So What's The Alternative?

[tachaudh]

It seems like the fan base around here is now split in roughly 2 dichotomies - those who think we should blow it up, trade all our top end talent away and get whatever we can in return, create a team that'll tank a few years, pick high and see where we are at.

And then there are those who argue that blowing it up is a mistake. That there are no guarantees that by blowing it up we'll be a contender (even though, at least to my knowledge, no one argues that tanking will guarantee anything).

To me the argument makes no sense. It's like a kid who is able to crawl and is ready to walk and run, but chooses not to because there's a chance that he'll fall and bump his head. And so he crawls along for the rest of his life.

This thread is completely separate from management issues. I wanna talk simply about our players and roster. Whether Sutter should stay or go is immaterial. We have plenty of threads talking about rebuilding and retooling. I'm just curious to hear from those who are always throwing around the caveats of blowing it all up and how trading Iggy and Kipper is absolutely out of the question.

So, what are your alternatives? We keep Iginla, Reggie, and Kipper. What's gonna turn this team into a contender? What's the best route we should take?

[Futile]

First of all let me say I'm on the fence when it comes to rebuilding or not and i really haven't decided whether a rebuild is called for or not.

The thing that makes me hesitate when it comes to rebuilding is that there are no guarantees. True there are successful examples of rebuilding (Washington, Pittsburgh, Chicago) but there are also teams that seem to be in a permanent rebuild. (Florida, NYI Atlanta etc) We don't know how successful we are going to be in the rebuild.

You said Darryl Sutter getting fired or not is moot but i disagree. I think that if scouting and management were changed more fans would be on board. I honestly don't want Darryl Sutter being the one to take charge of our rebuild.

If your asking what can we do to become a contender using our current core and without rebuilding. The answer is nothing. The next best thing would be to conduct a partial rebuild trading some core players but not all (e.g trading Reggie/Kipper and leaving Iginla) then hoping your current prospects will turn out to be great players. Or trying to squeeze a number one center out of another team with current roster players and picks.

[JTech780]

In my opinion I don't think we have much of a choice this year, Calgary may be able to trade Iginla or Regehr, but it is unlikely that they can or will trade them. I think it is near impossible to trade Kipper as the league is trending away from high paid goalies in their 30's.

There are a few players that have a chance at being unloaded at the trade deadline, they are as follows:

Alex Tanguay (resurrecting career this year can help a playoff team in need of scoring)

Curtis Glencross (can skate and play with grit can help any team on a playoff run)

Brendan Morrison (veteran who can play in any situation)

Craig Conroy (long shot to be traded but has veteran leadership that teams look for in the playoffs)

Steve Staios (same as Conroy)

Anton Babchuk (big shot on the PP, has played well since getting to Calgary)

Adam Pardy (big body on the back end could add depth to a playoff team)

The one thing that all these players have in common; they're UFA's at the end of the season. Most teams are looking for expiring contracts the the deadline now, it's hard to move players with term (unless you are trading to Calgary apparently). The only thing with this list is that none of these players is going to get a very good return at the most a 2nd round pick or a middle of the road prospect, but it's better than nothing.

At the end of the day Calgary can start building now, without blowing the whole thing up, by making better decisions. There is little doubt the Calgary needs to be younger, faster and more skilled; start building towards that by trading expiring contracts for young talent or picks, and looking for young talent via UFA or RFA.

[cross16]

IMo, there is no other option if the end goal is winning a cup or fielding a contending team. if you stay the course with a new coach maybe, you could potentially get to the place where your a playoff team in the 7/8th seed but thats it. this current core, IMO is not a cup contender and the problem with keeping the current core is that you really can't make any changes this season or next due to salary constraints. this team is a number 1 center, 2nd line RW, and another top 4 puck moving dman away from being a top contender. Thats alot of pieces and two of them are very, very tough to get on the FA market. You need a ton of cap space and your not getting that anytime soon.

the only way to truly do it, is to retool with trading iginla, Kipper, Regehr and others. That is the only option to winning a cup or fielding a contender. If the goal is just make the playoffs and be a mediocre team, then fire Sutter (both) bring in a new attitude and stay with what you have.

[Thanos316]

One has to trust that the upper management is actually going to follow a long-term rebuilding plan to make the blow-up alternative workable. I'm fairly certain at this stage of the Flames history that most fans would say that we haven't had a GM like that since Cliff Fletcher left town. All the high-profile draft picks won't help at all if they're chosen in a haphazard or illogical fashion.

I'd need to see a credentialled GM like Dale Tallon, Ken Holland, or Craig Patrick in place in the Flames front office before I signed off on a blow-up-then-rebuild plan. Without a good co-ordinator in place we'd just end up like the Maple Leafs, who've unfortunately been in rebuild mode since the curse of Harold Ballard first infected that team back in the late 1960's.

[tachaudh]

First of all let me say I'm on the fence when it comes to rebuilding or not and i really haven't decided whether a rebuild is called for or not.

The thing that makes me hesitate when it comes to rebuilding is that there are no guarantees. True there are successful examples of rebuilding (Washington, Pittsburgh, Chicago) but there are also teams that seem to be in a permanent rebuild. (Florida, NYI Atlanta etc) We don't know how successful we are going to be in the rebuild.

You said Darryl Sutter getting fired or not is moot but i disagree. I think that if scouting and management were changed more fans would be on board. I honestly don't want Darryl Sutter being the one to take charge of our rebuild.

If your asking what can we do to become a contender using our current core and without rebuilding. The answer is nothing. The next best thing would be to conduct a partial rebuild trading some core players but not all (e.g trading Reggie/Kipper and leaving Iginla) then hoping your current prospects will turn out to be great players. Or trying to squeeze a number one center out of another team with current roster players and picks.

I have a sentimental attachment to Iginla myself. I was there as a kid standing by the tunnel as he was signing autographs during his first two games here during the 1996 playoffs. Honestly, if he's ever traded, I'll cry. But we have to put our heads over our hearts here. You talk about squeezing out a number one center from another team with current roster players? Who, Nik Hagman, Cory Sarich, David Moss? If you want a number 1 center we're gonna have to go after potential. Getting a player who is already a number 1 center is impossible. And the best way to extract that is to deal your most valuable asset.

[The_People1]

We blew it up for 7 years prior to the current regime and came out of it 1-goal short of winning the Cup.

We stayed the course for 7 years with the current regime and have gone increasingly farther away from the Cup.

So, what do you think?

In my opinion, if it's broken then fix it. I don't buy this "stay the course" philosophy because first of all, "what course are we even on?" The track record of the current management group isn't nearly good enough to warrant any credibility on it's plan to stay the course, whatever the course even is in the first place. From what can be seen, these guys have set sail for fail and are steering us right into the eye of the storm.

Look, nobody wanted to trade Theo Fleury or Joe Nieuwendyk but this team has stayed competitive all these years because of the players we got back for them. Nobody wants to trade Jarome Iginla or Miikka Kiprusoff right now but sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing is the same. I mean, i'm pretty sure we can be last place in the conference with or without these guys.

[returnofthejets]

Even if I was on board to keep things intact I'd still be afraid if Sutter was the one making the moves. I think the days of him finding role players to come in and really help our core players at the cost of draft picks is over. These deals are now hurting the club.

For many years I've read about how we're a playoff team and all we need to do is get to the playoffs and look out. Well I've been looking out and we seem to continue to get knocked out. The playoffs have even more so then the regular season turned into a special teams game. Keep it close 5 on 5 and have your pp and pk win you the game. I don't think we're exactly built for that type of game so I can't agree with the label we're a playoff built team. So we can stay the course and see what happens, or we can decide to make some changes and see what happens. Those that want to stay the course argue that there's no guarantees of future success with a retool, but is there anymore guarantees of success standing pat with a team that sits 15th overall?

[funkyjaman]

So what would be the sense of trading Iginla, Reggie and kipper to start a rebuild? Who's the new "number one" centre going to play with? Your not seriously thinking to build around Rene, Backlund and co. If that's the case this team is in for a long wait before the streets streak red again. After the core group....we have nothing really, Tangs, Rene, OLLI, Hags?? I'm sorry but you do need hockey players to play during a rebuild and if the team lacks some, if not all of the top guns, what would that accomplish? Ya a crap load of prospects and 3rd/ forth liners night in and night out for a few years before we blow that up too. Borks streakier then a hobos underpants, do we need to gamble with that type of player to lead our core group? We could get some nice picks/ players dealing Gio, Stajan, Bork and kipper if need be. Thats somewhere to start IMO. I'm not partial to any one player on this team, but to blow $#@% up for the sake of Blowing %$#@ up is not going to do anyone any good.

Oh and if we want to get faster and more offensive minded, it wont matter who you drag though the door the system here wont allow for that style of play, well until the mafia leaves town!

Just my opinion thou guys, I like this team as much as the next guy and I'm open for options but we need to tread lightly here!!

[cross16]

So what would be the sense of trading Iginla, Reggie and kipper to start a rebuild? Who's the new "number one" centre going to play with? Your not seriously thinking to build around Rene, Backlund and co. If that's the case this team is in for a long wait before the streets streak red again. After the core group....we have nothing really, Tangs, Rene, OLLI, Hags?? I'm sorry but you do need hockey players to play during a rebuild and if the team lacks some, if not all of the top guns, what would that accomplish? Ya a crap load of prospects and 3rd/ forth liners night in and night out for a few years before we blow that up too. Borks streakier then a hobos underpants, do we need to gamble with that type of player to lead our core group? We could get some nice picks/ players dealing Gio, Stajan, Bork and kipper if need be. Thats somewhere to start IMO. I'm not partial to any one player on this team, but to blow $#@% up for the sake of Blowing %$#@ up is not going to do anyone any good.

Oh and if we want to get faster and more offensive minded, it wont matter who you drag though the door the system here wont allow for that style of play, well until the mafia leaves town!

Just my opinion thou guys, I like this team as much as the next guy and I'm open for options but we need to tread lightly here!!

Whats wrong with buildilng around the pieces you get back in a trade and draft picks? Flames could probably trade iginla and get Brayden Schenn. Would you not consider that a piece to build around? I sure would.

To counter that, how can you rebuild with keeping ignila,kipper,Regehr etc? Your not giong to have teh cap space to rebuild, and no other assets are going to net you anything. Stajan, Jokien, Tanugy etc are eithe immovalbe, or are going to net you next to nothing in the terms of return.

[tachaudh]

Whats wrong with buildilng around the pieces you get back in a trade and draft picks? Flames could probably trade iginla and get Brayden Schenn. Would you not consider that a piece to build around? I sure would.

To counter that, how can you rebuild with keeping ignila,kipper,Regehr etc? Your not giong to have teh cap space to rebuild, and no other assets are going to net you anything. Stajan, Jokien, Tanugy etc are eithe immovalbe, or are going to net you next to nothing in the terms of return.

On top of that, if you pick top two and are able to garner some further picks and prospects by dealing away Kipper and Reggie and you have more to build around. Strictly hypothetically speaking, Coutourier, Schenn, and Backlund would likely make us pretty solid down the middle.

[Flyerfan52]

1 thing many aren't considering when they say "Trade Iggy, Regher, Kipper & all the other players over 25 for picks/prospects & get rid of the Sutters" is that it would leave us with a very young team. We just happen to have 1 of the best coaches to get the most out of young players. Those WJC Golds proved that.

If we're going to dump the players we should keep the coach/management. If we dump the coach/management they should be allowed to see what they can do with the present roster via moves or system.

[FlamesFanatic]

This team needs elite talent up front, and they simply don't have it. Unless you make a big trade for it, the only way to go usually is UFA. Assuming Langkow comes back, after fiddling around with Cap Geek, this was what I saw. Supposedly the cap is supposed to go up about 4 million, so with that in mind, this is what our roster looks like next year while only keeping RFA's.

FORWARDS

Rene Bourque ($3.333m) / Matthew Stajan ($3.500m) / Jarome Iginla ($7.000m)

Niklas Hagman ($3.000m) / Olli Jokinen ($3.000m) / Ales Kotalik ($3.000m)

Tom Kostopoulos ($0.916m) / Daymond Langkow ($4.500m) / David Moss ($1.300m)

Raitis Ivanans ($0.600m) / Mikael Backlund ($1.270m) / Tim Jackman ($0.550m)

DEFENSEMEN

Jay Bouwmeester ($6.680m) / Robyn Regehr ($4.020m)

Mark Giordano ($4.020m) / Cory Sarich ($3.600m)

T.J. Brodie ($0.733m) / Brendan Mikkelson ($0.687m)

GOALTENDERS

Miikka Kiprusoff ($5.833m) /Leland Irving ($1.193m)

CAP SPACE (20-man roster): $5,120,001

So we have 5 million in space, with none of our UFA's signed. If Langkow comes back, we could have up to 10 million ish. This is what I'd like to see if Langkow doesn't come back:

- Make a big pitch for one of Brad Richards or Alex Semin

- Get rid of Kotalik and Jokinen if possible

- Re-sign Karlsson, simply because I don't know if Irving is ready, and the cap hit would probably be slightly smaller.

- Waive Ivannas

- Re-sign Tanguay for around 3 million if possible (may take more, really don't know)

- Re-sign Glencross for about the same (1.2)

- Bring in a solid fourth liner center of some sorts. I'll put in conroy just for simplicities sake, though I don't necessarily mean him.

- Dump David Moss for scraps.

- Bring in a solid bottom pairing guy like Steve Montador to work with Brodie.

- Make a pitch for possibly two of the following wingers: Michael Ryder, Justin Williams, Marco Sturm, Jamie Langenbrunner, Tomas Fleischmann, Matt Moulson, Andrew Brunnette, Scottie Upshall, Nikolai Zherdev, Jussi Jokinen, Ville Leino. Probably cost somewhere between 2-4 million. Personally I'd love Scottie Upshall or Andrew Brunnette and one of Zherdev or Leino, and I don't really think we can get all of them.

It would give us something like this:

FORWARDS

Alex Tanguay ($3.000m) / Brad Richards ($7.500m) / Jarome Iginla ($7.000m)

Rene Bourque ($3.333m) / Matthew Stajan ($3.500m) / Scottie Upshall ($3.250m)

Curtis Glencross ($1.200m) / Mikael Backlund ($1.270m) / Niklas Hagman ($3.000m)

Tom Kostopoulos ($0.916m) / Craig Conroy ($0.500m) / Tim Jackman ($0.550m)

/ / Stefan Meyer ($0.512m)

DEFENSEMEN

Jay Bouwmeester ($6.680m) / Robyn Regehr ($4.020m)

Mark Giordano ($4.020m) / Cory Sarich ($3.600m)

T.J. Brodie ($0.733m) / Steve Montador ($1.750m)

/ Brendan Mikkelson ($0.687m)

GOALTENDERS

Miikka Kiprusoff ($5.833m) /Henrik Karlsson ($0.500m)

BUYOUTS: Nigel Dawes ($0.141m)

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)

(these totals are compiled using the bonus cushion)

SALARY CAP: $63,400,000; CAP PAYROLL: $63,499,166; BONUSES: $600,000

CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $500,834

Obviously this is a lot of ifs and potentials. Its hard to calculate how money will play out with Free Agents, if at all. I think the major components are get Brad Richards, re-sign Tanguay, bring in a solid bottom pairing guy, and upgrade the top six with a scorer.

Its also entirely possible that all we can get is something closer to this, especially if Langkow comes back:

FORWARDS

Alex Tanguay ($3.000m) / Daymond Langkow ($4.500m) / Jarome Iginla ($7.000m)

Rene Bourque ($3.333m) / Matthew Stajan ($3.500m) / Niklas Hagman ($3.000m)

David Moss ($1.300m) / Mikael Backlund ($1.270m) / Ales Kotalik ($3.000m)

Tom Kostopoulos ($0.916m) / Olli Jokinen ($3.000m) / Tim Jackman ($0.550m)

Raitis Ivanans ($0.600m)

DEFENSEMEN

Jay Bouwmeester ($6.680m) / Robyn Regehr ($4.020m)

Mark Giordano ($4.020m) / Cory Sarich ($3.600m)

T.J. Brodie ($0.733m) / Brendan Mikkelson ($0.687m)

Adam Pardy ($0.700m)

GOALTENDERS

Miikka Kiprusoff ($5.833m) /Leland Irving ($1.193m)

CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $1,420,001

This scares me, because its more of a realist view. There is potential of being unable to move Kotalik, Langkow, Jokinen, Moss, etc. and not having enough salary space to sign a Brad Richards type player.

I think the reason so many people are set on rebuild is its just so difficult to rebuild when the team has so many potential immovable contracts.

[funkyjaman]

Whats wrong with buildilng around the pieces you get back in a trade and draft picks? Flames could probably trade iginla and get Brayden Schenn. Would you not consider that a piece to build around? I sure would.

To counter that, how can you rebuild with keeping ignila,kipper,Regehr etc? Your not giong to have teh cap space to rebuild, and no other assets are going to net you anything. Stajan, Jokien, Tanugy etc are eithe immovalbe, or are going to net you next to nothing in the terms of return.

I think my issue is how do you build around someting unproven? Making an assumption that "high prospects" are going to save this team is risky business. You would trade all asset the flames have with trading Iggy, Kipper, Regehr for "might ifs". Why not retain something to build around. I hear you with Schenn and agree he has potential but its potential that's all. With out strong players around, even a few, you don't build a team, just an idea. You here it all the time in these forums that after Iggy, Kipper, Reggie, J-bo and Gio there's not much left in the bank. I would consider 1 of the core guys tradeble and whoever gets the best return could go, but not all of them, and not all at once.

With our present state of affairs on ice we will most likely be picking in a good spot this draft anyway. Trade Iggy or Kipper if you think it's the most appealing and land a first and whatever else. That gives us two first rounders, high ones, this draft. Use players like Tangs, Bork, Stajan, Moss etc. for other picks/players if you can.We also should keep in mind that in 2012 we have like 9 players (including, Staios, Olli, Kotalik, Lanks, Sarich)and 25+ million coming off the books, that's in a season and a half. No matter what we do to the team this year it's not going to make next season any better, better prospects maybe, but not better. So instead of a team with a combined age of Hugh Hefner next season we still keep some age and experience to grow around, bring up players like (not all) Brodie, Nemisz, Negrin, Pelech, Stone, Wahl and see how we play next season and then add in the 2012 off season the players to fill whatever holes needing to be filled, plus most likely another first round pick to add to the group. I, in my humble opinion, believe this route to be a better and more stable rebuilding process then a barn burner. With less risk, more time to think threw our dealings and with less emotion involved and still beable to watch a hockey game at the end of the day. It's not that much different really then what you fine folks are saying, just another way.

[cross16]

i don't agree that trading just iggy,Kipper, Regehr, is a 'barn burning". i think keeping guys like Backlund, jbow, Gio, Bouque etc gives you enough of a base to build off of. You'd still have a d core that, IMO, would be very solid and really your only losing Iginla up front. Big loss, but is it really that big?

Sure Schenn and other prospects are unknown. but would you really rather wait 3 seaons, continue to be mediocre hope for other unknown porpsects in Nemisz, Wahl etc to work out? plus by the time you do, ignila, Kipper, Regher are all nearing the end of their careers. YOu've just prolonged the rebuild.

I agree completely with Fanatic, the Flames problam is their high end talent. Even if they wait for guyus like Nemisz, Wahl etc those guys are not the high end talent guys the Flames need. Drafting one of two in the first round is going to take a few years to materialize. i think the fastest way to fix this problem is to trade for high end talent. IMO, high end talent prospects are not as much of a risk or gamble as you.

[Jens-1]

We blew it up for 7 years prior to the current regime and came out of it 1-goal short of winning the Cup.

We stayed the course for 7 years with the current regime and have gone increasingly farther away from the Cup.

So, what do you think?

In my opinion, if it's broken then fix it. I don't buy this "stay the course" philosophy because first of all, "what course are we even on?" The track record of the current management group isn't nearly good enough to warrant any credibility on it's plan to stay the course, whatever the course even is in the first place. From what can be seen, these guys have set sail for fail and are steering us right into the eye of the storm.

Look, nobody wanted to trade Theo Fleury or Joe Nieuwendyk but this team has stayed competitive all these years because of the players we got back for them. Nobody wants to trade Jarome Iginla or Miikka Kiprusoff right now but sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing is the same. I mean, i'm pretty sure we can be last place in the conference with or without these guys.

I totally agree with you!

I think it'll be tough for all of us, when we're going to trade Iggy or Reggie or Kipper,...but you said it, sometimes the hardest things are the right things...

I really hope that Iggy retires as a Flame!He's our Franchise player, a great leader and a great guy. But we really have to weigh a deal, if the price is right!

[PokernHockey]

I think my issue is how do you build around someting unproven? Making an assumption that "high prospects" are going to save this team is risky business. You would trade all asset the flames have with trading Iggy, Kipper, Regehr for "might ifs". Why not retain something to build around. I hear you with Schenn and agree he has potential but its potential that's all. With out strong players around, even a few, you don't build a team, just an idea. You here it all the time in these forums that after Iggy, Kipper, Reggie, J-bo and Gio there's not much left in the bank. I would consider 1 of the core guys tradeble and whoever gets the best return could go, but not all of them, and not all at once.

With our present state of affairs on ice we will most likely be picking in a good spot this draft anyway. Trade Iggy or Kipper if you think it's the most appealing and land a first and whatever else. That gives us two first rounders, high ones, this draft. Use players like Tangs, Bork, Stajan, Moss etc. for other picks/players if you can.We also should keep in mind that in 2012 we have like 9 players (including, Staios, Olli, Kotalik, Lanks, Sarich)and 25+ million coming off the books, that's in a season and a half. No matter what we do to the team this year it's not going to make next season any better, better prospects maybe, but not better. So instead of a team with a combined age of Hugh Hefner next season we still keep some age and experience to grow around, bring up players like (not all) Brodie, Nemisz, Negrin, Pelech, Stone, Wahl and see how we play next season and then add in the 2012 off season the players to fill whatever holes needing to be filled, plus most likely another first round pick to add to the group. I, in my humble opinion, believe this route to be a better and more stable rebuilding process then a barn burner. With less risk, more time to think threw our dealings and with less emotion involved and still beable to watch a hockey game at the end of the day. It's not that much different really then what you fine folks are saying, just another way.

well, when we got them, iggy, regeher, and kipper were all unproven prospects. building around them got us within a goal of winning the cup, and into the playoffs every year until last year since the cup run. crosby (a cup), ovi, taves (cup), kane (cup), broduer (many cups), hall (rookie year and already outscoring all but 2 flames), nash, etc. etc. etc. were all unproven prospects when teams decided to build around them.

im not saying it is guaranteed, you could also try to build around a dagle, but there is precedent of it working, especially for teams outside of the playoffs, it is the normal trend. current cup contenders do not build around prospects, but I would argue we are closer to the position the pens and hawks were in then the position of boston this year where segin is their future, but he will be "proven" if and when the hawks decide to build around him.

to the point that you can trade other "core" and rebuild while keeping iggy, kipper, reg. I agree that you could get assets back for gio, backland, etc. however, a) the return would not be as high, and if you are "rebuilding" it is unrealistic to think that it can win you a cup within a year or 2. if you trade gio you traded the "core/asset" that is in his prime and has probably 10 years at least in the nhl still. if you keep iggy he has at best a few years left in his prime. yes- he can probably play for another 6-7 years, but does anyone honestly expect him to be a first line superstar in 3 years? at 36? unlikely.

THAT is why i think if you do decide to do the rebuild, it HAS to be iggy, kipper, reg who you trade and the younger "Core" players who you keep.

also, keeping, gio, buckland, BORK, bouwmiester (only current "core" i think should potentially stay if you are doing a rebuild because he will still be able to be a contributor for a number of years). does give you something to build around and hopefully we get back, or draft something that is amazing and becomes the next iggy for us.

another thing for this is you have to look at who would want to give up the return you want. its all good to say trade a player who is a few years away from their prime for a prospect who is farther away from it, but what team wants to do that?

there are basically 2 types of teams:

-contenders who want to win today, and they will trade assets to be better today (the flames since the cup run)

-non contenders who want assets, and will trade their aging superstars/other non prospects (players under 24 for lack of better definition) to get prospects/picks back.

we are not going to be able to get hall out of the oil for iggy, or for backland + gio if you wanna keep iggy but still get that top talent

we are also not going to get crosby out of the pens for assets to help today.

we can however get prospects and other "future" players out of the kings, etc. for iggy, kipper, reg.

[C_worthy]

I am going to approach this from (what I believe to be) the view of management. It is easy in forums like this to talk about change, but when you are managing a major enterprise like the Flames, change is difficult, slow to materialize, and rife with uncertainty. Most importantly, once you change direction, you can't go back, so you better be sure you are making the right decision (it is through multiple changes of direction that you find yourself in situations like FLA, NYI and TLM, so you definitely want to avoid that!).

So let's look at what management thinks they currently have. They strongly believe (and I heard this directly from KK's mouth very recently) that they have loads of talented players and that the team is VERY close to turning the corner and putting it all together. It doesn't matter at all whether they are right, or whether we agree with them. The fact of the matter is that they believe it and they MAY be right - and history shows many examples of teams that looked terrible and then one thing happened and the ship was righted. (I am not saying I believe this, I am simply trying to illustrate where the team is and where management thinks it is, so please save your arguments about a lack of talent, because we have already heard them and management doesn't agree with you.

Okay, so understanding where we are, we have 3 basic options IMO:

1) stay the course, and possibly try to tweak things a bit.

2) remain committed to the core, but try to do a minor rebuild around them

3) do a full rebuild

Again, since change is un-reversible, the most managerially sound approach is to start with the simplest strategy that requires the least amount of change. Obviously, that is #1 and that is precisely the path management is currently on. The issue here is: at what point to you decide that the ship-righting is never going to happen? And the challenge for management is that the line is right there in front of them - the team is close, they are right in every game, there is - on paper - enough talent for this team to be successful. And the last thing management wants to do is throw in the towel on the team they built just before it finally gets its act together.

So count on management staying the course for a while.

But let's assume that nothing has changed by February and the team is still 14th or 15th. At that point, management has to move to either strategy #2 or #3. Going to #2 requires less change than #3.

The problem with #2 is that, with cap restraints, and with the age of the core (specifically Iggy, Kipper, and Regehr - obviously some of the other key players are a bit younger), it would be EXTREMELY difficult to re-build around those players in a short enough amount of time that those players are still young enough to be effective by the time the re-tooling is complete. Cross already discussed this point, so I won't bother going into any more detail on it.

For those that say a number one centre will push this core over the top, I believe this is actually a FAR riskier strategy than a rebuild. The reason being that the amount of assets that it would cost to acquire one (almost certainly including picks and or some of the few prospects that we do have) would be significant. And if the team still didn't win, then what? We would be looking at a very long, and very painful re-build. AND, even the younger core players like Gio, JBo and Bourque, would be past their prime by the time the cupboards were re-stocked. No IMO, this is the worst possible road for the team.

So that leaves #3. Again, Cross and others have already outlined a very good and very executable blueprint. If we trade Iggy, Regehr, Kipper, and any of the other older players (like Tangs, Hagman and Sarich) that we could get a decent return for, we could re-stock the cupboards very quickly. Assuming the oft-talked-about trade with LA as a starting point, if we could get Schenn and a 1st or another prospect for Iggy, a late-round first for Regehr, and a couple good prospects]picks for Kipper, we would immediately add 3 prospects (including a very high-end centre prospect) and 3 first rounders INCLUDING a lottery pick, in one year! That would likely mean 3 top 6 players right away to add to Backlund and Bourque, just in the first summer.

Considering that we already have a great young nucleus of defensemen to build around, along with some solid 2nd and 3rd line prospects like Nemisz et all, the prospect pool would instantly go from being among the skinniest in the NHL to among the deepest. Then, one more year of being less than a contender, and we get another good position in the draft (maybe even another lottery pick). Then all of those contracts that we couldn't move,(hopefully some would have been traded, of course) like Joker, Kotalik, Sarich, Moss, Langkow, Hagman, Kostopoulos, Ivanans, and Jackman all come off the books, and suddenly we have plenty of cash for free agents to plug whatever holes remain (probably one or two more top 6's.

In my opinion, the Flames are in a unique position (with lots of assets and many young defensemen), to rebuild in a very quick fashion. However, there is (and should be, IMO) still a commitment to the first strategy. But the moment it becomes clear (I know many of you already think it already is clear, but try to put yourself in management's shoes) that strategy #1 isn't working, THEY NEED TO MAKE A COMPLETE AND IMMEDIATE COMMITMENT to strategy #3.

Good topic and OP (and lots of good ideas from everyone), and my apologies for the length of the post.

[calgarywhite]

the only way to truly do it, is to retool with trading iginla, Kipper, Regehr and others.

My thoughts as well. The biggest problem is that if we are trading away the family jewels, I wouldn't trust Dutter in the negotiations. We need someone with fresh ideas who can trade for the long term growth of the club, not just to try to fix a sinking ship in the short term by bringing in golden oldies for their "leadership qualities". How many old leaders do we now have who are on ridiculous contracts, who can turn about as fast as milk. Once we get some young legs and players who are willing to buy into the coach's system 100% of the time, I'm sure Butter will have success.

We have too many old dogs who don't want to learn any new tricks.

[funkyjaman]

i don't agree that trading just iggy,Kipper, Regehr, is a 'barn burning". i think keeping guys like Backlund, jbow, Gio, Bouque etc gives you enough of a base to build off of. You'd still have a d core that, IMO, would be very solid and really your only losing Iginla up front. Big loss, but is it really that big?

Sure Schenn and other prospects are unknown. but would you really rather wait 3 seaons, continue to be mediocre hope for other unknown porpsects in Nemisz, Wahl etc to work out? plus by the time you do, ignila, Kipper, Regher are all nearing the end of their careers. YOu've just prolonged the rebuild.

I agree completely with Fanatic, the Flames problam is their high end talent. Even if they wait for guyus like Nemisz, Wahl etc those guys are not the high end talent guys the Flames need. Drafting one of two in the first round is going to take a few years to materialize. i think the fastest way to fix this problem is to trade for high end talent. IMO, high end talent prospects are not as much of a risk or gamble as you.

Good points! I do have some questions though:

Edit: I don't ever remember saying we should wait three years to trade Iggy, Kipper, Reggie etc. I said trade one of them this year(most likely Iggy or Kipper)and see what returns you get then work on the rest next season. I do not believe we need to keep the top four, I just don't see the need to get rid of them all at the same time this year.

Which brings me to the following questions

1. Do you have any examples of an NHL team dispossing of all their top end talent in the same year and competing in the next few with the returns they gain? And I'm talking about about teams that traded away 3- 4 top/elite players not one or two.

2. When we trade away Iggy, Kipper, Reggie, Tangs etc.do we also hope to be rid of the Sutters and bring in new coaches/ Management and a new system/ atmosphere to build around as well?

That's all

[tachaudh]

Good points! I do have some questions though:

Edit: I don't ever remember saying we should wait three years to trade Iggy, Kipper, Reggie etc. I said trade one of them this year(most likely Iggy or Kipper)and see what returns you get then work on the rest next season. I do not believe we need to keep the top four, I just don't see the need to get rid of them all at the same time this year.

Which brings me to the following questions

1. Do you have any examples of an NHL team dispossing of all their top end talent in the same year and competing in the next few with the returns they gain? And I'm talking about about teams that traded away 3- 4 top/elite players not one or two.

2. When we trade away Iggy, Kipper, Reggie, Tangs etc.do we also hope to be rid of the Sutters and bring in new coaches/ Management and a new system/ atmosphere to build around as well?

That's all

Allow me to weigh in -

1. Let's leave the principle of precedent to our legal system. I can't think of any team previously doing something like that, but so what? If something makes sense, you do it. If we trade them all away, I don't think our team is going to be competitive in the next few years. And to be honest, I don't care. In fact, that's precisely what I want, so that we can finish low enough to finally garner good draft positioning to supplement the talent that we acquire by trading them. Proper rebuilds are supposed to take time. I'm not looking for a quick turnaround, otherwise we'll just get caught up in the same garbage we've been caught in the last few years.

2. As far as the Sutters are concerned, and obviously many disagree with me on this, I don't think it's necessary to get rid of them. Yes this particular management team has made mistakes, but that's not an entirely bad thing. Hopefully they've learned from them. I think the only reason you get rid of them is if they refuse to enter into a rebuild phase and continue making the same decisions they have that has led us into this mess.

[cross16]

Good points! I do have some questions though:

Edit: I don't ever remember saying we should wait three years to trade Iggy, Kipper, Reggie etc. I said trade one of them this year(most likely Iggy or Kipper)and see what returns you get then work on the rest next season. I do not believe we need to keep the top four, I just don't see the need to get rid of them all at the same time this year.

Which brings me to the following questions

1. Do you have any examples of an NHL team dispossing of all their top end talent in the same year and competing in the next few with the returns they gain? And I'm talking about about teams that traded away 3- 4 top/elite players not one or two.

2. When we trade away Iggy, Kipper, Reggie, Tangs etc.do we also hope to be rid of the Sutters and bring in new coaches/ Management and a new system/ atmosphere to build around as well?

That's all

1. Nope I can't think of an example like that, but at the same time can you think of a franichse that has the talent level of the Flames yet is playing that poorly? because i can't. I can't think of a last place team that has a talent level like the flames do.

The NHL is a copy cat league, but I think everyone needs to be a trend setter. I'm not opposed to trading one player at a time over a few seasons. Its jut my opinion that i would rather do it all at once and start the rebuild faster, than pro long it with trades. having said that, I am only willing to trade those players provided the reutn is right. I would not trade them just for the sake of trading them. I think ignila is a much move becuase of his value, but the other two you trade based on the return value.

2. yes I think it needs to be cleaned out. I think this organizatio needs a fresh attitude and persepctive. That only comes with a housecleaning of management/coaching. i actualy think Brent sutter woudlnm't be bad to keep as coach, but I just think he's lost the team.

[FlamesFanatic]

Great post C Worthy. Very impressive. You nailed exactly why I think the team needs to trade what assets they have now for potentials. Its like I said in my blog on rebuilding, the Flames are in an odd situation where they need to rebuild, yet they have some fantastic pieces of trade bait that could garner great returns.

[DL44]

Alex Tanguay (resurrecting career this year can help a playoff team in need of scoring)

Curtis Glencross (can skate and play with grit can help any team on a playoff run)

Brendan Morrison (veteran who can play in any situation)

Craig Conroy (long shot to be traded but has veteran leadership that teams look for in the playoffs)

Steve Staios (same as Conroy)

Anton Babchuk (big shot on the PP, has played well since getting to Calgary)

Adam Pardy (big body on the back end could add depth to a playoff team)

The one thing that all these players have in common; they're UFA's at the end of the season. Most teams are looking for expiring contracts the the deadline now, it's hard to move players with term (unless you are trading to Calgary apparently). The only thing with this list is that none of these players is going to get a very good return at the most a 2nd round pick or a middle of the road prospect, but it's better than nothing.

I would have to agree that these are the pieces in play this yr only... return will be limited, but still significant if there's a slew of 2nds, 3rds and 4ths coming back.

Only problem is it doesn't free up much salary for next yr, which is expected since all the fat contracts are locked in next yr already...

you would be looking at filling in 5-6 rosters spots averaging about $1.4 mil next offseason.

with the status of Langkow still in limbo, that is some good flexibility for next season...

you potentially could add a $3mil piece, 2mil, 1.5mil, 1mil, and then 2 min wage players to fill.

Thats significant.

And probably the way they'll go... basically be able to fill with competitive pieces till the true cap flexibility comes in the summer of 2012.

[FCF]

To make the right decision on this one I think you need to fire the coach and see what happens. This team was in great shape around Christmas of last year, and on paper this team is much stronger than they were then. Since January last year we have one of the worst records in the league and despite shoring up scoring which was the perceived problem last year we still can't win. Brent has tried everything from using every imaginable line combination and d' combination to benching players and it doesn't seem to make any difference.

Is it goalscoring? Is it GA? We simply don't know because the problems seems different from game to game. We let in two but we can't score three. We score three but give up four. The only constant is, we continue to find new ways to lose. Sometimes we look like teh best team in the league other nights the worst.

There comes a time IMO, when you have to say that the coaching staff does not suit the team. Whether it is because of the system they are using, their motivational techniques, their instructing style, their personalities, a combination of some or all, or something else, and realize there needs to be a change.

I am not a Sutter basher, I admire and respect the family for what they have accomplished both on and off the ice. I think both Brent and Darryl are doing their best, but they are both very rigid-practically inflexible-when they think they are on the right path and imo this has hurt us at both the GM level as well as the coaching level.

Making sweeping or even moderate changes in the lineup presents serious challenges because of the situation we are in. Dealing from a position of dire necessity or weakness in the NHL is a recipe for getting a raw deal. Especially when the players you want to move have NMCs and if they consent to waive their contracts, would most certainly be offered the option of naming a list of teams they would allow themselves to be dealt to.

If we are to deal our best players, the deadline would be the time to do it, and it we did we would most certainly tank the rest of the season and the fire sale would be on. Before we do that I would like to see what this group can do under another coach, because the season could still be saved. The danger of that, is we may play well during the 'honeymoon period' and then fall into our losing ways again. But the upside to that is, if we do, then there will be no doubt we have to do some major reconstruction.

There are a lot of intangibles, but the cold hard facts are: before Brent took over as coach we were a playoff team and since he took over we are not.