Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Well he did state that they had a "futures" offer for Tkachuk last summer but decided against it. Alluded to the fact they felt they had too many good pieces. 

 

he also pointed to the analytics in his answer around why he felt we shouldn't overreact. He may be getting fooled but i'm not sure it's in the way you describe. 

 

I'm not sure I'd consider 11-6-4 against a soft schedule a "run". 

 

 

 

Yes I was being a little over the top.  But what I got from the presser was that Bean is open to a rebuild (complete tear down) if the situation warranted it.  Right now, it doesn't.  But let's see if Lindholm will extend long term or not.  That should change the Flames direction if Lindholm won't extend.

[cross16]

18 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes I was being a little over the top.  But what I got from the presser was that Bean is open to a rebuild (complete tear down) if the situation warranted it.  Right now, it doesn't.  But let's see if Lindholm will extend long term or not.  That should change the Flames direction if Lindholm won't extend.

 

Yeah i didn't get that. I took that as a PR spin myself. I think they were trying to to placate fans by suggesting they are always looking at whether to rebuild or not.  Thought the answer reeked of ego and very much a "we know better than you" type of answer. 

 

I don't believe for a second they considered it last summer (despite what Bean suggested) and I don't think for a second they'll consider it until they absolutely have to. 

[The_People1]

8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Yeah i didn't get that. I took that as a PR spin myself. I think they were trying to to placate fans by suggesting they are always looking at whether to rebuild or not.  Thought the answer reeked of ego and very much a "we know better than you" type of answer. 

 

I don't believe for a second they considered it last summer (despite what Bean suggested) and I don't think for a second they'll consider it until they absolutely have to. 

 

Fair.  Bean just giving us hope but we know better.  Plus, he said the data suggests we have a good team.  What data and what is a "good team"?  Good enough to win the Cup?  No way.  Good enough to make the playoffs?  Of course.  You only have to be better than 50% of the league to make the playoffs.  If we only need data to suggest we are better than 50% of the teams in the league then we can surely expect to never rebuild.

[Heartbreaker]

9 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Yeah i didn't get that. I took that as a PR spin myself. I think they were trying to to placate fans by suggesting they are always looking at whether to rebuild or not.  Thought the answer reeked of ego and very much a "we know better than you" type of answer. 

 

I don't believe for a second they considered it last summer (despite what Bean suggested) and I don't think for a second they'll consider it until they absolutely have to. 

 

I tend to agree with this, and one of the things that I found very frustrating about this season is that it seemed like an excellent opportunity to retool. In my opinion, the writing was on the wall well before the trade deadline that this iteration of the Flames was not going to be making any noise in the post season. Even if they'd made it, I did not see evidence of the resilience and consistency to get past the first round. If it were me, I would have moved a couple of next year's UFAs while the prices were astronomical, and played more kids. I think that there would have been significant draft capital, and that, coupled with very likely finishing lower in the standings would have helped to reload this team.

 

I am confident that next year will be better - even if everything stays the same - because there are many factors that are extremely unlikely to be repeated. The problem is it'll be a lot harder to justify moving those expiring assets when you're in the midst of a playoff race, or you've already punched your ticket to the post season.

 

Love.

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I tend to agree with this, and one of the things that I found very frustrating about this season is that it seemed like an excellent opportunity to retool. In my opinion, the writing was on the wall well before the trade deadline that this iteration of the Flames was not going to be making any noise in the post season. Even if they'd made it, I did not see evidence of the resilience and consistency to get past the first round. If it were me, I would have moved a couple of next year's UFAs while the prices were astronomical, and played more kids. I think that there would have been significant draft capital, and that, coupled with very likely finishing lower in the standings would have helped to reload this team.

 

I am confident that next year will be better - even if everything stays the same - because there are many factors that are extremely unlikely to be repeated. The problem is it'll be a lot harder to justify moving those expiring assets when you're in the midst of a playoff race, or you've already punched your ticket to the post season.

 

Love.

 

If we just stay the same, other teams will start to get better.  We had 1/4 of the league pretending to compete in the 2nd half.  Next year, they will be better and most teams will make summer improvements.  The so-called easy wins will be gone.  

 

Any GM that has autonomy will make the determination of whether we can keep the current pending UFA's, what we can get in return and what we need to do external.  That is gonna happen this summer and early fall.  Chances are that one pending UFA will be left to do something with, and any GM worth his salt is going to make that call at TDL regardless of the playoff picture.  He's not about to let a Backlund or Toffoli or Lindholm walk because they haven't signed.  Been there, it hasn't worked.  When you trade for a pending UFA, you are not expecting to re-sign them.  Different scenario.  

 

Then again, all that could go out the window if we simply bring in a figure head.  

[The_People1]

5 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I tend to agree with this, and one of the things that I found very frustrating about this season is that it seemed like an excellent opportunity to retool. In my opinion, the writing was on the wall well before the trade deadline that this iteration of the Flames was not going to be making any noise in the post season. Even if they'd made it, I did not see evidence of the resilience and consistency to get past the first round. If it were me, I would have moved a couple of next year's UFAs while the prices were astronomical, and played more kids. I think that there would have been significant draft capital, and that, coupled with very likely finishing lower in the standings would have helped to reload this team.

 

I am confident that next year will be better - even if everything stays the same - because there are many factors that are extremely unlikely to be repeated. The problem is it'll be a lot harder to justify moving those expiring assets when you're in the midst of a playoff race, or you've already punched your ticket to the post season.

 

Love.

 

That press conference was supposed to introduce Don Maloney as new POHO but instead, it introduced darker days ahead for us.

[travel_dude]

2 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

That press conference was supposed to introduce Don Maloney as new POHO but instead, it introduced darker days ahead for us.

 

Tell us what goalie you think will be back and that the team was unlucky.

[cross16]

58 minutes ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I tend to agree with this, and one of the things that I found very frustrating about this season is that it seemed like an excellent opportunity to retool. In my opinion, the writing was on the wall well before the trade deadline that this iteration of the Flames was not going to be making any noise in the post season. Even if they'd made it, I did not see evidence of the resilience and consistency to get past the first round. If it were me, I would have moved a couple of next year's UFAs while the prices were astronomical, and played more kids. I think that there would have been significant draft capital, and that, coupled with very likely finishing lower in the standings would have helped to reload this team.

 

I am confident that next year will be better - even if everything stays the same - because there are many factors that are extremely unlikely to be repeated. The problem is it'll be a lot harder to justify moving those expiring assets when you're in the midst of a playoff race, or you've already punched your ticket to the post season.

 

Love.

sounds like you know Murray Edwards 

[jjgallow]

20 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

I tend to agree with this, and one of the things that I found very frustrating about this season is that it seemed like an excellent opportunity to retool. In my opinion, the writing was on the wall well before the trade deadline that this iteration of the Flames was not going to be making any noise in the post season. Even if they'd made it, I did not see evidence of the resilience and consistency to get past the first round. If it were me, I would have moved a couple of next year's UFAs while the prices were astronomical, and played more kids. I think that there would have been significant draft capital, and that, coupled with very likely finishing lower in the standings would have helped to reload this team.

 

Beautifully said, completely agree

 

20 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

I am confident that next year will be better - even if everything stays the same - because there are many factors that are extremely unlikely to be repeated. The problem is it'll be a lot harder to justify moving those expiring assets when you're in the midst of a playoff race, or you've already punched your ticket to the post season.

 

Love.

 

I do not believe that the players we would need to count on for any kind of rebound, are at an age where this can realistically be expected by anyone, except maybe Murray Edwards.   And that's why I don't see a rebound happening.

 

Is a 34 year old Markstrom going to return to the form of a 30 year old Markstrom?  I doubt.   Can we do anything about it?  Not with that contract.   This goes way beyond goal but goal is a thing.

 

I see one scenario where this plays out as you stated:  Wolf takes a big, big step.

    And maybe Chris Philips translates etc.

 

I would not bet on such things happening, but I wouldn't necessarily bet against them either.  there is that possibility.

[travel_dude]

59 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Beautifully said, completely agree

 

 

I do not believe that the players we would need to count on for any kind of rebound, are at an age where this can realistically be expected by anyone, except maybe Murray Edwards.   And that's why I don't see a rebound happening.

 

Is a 34 year old Markstrom going to return to the form of a 30 year old Markstrom?  I doubt.   Can we do anything about it?  Not with that contract.   This goes way beyond goal but goal is a thing.

 

I see one scenario where this plays out as you stated:  Wolf takes a big, big step.

    And maybe Chris Philips translates etc.

 

I would not bet on such things happening, but I wouldn't necessarily bet against them either.  there is that possibility.

 

Markstrom was 33 when he had a career numbers, so yeah he can rebound.

Huberdeau and Kadri are a year removed from career seasons.

Consistent and played in the right situations is all it really takes to get close.

 

But, TBH I think we have to move some assets now.  Call it a re-tool if you like.

Get the best return for pending UFA's, but you do it in the summer.

We won't do it if we are close to a playoff spot.

And if there's an inkling that is the plan, the coach will bury him to make him worthless.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Beautifully said, completely agree

 

 

I do not believe that the players we would need to count on for any kind of rebound, are at an age where this can realistically be expected by anyone, except maybe Murray Edwards.   And that's why I don't see a rebound happening.

 

Is a 34 year old Markstrom going to return to the form of a 30 year old Markstrom?  I doubt.   Can we do anything about it?  Not with that contract.   This goes way beyond goal but goal is a thing.

 

I see one scenario where this plays out as you stated:  Wolf takes a big, big step.

    And maybe Chris Philips translates etc.

 

I would not bet on such things happening, but I wouldn't necessarily bet against them either.  there is that possibility.

I believe that they'll have a rebound season. I think it was Rhett, Pinder, and Boomer on Barn Burner saying that being a perennial playoff team is more of a 105 points plus team and not one flirting with 95 points every year. 
 

sure we've won divisions, but have almost always missed the playoffs the year after, albeit with different teams. 
 

I think they'll get something like 95-97 points next year and eek in. We get slightly better goaltending, and then goaltending fails us in the first round. 
 

we go this way for 3-4 more years, one year in and one year out. Then we realize a rebuild is needed. 
 

we sell off iggy guys but are stuck with Huberdeau. At least Weegar will play up to his contract. 

[robrob74]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Markstrom was 33 when he had a career numbers, so yeah he can rebound.

Huberdeau and Kadri are a year removed from career seasons.

Consistent and played in the right situations is all it really takes to get close.

 

But, TBH I think we have to move some assets now.  Call it a re-tool if you like.

Get the best return for pending UFA's, but you do it in the summer.

We won't do it if we are close to a playoff spot.

And if there's an inkling that is the plan, the coach will bury him to make him worthless.

I kind of think it can force Sutter to use young players. Don't replace with vets. 
 

we might see a Coleman traded and then Lewis, Lucic re-signed lol.

[jjgallow]

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, jjgallow said:

 

Self portrait?  LOL

[jjgallow]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Self portrait?  LOL

 

That's me when we win the cup sigh

[travel_dude]

39 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

That's me when we win the cup sigh

 

You are ambitious. 

I thought it might be the GM of Arizona.

 

With all seriousness, winning the cup is tough.

Have to catch the perfect storm to win it.

COVID year or North/South/East/West division year.

Or you aging superstar finally gets good enough goaltending.

Or your injury situation lines up with the playoffs.

Or it was 10 years ago when it was a different beast.

All I am trying to say is there is no magic formula that works.

Some things may get you further or not at all.

I don't know yet (season not started) if this is a year we put it all together.

You don't have to be a contender every year to win it.

And repeats are near impossible in this cap era. 

The two bolded area had a lot to do with it.

You can't plan that.

[robrob74]

My brother was a die hard Canucks fan. He gave up. Fed up about the way they are run, Same way as Calgary.

 

 

 We are never winning the cup in our life times...

[conundrumed]

4 hours ago, robrob74 said:

My brother was a die hard Canucks fan. He gave up. Fed up about the way they are run, Same way as Calgary.

 

 

 We are never winning the cup in our life times...

Can I interest you in another red-jersied team?lol Building on giant Dmen? Lots in the prospect pool? Not afraid to make trades? Crafty in UFA? Snarly Captain? Value draft picks? Just as good but getting better? Fun and fast?

Watching Bertuzzi in Boston, it's too bad Detroit can't afford to sign him due to upcoming future contracts on great young players. It's fun cheering for a team that will even trade a good fan-fave player because they can see the forest through the trees.

I grew up with Detroit but near 2 decades in Calgary(was always anti-Oilers anyways) caused me to love them too. I cheered Calgary over the D in the playoffs in the past, I loved Kipper and Yelle. Something about a chain-smoking goalie with vodka(?) in his water bottle and always seems angry is a guy I can get behind.lol Reminded me of me if I was a lot faster.lol

Having 2 teams are fun to compare also. Detroit keeps grabbing UFAs the way Calgary should. 1 to 3 years and you should still have trade value at tdl if we choose. Maata, Perron, Copp, Kubalik, Sundqvist, Suter. All solid affordable players that would fit here then flip for picks for ROI. NOT the biggest fish in UFA. Though Chiarot is arguable and too much term.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Can I interest you in another red-jersied team?lol Building on giant Dmen? Lots in the prospect pool? Not afraid to make trades? Crafty in UFA? Snarly Captain? Value draft picks? Just as good but getting better? Fun and fast?

Watching Bertuzzi in Boston, it's too bad Detroit can't afford to sign him due to upcoming future contracts on great young players. It's fun cheering for a team that will even trade a good fan-fave player because they can see the forest through the trees.

I grew up with Detroit but near 2 decades in Calgary(was always anti-Oilers anyways) caused me to love them too. I cheered Calgary over the D in the playoffs in the past, I loved Kipper and Yelle. Something about a chain-smoking goalie with vodka(?) in his water bottle and always seems angry is a guy I can get behind.lol Reminded me of me if I was a lot faster.lol

Having 2 teams are fun to compare also. Detroit keeps grabbing UFAs the way Calgary should. 1 to 3 years and you should still have trade value at tdl if we choose. Maata, Perron, Copp, Kubalik, Sundqvist, Suter. All solid affordable players that would fit here then flip for picks for ROI. NOT the biggest fish in UFA. Though Chiarot is arguable and too much term.

 

you know. 
 

 

absolutely hated Yzerman 

never wanted to see him win. 

 

 

then. 
 

i came to my senses and felt he deserved to, before he ever won

 

i started to really respect gore he committed and competed 

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Can I interest you in another red-jersied team?lol Building on giant Dmen? Lots in the prospect pool? Not afraid to make trades? Crafty in UFA? Snarly Captain? Value draft picks? Just as good but getting better? Fun and fast?

Watching Bertuzzi in Boston, it's too bad Detroit can't afford to sign him due to upcoming future contracts on great young players. It's fun cheering for a team that will even trade a good fan-fave player because they can see the forest through the trees.

I grew up with Detroit but near 2 decades in Calgary(was always anti-Oilers anyways) caused me to love them too. I cheered Calgary over the D in the playoffs in the past, I loved Kipper and Yelle. Something about a chain-smoking goalie with vodka(?) in his water bottle and always seems angry is a guy I can get behind.lol Reminded me of me if I was a lot faster.lol

Having 2 teams are fun to compare also. Detroit keeps grabbing UFAs the way Calgary should. 1 to 3 years and you should still have trade value at tdl if we choose. Maata, Perron, Copp, Kubalik, Sundqvist, Suter. All solid affordable players that would fit here then flip for picks for ROI. NOT the biggest fish in UFA. Though Chiarot is arguable and too much term.

 

Perhaps our UFA decisions were BT's failure.  Or perhaps the owners didn't want to spend the money on fairweather Flames, they wanted community guys that they could call up and get to go to a parade or event.

 

I'm curious what you think Bert is worth next year.  He's 28 already which I was shocked at.  I don't see any way we could ever sign him, but I wonder if he would be a better investment than say Mangiapane.  

 

Anyway, I dread off-seasons in Calgary.  Never a Nemestnikov signing, just the opposite ends of the scale.  Rooney or Kadri/Neal types.  No 2 year deal like Perron, just a Rooney.  I love the Zadorov signing because it gives us options this year.  He had a great year and is not expensive or long term.  We have to take advantage of pending UFA's and not get too caught up in forever a Flame nonsense.  Iggy was traded (too late) but he didn't retire here.  No way that Backlund deserves better.  I don't mean that as an insult, just that team comes first.

[cross16]

4 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Perhaps our UFA decisions were BT's failure.  Or perhaps the owners didn't want to spend the money on fairweather Flames, they wanted community guys that they could call up and get to go to a parade or event.

 

I'm curious what you think Bert is worth next year.  He's 28 already which I was shocked at.  I don't see any way we could ever sign him, but I wonder if he would be a better investment than say Mangiapane.  

 

Anyway, I dread off-seasons in Calgary.  Never a Nemestnikov signing, just the opposite ends of the scale.  Rooney or Kadri/Neal types.  No 2 year deal like Perron, just a Rooney.  I love the Zadorov signing because it gives us options this year.  He had a great year and is not expensive or long term.  We have to take advantage of pending UFA's and not get too caught up in forever a Flame nonsense.  Iggy was traded (too late) but he didn't retire here.  No way that Backlund deserves better.  I don't mean that as an insult, just that team comes first.

 

I think this piece is pretty simple. When you have a mandate of being in the playoffs every year you can't afford to leave holes on your roster, and when you combine that with the needing to trade draft picks you're going to leave significant holes. Therefore UFA become a pretty key tool to build out the team. 

 

Then combine that with the fact that you have one of the more undesirable markets in the NHL, your not in a position of strength when it comes to UFA.

 

I personally think the narrative that Treliving was bad at UFA is wrong. He had his misses but, but more often than not he got good players and the right players to reasonable deals. You will always overpay in UFA but that goes back to why do you need to be so active in the first place?

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I think this piece is pretty simple. When you have a mandate of being in the playoffs every year you can't afford to leave holes on your roster, and when you combine that with the needing to trade draft picks you're going to leave significant holes. Therefore UFA become a pretty key tool to build out the team. 

 

Then combine that with the fact that you have one of the more undesirable markets in the NHL, your not in a position of strength when it comes to UFA.

 

I personally think the narrative that Treliving was bad at UFA is wrong. He had his misses but, but more often than not he got good players and the right players to reasonable deals. You will always overpay in UFA but that goes back to why do you need to be so active in the first place?

 

I wasn't blaming him, just saying that the overview of UFA's signed here is not that impressive.  We don't really know what UFA's want as we only see the signed contracts.  I do think that sometimes this market is viewed by the fans as undesirable more than the players.  It could be as simple as us offering 4 years and the player wanting two.  Or the player doesn't see a fit.  We may overpay because of bidding with other teams for sure.  

 

I think overall that BT was a good GM for us.  There are lots that would have made us worse off.  I would prefer that we be more active in the trade market than the UFA market, but we seem to have to dip into the picks to do them.  This year, we have some trade pieces, so if we can use that, then lets see what happens.  Doesn't mean you stay away entirely from the UFA market, but you need to be more selective now.  Cap issues unless we make trades and only room for UFA's if we make trades.  As long as the new GM doesn't just follow the owners in how to set the direction, we may do the right thing.

[conundrumed]

I think at the higher levels they were good signings/at the time for that player. The bottom roster spots were real mediocrity. I mean the Leivo's and Raymond's and that end of UFA's. I'm a big fan of a solid bottom 6 so I tend to look at more bottom 6-9 fwds.

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Perhaps our UFA decisions were BT's failure.  Or perhaps the owners didn't want to spend the money on fairweather Flames, they wanted community guys that they could call up and get to go to a parade or event.

 

I'm curious what you think Bert is worth next year.  He's 28 already which I was shocked at.  I don't see any way we could ever sign him, but I wonder if he would be a better investment than say Mangiapane.  

 

Anyway, I dread off-seasons in Calgary.  Never a Nemestnikov signing, just the opposite ends of the scale.  Rooney or Kadri/Neal types.  No 2 year deal like Perron, just a Rooney.  I love the Zadorov signing because it gives us options this year.  He had a great year and is not expensive or long term.  We have to take advantage of pending UFA's and not get too caught up in forever a Flame nonsense.  Iggy was traded (too late) but he didn't retire here.  No way that Backlund deserves better.  I don't mean that as an insult, just that team comes first.

Bert's likely 6-7 term in the $6.25 per range is my thought. Around Nichushkin.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I think this piece is pretty simple. When you have a mandate of being in the playoffs every year you can't afford to leave holes on your roster, and when you combine that with the needing to trade draft picks you're going to leave significant holes. Therefore UFA become a pretty key tool to build out the team. 

 

Then combine that with the fact that you have one of the more undesirable markets in the NHL, your not in a position of strength when it comes to UFA.

 

I personally think the narrative that Treliving was bad at UFA is wrong. He had his misses but, but more often than not he got good players and the right players to reasonable deals. You will always overpay in UFA but that goes back to why do you need to be so active in the first place?

 

Feels like chicken and the egg though.  You didn't draft a RHS RW so you reach in UFA to sign Troy Brouwer.  That didn't work out so you reach in UFA again for James Neal.  That was disastrous so you sign a LW Coleman and throw him over to RW.

 

Coronato was a bit of a reach in his draft.  Ranked 15ish at the time.  But if you don't reach in the draft for RHS RW, then you reach in UFA.