Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[jjgallow]

16 hours ago, JTech780 said:

Bottom line, as long as the owners are only concerned with the bottom line this team will never stay a contender and will always be looked as as a bottom end franchise.

 

Regardless of who the GM is here, the mandate from ownership will always be to take shortcuts to stay competitive. They don’t care about winning a Cup, they just care about being good enough to sell corporate sponsorships and box seats.

 

What really needs to happen with this franchise, is that it needs a complete overhaul top to bottom. We need an ownership group that is committed to bringing in energy and excitement, and we need a management group that is willing to build this franchise the right way and not take shortcuts. Till those things happen we will be perpetually stuck in this mediocrity.

 

Quite frankly I am getting frustrated with this franchise and the only way we will ever have change is for us to stop spending money on mediocrity and ask for more, even if that means going through a rebuild, which is where this team is at.

 

I really hate to say it because I like to think we can solve everything with a new GM.   But I do fear you are right.  Maybe not always "bottom end", just......."middling"  😕    Which isn't much better.

 

I mean, they really did swing for the cup this year, but it was a hail-mary approach.  We made moves that kind of said "man, we don't know how we get here and we don't expect to be back for a long time, so let's gamble it"

 

My worst fears are that you are right.  But even I'm not negative enough to call it.

[phoenix66]

23 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I really hate to say it because I like to think we can solve everything with a new GM.   But I do fear you are right.  Maybe not always "bottom end", just......."middling"  😕    Which isn't much better.

 

I mean, they really did swing for the cup this year, but it was a hail-mary approach.  We made moves that kind of said "man, we don't know how we get here and we don't expect to be back for a long time, so let's gamble it"

 

My worst fears are that you are right.  But even I'm not negative enough to call it.

Not discounting your frustrations, but even with mistakes I put BT head and shoulders above truly bad GMs like PC, Millbury, Feaster, Snow , Sutter...

Anybody clamoring for Young Guns 2.0 obviously didn't live through, or they forget Young Guns 1.0.. they were bad .we almost lost the team.. 

And seriously, when has a tear down ever worked ? Buffalo still sucks . Edmonton is just now looking respectable after a slough of first overalls and the best lottery win in ages .. Chicago is about to be a sinkhole for years ..

You need luck that has nothing to do with the gm.. a lottery win , a 4th round gamble becoming a superstar, a trade for a 3rd string goalie that exceeds anybody's expectations.

What Tampa did even making 3 finals and winning 2 was remarkable ..but also required some luck 

San Jose is just now making the switch to rebuild /retool after a long run of contender status. Always in the playoffs..always a threat.. but made one final in all those years .

Just saying there is no right magic way..every team has a 1/32 chance of hoisting the cup.. in every case , luck was involved . You need the be in the race . 

Sutter was right .our next goal is the be a year after year playoff team..stop the in and out rotation ..  losing Johnny, even if we have to move Tkachuk , we are still in good position that be that.   A new GM wouldn't change that it might actually make it worse  . 

[jjgallow]

10 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Not discounting your frustrations, but even with mistakes I put BT head and shoulders above truly bad GMs like PC, Millbury, Feaster, Snow , Sutter...

Anybody clamoring for Young Guns 2.0 obviously didn't live through, or they forget Young Guns 1.0.. they were bad .we almost lost the team.. 

And seriously, when has a tear down ever worked ? Buffalo still sucks . Edmonton is just now looking respectable after a slough of first overalls and the best lottery win in ages .. Chicago is about to be a sinkhole for years ..

You need luck that has nothing to do with the gm.. a lottery win , a 4th round gamble becoming a superstar, a trade for a 3rd string goalie that exceeds anybody's expectations.

What Tampa did even making 3 finals and winning 2 was remarkable ..but also required some luck 

San Jose is just now making the switch to rebuild /retool after a long run of contender status. Always in the playoffs..always a threat.. but made one final in all those years .

Just saying there is no right magic way..every team has a 1/32 chance of hoisting the cup.. in every case , luck was involved . You need the be in the race . 

Sutter was right .our next goal is the be a year after year playoff team..stop the in and out rotation ..  losing Johnny, even if we have to move Tkachuk , we are still in good position that be that.   A new GM wouldn't change that it might actually make it worse  . 

 

Oh I put BT ahead of a lot of bad GMs too, no disagreement there.   But...this goes back to what @JTech780 said about the owners being okay with average.    Are we really the organization that's like.... "our GM isn't the worst in the league so we're good"?

 

When have teardowns worked...   well, not every time.  But you simply need to look at a list of Stanley Cup champs.  Typically, most of them had a relatively recent teardown.  True for Colorado, true for Tampa, true for St Louis, true for Chicago and Pittsburg.  So at least the last 10 year of Stanley Cup champs had teardowns.

 

If you're into Stanley Cups....that's something to jot down.

 

And sure there's the arguement that not all teardowns result in Stanley Cups, but ...seriously 

 

p.s..so..okay, how do you make sure your teardown is successful?  Well, that's what this thread is for because it's not just a matter of deciding to tear down (and sometimes you don't get a choice, which is what seems to be happening here).   It's a matter of building it back up right, which starts with an incredible GM.  Not just a GM who isn't the worst.

[phoenix66]

17 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Oh I put BT ahead of a lot of bad GMs too, no disagreement there.   But...this goes back to what @JTech780 said about the owners being okay with average.    Are we really the organization that's like.... "our GM isn't the worst in the league so we're good"?

 

When have teardowns worked...   well, not every time.  But you simply need to look at a list of Stanley Cup champs.  Typically, most of them had a relatively recent teardown.  True for Colorado, true for Tampa, true for St Louis, true for Chicago and Pittsburg.  So at least the last 10 year of Stanley Cup champs had teardowns.

 

If you're into Stanley Cups....that's something to jot down.

 

And sure there's the arguement that not all teardowns result in Stanley Cups, but ...seriously 

 

p.s..so..okay, how do you make sure your teardown is successful?  Well, that's what this thread is for because it's not just a matter of deciding to tear down (and sometimes you don't get a choice, which is what seems to be happening here).   It's a matter of building it back up right, which starts with an incredible GM.  Not just a GM who isn't the worst.

But that's kind of my point .. you could make an argument he's in the league top 5.

Seriously what he has he done that is so "bad" ?

 

 

He has great players on good contracts .. Johnny was probabaly his only re-signing miss in his entire tenure.  

We have studs at every position 

 

To rebuild properly you have to hit on the biggest gamble of them all and that's drafting..we've actually done quite well in that regard but that's more on the scouts than the gm..they make the list. Good and bad that's what they get paid for ..and I'd argue theyve had way more hits than misses 

 

Sure Colorado got a Cale Makar at 4 , but they could have just as easily gotten a Sam Bennet.. and don't forget we did get Adam Fox , not Brad's fault he turned into a douche .

Chicago won a lotery or there wouid be no Kane ..and likely no cup run.. 

Burke said it best when he said "Pittsburgh had no blueprint , they won a damn lottery" 

St Louis caught lightning in a bottle with a hot Goalie..I'd argue they never had a rebuild ..they're the ultimate "middling team" 

Sure he has had some bad signings ..but so what. All it cost us was $.. this is the first time in his tenure he's had to juggle cap.. and currently I'd say we don't have a bad contract except Lucic and even that was a shrewd swap . Until now we have never had to lose good players just because of cap ..and we still haven't yet.  And all of his signings had merit at the time ..only hindsight made them bad .. 

 

And above all .we don't know his marching orders .. you could reincarnate Sam Pollock but if he's ordered to do what it takes to win, that's what he's gonna do .

I had mentioned before .. Ottawa had good teams when Murray was there .. he died and they turned into a joke .. Melnyk dies and suddenly Dorian is making good deals ? 

I'm certain it took time but they finally sold ownership on paying for a coach .and look at that.. 

 

All im Saying is we have a gm with a good track record on what he's been ordered to do.. I could easily again make the argument he's top 5.. but unless ownership tells him to rebuild that's the direction he's going .

 

 

 

[jjgallow]

5 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

But that's kind of my point .. you could make an argument he's in the league top 5.

Seriously what he has he done that is so "bad" ?

 

 

Sorry to abbreviate, but I think we have to stop right there.   This is the most devastating UFA signing maybe ever in the NHL, and certainly of the last few years.   It was 100% preventable, and 100% a known serious risk, years in advance.

 

I am saying that, imho, this qualifies as "bad", from a risk management perspective, even if I understand the motive.  If this doesn't qualify as bad, please tell me what does.

 

In terms of arguing he's top 5?   That's a full stop no, imho this move blackballs him from that list forever, as the only ways to undo it are to have an equally impressive UFA season that is better than Gaudreau (wont' happen), or win multiple Stanley cups (he emptied the cupboard already).

 

[phoenix66]

27 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Sorry to abbreviate, but I think we have to stop right there.   This is the most devastating UFA signing maybe ever in the NHL, and certainly of the last few years.   It was 100% preventable, and 100% a known serious risk, years in advance.

 

I am saying that, imho, this qualifies as "bad", from a risk management perspective, even if I understand the motive.  If this doesn't qualify as bad, please tell me what does.

 

In terms of arguing he's top 5?   That's a full stop no, imho this move blackballs him from that list forever, as the only ways to undo it are to have an equally impressive UFA season that is better than Gaudreau (wont' happen), or win multiple Stanley cups (he emptied the cupboard already).

 

But again..what were his oders?  He's not the first to lose a dominant Ufa .he won't be the last.. Columbus lost what, 4 or 5 at once ? And Jarmo is considered one of the best GM's in the league 

Johnny gave every indication he was open and wanted to stay, with the right deal of course..  his statement right after the playoffs " my agent and Brad will sit down now and I'm sure they'll get a deal done " he said " I want to be back"

He declined an extension last offseason and they agreed to pick it up now .. had he traded him .1st we'd have hated the return ..and 2 I guarantee we'd b all over BT due to " he said he wanted to stay" .." he traded the face of the franchise for a garbage return" 

Johnny said up until the last second he wanted to stay .heck, the final offer of $10.5 came from johnny's camp as a deal he would sign.. his agent even got sideswiped with the about face .. that is not on Brad .. that was 100% on Johnny .. you can say and agree that yes it was his right, you can respect that he chose family over money .but in the end he is responsible for the about face .. why do you think Murray personally put him on blast immediately after 

He's had a good list of good to great signings.. Versteeg, Gubrandson, Zadorov, Hillier (1st year anyway) Neal was at the time , there was no way to know hed fall off a cliff immediately 

But all anybody wants to talk about is Brouwer 

 

When a gm has orders to always be a playoff team. What wouid you have him do ? A different gm wouid have no different results 

And like I also mentioned before ..even the best ones make mistakes..it's how you proceed that speaks volumes ..andni guarantee he'll never get put in this position again 

[jjgallow]

11 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

But again..what were his oders?  He's not the first to lose a dominant Ufa .he won't be the last.. Columbus lost what, 4 or 5 at once ? And Jarmo is considered one of the best GM's in the league 

Johnny gave every indication he was open and wanted to stay, with the right deal of course..  his statement right after the playoffs " my agent and Brad will sit down now and I'm sure they'll get a deal done " he said " I want to be back"

He declined an extension last offseason and they agreed to pick it up now .. had he traded him .1st we'd have hated the return ..and 2 I guarantee we'd b all over BT due to " he said he wanted to stay" .." he traded the face of the franchise for a garbage return" 

Johnny said up until the last second he wanted to stay .heck, the final offer of $10.5 came from johnny's camp as a deal he would sign.. his agent even got sideswiped with the about face .. that is not on Brad .. that was 100% on Johnny .. you can say and agree that yes it was his right, you can respect that he chose family over money .but in the end he is responsible for the about face .. why do you think Murray personally put him on blast immediately after 

He's had a good list of good to great signings.. Versteeg, Gubrandson, Zadorov, Hillier (1st year anyway) Neal was at the time , there was no way to know hed fall off a cliff immediately 

But all anybody wants to talk about is Brouwer 

 

When a gm has orders to always be a playoff team. What wouid you have him do ? A different gm wouid have no different results 

And like I also mentioned before ..even the best ones make mistakes..it's how you proceed that speaks volumes ..andni guarantee he'll never get put in this position again 

 

 

I honestly have no idea what he smelled like

 

But in all seriousness, in this I agree with you.  It's entirely possible that this is an owner issue, going back to what @JTech780 wrote.

 

But that,,,,is so negative and hopeless that even I can't process it.   We're essentially then waiting for people to die so we an win a cup.   So yeah.    I can't.

 

I have to assume the problem is fixable for  my own sanity, that's all we can do as fans.  So rather than blame the players, or the coach, etc, I look to the GM.

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

I honestly have no idea what he smelled like

 

But in all seriousness, in this I agree with you.  It's entirely possible that this is an owner issue, going back to what @JTech780 wrote.

 

But that,,,,is so negative and hopeless that even I can't process it.   We're essentially then waiting for people to die so we an win a cup.   So yeah.    I can't.

 

I have to assume the problem is fixable for  my own sanity, that's all we can do as fans.  So rather than blame the players, or the coach, etc, I look to the GM.

I get it ..I just simply ask what more could any different gm have done ? 

 

He makes trades that improve us..he signs players which, at the time , either are heralded as great signings (Brouwer, Neal, Elliott, Czarnik)or they become good ones after getting roasted (Gubrandson, Stone) 

What if he had flipped Johnny last offseason for a pick and prospect..wouid we be cheering him now ? I virtually guarantee one of those picks wouid not be a first..Johnny had a brutal season . And if he had offered him 10.5 x8 last offseason?( It's what it would have taken )  we would have run him out of town ..

I do believe he may have been in the Eichel pitch but not sure I trust the source 

 

I know yes he has traded 1st and 2nd rounders .. but those are lottery tickets ..the player Boston took with our pick in the Hamilton deal I think is out of the league now..no Guarantee our pick would have been any better .. you could be the worst team in the league and still not pick in the top 3 

 

 

How the tkachuk thing plays out obviously will play a part .but assuming we put this team on the ice right now ..less Gubrandson..   we had the 2nd least goals allowed in the league .. there's no reason to believe that with the absence of a bunch of 9 goal games we can't continue to win 4-2, 3-1 etc type games .. but I do believe another scorer will emerge ..either internally or externally 

 

What was lost in the excitement of Johnny having the most 5x5 points in league history since Gretzky was the other fact that he had very few on the powerplay . Our best player sucked on the powerplay ..let that sink in..

Our problem isn't no Johnny..it's fixing the powerplay 

[jjgallow]

14 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I get it ..I just simply ask what more could any different gm have done ? 

 

He makes trades that improve us..he signs players which, at the time , either are heralded as great signings (Brouwer, Neal, Elliott, Czarnik)or they become good ones after getting roasted (Gubrandson, Stone) 

What if he had flipped Johnny last offseason for a pick and prospect..wouid we be cheering him now ? I virtually guarantee one of those picks wouid not be a first..Johnny had a brutal season . And if he had offered him 10.5 x8 last offseason?( It's what it would have taken )  we would have run him out of town ..

I do believe he may have been in the Eichel pitch but not sure I trust the source 

 

I know yes he has traded 1st and 2nd rounders .. but those are lottery tickets ..the player Boston took with our pick in the Hamilton deal I think is out of the league now..no Guarantee our pick would have been any better .. you could be the worst team in the league and still not pick in the top 3 

 

 

How the tkachuk thing plays out obviously will play a part .but assuming we put this team on the ice right now ..less Gubrandson..   we had the 2nd least goals allowed in the league .. there's no reason to believe that with the absence of a bunch of 9 goal games we can't continue to win 4-2, 3-1 etc type games .. but I do believe another scorer will emerge ..either internally or externally 

 

What was lost in the excitement of Johnny having the most 5x5 points in league history since Gretzky was the other fact that he had very few on the powerplay . Our best player sucked on the powerplay ..let that sink in..

Our problem isn't no Johnny..it's fixing the powerplay 

 

The short answer is that he should have traded Gaudreau, probably in 2019.   It's much more than that but there's no need.

 

I could go into great detail about this, and have, but it's a revolving arguement of hindsight.

 

The bottom line is that great organizations are always investing in their future.  The notion that draft picks are of little value is fundamentally one of the greatest problems we have here, and we can show that with stats, and have.

[JTech780]

I do wonder if some of the hold up with action, is that management and ownership are talking about what the best course of action is right now.

 

I am sure they are planning contingencies for if Tkachuk and Mangiapane sign long term deals and if one or both don’t sign long term deals.

 

I am also sure they are looking at if they should just go with a rebuild/retool regardless, sort of where Montreal and Ottawa are and seeing that their teams are starting to look pretty good and have something to look forward too.

 

I know we still have plenty of very good players and can still compete to get into the playoffs, but I just think everyone understands just how much Gaudreau meant to the offense of this team.

 

It wasn’t just that he was important to the offense, but he was the offense. We can barely gain the blue line without him.

 

I have my doubts that this team will be able to produce offense next season unless something drastic happens. I think you will see Lindholm and Tkachuk end up as 60 point players next year, that’s how important Gaudreau was to that line.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

It wasn’t just that he was important to the offense, but he was the offense. We can barely gain the blue line without him.

 

I have my doubts that this team will be able to produce offense next season unless something drastic happens. I think you will see Lindholm and Tkachuk end up as 60 point players next year, that’s how important Gaudreau was to that line.

 

Nobody doubts the impact his leaving will have.  I doubt Tkachuk drops off to 60, since he was above that as a 2nd line player with Backlund.  I do wonder what happens to the PP.  We lost the QB.  But we were at times ineffective because it went through him.  We need to replace that role.  Maybe it results in more offense on the PP and less at evens.  

 

I do think we need to be quite careful in what we do in FA.  I prefer the idea of looking for a playmaker nad a PP specialist, either through trade or FA.  But we also need to be sure that the team deals with expiring contracts like Lucic and Monahan.  We can keep them, hope for Monahan to rebound and be less impressed with a dip in the standings.  Such has been the case, with or without JH.  I would prefer to ship them off, add a lesser costing toughie to replace Lucic and go from there.  Use the cap to improve.  As long as that doesn't cost us dearly to move them.  Target trades that bring in players that fit the vision and add skill we lack.  Milano is unsigned.  He adds something we lack.  

[JTech780]

24 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Nobody doubts the impact his leaving will have.  I doubt Tkachuk drops off to 60, since he was above that as a 2nd line player with Backlund.  I do wonder what happens to the PP.  We lost the QB.  But we were at times ineffective because it went through him.  We need to replace that role.  Maybe it results in more offense on the PP and less at evens.  

 

I do think we need to be quite careful in what we do in FA.  I prefer the idea of looking for a playmaker nad a PP specialist, either through trade or FA.  But we also need to be sure that the team deals with expiring contracts like Lucic and Monahan.  We can keep them, hope for Monahan to rebound and be less impressed with a dip in the standings.  Such has been the case, with or without JH.  I would prefer to ship them off, add a lesser costing toughie to replace Lucic and go from there.  Use the cap to improve.  As long as that doesn't cost us dearly to move them.  Target trades that bring in players that fit the vision and add skill we lack.  Milano is unsigned.  He adds something we lack.  

The PP is going to take a huge hit just with the entries. Who is going to be that person who gains the zone consistently? That could be enough to drop him to 60 points right there. Even when he was playing 2nd line he was still playing 1st PP.

[phoenix66]

15 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

The PP is going to take a huge hit just with the entries. Who is going to be that person who gains the zone consistently? That could be enough to drop him to 60 points right there. Even when he was playing 2nd line he was still playing 1st PP.

Maybe this will force them to find more than one way .like I'd pointed out in another post . Such a huge deal was made about how he had over 90 5x5 points.. that means he had less than 25 pp points .. in playoffs our power play tanked likely for that very reason.. we relied too much on his entries and they shut us down 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

The PP is going to take a huge hit just with the entries. Who is going to be that person who gains the zone consistently? That could be enough to drop him to 60 points right there. Even when he was playing 2nd line he was still playing 1st PP.

 

Part of that is puck movers.  I think I recall that several players were really good at zone entry success, but I don't exactly remember who.  Ras and Kylington?  Backlund?  Need to also win O-zone draws on the PP.  Anyway the point is taken, and if this was the final roster we are in some trouble.  If they are doing a proper job of evaluating pros, then they can identify targets that can take this up.

 

I also think we didn't always put players in the right positions to excel.  We used them in the obvious spots, but mabe not the best?  A top 6 C should always be a target, but so should puck movers.  Is Milano or Kapanen that guy?  Is Dvorak?  There are some teams in odd places that could be trading partners.

[JTech780]

11 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Part of that is puck movers.  I think I recall that several players were really good at zone entry success, but I don't exactly remember who.  Ras and Kylington?  Backlund?  Need to also win O-zone draws on the PP.  Anyway the point is taken, and if this was the final roster we are in some trouble.  If they are doing a proper job of evaluating pros, then they can identify targets that can take this up.

 

I also think we didn't always put players in the right positions to excel.  We used them in the obvious spots, but mabe not the best?  A top 6 C should always be a target, but so should puck movers.  Is Milano or Kapanen that guy?  Is Dvorak?  There are some teams in odd places that could be trading partners.

Kylington, Andersson, and Hanifin have the ability to gain the zone, the problem is the ability to distribute the puck once the gain the zone. The all have this bad habit of holding the puck too long.

[travel_dude]

5 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Kylington, Andersson, and Hanifin have the ability to gain the zone, the problem is the ability to distribute the puck once the gain the zone. The all have this bad habit of holding the puck too long.

 

Well, losing JH means we lost the QB.  So, that has to be replaced somehow.  Even without the PP, we need someone to feed people on the top line.

[tmac70]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

The short answer is that he should have traded Gaudreau, probably in 2019.   It's much more than that but there's no need.

 

I could go into great detail about this, and have, but it's a revolving arguement of hindsight.

 

The bottom line is that great organizations are always investing in their future.  The notion that draft picks are of little value is fundamentally one of the greatest problems we have here, and we can show that with stats, and have.

The most difficult with the tear it down crowd is tearing it down a GUARNETEE it will be better. Your going to ahve a larger problem getting guys in the future than now.  So we have MT at #6 and Bennett at #4( now gone), you have the under wear stains up north with what 4 in 5 years. Its not an absoulte. If the goal is to get Bedard I am not sure you can bottom this club out far enough to lower it past CHI or ARZ.  Your at best shootign for a 3-5 pick which we have Proof didn't work. For me the rebuilt got screwed the year we made the playoffs they tried to fast track, you can't cut corners. 

 

The issue is players want to go to contenders and the only reason some chose the crap up north, is MC BABY. Take him out the equation and you have nothing as well. What I will advocate is that the issue is this club has and seems to breed a middle level element to it. Until Sutter the attitude here sucked and now is trending upwards. Signing MT is the starting point to staying above water and still trending. For me the movement for the rebuild will be 100% on the signing or not signing of Matthew

[The_Tribal Chief]

Most Owners Dont want the Tear down build it back up route cause as much as this is Ejoyment for the Fans it is a business and what money do they make with a crappy team on the ice cause of a rebuild

[phoenix66]

2 hours ago, tmac70 said:

The most difficult with the tear it down crowd is tearing it down a GUARNETEE it will be better. Your going to ahve a larger problem getting guys in the future than now.  So we have MT at #6 and Bennett at #4( now gone), you have the under wear stains up north with what 4 in 5 years. Its not an absoulte. If the goal is to get Bedard I am not sure you can bottom this club out far enough to lower it past CHI or ARZ.  Your at best shootign for a 3-5 pick which we have Proof didn't work. For me the rebuilt got screwed the year we made the playoffs they tried to fast track, you can't cut corners. 

 

The issue is players want to go to contenders and the only reason some chose the crap up north, is MC BABY. Take him out the equation and you have nothing as well. What I will advocate is that the issue is this club has and seems to breed a middle level element to it. Until Sutter the attitude here sucked and now is trending upwards. Signing MT is the starting point to staying above water and still trending. For me the movement for the rebuild will be 100% on the signing or not signing of Matthew

And this is just one of the issues.  Like I mentioned , anybody here have to live through Young Guns 1.0 ?   Anybody good couldn't wait to leave town.   Remember Chris Drury? He didn't even hide it.. Val Bure? Here for a bit but eventually wanted out .  Our captain was Jason ##_& Weimer..  I think Bob Boughner was too 

The Oilers did it wrong , so did Buffalo .because they made losing acceptable .. .. I remember Buffalos attempted tank for McDavid . Kept moving goalies out cuz they kept going on winning streaks .

The young guns were not exciting.. constant losing only pushes the fans away 

 

Also . Proponents talk about moving all the ones we cultured ..Anderson, Mangiapane ..tkachuk..   just shows your players well cultivate you just to turn you into picks so we can do it again. 

You need to breed a culture of winning..winning attracts winning.. does that mean suffering through a run of first round exits until you break the seal? Maybe . 

I'm all for bringing the kids in..the vakimakis, the Mackey's , Pelletiers and wolfs.. but you need to bring them Into a winning culture.

Any given year a team gets hot at the right time ..Montreal, Dallas, come to mind 

 

Bottom line ..retool is good , many times necessary .but a complete overhaul just breeds losing, and require too much luck that can't be controlled to end up on the right end.. 

 

I shouid add too. If Murray Edwards is going to give his gm a blank check every year to soend to the cap .I think he has a right to at least ask that we try and win ..seems like a fair trade .. 

[robrob74]

7 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Not discounting your frustrations, but even with mistakes I put BT head and shoulders above truly bad GMs like PC, Millbury, Feaster, Snow , Sutter...

Anybody clamoring for Young Guns 2.0 obviously didn't live through, or they forget Young Guns 1.0.. they were bad .we almost lost the team.. 

And seriously, when has a tear down ever worked ? Buffalo still sucks . Edmonton is just now looking respectable after a slough of first overalls and the best lottery win in ages .. Chicago is about to be a sinkhole for years ..

You need luck that has nothing to do with the gm.. a lottery win , a 4th round gamble becoming a superstar, a trade for a 3rd string goalie that exceeds anybody's expectations.

What Tampa did even making 3 finals and winning 2 was remarkable ..but also required some luck 

San Jose is just now making the switch to rebuild /retool after a long run of contender status. Always in the playoffs..always a threat.. but made one final in all those years .

Just saying there is no right magic way..every team has a 1/32 chance of hoisting the cup.. in every case , luck was involved . You need the be in the race . 

Sutter was right .our next goal is the be a year after year playoff team..stop the in and out rotation ..  losing Johnny, even if we have to move Tkachuk , we are still in good position that be that.   A new GM wouldn't change that it might actually make it worse  . 

with a GM who knows how to use his scouts, and if someone Is happy with their scouts, then a rebuild shouldn’t be so scary. Id be more fearful of one if it was a Feaster or PC, or ones like that running it. BT is a middle of the pack Gm, and seems like everyone’s friend. I’m not sure if Iit wins him GM friends. 

 

3 hours ago, tmac70 said:

The most difficult with the tear it down crowd is tearing it down a GUARNETEE it will be better. Your going to ahve a larger problem getting guys in the future than now.  So we have MT at #6 and Bennett at #4( now gone), you have the under wear stains up north with what 4 in 5 years. Its not an absoulte. If the goal is to get Bedard I am not sure you can bottom this club out far enough to lower it past CHI or ARZ.  Your at best shootign for a 3-5 pick which we have Proof didn't work. For me the rebuilt got screwed the year we made the playoffs they tried to fast track, you can't cut corners. 

 

The issue is players want to go to contenders and the only reason some chose the crap up north, is MC BABY. Take him out the equation and you have nothing as well. What I will advocate is that the issue is this club has and seems to breed a middle level element to it. Until Sutter the attitude here sucked and now is trending upwards. Signing MT is the starting point to staying above water and still trending. For me the movement for the rebuild will be 100% on the signing or not signing of Matthew

i just think that the problem with teams like buf and Edm is they couldn't draft outside the first round.  
 

the flames can a bit. If you're still not convinced they can draft NHL players outside of the first round then that's the answer. 
 

i think they can find players if they keep they picks. Maybe we still haven't drafted a real difference maker yet. 

[jjgallow]

12 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Not discounting your frustrations, but even with mistakes I put BT head and shoulders above truly bad GMs like PC, Millbury, Feaster, Snow , Sutter...

Anybody clamoring for Young Guns 2.0 obviously didn't live through, or they forget Young Guns 1.0.. they were bad .we almost lost the team.. 

And seriously, when has a tear down ever worked ? Buffalo still sucks . Edmonton is just now looking respectable after a slough of first overalls and the best lottery win in ages .. Chicago is about to be a sinkhole for years ..

You need luck that has nothing to do with the gm.. a lottery win , a 4th round gamble becoming a superstar, a trade for a 3rd string goalie that exceeds anybody's expectations.

What Tampa did even making 3 finals and winning 2 was remarkable ..but also required some luck 

San Jose is just now making the switch to rebuild /retool after a long run of contender status. Always in the playoffs..always a threat.. but made one final in all those years .

Just saying there is no right magic way..every team has a 1/32 chance of hoisting the cup.. in every case , luck was involved . You need the be in the race . 

Sutter was right .our next goal is the be a year after year playoff team..stop the in and out rotation ..  losing Johnny, even if we have to move Tkachuk , we are still in good position that be that.   A new GM wouldn't change that it might actually make it worse  . 

 

It was in

[The_People1]

18 hours ago, tmac70 said:

The most difficult with the tear it down crowd is tearing it down a GUARNETEE it will be better. Your going to ahve a larger problem getting guys in the future than now.  So we have MT at #6 and Bennett at #4( now gone), you have the under wear stains up north with what 4 in 5 years. Its not an absoulte. If the goal is to get Bedard I am not sure you can bottom this club out far enough to lower it past CHI or ARZ.  Your at best shootign for a 3-5 pick which we have Proof didn't work. For me the rebuilt got screwed the year we made the playoffs they tried to fast track, you can't cut corners. 

 

The issue is players want to go to contenders and the only reason some chose the crap up north, is MC BABY. Take him out the equation and you have nothing as well. What I will advocate is that the issue is this club has and seems to breed a middle level element to it. Until Sutter the attitude here sucked and now is trending upwards. Signing MT is the starting point to staying above water and still trending. For me the movement for the rebuild will be 100% on the signing or not signing of Matthew

 

There's quite a bit to untangle here but I'll begin with this because I've been a part of the "tear it down crowd".  And I don't speak for all but I've personally never guaranteed that a tear down would result in winning the Cup... Or that it will be better...better in terms of results and method... But a bit more on that later.

 

The way to explain this is that you ultimately need all your core players to hit prime at around the same time.  There's no use having Gaudreau in his prime and a Giordano on his last legs.  Tkachuk enters his prime and Giordano is no longer relevant.  What?  Bad timing.  Bad rebuild.  I hope there is no debating this.

 

Crucial ingredients for a Cup:

1 top 10 NHL player in any position 

#1C (top 10 NHL C)

#1D (top 10 NHL D)

#1G (top 10 NHL G)

 

Supporting cast:

#3C (top 10 shut down C)

#2&3D (need to have at least 3 D total who are elite to help the team overlap all critical situations.  PP and PK.  Shut down and offense).

 

Final pieces:

Scoring wingers

The grinders/sandpaper/agitators

Hard hitting D

PK specialists/shut down wingers 

 

So what, that's like 7 to 8 core players.  Forwards all must be 23 to 27-years-old and all putting up career numbers together.  D take longer.  They need to be 25 to 30 years old.  Many older D win Norris Trophies in their early 30s.. D can be older.  And the Goalie is preferably 25 to 30 years old giving you top 10 in the NHL.

 

Great, now that we understand what it takes, how do you work backwards from that? 

 

Trade for all those pieces?  Not happening.  Real life isn't EA NHL.  You could probably trade for a supporting cast Winger or stud shut down D.  There's one or two of those available in trades every season.  But that top10player, 1C 1D... in that age group... You draft them or you don't have them.  Simple as that.

 

How to draft a top 10 NHL player?  Well theoretically, anywhere.   Can be 1st overall but can also be in the 5th round.  But to play the odds, drafting higher has almost always been better for getting a top 10 NHL player. Kucherov is winning the lottery.  Same with Gaudreau.  Fox.  Josi.  Panarin (undrafted).  But the top 10 NHL player otherwise comes from the #1 or #2 overall picks.

 

What's key is to not abandon drafting well in other rounds just because we draft top 2.  We still need to hit some homeruns in the mid to late rounds too.

 

What I want to emphasize next is the idea that all core players peak at the same time.  And what that means is if you stack consecutive drafts with multiple 1st and 2nd round picks... Say, make a total of 6 first round picks in 3 year (and get into the top 2 picks)... 10 second round picks in 3 years... That is really turning the tide in your favour because playing the odds, you can find 3 stud Cs, 3 stud Ds, and 1 stud G... It's possible to have many parts of the supporting cast filled through 3 drafts. Hopefully you drafted high enough that one of those 7 is a top 10 NHL player.

 

And hopefully, you also did well in the mid to late rounds.

 

Why do we want all players to peak at the same time... Well, look at the Flames and Giordano... Poor timing.  McDavid in Edmonton, leaving in 4 years.  They need all of Bouchard, Broberg, Yamamoto, etc to peak in the next 4 years.  Year 5 wouldn't cut it.  Timing is so important.

 

Flames needed all of Gaudreau, Giordano, Brodie, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Backlund, Tanev, Monahan (healthy), and Bennett to have all hit prime together and all be cheap and affordable.  But no.

 

And that's why a tear down method is better.  You ultimately want the new build of our next core players to all peak together at around the same time.  If we hang on, then Tkachuk might be 30 by the time we are Cup contenders again.  Lindholm 32.  Mangiapane 31.  Instead, the picks they get traded for would be 23 years old.  What a difference that makes.

[robrob74]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

There's quite a bit to untangle here but I'll begin with this because I've been a part of the "tear it down crowd".  And I don't speak for all but I've personally never guaranteed that a tear down would result in winning the Cup... Or that it will be better...better in terms of results and method... But a bit more on that later.

 

The way to explain this is that you ultimately need all your core players to hit prime at around the same time.  There's no use having Gaudreau in his prime and a Giordano on his last legs.  Tkachuk enters his prime and Giordano is no longer relevant.  What?  Bad timing.  Bad rebuild.  I hope there is no debating this.

 

Crucial ingredients for a Cup:

1 top 10 NHL player in any position 

#1C (top 10 NHL C)

#1D (top 10 NHL D)

#1G (top 10 NHL G)

 

Supporting cast:

#3C (top 10 shut down C)

#2&3D (need to have at least 3 D total who are elite to help the team overlap all critical situations.  PP and PK.  Shut down and offense).

 

Final pieces:

Scoring wingers

The grinders/sandpaper/agitators

Hard hitting D

PK specialists/shut down wingers 

 

So what, that's like 7 to 8 core players.  Forwards all must be 23 to 27-years-old and all putting up career numbers together.  D take longer.  They need to be 25 to 30 years old.  Many older D win Norris Trophies in their early 30s.. D can be older.  And the Goalie is preferably 25 to 30 years old giving you top 10 in the NHL.

 

Great, now that we understand what it takes, how do you work backwards from that? 

 

Trade for all those pieces?  Not happening.  Real life isn't EA NHL.  You could probably trade for a supporting cast Winger or stud shut down D.  There's one or two of those available in trades every season.  But that top10player, 1C 1D... in that age group... You draft them or you don't have them.  Simple as that.

 

How to draft a top 10 NHL player?  Well theoretically, anywhere.   Can be 1st overall but can also be in the 5th round.  But to play the odds, drafting higher has almost always been better for getting a top 10 NHL player. Kucherov is winning the lottery.  Same with Gaudreau.  Fox.  Josi.  Panarin (undrafted).  But the top 10 NHL player otherwise comes from the #1 or #2 overall picks.

 

What's key is to not abandon drafting well in other rounds just because we draft top 2.  We still need to hit some homeruns in the mid to late rounds too.

 

What I want to emphasize next is the idea that all core players peak at the same time.  And what that means is if you stack consecutive drafts with multiple 1st and 2nd round picks... Say, make a total of 6 first round picks in 3 year (and get into the top 2 picks)... 10 second round picks in 3 years... That is really turning the tide in your favour because playing the odds, you can find 3 stud Cs, 3 stud Ds, and 1 stud G... It's possible to have many parts of the supporting cast filled through 3 drafts. Hopefully you drafted high enough that one of those 7 is a top 10 NHL player.

 

And hopefully, you also did well in the mid to late rounds.

 

Why do we want all players to peak at the same time... Well, look at the Flames and Giordano... Poor timing.  McDavid in Edmonton, leaving in 4 years.  They need all of Bouchard, Broberg, Yamamoto, etc to peak in the next 4 years.  Year 5 wouldn't cut it.  Timing is so important.

 

Flames needed all of Gaudreau, Giordano, Brodie, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Backlund, Tanev, Monahan (healthy), and Bennett to have all hit prime together and all be cheap and affordable.  But no.

 

And that's why a tear down method is better.  You ultimately want the new build of our next core players to all peak together at around the same time.  If we hang on, then Tkachuk might be 30 by the time we are Cup contenders again.  Lindholm 32.  Mangiapane 31.  Instead, the picks they get traded for would be 23 years old.  What's a difference that makes.

 

In the last tear down we didn't amass enough picks. Not enough over the few years we were rebuilding. 
 

it's tough to know what the last few years would have been like, but what about these drafts say they'll be good drafts to tank? 
 

last time we got Bennett but Tkachuk after, 

[travel_dude]

12 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

In the last tear down we didn't amass enough picks. Not enough over the few years we were rebuilding. 
 

it's tough to know what the last few years would have been like, but what about these drafts say they'll be good drafts to tank? 
 

last time we got Bennett but Tkachuk after, 

 

We got hosed for picks due to Feaster, but even so we had 3 x 1st rounders.  

[cross16]

15 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

In the last tear down we didn't amass enough picks. Not enough over the few years we were rebuilding. 
 

it's tough to know what the last few years would have been like, but what about these drafts say they'll be good drafts to tank? 
 

last time we got Bennett but Tkachuk after, 

 

As I've said before I don't think the Flames ever rebuilt, they re tooled. There was never a design that they would be bad for multiple years. 

 

But they were doomed from the start by letting Feaster run it. More picks, whatever it wouldn't have mattered they just had a bad GM in charge.  Got unlucky with some softer drafts years but you can't have a bad GM in charge on hope to succeed in a rebuild.