Fire Feaster!

[cross16]

Yeah, on the one hand I agree with this and so did Feaster (past-tense) when he said (I paraphrase) that if the Flames owners want to rebuild they should find another GM to do it. 

 

On the other hand, there are 30 GM jobs in the NHL and walking away from two of them would spell the end of Feaster's ability to land a job with any organization in any sort of hockey ops role.  He's not qualified to be a scout.  He's not qualified to be a coach.  He's not even really qualified as a capologist.  He's a GM, assistant GM or bust.  He would be leaving, what I'm guessing, is his dream job of being a NHL GM and would likely have to go back to the mundane task of being a practicing lawyer (no offense to lawyers).

 

I guess at the end of the day all of us need to determine who our client is, ie. the person(s) we are responsible for making happy.  In my job it's pretty easy:  I have a boss and I have a client that expects a certain level of performance.  Seems to me that Feaster has (rightly) determined that KK and Murray Edwards are his client/boss.  They ultimately agree on the direction, hopefully with some professional hockey guys input, and then Feaster steers the ship in the indicated direction to the best of his abilities.

 

If I was a GM and the President/owner of the team said we are or we are not rebuilding I would do my damndest to make him/her/them happy.

I agree 100% but that also means to me Feaster made a choice and therefore needs to accept full responsibility for it. We're I was going with this is there is no way Feaster deserves to be "let off the hook" sort to speak as some fans want to suggest .

[conundrumed]

I agree 100% but that also means to me Feaster made a choice and therefore needs to accept full responsibility for it. We're I was going with this is there is no way Feaster deserves to be "let off the hook" sort to speak as some fans want to suggest .

 

Hey I said "kinda have to give him a pass!

I should have said "I'll give him a bit of a pass"!!

I'm hardly a huge supporter of the guy, we suck.

But there are some semantics to deal with in who had trade value (Iggy, Kipper) and there's no doubt KK had input on that one, let alone NTC's.

He MAY have been a bit hog-tied by situations he didn't create, is all I'm getting at.

As far as what he says and has said goes, I readily admit he's a buffoon. Hopefully he stops trying to "say the right things" and actually be a hard nut when he has to be. More like a GM in this league.

Red makes a good point that there isn't another hockey job waiting for him...capologist .

I'm not saying we shouldn't have a knife on his rope, but I'd like to see if he leans into it, now that all of the possible excuses are gone (contracts he never signed and personnel he *possibly* had no control over).

His hand-picked coach gets a full year of camps et al, unlike last years debacle of a season.

I also believe Ramo has to be better than good, or the failure will be mounting a little too high, pdq.

Kipper's end was never in question for a couple years now, has he prepared us for it?

We shall see.

[The_People1]

And it's not like he has embraced this rebuild as something he always wanted to do. In fact he's acted like he is rebuilding reluctantly

 

It's not called the tarsands.  It's called the oilsands.  Okay?

 

But who are we kidding?  It was a "rebuild" as per the very definition of the word in hockey.  Feaster kept insisting it was a "retool".  This isn't Tampa Bay and insulting the hockey intelligence of hockey fans in a hockey market is the worst thing he could've done.  It's borderline false advertising and that's illegal.

 

And who are these "post-apex" players he's not targetting?  Get real. If a 35-year-old veteran is willing to come play in Calgary for "below" market value, then you sign him.  It's not about post-apex as much as it's about paying for past performances.  You have to pay for current production.  Feaster shot himself in the foot again because maybe the Flames could've gotten a Jagr to mentor the young ones and then traded Jagr to a contender at the trade deadline for a late first rounder.

 

Well, the organization finally had to come out and use the words "rebuild" openly and honestly.  They were never fooling anybody.

 

Craig Conroy was brought in as a special assistant to the GM (or aka, his wife is best friends with Iginla's wife and the Flames needed to keep Iginla happy.)  I'm glad Iginla has moved on and Conroy is shipped off to the farm team.  I don't see many franchises who willingly give up the entire forest for one tree.  The next good move is to replace Feaster.

[s4xon]

It's not called the tarsands.  It's called the oilsands.  Okay?

 

But who are we kidding?  It was a "rebuild" as per the very definition of the word in hockey.  Feaster kept insisting it was a "retool".  This isn't Tampa Bay and insulting the hockey intelligence of hockey fans in a hockey market is the worst thing he could've done.  It's borderline false advertising and that's illegal.

 

And who are these "post-apex" players he's not targetting?  Get real. If a 35-year-old veteran is willing to come play in Calgary for "below" market value, then you sign him.  It's not about post-apex as much as it's about paying for past performances.  You have to pay for current production.  Feaster shot himself in the foot again because maybe the Flames could've gotten a Jagr to mentor the young ones and then traded Jagr to a contender at the trade deadline for a late first rounder.

 

Well, the organization finally had to come out and use the words "rebuild" openly and honestly.  They were never fooling anybody.

 

Craig Conroy was brought in as a special assistant to the GM (or aka, his wife is best friends with Iginla's wife and the Flames needed to keep Iginla happy.)  I'm glad Iginla has moved on and Conroy is shipped off to the farm team.  I don't see many franchises who willingly give up the entire forest for one tree.  The next good move is to replace Feaster.

 

And at this point.  Hartley.  I wouldn't mind a coach that can stick to a line or two.  The duo can find work elsewhere as far as I'm concerned.  Heck, throw King into the mix after he's done refurbing the Dome and we'll make it a trio.

[Redslinger]

Based on his work with the Flames for the previous two seasons I think Feaster deserves to be fired.  Based on his much smaller sample size of March 2013 to the present, I think he's done a very good job.  Once the Flames management, owners, president, etc. embraced the concept of a rebuild I think Feaster has done very well executing it.  Of course, we don't know how the results will look for a couple of years but on it's face value I think he's done a much better job than the Oilers, who have had higher draft picks.

 

Also, while Iginla, Bouwmeester, Kiprusoff, Tanguay and some of the other old guard were still on the team I think Feaster was being honest in calling in a "retool" rather than a "rebuild".  The Iginla trade was the start of the rebuild as far as I'm concerned.

 

As far as the post-apex thing goes, since the Iginla trade he hasn't brought in a new player yet who is clearly past his prime so I'll take him at his word for now.   That said, I think there is a place for some solid veteran presence on the Flames now. Having one or two solid veterans that lead by example on and off the ice could only be positive, as long as they are cheap, short term and not taking a roster spot from an up and coming younger player.   I'm not sure why the Flames would want a Jagr except to turn him into additional assets at the trade deadline.  I'm not sure I'd want a guy who refuses to backcheck or go into the corners being a mentor for younger players.

 

Where are you getting the stuff about Conroy?  That's the first I've heard of it.  I think he's been a solid hire so far.

[robrob1974]

It's not called the tarsands.  It's called the oilsands.  Okay?

 

But who are we kidding?  It was a "rebuild" as per the very definition of the word in hockey.  Feaster kept insisting it was a "retool".  This isn't Tampa Bay and insulting the hockey intelligence of hockey fans in a hockey market is the worst thing he could've done.  It's borderline false advertising and that's illegal.

 

And who are these "post-apex" players he's not targetting?  Get real. If a 35-year-old veteran is willing to come play in Calgary for "below" market value, then you sign him.  It's not about post-apex as much as it's about paying for past performances.  You have to pay for current production.  Feaster shot himself in the foot again because maybe the Flames could've gotten a Jagr to mentor the young ones and then traded Jagr to a contender at the trade deadline for a late first rounder.

 

Well, the organization finally had to come out and use the words "rebuild" openly and honestly.  They were never fooling anybody.

 

Craig Conroy was brought in as a special assistant to the GM (or aka, his wife is best friends with Iginla's wife and the Flames needed to keep Iginla happy.)  I'm glad Iginla has moved on and Conroy is shipped off to the farm team.  I don't see many franchises who willingly give up the entire forest for one tree.  The next good move is to replace Feaster.

 

This franchise has been doing this with Iginla far too often. It's great to see him moved and the team can concentrate on playing as a team instead of force feeding the puck to Iginla.

 

Personally, I think Feaster had an extremely tight leash on him with ownership's desire to make the playoffs.

 

Conroy has been placed as the General Manager(?) of the Heat. I think they're grooming him for a career in hockey and he's a great guy so why not. Although, I might think his attitude is way too upbeat for the job. He thinks everyone's great!

[The_People1]

And at this point.  Hartley.  I wouldn't mind a coach that can stick to a line or two.  The duo can find work elsewhere as far as I'm concerned.  Heck, throw King into the mix after he's done refurbing the Dome and we'll make it a trio.

 

Feaster is kind of ridiculing our knowledge of the game every time he invents phrases like, "intellectual honesty", "re-tool", "post-apex", etc.  There's the Ryan O'Reilly saga that could've costed the Flames Sean Monahan.  If that wasn't the end, then that surely was the very last straw.  If he messes up like that again, then there's no excuse.  "Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me" another gem out of Feaster's mouth himself.

 

 

Based on his work with the Flames for the previous two seasons I think Feaster deserves to be fired.  Based on his much smaller sample size of March 2013 to the present, I think he's done a very good job.  Once the Flames management, owners, president, etc. embraced the concept of a rebuild I think Feaster has done very well executing it.  Of course, we don't know how the results will look for a couple of years but on it's face value I think he's done a much better job than the Oilers, who have had higher draft picks.

 

Also, while Iginla, Bouwmeester, Kiprusoff, Tanguay and some of the other old guard were still on the team I think Feaster was being honest in calling in a "retool" rather than a "rebuild".  The Iginla trade was the start of the rebuild as far as I'm concerned.

 

As far as the post-apex thing goes, since the Iginla trade he hasn't brought in a new player yet who is clearly past his prime so I'll take him at his word for now.   That said, I think there is a place for some solid veteran presence on the Flames now. Having one or two solid veterans that lead by example on and off the ice could only be positive, as long as they are cheap, short term and not taking a roster spot from an up and coming younger player.   I'm not sure why the Flames would want a Jagr except to turn him into additional assets at the trade deadline.  I'm not sure I'd want a guy who refuses to backcheck or go into the corners being a mentor for younger players.

 

Where are you getting the stuff about Conroy?  That's the first I've heard of it.  I think he's been a solid hire so far.

 

In regards to "post-apex", the Flames should focus on "good value".  We shouldn't mind the 35-year-old journeyman if he comes here under market value.  We got to look for the good deals.  aka Gelinas, Lowry, Yelle, Macammond, Simon, Warrener, etc.  We shouldn't cancel out players due to age.  We should cancel out players due to cost/productivity ratio.

 

 

Conroy has been placed as the General Manager(?) of the Heat. I think they're grooming him for a career in hockey and he's a great guy so why not. Although, I might think his attitude is way too upbeat for the job. He thinks everyone's great!

 

I recall a news article stating Conroy has been moved to GM of the Heat but i cannot find anything on it at the moment.  Wiki, Google, etc all have Conroy listed as the Special Assistant GM of the Flames.

[s4xon]

Feaster is kind of ridiculing our knowledge of the game every time he invents phrases like, "intellectual honesty", "re-tool", "post-apex", etc.  There's the Ryan O'Reilly saga that could've costed the Flames Sean Monahan.  If that wasn't the end, then that surely was the very last straw.  If he messes up like that again, then there's no excuse.  "Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me" another gem out of Feaster's mouth himself.

 

He's definitely a keeper when it comes to quotes in front of the camera....

 

I'm not about the "almosts" so much as the 'WTF Feaster?" moments when he actually went forward with moves and acquisitions, and his mouth that seems to paint him into a corner. 

 

Most people were thrilled he OS'd O'Reilly until they found out the possible threat if Colorado didn't sign.  I don't hold him hostage for what almost happened, heck the Canucks almost won a cup in '11 but they didn't so no harm no foul.  And Feaster wasn't the only fish on the hook for the kid either.  Gillis was right there with him along with 2 other offers.

 

I wouldn't pen myself up in my room curled on my bed crying if Feaster was let go.  Same with Hartley and same with King.  If Feaster stays, meh, as long as he continues the last 3 month trend instead of the last 2 years.  Sarich and Comeau signings were "WTF Feaster?" moments, along with the Tanguay extension and the Kris Russell signing.  He seems to have eased off the on camera, on the record antics.  However, it's not the regular season just yet so I'm not holding my breath.  When the sh*t storm comes during the season, that's when we'll see if he's up to his old ways or turned a new leaf.

[DirtyDeeds]

....................................

 

I recall a news article stating Conroy has been moved to GM of the Heat but i cannot find anything on it at the moment.  Wiki, Google, etc all have Conroy listed as the Special Assistant GM of the Flames.

A more recent article:

Flames add Ftorek, Conroy to Abbotsford Heat hockey staff

[lordxan]

WTF is wrong with you all?

 

Let's think back to when Feaster was first give the interim GM  title, do you really think he was in a position to tell Mgt how it is

going to be?  Hell NO!

 

Now, let's dig deep into our databases (memory) and recall Feaster's comments when the interim title was dropped, he tabled two (2) plans to Mgt which were both accepted, if you recall, and listened closely to his comments he alluded to one being a sort of plan B.  

 

Then, after the Iggy trade, he brought that up yet again. I have noted Feaster is very subtle about what he says, BUT if you get a grasp on how he speaks you can get an idea of what he really means.  In short, he has said all along that he was going to try things KK's way (that would be the plan A) BUT he has had plan B (what we are seeing now) on the table.  In short the guy is smart, and knows what to say, when to say it and how to say it so as to not overtly take away authority form his bosses (KK).  If you want an overt gy you get Torts, I for one do NOT want a guy like Torts or in a GM role Burke, they can be too disruptive to a team plain and simple.

 

Now moving on, I would caution everyone to look at the moves Feaster has made recently (this year) and not in the past 2.  Why?  Well, look at the little things he did have control over in the past 2 years, drafting has been excellent which is a reflection of his ability to put the right people in the right spots, and thus far he's done very well on that!  Next, which is closely related to the drafting, personnel (coaching, scouting etc,) he's done very well there too. 4

 

In short, WTF is wrong with you guys, if you want Feaster gone, then I'll comment like many other have here on this matter,and say a stupid blanket comment like this:

 

If you want Feaster gone then you would like to have Jnako, Johnny G, Ber, Poirier, Monahan and basically all his picks gone too as they would surely not be here if not for Feaster.

 

Get a clue guys, while that is a stupid comment to make, consider this, true Feaster did not scout them, BUT he drafted them based upon the advise of his scouts HE hired so in away not so stupid of a comment now is it?

 

Any way, I'm good with Feaster and his moves...For now...

[conundrumed]

WTF is wrong with you all?

 

Let's think back to when Feaster was first give the interim GM  title, do you really think he was in a position to tell Mgt how it is

going to be?  Hell NO!

 

Now, let's dig deep into our databases (memory) and recall Feaster's comments when the interim title was dropped, he tabled two (2) plans to Mgt which were both accepted, if you recall, and listened closely to his comments he alluded to one being a sort of plan B.  

 

Then, after the Iggy trade, he brought that up yet again. I have noted Feaster is very subtle about what he says, BUT if you get a grasp on how he speaks you can get an idea of what he really means.  In short, he has said all along that he was going to try things KK's way (that would be the plan A) BUT he has had plan B (what we are seeing now) on the table.  In short the guy is smart, and knows what to say, when to say it and how to say it so as to not overtly take away authority form his bosses (KK).  If you want an overt gy you get Torts, I for one do NOT want a guy like Torts or in a GM role Burke, they can be too disruptive to a team plain and simple.

 

Now moving on, I would caution everyone to look at the moves Feaster has made recently (this year) and not in the past 2.  Why?  Well, look at the little things he did have control over in the past 2 years, drafting has been excellent which is a reflection of his ability to put the right people in the right spots, and thus far he's done very well on that!  Next, which is closely related to the drafting, personnel (coaching, scouting etc,) he's done very well there too. 4

 

In short, WTF is wrong with you guys, if you want Feaster gone, then I'll comment like many other have here on this matter,and say a stupid blanket comment like this:

 

If you want Feaster gone then you would like to have Jnako, Johnny G, Ber, Poirier, Monahan and basically all his picks gone too as they would surely not be here if not for Feaster.

 

Get a clue guys, while that is a stupid comment to make, consider this, true Feaster did not scout them, BUT he drafted them based upon the advise of his scouts HE hired so in away not so stupid of a comment now is it?

 

Any way, I'm good with Feaster and his moves...For now...

 

And that's Feaster's grain of salt for me, I'll give him a grain of salt, but the leash doesn't have any more give.

His moves now have to be solid and understandable to a rebuild.

[Carty]

[lordxan]

And that's Feaster's grain of salt for me, I'll give him a grain of salt, but the leash doesn't have any more give.

His moves now have to be solid and understandable to a rebuild.

Exactly, and that was the very point of my post.  Thanks!

But this is just funny LOL!

[lordxan]

Just noticed this:

 

You either play the way we want you to play or you won't play.  And if you are not going to play the way we want you to play then we'll do our best, as a management group, to move you out because there's only going to be one way to do it now."  

 

If that underline part doesn't scream what I have been saying all along I don't know what dose..Looking more and more like Feaster's hands had been tied, just up til last year's trade deadline.

 

It's becoming more and more obvious, Iggy had way too much say in the team design.  Still one of my all time fav Flames, but he was too long in the tooth here.

[Kulstad]

Just noticed this:

 

You either play the way we want you to play or you won't play.  And if you are not going to play the way we want you to play then we'll do our best, as a management group, to move you out because there's only going to be one way to do it now."  

 

If that underline part doesn't scream what I have been saying all along I don't know what dose..Looking more and more like Feaster's hands had been tied, just up til last year's trade deadline.

 

It's becoming more and more obvious, Iggy had way too much say in the team design.  Still one of my all time fav Flames, but he was too long in the tooth here.

 

I think there have been too many changes, top to bottom, for this to be placed solely on Iginla's shoulders, although I'm sure he did have some influence.

 

I also think you're reading too much into the underlined part.  I interpret that to mean "we've [mangement] decided to take more of a hard-line approach to things, and what we say, goes.  We need to put this in strong words that everyone can easily understand, so here's the widely-understood and old-school way of saying 'my way or the highway'".  However, since none of us are attendees in the Flames' war room activities (dramatic pause for evil-eye gaze around the room for suspicious-acting posters), we will never know for sure.

[CastleMania]

I think there have been too many changes, top to bottom, for this to be placed solely on Iginla's shoulders, although I'm sure he did have some influence.

 

I also think you're reading too much into the underlined part.  I interpret that to mean "we've [mangement] decided to take more of a hard-line approach to things, and what we say, goes.  We need to put this in strong words that everyone can easily understand, so here's the widely-understood and old-school way of saying 'my way or the highway'".  However, since none of us are attendees in the Flames' war room activities (dramatic pause for evil-eye gaze around the room for suspicious-acting posters), we will never know for sure.

I agree. If you listen to people speak you can pick up several things that they say, isolate them, and interpret them however you want. In fact, the only word in that sentence that hits on lordxan's interpretation is "now." Take out the "now" and it doesn't sound anything like that. My point being, you should never let one word dictate how you read someone's comments, because one word can be misplaced way too easily.

 

When that whole statement is taken in context I read it as saying that we're rebuilding and changing the direction of the team. If you're onboard, then great, if not then we'll move you.

 

Whether or not Iggy had too much say, that still falls on the hands of the coaches and management. He's just a player, so if he had that much say and it was detrimental to the team, then someone higher in the organization should have done something. I have a hard time believing that iggy was going out there and saying, "Hey guys, let's go half-checking from behind it, because I don't care if I win the cup."

[lordxan]

I think there have been too many changes, top to bottom, for this to be placed solely on Iginla's shoulders, although I'm sure he did have some influence.

 

I also think you're reading too much into the underlined part.  I interpret that to mean "we've [mangement] decided to take more of a hard-line approach to things, and what we say, goes.  We need to put this in strong words that everyone can easily understand, so here's the widely-understood and old-school way of saying 'my way or the highway'".  However, since none of us are attendees in the Flames' war room activities (dramatic pause for evil-eye gaze around the room for suspicious-acting posters), we will never know for sure.

No I disagree, why should a player, the employee have any say, really when you think about it.  However, your point is fair, I should have added KK to that mix as there is no doubt he was tying the hands of Feaster too.  With that said, KK and Iggy were "buds" so to speak, allowing Iggy to have say where he really should not have.

 

Consider the ample coaching changes, there is some thing going on there, also, player moves and yes I speak of the Phaneuf one, that has inconclusively come out to be a Phaneuf vs Iggy thing and Iggy obviously won that.  Though, seeing how Phaneuf has turned out in TO, not 100% bad, but we got lucky, he could have just as easily turned into a Norris winner.  Fortunately, his degradation has kept going but that could have come back to bite us hard.

 

Anyway, moving on to the big point here, I recall many many moves Sutter made, they was always talk of consultation with guess who, Iggy.  I recall the JBow, Cammy (both initial and reacquisition) and the reacquisition of Tanguay and even the Bertuzzi (not 100% about that one though).  Anyway, point in case, Iggy had way too much say, regardless of his status as Captain, or what he has done for the team, in the end he was still an employee therefore as an employee he should have been doing what he was told to do, not telling what he was doing.

 

With that said, true, Sutter (and others) probably should have grown a pair and put him in his place, but hard to tell how much clout Iggy had with KK, may have been harder to do we simply don't know the full details of that.

 

Just my thoughts on it, looking at at all the different angles and going on's over the past 4-5 years.

[SKscout]

I am onside with this (and have been for a long time) KK and more importantly the Ownership group loved Iggy.  He was "their guy" and whatever he wanted he got.

 

How many coaches (here's a hint ALL of them) have said "this is a really tough group to coach" or something similar.  Why you have to ask, maybe because the team Captain has more clout with ownership than the coach, GM and quite possibly the pres.

 

Iggy got what Iggy wanted and while that isn't really a bad thing on the surface, over time it allows a certain entitled air to settle in the dressing room.  I have never played in the NHL but I have played on many very competitive teams and seen exactly this happen.  Once the captain of the team has that unofficial authority it becomes extremely difficult for the coach to do his job, particularly when what he wants and what the captain wants are at odds.

 

Then the players realize that the captain has the clout then that is the guy the listen to.  At that point the coach has lost the room, and the sad part is that in reality he never once had it.

 

I don't think that Iggy "used" his status in any way, I don't think he did anything intentional.  He's a fantastic player and more importantly a fantastic human being but at the end of the day the management were playing with one hand tied behind their back.

 

I honestly hope that Iggy wins the cup in Boston, I really do.  He was a big part of the success we did have, but I also think that he shares a part of the blame for the many failures.  And, again, I don't think it was anything conscious on his part it was a byproduct of his close ties to ownership and upper management.

 

That said, I would love a Cinderella story where the Flames and Bruins duked it out for the cup with Calgary eeking out a game 7 win.  yeah I know it's pure fantasy but let a guy dream eh!

[stubblejumper1]

I wasn't all over Feaster for the O'Reilly episode.  No harm, no foul.  However, I heard Feaster on the radio today saying that one of the goalie's would not have to clear waivers if he was sent to the minors.  I immediately thought "I don't trust Feaster to know the ins and outs of the waiver wire."  It is scary that he is in charge of the franchise.

[Wreckening]

I wasn't all over Feaster for the O'Reilly episode. No harm, no foul. However, I heard Feaster on the radio today saying that one of the goalie's would not have to clear waivers if he was sent to the minors. I immediately thought "I don't trust Feaster to know the ins and outs of the waiver wire." It is scary that he is in charge of the franchise.

Don't forget about Burke. Jay may not know the ins and outs but I'm pretty sure Burke does and I believe he's not going to let Jay come out and say something as a matter of fact as this without being right. Don't think for one minute that Burke hasn't already put his 2 cents worth in on what this team will look like come Monday.