Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[cross16]

5 hours ago, redfire11 said:

A -1 for BT thinking Grossman > than Nakladal

 

I dont think that was the discussion, it is a question of fit. Flames have Hamilton, Wideman and Engelland as RH shots and Brodie plays the right side frequently. Nak would never get it to the lineup and if he did you likely have to shuffle a few things around which is not ideal. 

 

Flames needed a LH shot as their depth guy. 

[AlbertaBoy12]

55 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I dont think that was the discussion, it is a question of fit. Flames have Hamilton, Wideman and Engelland as RH shots and Brodie plays the right side frequently. Nak would never get it to the lineup and if he did you likely have to shuffle a few things around which is not ideal. 

 

Flames needed a LH shot as their depth guy. 

I think everyone needs to get over the nak thing as well, this guy didnt sign till a day before training camp. Is he good depth? yes, was he going to make a huge difference to our D corp, no he was not.

[travel_dude]

43 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I dont think that was the discussion, it is a question of fit. Flames have Hamilton, Wideman and Engelland as RH shots and Brodie plays the right side frequently. Nak would never get it to the lineup and if he did you likely have to shuffle a few things around which is not ideal. 

 

Flames needed a LH shot as their depth guy. 

 

The other issue was always around available cap.  Grossman came in under the amount BT had available before placing Smid on LTIR.  Right now, there is $8k in cap space, so assigning Smid now would maximize the amount of overage we would have.

Slightly less than $3.5m

[redfire11]

It is time for BT to start asserting control.

A team that is 5th highest in ticket average prices,

A team that has the 6th highest payroll.

A team that is in the bottom 6th in the league.

A team that needs a harsh awakening.

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, redfire11 said:

It is time for BT to start asserting control.

A team that is 5th highest in ticket average prices,

A team that has the 6th highest payroll.

A team that is in the bottom 6th in the league.

A team that needs a harsh awakening.

 

Maybe it's time for the fans to start asserting control?

 

We're 5th highest in ticket prices, because fans pay for them at that price.  Indicating that we're happy with the product.

 

IMHO, BT does not have the skillsets or the cards to turn this around.   He's made his mark and he can't go back now.  Either he lucks out and it turns around on its own, or there will be a wreckoning in the not too distant future  (A BT and GG wreckoning, within a year).   Somehow I feel that BB will escape it all, but I'm not certain he should.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Maybe it's time for the fans to start asserting control?

 

We're 5th highest in ticket prices, because fans pay for them at that price.  Indicating that we're happy with the product.

 

IMHO, BT does not have the skillsets or the cards to turn this around.   He's made his mark and he can't go back now.  Either he lucks out and it turns around on its own, or there will be a wreckoning in the not too distant future  (A BT and GG wreckoning, within a year).   Somehow I feel that BB will escape it all, but I'm not certain he should.

Lol does no one get we are 14 games into the season with a new coach. This doesn't turn around over night, as cross has said in other threads and I've said, the team has looked great when they play the way they are supposed to, When they lose their way it's a little different, and this is without our top players firing on all cylinders.

 

ON another note I really doubt GG is going to lose his job this early in the season no matter how much all the fans on these forums think he's an idiot. Ownership is not going to pay another coach to sit around.

 

THere have been countless teams that undergo coaching changes and struggle for a bit at the beginning, there has been teams that don't struggle in coaching changes. It doesn't mean that it's time to blow things up and start a riot.

 

for the record I'm not just replying to you JJ, I just am curious to see what people are even thinking. Like the flames should fire GG and BT because of this start, trade gio and call it a day.

 

TLDR: give it a rest, the flames will be under this regime for a little while. Some teams struggle under coaching changes, doesn't mean they are bad.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Maybe it's time for the fans to start asserting control?

 

We're 5th highest in ticket prices, because fans pay for them at that price.  Indicating that we're happy with the product.

 

IMHO, BT does not have the skillsets or the cards to turn this around.   He's made his mark and he can't go back now.  Either he lucks out and it turns around on its own, or there will be a wreckoning in the not too distant future  (A BT and GG wreckoning, within a year).   Somehow I feel that BB will escape it all, but I'm not certain he should.

Holy Mackeral you guys, its all about winning with you that complains in this fashion. Do you watch hockey for your own self gratification ? Serious changes take time to settle in and fans better have some patience or posts such as these will persist.

[Carty]

1 hour ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

ON another note I really doubt GG is going to lose his job this early in the season no matter how much all the fans on these forums think he's an idiot. Ownership is not going to pay another coach to sit around.

 

While I don't think that Gulutzan is going anywhere anytime soon, ownership not wanting to pay another coaches salary has nothing to do with it...   Ownership didn't have a problem paying Hartley $1.75 mil to sit in his cabin in the Laurentians, and I am pretty sure that Gully is making less than that...   The Flames have a lot more money than that tied up in benched players salaries and players that were sent down to the minors...   It has more to do with what management believes is best for the team than paying another coach out on his contract...

 

Gulutzan has a one year deal, and he will get time to try and turn things around...   The question is whether or not he will get an extension, and it's much too early to speculate on that...

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 minute ago, Carty said:

 

While I don't think that Gulutzan is going anywhere anytime soon, ownership not wanting to pay another coaches salary has nothing to do with it...   Ownership didn't have a problem paying Hartley $1.75 mil to sit in his cabin in the Laurentians, and I am pretty sure that Gully is making less than that...   The Flames have a lot more money than that tied up in benched players salaries and players that were sent down to the minors...   It has more to do with what management believes is best for the team than paying another coach out on his contract...

 

Gulutzan has a one year deal, and he will get time to try and turn things around...   The question is whether or not he will get an extension, and it's much too early to speculate on that...

 

He only signed a one year deal? hmmm I was unaware of that.Either way it doesnt set a good precendent when you fire your coach after 14 games because you didnt start off on a crazy big winning streak.

[cross16]

I do question the legitimacy of that report out there that he only signed a 1 year deal. I know Cap Friendly has it there but they also have his salary as unknown so I wonder if they just don't have any sources on it.

 

It would be extremely rare for a coach to sign a 1 year contract and equally as rare for an organization to only want a coach for 1 year. Getting a coach for 1 year during a rebuild is a horrible decision that I just cannot see Burke or Treliving supporting. 

[Carty]

Even though the Flames did not officially release terms of the contract themselves and the only term I can find reference for is one year, for me it doesn't really matter if Gulutzan signed a 1 or 2 year deal...   If Gully has a train wreck, there is a good chance he will get shown the door, if he delivers on enough positive changes, he would get an extension...

 

Debating the length of his contract is futile, as it is relatively meaningless...   What is more relevant is that it is highly unlikely that Gulutzan is going anywhere anytime soon...

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Lol does no one get we are 14 games into the season with a new coach.

 

When you hire a coach based solely on his interview skills....what else do you have to go on?  His many stanley cup wins?

 

As per my post, I'm not expecting an announcement this weekend.   I stated within a year.   My track record isn't bad.

 

We've fired Jack Adams winners in shorter periods of time, with better performance, based mostly on their first 14 games of the season.

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

When you hire a coach based solely on his interview skills....what else do you have to go on?  His many stanley cup wins?

 

As per my post, I'm not expecting an announcement this weekend.   I stated within a year.   My track record isn't bad.

 

We've fired Jack Adams winners in shorter periods of time, with better performance, based mostly on their first 14 games of the season.

 

We fired a Jack Adams winner after a much worse start, at the end of the year.  26th in the league at the end of the season is not exactly a good track record.  134-135-25 in 4 seasons.  Not bad for a rebuild, I guess, but it includes a winning record in 2014/15 (45-30-7).

[AlbertaBoy12]

8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

When you hire a coach based solely on his interview skills....what else do you have to go on?  His many stanley cup wins?

 

As per my post, I'm not expecting an announcement this weekend.   I stated within a year.   My track record isn't bad.

 

We've fired Jack Adams winners in shorter periods of time, with better performance, based mostly on their first 14 games of the season.

what? BH had more time then 14 games he had 3 seasons, 3 full seasons that is to work with this team, and showed no improvement. The playoff run  was a fluke no matter how you look at it, the underlying numbers were crap. Now the underlying numbers are starting to improve in alot of categories.

 

Im sorry I seem to remember you saying BH should have stuck around because the goaltending was BTs fault, and BH deserved a chances, not that he would be fired.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, Carty said:

 

Debating the length of his contract is futile, as it is relatively meaningless...   What is more relevant is that it is highly unlikely that Gulutzan is going anywhere anytime soon...

 

I don't agree there. a 1 year deal screams that either Gulutzan was never THEE guy and they had to settle, or Trelivng likes him but not enough to give him the reigns. Maybe not true, but that is the optics of it all. 

 

Either way, giving a coach a 1 year deal is pretty significant based on past precedent. 

[Carty]

27 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't agree there. a 1 year deal screams that either Gulutzan was never THEE guy and they had to settle, or Trelivng likes him but not enough to give him the reigns. Maybe not true, but that is the optics of it all. 

 

Either way, giving a coach a 1 year deal is pretty significant based on past precedent. 

 

Just to clarify, the Flames did not disclose the terms of Gulutzans contract, so there is no point in debating whether it was for 1 or 2 years...

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Im sorry I seem to remember you saying BH should have stuck around because the goaltending was BTs fault, and BH deserved a chances, not that he would be fired.

 

Exactly.   You may see a contradiction here but that's because we all like to trail off topic.

 

You're right, this all falls in BT's lap.   GG is just collatoral damage at the end of the day.   

 

BT has done some good things....generally I thought the 2015 and 2016 drafts were well done (and I like to complain about drafts).    I liked the Hamilton trade.

 

But coach personnel issues, musical goaltenders, the finger pointing (he was BRUTAL on the radio this morning)...none of it is good.

And the draft....that was the scouts, not him.  

 

So I credit him with the Hamilton trade, and I'm not seeing much of a development plan there for Hamilton, so that is looking less appealing of a trade as time passes.

[travel_dude]

14 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Exactly.   You may see a contradiction here but that's because we all like to trail off topic.

 

You're right, this all falls in BT's lap.   GG is just collatoral damage at the end of the day.   

 

BT has done some good things....generally I thought the 2015 and 2016 drafts were well done (and I like to complain about drafts).    I liked the Hamilton trade.

 

But coach personnel issues, musical goaltenders, the finger pointing (he was BRUTAL on the radio this morning)...none of it is good.

And the draft....that was the scouts, not him.  

 

So I credit him with the Hamilton trade, and I'm not seeing much of a development plan there for Hamilton, so that is looking less appealing of a trade as time passes.

 

Out of curiosity, what did he say today?  Who did he out?

[jjgallow]

20 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Out of curiosity, what did he say today?  Who did he out?

 

It went something like this (by exaggerated memory only, sorry):

 

"I'm not about to name names, it's not about naming names, but our best players have to be better.   We need more from Gaudreau and Monahan.   It's not a question of work ethic, it's not a question of sweat.  If it was, I'd be naming names.  And naming numbers.   But I've been in this business for 30 years, and I must have seen 50 players now sign huge contracts, and then they think they have to score 100 points instead of 70, and then they grip their stick to tight and they don't even get 60 points.  I have seen it at least 50 times, more than 50 times.  I must have seen it 100 times."

 

He also went on to mention the Road schedule, and alluded to some misgivings he had with GG about how it was handled...I didn't really get all that (was driving).

 

A lot of contradictive and outwardly-pointing excuses/statements that did not reflect any causation or correlation with decisions he himself had made.

 

I don't disagree with the JG and SM thing, of course.   But he picked those contracts, he picked the coach, he had a lot to do with his own frustrations.

 

 

[cross16]

6 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

It went something like this (by exaggerated memory only, sorry):

 

"I'm not about to name names, it's not about naming names, but our best players have to be better.   We need more from Gaudreau and Monahan.   It's not a question of work ethic, it's not a question of sweat.  If it was, I'd be naming names.  And naming numbers.   But I've been in this business for 30 years, and I must have seen 50 players now sign huge contracts, and then they think they have to score 100 points instead of 70, and then they grip their stick to tight and they don't even get 60 points.  I have seen it at least 50 times, more than 50 times.  I must have seen it 100 times."

 

He also went on to mention the Road schedule, and alluded to some misgivings he had with GG about how it was handled...I didn't really get all that (was driving).

 

A lot of contradictive and outwardly-pointing excuses/statements that did not reflect any causation or correlation with decisions he himself had made.

 

I don't disagree with the JG and SM thing, of course.   But he picked those contracts, he picked the coach, he had a lot to do with his own frustrations.

 

 

 

You know that was Brian Burke right?

[travel_dude]

^^^^^

Interesting.  I thought the 30 years part seemed a little odd.  Burkie wouldn't pull any punches when talking about the players or coach.  If he feels strongly about using or not using Grossmann or Kulak, then he needs to discuss it with BT.  Unfortunately, BB says too much.  It didn't help the Sven situation.  I doubt it will help Johnny or Monahan.  That's up to the coach to fix.

 

[Carty]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Out of curiosity, what did he say today?  Who did he out?

 

Click on the pic of Burke...   http://www.sportsnet.ca/960/

[DirtyDeeds]

[media]

http://pmd.fan960.com/audio_on_demand_2013/Brian-Burke-with-Ryan-Pinder,-Rhett-Warrener,-Will-Nault-RP-20161107-Interview.mp3

[/media]

Here is the Brian Burke interview from this morning.

 

 

[jjgallow]

39 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

You know that was Brian Burke right?

 

No, just heard it on the AM radio.  And I don't have the greatest hearing.     That does make more sense, for sure.

 

Not helpful.

[AlbertaBoy12]

6 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Exactly.   You may see a contradiction here but that's because we all like to trail off topic.

 

You're right, this all falls in BT's lap.   GG is just collatoral damage at the end of the day.   

 

BT has done some good things....generally I thought the 2015 and 2016 drafts were well done (and I like to complain about drafts).    I liked the Hamilton trade.

 

But coach personnel issues, musical goaltenders, the finger pointing (he was BRUTAL on the radio this morning)...none of it is good.

And the draft....that was the scouts, not him.  

 

So I credit him with the Hamilton trade, and I'm not seeing much of a development plan there for Hamilton, so that is looking less appealing of a trade as time passes.

No no you misunderstand me..I said the goaltending last year was BT's fault. This team is not BT's fault, I dont think there is anything wrong with this team, and I certainly dont think there is anything wrong with coach. I like the direction we are going and I like what GG is doing. We would not have won hockey games without our best players going under BH, we are playing a much better hockey game now, the results are coming, im optimistic.