Flames & Losing For Higher Draft Order.

[CheersMan]

So many good posts wasted on so few canTANKerous people.

[DirtyDeeds]

I want the Flames to come out of a rebuild and win the Cup, not just be an average team.  So with all due respect FF, you might want to use an example of a team winning the Cup without having to draft in the top 2 or 3 in order to do so.  That said, I think you will find there to be more teams who had to draft high before they won the Cup compared to those who did not. 

 

ie. Kane, Doughty, Staal, Malkin, etc, even Seguin and the Bruins.

 

It is true that drafting in the top 3 or 4 alone doesn't win the Cup. ie. Oilers and Islanders.  So let's get one thing straight, no one is saying drafting in the top 3 or 4 is enough.  Please don't inaccurately categorize us.  We still recognize the need to do everything else right.

 

Please also acknowledge this fact:  Teams who have won the Cup recently have all drafted very high at one point.

 

 

What more is there to tank when the Flames are already so close to the bottom?  By virtue of staying relatively the same, the Flames have made the statement they are not trying to win this upcoming season.

 

The Flames open the season at home and then go on a six game road trip.  They can conceivably start the season 1-6-0.  It's unlikely they will be 6-1-0 or something crazy like that.

 

It will be interesting to see what management does after that.  Do they make moves to win more games or do they let "Natural Order" run its course?

 

 

This is some fine BS you are thinking peoples.... The Flames have not stayed virtually the same on purpose like you are trying to imply and in fact have attempted to improve.

 

They just don't want to improve in a way that would put us back in the "cap jail" category or by spending all sorts of money on veteran FA's that serve no long term purpose.

[kehatch]

What more is there to tank when the Flames are already so close to the bottom?  By virtue of staying relatively the same, the Flames have made the statement they are not trying to win this upcoming season.

 

The Flames open the season at home and then go on a six game road trip.  They can conceivably start the season 1-6-0.  It's unlikely they will be 6-1-0 or something crazy like that.

 

It will be interesting to see what management does after that.  Do they make moves to win more games or do they let "Natural Order" run its course?

 

A tanking team makes an effort to lose.  The Flames are making an effort to win within the boundaries of not jeopardizing the future.  

 

I understand the point.  The Flames are carrying the lowest salary in the NHL and (to this point) are icing a team that is worse than the one that finished 4 last a season ago.  You could point to them and suggest that they are icing a team aimed at the McDavid sweep stakes.  

 

But I don't believe that is what they are doing.  If a move becomes available that makes the team better without jeopardizing the future I have zero doubt that the Flames will make it.  I don't see them deciding not to make that move because it might cause them to climb in the standings.  

 

It might be semantics.  Whether the Flames aren't getting better because the moves aren't available without hurting the future or they aren't getting better because they want to finish last doesn't change the fact that they are going to be a bottom team next season.  But in this case I think the semantics are important.  Your arguing for motive.  You are suggesting that the Flames are intentionally tanking for a higher draft pick.  There is nothing in Treliving's or Burke's history or the Flames history last season that would suggest that. In fact it is exactly the opposite.  

 

The Flames won't commit to term contracts that will hurt the rebuild.  They will not trade futures without similar futures coming back in return.  The unintended consequence is that they may finish at the bottom.  But is a long leap to suggest that losing is an intended consequence and it seems more about supporting your agenda that the Flames should lose to win. 

[Flyerfan52]

I want the Flames to come out of a rebuild and win the Cup, not just be an average team.  So with all due respect FF, you might want to use an example of a team winning the Cup without having to draft in the top 2 or 3 in order to do so.  That said, I think you will find there to be more teams who had to draft high before they won the Cup compared to those who did not. 

 

ie. Kane, Doughty, Staal, Malkin, etc, even Seguin and the Bruins.

 

It is true that drafting in the top 3 or 4 alone doesn't win the Cup. ie. Oilers and Islanders.  So let's get one thing straight, no one is saying drafting in the top 3 or 4 is enough.  Please don't inaccurately categorize us.  We still recognize the need to do everything else right.

 

Please also acknowledge this fact:  Teams who have won the Cup recently have all drafted very high at one point.

The pick(s) used to take Seguin (& Hamilton) came via the trade of a player that wanted out & made it clear he would only go to 1 team.

Far from tanking that was good asset management.

 

I will agree that Malkin (& Crosby & others) came via full fledged tanking. It was done by the team that wrote the book on it.

 

Ottawa was in full fledged tank mode in the '90s. That resulted in Yashin, the infamous Daigle, Bonk, Berard & Chris Phillips.

I'd call Spezza @ #2 a better pick & that pick came via trade.

 

Of course most teams that have won the SC drafted high @ 1 time. The dynasty Canadians picked Guy LeFleur 1st overall due to some fancy trading by Sam Pollock. The difference comes in how the pick was acquried.

In the same vein the majority of bottom feeders have picked high very often & many continue to do so.

 

A large part comes from management not being afraid to make unpopular moves by trading recent high picks rather then holding their breath waiting for all that "potential" to come to the fore. See Joe Thornton.

Fans fall in love with players merely because of how high they were drafted. Management is not doing it's job if they think the same way.

[The_People1]

Management has left us with Sean Monahan as the only player on the roster who scored more than 20-goals last season.  We lost our top goal scorer and replaced him with a Toronto Maple Leafs castaway.  We overpaid a 3rd pair Dman to get above the cap floor.  We overpaid for a back-up who was 3rd string on his team last season.

 

Wake up and smell the stampede breakfast.

 

I'm not saying the Flames are tanking because the Flames are already there. This team is heading straight for a top 5 pick again and we'll have to see if management makes an effort to steer themselves away from its course.  If they make moves to help the team win now, especially significant moves, then they are trying to win.  If they stay the same or don't help the team win now, then they have set course for a top 5 pick.

 

It's not even a bad thing to aim for a top 5 pick at this stage of a rebuild.

[FeyWest]

Management has left us with Sean Monahan as the only player on the roster who scored more than 20-goals last season.  We lost our top goal scorer and replaced him with a Toronto Maple Leafs castaway.  We overpaid a 3rd pair Dman to get above the cap floor.  We overpaid for a back-up who was 3rd string on his team last season.

 

Wake up and smell the stampede breakfast.

 

I'm not saying the Flames are tanking because the Flames are already there. This team is heading straight for a top 5 pick again and we'll have to see if management makes an effort to steer themselves away from its course.  If they make moves to help the team win now, especially significant moves, then they are trying to win.  If they stay the same or don't help the team win now, then they have set course for a top 5 pick.

 

It's not even a bad thing to aim for a top 5 pick at this stage of a rebuild.

 

Treliving talks like he's always planning and seeing whats available, he's very hands on with the prospects, just seems like he is always thinking trying to tinker.  As long as they embrace the rebuild and not "Sell the Future" for a one-shot SC showing I don't care if we end up with a top-5, top-10, top-15 pick. 

 

I don't care what stage we are at, we should always aim for the SC not a top 5, prioritize SC if you fail that objective, evaluate the team/organization and tinker in the appropriate places. Just don't be blinded by delusions of grandeur; realistic expectations and plans for reaching them are a must.

 

I fully realize the position were in, understanding what we've lost to FA and also what we've gained in both picks and more experience to existing players and prospects.  Given what we have, there's tons of potential and excitement to be had for the future, I've accepted being patient because we've seen the desert of mediocrity and this is the first time I've been as excited as I am for the next year to build on both the successes and failures we had.

 

I do agree it's early to tell what their full scale plan is and we'll get a better idea come training camp and pre season. We aren't poised for competing in the PO's but we have so many unknowns we may be surprised! I just don;t think the top-5 mentality is there for BT.

[kehatch]

Management has left us with Sean Monahan as the only player on the roster who scored more than 20-goals last season.  We lost our top goal scorer and replaced him with a Toronto Maple Leafs castaway.  We overpaid a 3rd pair Dman to get above the cap floor.  We overpaid for a back-up who was 3rd string on his team last season.

 

Wake up and smell the stampede breakfast.

 

I'm not saying the Flames are tanking because the Flames are already there. This team is heading straight for a top 5 pick again and we'll have to see if management makes an effort to steer themselves away from its course.  If they make moves to help the team win now, especially significant moves, then they are trying to win.  If they stay the same or don't help the team win now, then they have set course for a top 5 pick.

 

It's not even a bad thing to aim for a top 5 pick at this stage of a rebuild.

 

So what moves do you suggest the Flames could make?  What big goal scorers are in the Flames grasp?  

 

They were forced to trade Iginla, Bouwmeester, and Stempniak to avoid losing them to free agency.  Kipper retired.  They lost Cammalleri to free agency.  They can't afford to pay the term to attract the high end free agents and the only attractive assets they have are the kind they can't afford to give up.  

 

They are probably destined for another top 5 pick.  Nobody is disputing that.  But it isn't because the Flames want to finish in the bottom 5.  It is a reality of the situation they are in.  You haven't made one credible argument to show why the Flames are intentionally tanking.  All you have shown is that the roster isn't good and are jumping to the conclusion that this means the Flames want to tank.  

 

Plus you are using gross exaggerations.  Hiller isn't a third string goalie that we overpaid for.  He is a proven starter signed to a very reasonable contract and he clearly was brought on to fill a need and help the Flames be competitive.  Monahan isn't the only 20 goal scorer.  Hudler and Glencross are both 20 goal scorers and would have been last season if not for injury, Backlund put up 18 goals despite injury and a slow start, Raymond has scored at a 20 goal pace most of his career (and was a goal shy last season).  Engallend might be overpaid, but he was brought on to fill a need and help us compete.  

 

Calling the management inept for not making quick fixes, or suggesting this is being done for the purposes of losing, is wrong.  The management team isn't trying to lose.  They are not inept for losing.  Its the reality of the situation they are in.  

 

If you want to talk about inept management talk about the guys that got us here.  The Flames should have been rebuilding in the summer of 2011.  You, I, and MANY others were saying exactly that.  To avoid exactly this.  It was predictable that the bottom was going to fall out of the Flames didn't take preventative action.  The bottom has fallen out and the new management is trying to clean up the mess.  

[stubblejumper1]

I can't see any team being worse than Buffalo next year, so tanking may not even be an option..but from a mathematical/statitical standpoint, tanking vs losing "even though you tried" is the same thing. A loss is a loss, and there will be many of them next year. All that is left is the hand-wringing.

[kehatch]

I can't see any team being worse than Buffalo next year, so tanking may not even be an option..but from a mathematical/statitical standpoint, tanking vs losing "even though you tried" is the same thing. A loss is a loss, and there will be many of them next year. All that is left is the hand-wringing.

 

Running over your neighbors dog because you didn't see versus going out of your way to run it down might have the same outcome, but it isn't the same thing.  

 

I don't know where Buffalo is going to end up.  On one hand Ehrhoff and Miller and even with those guys they finished 25 points lower than the Flames.  On the other hand they added a lot of pieces, they have some good youth that should be stepping up, and they were MUCH better the prior season.  

 

Regardless, the Flames may not finish in last place.  But they will finish close to last place.  I just don't think they are intentionally trying to.  

[Carty]

Management has left us with Sean Monahan as the only player on the roster who scored more than 20-goals last season.

 

So far...   But who said they were done...   Both Burke and Treliving have said that they weren't...

 

We lost our top goal scorer and replaced him with a Toronto Maple Leafs castaway.

 

Cammy obviously wanted to cash in on what will likely be his last longer term cash cow contract..   I am glad that the Flames did not commit to a 5 years term with him...

 

Raymond was a pick up signed for both a reasonable amount and term that wanted to play in Calgary and should be able to make positive contributions ...   To say that he was meant as a replacement for Cammy is only conjecture...

 

We overpaid a 3rd pair Dman to get above the cap floor.

 

I am guessing, but I also think that they overpaid to prevent him from going to the Oilers who were also trying to sign him...   Engelland putting a big hit on one of the Flames younger players is not something any of us would want to see...

 

We overpaid for a back-up who was 3rd string on his team last season.

 

Calling Hiller 3rd string is more than a little bit of a stretch...   Calling Joey MacDonald a 3rd stringer isn`t...

 

Wake up and smell the stampede breakfast.

 

I did...   It smells like a rebuild being done in the proper way without selling the future or tying into long term contracts that could come back to haunt the team later...

 

I'm not saying the Flames are tanking because the Flames are already there. This team is heading straight for a top 5 pick again and we'll have to see if management makes an effort to steer themselves away from its course.  If they make moves to help the team win now, especially significant moves, then they are trying to win.  If they stay the same or don't help the team win now, then they have set course for a top 5 pick.

 

That`s a lot of big if`s seeing as we are only one week into July...

 

It's not even a bad thing to aim for a top 5 pick at this stage of a rebuild.

 

That`s your opinion, and if you choose to hope for a tank job that`s fine and of course you are entitled to do so...   But it doesn`t make you right either...  

 

I am of the opinion that both Burke and Treliving disagree with you, and I have formed that opinion after both reading and hearing what both of them have said on enough occasions to arrive at that conclusion...

[The_People1]

Running over your neighbors dog because you didn't see versus going out of your way to run it down might have the same outcome, but it isn't the same thing.    

 

There's enough hockey intelligence in the management group to see this roster is heading straight for the neighbour's dog.  I'm not saying they are accelerating into it, which you are implying i'm suggesting.  I'm saying they need to steer away if they want to avoid hitting it.

[kehatch]

There's enough hockey intelligence in the management group to see this roster is heading straight for the neighbour's dog. I'm not saying they are accelerating into it, which you are implying i'm suggesting. I'm saying they need to steer away if they want to avoid hitting it.

Read your posts dude. You have management putting their cap on the 26 just long enough to share the nitro button.

[The_People1]

They are probably destined for another top 5 pick.  Nobody is disputing that.  

 

Actually, there's a few disputing that.

 

But it isn't because the Flames want to finish in the bottom 5.  It is a reality of the situation they are in.  You haven't made one credible argument to show why the Flames are intentionally tanking.  All you have shown is that the roster isn't good and are jumping to the conclusion that this means the Flames want to tank.  

 

Plus you are using gross exaggerations.  Hiller isn't a third string goalie that we overpaid for.  He is a proven starter signed to a very reasonable contract and he clearly was brought on to fill a need and help the Flames be competitive.  Monahan isn't the only 20 goal scorer.  Hudler and Glencross are both 20 goal scorers and would have been last season if not for injury, Backlund put up 18 goals despite injury and a slow start, Raymond has scored at a 20 goal pace most of his career (and was a goal shy last season).  Engallend might be overpaid, but he was brought on to fill a need and help us compete.  

 

Not taking action to improve the team is an action.

 

I'm not the one steering this team and neither are you.  Management (Treliving) is steering this team. We don't know what UFA's they talked to.  We can only see the results of their work.  So from that, our new GM is moving his mouth and saying all the right things.  You can choose to base his motives on his words (like many did with Feaster).  Or you can base them off the work he's done.

 

He's put together a roster worthy of being considered the worst in franchise history.  What else can/could he do?  Like everyone's said, there's still time to do something.  So come training camp/first game of the season, let's see what he's done by then.  If we finish the season in the bottom 3, you are calling it the natural order of things.  For me, not only does this mean the Flames intentionally let it finish that way, i would say Treliving is the only person responsible for it.

Read your posts dude. You have management putting their cap on the 26 just long enough to share the nitro button.

 

Flooring it would be trading Giordano for picks.  All they've done up to this point is steer directly at the dog.

[kehatch]

I am done with the debate. The Flames are not intentionally tanking. Not under Murray Edwards, Brian Burke, and Ken King.

I don't think even you really believe it. I think you are generating controversy for the sake of it and trying to justify your belief that tanking is okay.

Anyway, circles lead to the drain. And we are circling. I am catching the ledge before it is to late!

[The_People1]

I am done with the debate. The Flames are not intentionally tanking. Not under Murray Edwards, Brian Burke, and Ken King.

I don't think even you really believe it. I think you are generating controversy for the sake of it and trying to justify your belief that tanking is okay.

Anyway, circles lead to the drain. And we are circling. I am catching the ledge before it is to late!

 

I guess there are levels of tanking that we never brought to the table and talked about.  Some may say "tanking is tanking and there's no separation of levels" but this team has reached a point in their natural cycle that we will be bad next season.  I see inaction towards changing this fate as intentional tanking (albeit, at a very minor level) and you see it as a natural order running its course.

 

It doesn't matter at the end of the day, like you said, this roster remains the way it is, then let's celebrate a top 5 pick together on draft day 2015.

[redfire11]

I guess there are levels of tanking that we never brought to the table and talked about.  Some may say "tanking is tanking and there's no separation of levels" but this team has reached a point in their natural cycle that we will be bad next season.  I see inaction towards changing this fate as intentional tanking (albeit, at a very minor level) and you see it as a natural order running its course.

 

It doesn't matter at the end of the day, like you said, this roster remains the way it is, then let's celebrate a top 5 pick together on draft day 2015.

If we are picking in the top 5 next year with a 15+ million cap space Then that is a management/owner tank PERIOD.

Under no circumstances do I see Hartley and the players tanking for a second.

[The_People1]

If we are picking in the top 5 next year with a 15+ million cap space Then that is a management/owner tank PERIOD.

Under no circumstances do I see Hartley and the players tanking for a second.

 

Agreed. 

[travel_dude]

Actually, there's a few disputing that.

 

 

Not taking action to improve the team is an action.

 

I'm not the one steering this team and neither are you.  Management (Treliving) is steering this team. We don't know what UFA's they talked to.  We can only see the results of their work.  So from that, our new GM is moving his mouth and saying all the right things.  You can choose to base his motives on his words (like many did with Feaster).  Or you can base them off the work he's done.

 

He's put together a roster worthy of being considered the worst in franchise history.  What else can/could he do?  Like everyone's said, there's still time to do something.  So come training camp/first game of the season, let's see what he's done by then.  If we finish the season in the bottom 3, you are calling it the natural order of things.  For me, not only does this mean the Flames intentionally let it finish that way, i would say Treliving is the only person responsible for it.

 

Flooring it would be trading Giordano for picks.  All they've done up to this point is steer directly at the dog.

What would you consider actively making this team better? There are a few things that have been done or not done that have a positive effect so far:

- not signing Cammi to a 5-year deal which would limit our flexibility in the future

- not signing Butler (could still happen I guess) thereby eliminating the "Oh God, Butler again" rants

- signing Byron to a prove-it 1-year deal; motivates player

- signing a starting goaltender displaced by younger, cheaper options

- signing a winger that is pumped to play in Calgary and is not over 30

- not falling for the 5-7 year commitments needed to sign some of the top FA's

You are right in that we don't know whether he tried to sign Orpik for $7m x 1 year or Vrbata or Statsny $7m for 7 years.

You also mentioned degrees of tanking. How about degrees of rebuilding:

- slow and steady while icing a hard working team with decent support players that want to play here

- slow and steady but play every draft pick as soon as you sign them, but not having support players

- trading/signing a few high-end prospects to get vets that can compete today for 2-4 years

- trading futures and picks to make the team competitive today but not enough to win the division

- trading every possible prospect and pick for a team that will win as many game today as possible

You make it sound like every option except the last is some form of tanking. Don't know what you expect to happen.

[stubblejumper1]

Running over your neighbors dog because you didn't see versus going out of your way to run it down might have the same outcome, but it isn't the same thing.

I don't know where Buffalo is going to end up. On one hand Ehrhoff and Miller and even with those guys they finished 25 points lower than the Flames. On the other hand they added a lot of pieces, they have some good youth that should be stepping up, and they were MUCH better the prior season.

Regardless, the Flames may not finish in last place. But they will finish close to last place. I just don't think they are intentionally trying to.

This is a bad analogy. Intentionally killing your neighbour's dog is illegal in this country.

Losing a lot of hockey games is a business decision by a privately owned company. No harm no foul.

[Carty]

Anyway, circles lead to the drain. And we are circling. I am catching the ledge before it is to late!

 

I can't wait for the day when all this talk of people supporting the idea of the Flames tanking can go down the crapper where it belongs...

 

[travel_dude]

This is a bad analogy. Intentionally killing your neighbour's dog is illegal in this country.

Losing a lot of hockey games is a business decision by a privately owned company. No harm no foul.

If you consider season ticket holders to be akin to shareholders, then "tanking" would be looked at as a fraud.

[The_People1]

I will agree that Malkin (& Crosby & others) came via full fledged tanking. It was done by the team that wrote the book on it.

 

If the Penguins were the only ones to tank and win the Cup, then you have a case there FF.  They were probably a one-of and we can dismiss tanking as a viable strategy towards winning the Cup.  Unfortunately, they are not the only ones and as a matter of fact, more Cup winning teams under the salary cap era experienced tanking prior to winning the Cup compared to those who did not.

 

In the face of this inconvenient truth, you continually choose to focus on examples where this key ingredient to winning a Cup was misused in the effort to conclude that it is not necessary.  Your examples only prove that it alone is not enough.  There exists more examples where a high pick, in complement to doing everything else right, resulted in acheiving the ultimate goal.

 

 

What would you consider actively making this team better? There are a few things that have been done or not done that have a positive effect so far:

- not signing Cammi to a 5-year deal which would limit our flexibility in the future

- not signing Butler (could still happen I guess) thereby eliminating the "Oh God, Butler again" rants

- signing Byron to a prove-it 1-year deal; motivates player

- signing a starting goaltender displaced by younger, cheaper options

- signing a winger that is pumped to play in Calgary and is not over 30

- not falling for the 5-7 year commitments needed to sign some of the top FA's

You are right in that we don't know whether he tried to sign Orpik for $7m x 1 year or Vrbata or Statsny $7m for 7 years.

You also mentioned degrees of tanking. How about degrees of rebuilding:

- slow and steady while icing a hard working team with decent support players that want to play here

- slow and steady but play every draft pick as soon as you sign them, but not having support players

- trading/signing a few high-end prospects to get vets that can compete today for 2-4 years

- trading futures and picks to make the team competitive today but not enough to win the division

- trading every possible prospect and pick for a team that will win as many game today as possible

You make it sound like every option except the last is some form of tanking. Don't know what you expect to happen.

 

dude, i think we all know what it takes to win "right now" and winning right now was sacrificed for winning in the future (rightfully so).  All moves so far have a positive effect on the future, not necessarily right now (rightfully so).   So, to answer your question, I need to see moves that sacrifice the future for winning right now.  As you mentioned, they've done everything properly up to this point (by not winning right now).

 

We were under the cap floor and by the virtue of that, we had to sign players.  It wasn't a choice. The only choice was who we sign and we signed players who are not difference makers and will merely blend into the background.   Instead of spending $10-mil on an impact guy like Stastny, Vanek, etc, we are now presented with a McDavid worthy roster.

 

I guess you guys choose to view this as unintentional losing but i feel there is at least a little bit of intention to lose if not by the actions of the GM so far, then by the mere fact the roster is his responsibility.  There are still UFAs/RFAs available.  We may still see a Stempniak or Setoguchi but that's hardly going to alter our course.

 

They've set sail for fail and so many fans are buying into talk like "we are impatient people", "we will make moves if it makes sense", "we do not enjoy losing".  I guess what's difficult to conclude is "intent" which brings us to what may transpire in the coming months.  You can choose to listen to their talk or you can choose to make a judgement based on actions and results.

[The_People1]

I think there is a big difference between tanking and development. The flames are showing a dedication to developing their players over being in "win now" mode.you are correct that Chicago is a great example they came out of their rebuild as a powerhouse.

Lets assume for a second we go 6-0 on that road trip. Do you change things? Send Johnny to the farm? Overplay your D? Bring up the Alaska goalie for a look see?

Of course not, you ride the wave and improve on weak areas.

If we go 0-6 then you make adjustments. You work to win with what you have.

Im all in favor of sacrificing some standings for development but not the other way around.our position allowed Monahan to get 1st line minutes last year. He likely wouldn't have received that on a top 6 team.that doesn't mean we tanked.if Bennett and/or Johnny go lights out in camp I expect them to make the team, not get sent down because"its best for them"

The hot goalie should play, etc.

this all breeds a winning culture even if the Ws aren't there. Nobody is pulling a Feaster and guaranteeing playoff hockey but they are making it clear to everybody that is the goal.none of this Oilers "its ok we're rebuilding" mentality.

if we do all this and pick top 3 im ok with that..im also ok with picking 10-16.

 

I mostly agree phoenix. I'm okay picking top 3 as long as they do it right. 

 

I'm happy this roster is McDavid worthy and yet, still packs a punch with enduring hard workers like Giordano, Glencross, Backlund, and Stajan.  The key is not to dwell in the basement and that's a result of going overboard with hardcore tank mode.  It takes some franchises a generation to recover from that.  The Flames are setup bad enough to lose enough but also have the right veteran pieces to make a quick turn around once the young stars are old enough to carry the load.

 

Where i disagree is i do feel this classifies as intentionally tanking, but not hardcore tanking.  It's a low level tank... it is entirely possible to fill the roster with better players and still develop the kids but this route was not taken.  You and others tend to think there was little choice due to a lack of resources and/or assets to make signifcant moves so it should be classified as somethign like a natural order.  I feel the opposite as the Flames have a ton of cap room and valuable draft picks that could be used to improve the team immediately, but not used.

[travel_dude]

I mostly agree phoenix. I'm okay picking top 3 as long as they do it right. 

 

I'm happy this roster is McDavid worthy and yet, still packs a punch with enduring hard workers like Giordano, Glencross, Backlund, and Stajan.  The key is not to dwell in the basement and that's a result of going overboard with hardcore tank mode.  It takes some franchises a generation to recover from that.  The Flames are setup bad enough to lose enough but also have the right veteran pieces to make a quick turn around once the young stars are old enough to carry the load.

 

Where i disagree is i do feel this classifies as intentionally tanking, but not hardcore tanking.  It's a low level tank... it is entirely possible to fill the roster with better players and still develop the kids but this route was not taken.  You and others tend to think there was little choice due to a lack of resources and/or assets to make signifcant moves so it should be classified as somethign like a natural order.  I feel the opposite as the Flames have a ton of cap room and valuable draft picks that could be used to improve the team immediately, but not used.

Inability to sign impact players during FA - tanking?

Refusal to offer up 5-7 year deals to players during FA - tanking?

Sign players that fill a need (not getting pushed around, competent goalie, scoring forward), but are not game changers by themselves - tanking?

Not trading futures before they show value - tanking?

Keeping a 2015 1st round pick vs trading it for an impact player - tanking?

 

I doubt you will ever be convinced that the Flames will ice a team it feels will contend every night.  They must be sitting there going we want Connor or Jack, or (insert name of shiny new toy)...In previous seasons, the GM decided that the Flames had done reasonably well, and could possibly contend based on the existing roster - they didn't.  Was that tanking during the Iggy years?  Last year, goaltending exposed the warts of the team, and some of those have been addressed.  Some may take longer due to the right player being available at the right time.  Some are just warts that have to be replaced by drafted players and will take several years. 

[The_People1]

Inability to sign impact players during FA - tanking?

Refusal to offer up 5-7 year deals to players during FA - tanking?

Sign players that fill a need (not getting pushed around, competent goalie, scoring forward), but are not game changers by themselves - tanking?

Not trading futures before they show value - tanking?

Keeping a 2015 1st round pick vs trading it for an impact player - tanking?

 

I doubt you will ever be convinced that the Flames will ice a team it feels will contend every night.  They must be sitting there going we want Connor or Jack, or (insert name of shiny new toy)...In previous seasons, the GM decided that the Flames had done reasonably well, and could possibly contend based on the existing roster - they didn't.  Was that tanking during the Iggy years?  Last year, goaltending exposed the warts of the team, and some of those have been addressed.  Some may take longer due to the right player being available at the right time.  Some are just warts that have to be replaced by drafted players and will take several years. 

 

If this team wasn't already "tanked", then i agree with what you say because you are right, they are not trying to make this team worse.

 

Fact is though, the Flames were 4th last in the league and management has not help the cause to rise up the standings.  Instead, management's focus is the future, not the immediate (as they should).  We have been presented with one of the worst rosters in franchise history and I would consider the result of what's been presented to us a low level tank job (by merely staying a 4th last team or equivalent). You call it a by-product of an effective rebuild.  Sure, whatever you want to label it, the intention is not to win games.  Let's see what they do with the roster from here on in.