and more chances in transition) to compete with the Colorados and the Edmontons of the world. What's more, he saw this offseason as being the perfect opportunity to get started on making the transformation, especially given the emergence of some young building blocks (Pelletier, Ruzicka, Duehr, even Coronato), as well as the value that could be obtained by trading some of next season's impending UFAs now. Ultimately, I think Sutter (and ownership) didn't want to explore that route; rightly or wrongly, they believe in the shot-volume system. So not necessarily bad blood or a bad work relationship, just a different way of seeing the most appropriate next steps. Nonetheless, Treliving still saw the writing on the wall. He knew he wasn't going to be able to implement his own vision for the team (at least not easily) and instead would have been directed to implement Sutter's vision. That's fine if you believe in it, but if you don't, now you're in the unenviable position of having to implement a plan you don't trust. That makes the day-to-day a real drag. Perhaps more dauntingly, if this plan should happen to fail and you don't make the playoffs, you're facing the very real possibility that most of your UFAs walk away for nothing next offseason, especially given that so few of them seem interested in re-signing ahead of time. Any such mass exodus of UFAs would almost surely lead to Treliving being fired next offseason. By that logic, why not get out of town before the plan fails, while your reputation is still good around the league? To that end, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see Treliving go to a team like Toronto; there he would have all of the freedom and money to implement the vision he wants. Obviously I'm speculating a bit with this whole narrative. That said, if the last few days' events reveal anything to me, it's that ownership wants to stick to Sutter's brand of low-event hockey more than they want to move toward having a younger, faster team. Whether that's because they truly believe in the current system, because they don't want to go young and risk missing the playoffs (especially with an upcoming building expenditure), because they don't want to pay for another fired coach, or for some other reason entirely, I don't know. What's clear to me, however, is that the team's system is not going to change between now and October. Moreover, I'd be surprised to see much roster movement - the cap is too tight and it's too difficult to find hockey trades in this environment. Maybe one or two moves, but not much more than that. I do think there's some value to maintaining consistency, especially after last offseason's big moves. I think a full summer together, a season of having played within the system, and some general stability will do the team a world of good. I would even go so far as to say that this same roster could make the playoffs next year. Problem is, I think the mood of the dressing room is currently anything but stable. Not exactly a great recipe for success. Beyond that, I personally tend to favour the younger, hybrid model I described above, as opposed to the low-event shot-volume style currently implemented. That all leaves me a bit skeptical for the direction of the team as we head into the offseason. What leaves me even more skeptical for the medium- to long-term, are the circumstances surrounding Treliving's departure. As I said at the outset, I really like Treliving and what he brought to the team. I think ownership liked him too, if the rumours of offered contract extensions are to be believed. If he's leaving, I think it's because his vision for the team is irreconcilable with the vision that ownership currently holds. And while it's normal for ownership and their GMs to eventually disagree about the direction of the team, I think it's unfortunate that this situation ended with a good GM feeling he had better opportunities elsewhere. Then again, perhaps I value Treliving and his vision more highly than I should. Anyway, that's my analysis. Take it for what it's worth. Thanks for entertaining me with this chance to share my thoughts. Even if I don't necessarily agree with what appears to be the current vision of the team, I am optimistic that the team will hire a good GM.