Fire Feaster!

[403Loyalty]

I'd like Paul Fenton out of Nashville. 8 years as Director of Player Personnel (a say in drafting guys like Weber & Suter.) 7 as assistant to Poile & is the GM of  the Milwaukee Admirals.

Impressive resume IMO.

It seems you can never go wrong with Nashville sometimes.. But Poile has made some questionable trades as well so hes not perfect either but he has kept the preds competitive for the most part and guys like Fenton are reasons why...

 

The problem with Feaster is that he is a lawyer and not a Hockey guy so he surrounds himself with people who are. But if one of those hockey guys are not delievering where they should, how would Feaster know? and when he knows how does he tell him he is doing a bad job when that guy is the reason Feaster has a job with the Flames and is making trades/drafts based on their input.

 

I hope we can get out of our rebuild but can anyone actually see when we do start to contend (and thats actually an if with Feaster) that Feaster is the guy who will keep us competitive and be respected as one of the best GM's in this league?

[tachaudh]

It seems you can never go wrong with Nashville sometimes.. But Poile has made some questionable trades as well so hes not perfect either but he has kept the preds competitive for the most part and guys like Fenton are reasons why...

 

The problem with Feaster is that he is a lawyer and not a Hockey guy so he surrounds himself with people who are. But if one of those hockey guys are not delievering where they should, how would Feaster know? and when he knows how does he tell him he is doing a bad job when that guy is the reason Feaster has a job with the Flames and is making trades/drafts based on their input.

 

I hope we can get out of our rebuild but can anyone actually see when we do start to contend (and thats actually an if with Feaster) that Feaster is the guy who will keep us competitive and be respected as one of the best GM's in this league?

 

What's funny is that this is precisely what most General Managers in professional sports do. Just like any other business - they surround themselves with good people and pull triggers based on their advice. Managers who make decisions on their own are ones like the Mike Milburys of this world. Another manager who seemed to make decisions unilaterally? Darryl Sutter. We all know how that ended. Great coach. Horrific general manager. A manager's job is just that, to manage. Being a "hockey guy" isn't a prerequisite. A general manager never plays role of scout. That's the scouting department's job. Feaster is not the Director of Scouting.

 

And just exactly what is a "hockey guy"? Must a GM have on his resume that he was born in Mosquito Lake, Saskatchewan and played hockey on a backyard rink in the dead of winter when he was 12 years old? Feaster's been exposed, intimately, to the game of hockey for almost two decades now in ways that no body on this board has. This isn't someone Ken King recruited from The International Cricket Council. He's been involved in hockey since 1990 and the NHL since 1998. I'm sure he's learned a great deal about hockey talent along the way, as well.

 

How would he know that a person on his team is doing a bad job or isn't "delivering"? This is a results oriented business. If a particular individual on his team isn't "delivering", he doesn't need to call Stephen Hawking to ask him to formulate a logarithm to determine whether his guy is "delivering" or not. It's a purely objective assessment. 

 

I'm also sick of everyone crapping on lawyers. Brian Burke, who so many of you are begging to see here as GM, is a lawyer, as is Dean Lombardi...as am I. Funny, outside of myself, Burke, Lombardi, and Feaster have their names engraved on the Stanley Cup as General Managers. Mike Gillis is also a lawyer, but that's another story. 

 

Blindly using Feaster's educational background as a way to discredit him doesn't contribute anything meaningful to this discussion. In fact, it makes you look like fool. You want to talk about his record? That's fine. But the fact that he's a lawyer from Georgetown Law is a plus. It shows that he is able to engage in analytical and logical reasoning at an extraordinarily high level, which are critical components in any kind of management.

[Carty]

  Wow...   A lawyer defending another lawyer for being one...   Now who woulda thunk that was possible?  

 

Feaster is not of the same class of GM's as either Burke or Lombardi...   Also, the only reason Feaster has his name on the Stanley Cup is because the Flames goal in game 6 was not counted...  

[jjgallow]

I haven't changed my tune. I didn't want him hired and he has done nothing IMO that is really all that good. I'm not going to give him credit for "rebuilding" when it was so obvious that he basically had no other choice. I think he's moves have been ok since they made the decision to rebuild but they've just been ok. I agree with a lot of what Kehatch said in terms of why I dislike Feaster but mainly it's the fact he spent two seasons taking this team backwards, he is a bit of a media hound, and I just think his limited hockey knowledge has come through in trades.

 

Well said.

[phoenix66]

There are guys out there.  We missed out big time on getting Jim Nill for example.  You just have to be willing to look to see who is available.  If all else fails I would take Burke over Feaster as well.  

This really Isnt a fair statement..jim nill intetviewed for just about every gm opening in the last 10 years, including here when feaster was still "acting"..and was offered a few of them..he took himself out of the running. When he took the dallas job he said it was the first time he felt ready to step out on his own. He had it pretty cushy in detroit. Cant really say we missed out on him because he really wasnt ready to leave Detroit.

I think firinf him now is a bad idea..we would set ourselves back 5 years. The plan is in place, its being executed. The mere fact he finally sold management on the need for a rebuild is a major win. Ownership had iggy so high on a pedestal that he was untouchable, as soon as he got the green light he took action.

Saying the deals werent good enough is mere opinion, its easy to say we wanted more but reality is the market isnt what we want it to be. To others iggy is just an aging winger who is no longer what he was...

Fact is his drafting record is looking better than it has since Button, hes moved NMC players, gotten value in his trades

So what if he hates the word rebuild...it implies losing. People are aware the last "rebuild" almost got the flames moved from calgary, and they need to see this will be different. A good leader does not need to necessarily have all the skills, they need to manage those that do..and he has surrounded himself with people that do the job..he simply needs to manage them..which he does

I say hes earned the right to see this through

[jjgallow]

Let's face it, the problems with this team go above the GM.  Before they even consider a new GM, KK and ownership need to get themselves out of the hockey ops. It made me sick to my stomach seeing KK huddled with Feaster and Weisbrod at the draft table on Sunday.  I'm probably being a bit harsh but I think King is too hands on when it comes to the on ice product.  It also bothered me when KK said they are looking for bench strength when asked about Shanny.  Not bench strength Ken, new leadership with autonomy is what's needed.

 

There's no way around it.

 

When is the last time we've had an NHL-quality GM?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Calgary_Flames_general_managers

 

I would suggest 1991.  It's debateable, but only the Number of Decades is debatable.

 

Blaming Ken King is, in itself, generous.   One could conceivably look higher.

[Carty]

 The mere fact he finally sold management on the need for a rebuild is a major win.

 

He can't be given credit for that...   There is no other option...

[403Loyalty]

What's funny is that this is precisely what most General Managers in professional sports do. Just like any other business - they surround themselves with good people and pull triggers based on their advice. Managers who make decisions on their own are ones like the Mike Milburys of this world. Another manager who seemed to make decisions unilaterally? Darryl Sutter. We all know how that ended. Great coach. Horrific general manager. A manager's job is just that, to manage. Being a "hockey guy" isn't a prerequisite. A general manager never plays role of scout. That's the scouting department's job. Feaster is not the Director of Scouting.

 

And just exactly what is a "hockey guy"? Must a GM have on his resume that he was born in Mosquito Lake, Saskatchewan and played hockey on a backyard rink in the dead of winter when he was 12 years old? Feaster's been exposed, intimately, to the game of hockey for almost two decades now in ways that no body on this board has. This isn't someone Ken King recruited from The International Cricket Council. He's been involved in hockey since 1990 and the NHL since 1998. I'm sure he's learned a great deal about hockey talent along the way, as well.

 

How would he know that a person on his team is doing a bad job or isn't "delivering"? This is a results oriented business. If a particular individual on his team isn't "delivering", he doesn't need to call Stephen Hawking to ask him to formulate a logarithm to determine whether his guy is "delivering" or not. It's a purely objective assessment. 

 

I'm also sick of everyone crapping on lawyers. Brian Burke, who so many of you are begging to see here as GM, is a lawyer, as is Dean Lombardi...as am I. Funny, outside of myself, Burke, Lombardi, and Feaster have their names engraved on the Stanley Cup as General Managers. Mike Gillis is also a lawyer, but that's another story. 

 

Blindly using Feaster's educational background as a way to discredit him doesn't contribute anything meaningful to this discussion. In fact, it makes you look like fool. You want to talk about his record? That's fine. But the fact that he's a lawyer from Georgetown Law is a plus. It shows that he is able to engage in analytical and logical reasoning at an extraordinarily high level, which are critical components in any kind of management.

Lets just breathe for a second. Nobody is discrediting him for his lawyer skill set, in fact I can only see it as an asset in the business side of being a GM which is probably why so many GM's do have some sort of university backgrounds like law.

 

The point we are getting at is that Feaster has already discredited himself as having not the greastest pulse on the players and needed to have a guys like Conroy etc to help him. A GM should be able to do both IMO there is only 30 positions in the NHL for your job so you best be the top of the crop.

 

And before i continue Im still giving Feaster the next season before i decide if im on the fire feaster train but he doesnt strike a lot of confidence out of me.

 

As for whats a hockey guy? thats easy its someone that has been around hockey for a good part of their lifes either playing/coaching studying and even being a fan. Those fancy names of Gillis/Burke and Lombardi, well Gillis and Burke both played in the AHL and after continued to be envolved in Hockey as a life time career. Lombardi did not play the game but he was an player agent, and his path and Feasters are similar but the difference is Lombardi may only have 1 cup win so far, his record with San Jose and his input on draft choices and trades and aquasitions is what makes the difference between him and Feaster. There is not one stand out with Feaster yet, sure he won the cup in TB but his record is scary similar from Tampa Bay to Calgary which isn't always a good thing

 

His drafting record in TB was horrific and his trade record was not much better. Feaster has claimed that ownership interfered a lot from around 2007 when this trade was made

-Tampa Bay trades Gerald Coleman and 2007 first-round draft pick to the Anaheim Ducks for Shane O'Brien and a 2007 third-round draft pick

You can either believe Jay on this or not but I find it ironic that we now trade for the same Shane O'Brien as its becoming a reoccuring conicidence that Jay is seeking his previous draft choices, ex. Ramo, Jones. Which havent had any real impact in their NHL careers but we are now banking that Ramo is the second coming now that he has seasoned in the KHL ( we will see ).

 

The one thing I will give Jay is his contracts, hes been vocal even before Calgary on resonable contracts and lengths and I believe him on that when he says he will not handcuff this team when FA open on the 5th. I just hope he has surrounded himself with the right people to get our team being a top team for years to come. People say there is a reason people drop in a draft due to performance, attitude, skill set. Same could be said for a GM to be fired and nobody is knocking on his door for two years till we came calling.

[cross16]

 

And just exactly what is a "hockey guy"? Must a GM have on his resume that he was born in Mosquito Lake, Saskatchewan and played hockey on a backyard rink in the dead of winter when he was 12 years old? Feaster's been exposed, intimately, to the game of hockey for almost two decades now in ways that no body on this board has. This isn't someone Ken King recruited from The International Cricket Council. He's been involved in hockey since 1990 and the NHL since 1998. I'm sure he's learned a great deal about hockey talent along the way, as well.

 

I'm also sick of everyone crapping on lawyers. Brian Burke, who so many of you are begging to see here as GM, is a lawyer, as is Dean Lombardi...as am I. Funny, outside of myself, Burke, Lombardi, and Feaster have their names engraved on the Stanley Cup as General Managers. Mike Gillis is also a lawyer, but that's another story. 

 .

Big difference between all of them is that all of Lombardi, Burke, and Gillis played and grew up around the game. They were hockey players first and became lawyers, Feaster was a lawyer who became a hockey executive so while he may have 20 years those guys have double that. I agree that he shouldn't be put down just because of the law background but I think his background is a very valid point of discussion.

[TrippinVdUb]

This thread belongs on the HB forum!

[jjgallow]

What is the HB forum?

[bronco73]

He can't be given credit for that...   There is no other option...

I made this same argument for so many years when defending our rebuild too. It's a pretty easy choice to make when you don't have any other one.

[robrob1974]

Lets just breathe for a second. Nobody is discrediting him for his lawyer skill set, in fact I can only see it as an asset in the business side of being a GM which is probably why so many GM's do have some sort of university backgrounds like law.

 

The point we are getting at is that Feaster has already discredited himself as having not the greastest pulse on the players and needed to have a guys like Conroy etc to help him. A GM should be able to do both IMO there is only 30 positions in the NHL for your job so you best be the top of the crop.

 

And before i continue Im still giving Feaster the next season before i decide if im on the fire feaster train but he doesnt strike a lot of confidence out of me.

 

As for whats a hockey guy? thats easy its someone that has been around hockey for a good part of their lifes either playing/coaching studying and even being a fan. Those fancy names of Gillis/Burke and Lombardi, well Gillis and Burke both played in the AHL and after continued to be envolved in Hockey as a life time career. Lombardi did not play the game but he was an player agent, and his path and Feasters are similar but the difference is Lombardi may only have 1 cup win so far, his record with San Jose and his input on draft choices and trades and aquasitions is what makes the difference between him and Feaster. There is not one stand out with Feaster yet, sure he won the cup in TB but his record is scary similar from Tampa Bay to Calgary which isn't always a good thing

 

His drafting record in TB was horrific and his trade record was not much better. Feaster has claimed that ownership interfered a lot from around 2007 when this trade was made

-Tampa Bay trades Gerald Coleman and 2007 first-round draft pick to the Anaheim Ducks for Shane O'Brien and a 2007 third-round draft pick

You can either believe Jay on this or not but I find it ironic that we now trade for the same Shane O'Brien as its becoming a reoccuring conicidence that Jay is seeking his previous draft choices, ex. Ramo, Jones. Which havent had any real impact in their NHL careers but we are now banking that Ramo is the second coming now that he has seasoned in the KHL ( we will see ).

 

The one thing I will give Jay is his contracts, hes been vocal even before Calgary on resonable contracts and lengths and I believe him on that when he says he will not handcuff this team when FA open on the 5th. I just hope he has surrounded himself with the right people to get our team being a top team for years to come. People say there is a reason people drop in a draft due to performance, attitude, skill set. Same could be said for a GM to be fired and nobody is knocking on his door for two years till we came calling.

 

I don't think he hired Conroy to be that guy for him. I think he hired Conroy because of Conroy's charisma and passion and wanted him in the organization to groom him. Thus, now Conroy has his own position within the organization as the guy who leads the Heat operations. He hired Wiesbrod for that guy, which I think it's great to have that assistant GM. 

[geos]

You can either believe Jay on this or not but I find it ironic that we now trade for the same Shane O'Brien as its becoming a reoccuring conicidence that Jay is seeking his previous draft choices, ex. Ramo, Jones. Which havent had any real impact in their NHL careers but we are now banking that Ramo is the second coming now that he has seasoned in the KHL ( we will see ).

 

 

Between Jay chasing his failed draft picks and Weisbrod's fixation on undersized college players, the team is in deep with the influence of these two now. Tons of small players from college and random off the board picks make up our prospect pool. And both of their track records in the past are not great. I really do have to question what ownership was thinking.

[kehatch]

Between Jay chasing his failed draft picks and Weisbrod's fixation on undersized college players, the team is in deep with the influence of these two now. Tons of small players from college and random off the board picks make up our prospect pool. And both of their track records in the past are not great. I really do have to question what ownership was thinking.

 

Are you still on the college player kick? We didn't draft any college players until the 6-round.  The college prospects we do have are generally really good prospects.  What college players do you have a problem with exactly?

 

I am not a fan of Feaster.  But our prospect pool is not full of small college players and off the board picks.  It is a decent to good prospect pool.  

[DirtyDeeds]

If it makes any difference not even a handful of our players/prospects fit both the size(under 6' tall) and a college prospect.

 

Chad Billins 5' 10" 175lbs
David Eddy 5' 11" 190lbs
John Gaudreau 5' 6" 141lbs
John Gilmour 5' 11" 173lbs

 

Two or only half are borderline small at 5' 11"

 

We have a bunch more small players, but none of them went the college route.

 

Edit:

We do however have what appears to be an unusual high number of smaller players. Over and above the 4 listed above are the following:

 

Sven Baertschi 5' 10" 181lbs
Carter Bancks 5' 11" 181lbs
Paul Byron 5' 7" 153lbs
Michael Cammalleri 5' 9" 190lbs
Turner Elson 5' 11" 180lbs
Markus Granlund 5' 11' 166lbs
Ryan Howse 5' 11" 195lbs
Jiri Hudler 5' 10" 186lbs
Morgan Klimchuk 5' 11" 180lbs
Lee Stempniak 5' 11" 196lbs
Mark Cundari 5' 9" 195lbs
Kris Russell 5' 10" 173lbs

 

some food for thought on this smaller player list.

• the majority of the smaller players are forwards
• only a few are defense
• none are goaltenders

[The_People1]

Between Jay chasing his failed draft picks and Weisbrod's fixation on undersized college players, the team is in deep with the influence of these two now. Tons of small players from college and random off the board picks make up our prospect pool. And both of their track records in the past are not great. I really do have to question what ownership was thinking.

 

Believe it or not, organized hockey in the USA is growing.  There are now as many Americans in organized hockey as Canadians.  If this trend continues, we could see as much as TWO TIMES the amount of Americans in organized hockey than Canadians in about 6 ot 7 years.  Odds are, the best prospects will eventually come from the USA.  You already see U-18 and World Junior American teams at par or better than Team Canada.

 

So this labelling of "college players" and American born players does not hold as much negative connotation as it used to.  They may now actually be a trending hot bed and could be a big producer of diamonds in the rough.

[travel_dude]

Believe it or not, organized hockey in the USA is growing.  There are now as many Americans in organized hockey as Canadians.  If this trend continues, we could see as much as TWO TIMES the amount of Americans in organized hockey than Canadians in about 6 ot 7 years.  Odds are, the best prospects will eventually come from the USA.  You already see U-18 and World Junior American teams at par or better than Team Canada.

 

So this labelling of "college players" and American born players does not hold as much negative connotation as it used to.  They may now actually be a trending hot bed and could be a big producer of diamonds in the rough.

 

The funny thing is that we only ever hear about US college hockey. 

 

I agree that the US development is trending upwards.  Colleges have a lot to do with that, as it provide opportunity to kids that might never otherwise play higher level hockey.  Add to that the population base that the US has to work with.  It's only a matter of time before the US starts to dominate in the sport.  The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because of the exposure of football, basketball and baseball to the American culture.  That and the 20 degree Celsius days in January.

[conundrumed]

The funny thing is that we only ever hear about US college hockey. 

 

I agree that the US development is trending upwards.  Colleges have a lot to do with that, as it provide opportunity to kids that might never otherwise play higher level hockey.  Add to that the population base that the US has to work with.  It's only a matter of time before the US starts to dominate in the sport.  The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because of the exposure of football, basketball and baseball to the American culture.  That and the 20 degree Celsius days in January.

 

California is one of the epicenters. Every city that has a team has a pretty good development program. I agree with Peeps, it's a burgeoning market. 6x our population makes it 2-1 for them, at best for us, I'd surmise in the future.

Hard to argue 6-1 population advantage.

[Wreckening]

With respect to whether Feaster should lose his job right now or not you would have to say he's done a pretty good job this offseason.  He signed all of our RFA's to decent contracts.  Some would argue that Butler got paid too much but I believe we got market value for him.  He has stocked the cupboards with good picks and depth signings for the Heat, add to the fact we didn't get caught up in FA frenzy and overpay for someone.  We have all of our guys signed (with the exception of Carter Bancks) and sit at 47 contracts with a nice cushion of cap space.  All in all I'd say they've done a pretty good job thus far and seemed committed to our young guys.  I'd give this offseason an A.

Feaster, in my opinion, needs this rebuild on his resume as much as the Flames do as an organization.  We all know Feaster's thoughts on a rebuild initially but I think if he wishes to become better at what he does, like his players, he has to be able to learn new skills and adapt to become a better GM.  When you look at the Brian Burkes, Ken Hollands and such of this game all have been through rebuilds and all have done good and bad at one time or another.  Now I'm not saying Feaster is going to become the next GM super wonder, what I am saying is in order for him to improve his skills as a GM he needs to embrace this and make it his own.

[The_People1]

The funny thing is that we only ever hear about US college hockey. 

 

I agree that the US development is trending upwards.  Colleges have a lot to do with that, as it provide opportunity to kids that might never otherwise play higher level hockey.  Add to that the population base that the US has to work with.  It's only a matter of time before the US starts to dominate in the sport.  The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because of the exposure of football, basketball and baseball to the American culture.  That and the 20 degree Celsius days in January.

 

There are only so many athletes to go around in a country and with football and basketball taking away America's "biggest and tallest" athletes, you're only left with the John Gaudreau's of the world to play hockey.  They're great athletes pound-for-pound but size in hockey is not as critical as in football and basketball.  Some of America's best smaller athletes will naturally choose hockey just because there's a slightly better chance to make it to the big show some day.

[travel_dude]

There are only so many athletes to go around in a country and with football and basketball taking away America's "biggest and tallest" athletes, you're only left with the John Gaudreau's of the world to play hockey.  They're great athletes pound-for-pound but size in hockey is not as critical as in football and basketball.  Some of America's best smaller athletes will naturally choose hockey just because there's a slightly better chance to make it to the big show some day.

 

I do believe that hockey-type athletes are a different body type than basketball and football types.  Basketball attracts more 6'7" and above people with natural jumping ability.  Football tends to attract guys tipping the scale with hands the size of dinner plates.  I don't think the majority that excell in those sports fit the hockey mold.

 

States that have multiple hockey programs and those that have had Stanley Cup winners (Cal, NJ, NY, MI, IL,MA,TX) give rise to increased exposure to the sport. 

 

It takes time, but I think you will see a lot more quality players coming from the US.

[The_People1]

I do believe that hockey-type athletes are a different body type than basketball and football types.  Basketball attracts more 6'7" and above people with natural jumping ability.  Football tends to attract guys tipping the scale with hands the size of dinner plates.  I don't think the majority that excell in those sports fit the hockey mold.

 

States that have multiple hockey programs and those that have had Stanley Cup winners (Cal, NJ, NY, MI, IL,MA,TX) give rise to increased exposure to the sport. 

 

It takes time, but I think you will see a lot more quality players coming from the US.

 

Baseball is also going through ugly times with drug abuse and they may turn away naturally gifted athletes aspiring to be a baseball player.  Maybe they will choose hockey instead.

 

All in all, i have no problems with Flames management scouting heavy into the US College schools for talent.  I think it's a smart idea to get a head start, build rapport as an organization willing to open their doors to US born players, and encourage Americans to come play for Calgary.

[robrob1974]

Baseball is also going through ugly times with drug abuse and they may turn away naturally gifted athletes aspiring to be a baseball player.  Maybe they will choose hockey instead.

 

All in all, i have no problems with Flames management scouting heavy into the US College schools for talent.  I think it's a smart idea to get a head start, build rapport as an organization willing to open their doors to US born players, and encourage Americans to come play for Calgary.

 

Not only that, what organizations are trading 22-28 year olds in their system? They don't trade their higher end prospects for picks. So we have to go this route because the drafting or lack thereof in the previous regime has left us bone dry with players in that age group. We need players in that group to push in the AHL as well as push players on the NHL roster to be better as well. If we've got players closer to NHL ready, it makes the whole system better. It's a start and they're bridging that gap. It's better than standing pat and hoping someone lands in our laps.

 

They're giving guys like Cervenka a chance because who knows? I think if his defensive game was there, he would have stuck here. He had the offensive ability to play in the NHL. 

[robrob1974]

I do believe that hockey-type athletes are a different body type than basketball and football types.  Basketball attracts more 6'7" and above people with natural jumping ability.  Football tends to attract guys tipping the scale with hands the size of dinner plates.  I don't think the majority that excell in those sports fit the hockey mold.

 

States that have multiple hockey programs and those that have had Stanley Cup winners (Cal, NJ, NY, MI, IL,MA,TX) give rise to increased exposure to the sport. 

 

It takes time, but I think you will see a lot more quality players coming from the US.

 

I don't know about that. I think that players in those sports tend to work out a certain way to play within it. Look at Jones, his dad was a decent NBA player and Jones chose hockey over basketball. I think that if you're an athletic type, you're an athletic type. Muscle memory and repetition allows you to build your skill on what you have. There are a lot who are just gifted naturally at it. I think those are the ones who know the game, think the game and live the game inside out. Others have to work at it but still make the NHL or other sports leagues. 

With respect to whether Feaster should lose his job right now or not you would have to say he's done a pretty good job this offseason.  He signed all of our RFA's to decent contracts.  Some would argue that Butler got paid too much but I believe we got market value for him.  He has stocked the cupboards with good picks and depth signings for the Heat, add to the fact we didn't get caught up in FA frenzy and overpay for someone.  We have all of our guys signed (with the exception of Carter Bancks) and sit at 47 contracts with a nice cushion of cap space.  All in all I'd say they've done a pretty good job thus far and seemed committed to our young guys.  I'd give this offseason an A.

Feaster, in my opinion, needs this rebuild on his resume as much as the Flames do as an organization.  We all know Feaster's thoughts on a rebuild initially but I think if he wishes to become better at what he does, like his players, he has to be able to learn new skills and adapt to become a better GM.  When you look at the Brian Burkes, Ken Hollands and such of this game all have been through rebuilds and all have done good and bad at one time or another.  Now I'm not saying Feaster is going to become the next GM super wonder, what I am saying is in order for him to improve his skills as a GM he needs to embrace this and make it his own.

 

I think that goes for learning how to assess trades and value to players. I think that once we have players of good pedigree he will be able to negotiate from a place of strength. The Regehr deal was probably more from weakness as I think people viewed Reggie as slowing down and the Flames were ready to get him out. 

 

Let's see how he does with negotiations when we're in a position of strength.