Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[DirtyDeeds]

.....

 

Here's a fun mental exercise. Put our goaltenders onto a current playoff team for this regular season. Does that team make the playoffs still? Is it the system or is it the goaltending?

No. It is the Goaltending.

[cross16]

No. It is the Goaltending.

 

While I agree that goaltending is the primary reason the Flames are a bottom tier team, it doesn't tell the whole story. The Flames were a bottom 5 team in all of these categories: special teams, puck possession 5 on 5, scoring chances against 5 on 5 and high danger scoring chances 5 on 5. Their goaltending was crappy, but its not the entire story. Would have taken a pretty amazing goaltending performance for the Flames to be anything more than a fringe playoff team last year. 

[phoenix66]

 

Here's a fun mental exercise. Put our goaltenders onto a current playoff team for this regular season. Does that team make the playoffs still? Is it the system or is it the goaltending?

 

 

Ok lets reverse that .. lets put Brian Elliot or Ben Bishop on this team.. do we make the playoffs?..maybe

do we hit the golf course 4-7 games later ?  very likely 

 

I would even go so far as to say if Ramo or Ortio played for Chicago ?.. Chicago still makes the playoffs

[DirtyDeeds]

While I agree that goaltending is the primary reason the Flames are a bottom tier team, it doesn't tell the whole story. The Flames were a bottom 5 team in all of these categories: special teams, puck possession 5 on 5, scoring chances against 5 on 5 and high danger scoring chances 5 on 5. Their goaltending was crappy, but its not the entire story. Would have taken a pretty amazing goaltending performance for the Flames to be anything more than a fringe playoff team last year. 

We got pretty amazing goaltending from Ramo and he managed to get us back into a playoff spot for what a day? two?

 

He got hurt and neither of Hiller and Ortio was able to keep us in the running.

Ok lets reverse that .. lets put Brian Elliot or Ben Bishop on this team.. do we make the playoffs?..maybe

do we hit the golf course 4-7 games later ?  very likely 

 

I would even go so far as to say if Ramo or Ortio played for Chicago ?.. Chicago still makes the playoffs

You are not being fair. You have to take baby steps before you can do and olympic 100 yards dash.

 

Give the Flames avg or better goaltending and they are fighting for a playoff spot this past season.

 

Which Ramo are you talking about the one who played terrible to start the season or the one who played well enough to get us into playoff contention around christmas? Same question for Ortio.. both were waived for poor play...

[robrob1974]

Two different unrelated points. Baer was benched and asked to play a 2 way game. He did not respond and was sent down. He then demanded a trade. He hasn't thrived in another system.

He was actually complimented on his two way game in Vancouver. I thought his two way game was ok. He back checked but he was not intense about and I think it made it look like he wasn't trying. It's probably because it looks more like he is floating, yet he is in position.

I just think coaching/management didn't like him. He came into camp with an attitude and it cost him. Maybe without the attitude that one development camp and he might have been given the same leeway as Monahan got.

We all see it subjectively different and that's how I see that situation. I may not be right to some but to others, they may see it the same way.

I think Baertschi isn't an in your face guy and that's what they want, but that's not him as a player. His 2-way game is fine, it's just not in your face aggressive.

[robrob1974]

We got pretty amazing goaltending from Ramo and he managed to get us back into a playoff spot for what a day? two?

He got hurt and neither of Hiller and Ortio was able to keep us in the running.

You are not being fair. You have to take baby steps before you can do and olympic 100 yards dash.

Give the Flames avg or better goaltending and they are fighting for a playoff spot this past season.

Which Ramo are you talking about the one who played terrible to start the season or the one who played well enough to get us into playoff contention around christmas? Same question for Ortio.. both were waived for poor play...

We were out of a playoff spot when Ramo went down. Sure he got us back in the mix, back to .500. The team had a miracle stretch of hockey, and if that's what you're counting on to get in then you're not a contender. After that stretch they played under .500 again and that was with Ramo in and some decent performances by Ortio. This team has good parts but isn't close to being a contender yet, especially if management wants them to play a rougher harder brand. We don't have the bodies to play that style. Possession styles, maybe they can with one or two lines.

[phoenix66]

We got pretty amazing goaltending from Ramo and he managed to get us back into a playoff spot for what a day? two?

 

He got hurt and neither of Hiller and Ortio was able to keep us in the running.

You are not being fair. You have to take baby steps before you can do and olympic 100 yards dash.

 

Give the Flames avg or better goaltending and they are fighting for a playoff spot this past season.

 

Which Ramo are you talking about the one who played terrible to start the season or the one who played well enough to get us into playoff contention around christmas? Same question for Ortio.. both were waived for poor play...

 

Maybe was the key word.. the fact that good goaltending gets us fighting for a spot proves a point.

And really if you look at the sequence, they werent sent down for poor starts .. they were sent down cuz BH had some kind of man crush on Hiller.  Ramo had TWO starts.. one, everybody was bad.. the other , he played extremely well.  Ortio ate popcorn most of the time.. 

Ramo went on a run when given the chance.. Ortio played above well.. Hiller stunk out the joint almost every start all year..  this is mismanagement of your goaltenders exemplified..again ..on BH, and this "schedule" he had..Really?

Not taking all the blame off the goalies, but again , Hartley obviously contributed to their management.

[DirtyDeeds]

He was actually complimented on his two way game in Vancouver. I thought his two way game was ok. He back checked but he was not intense about and I think it made it look like he wasn't trying. It's probably because it looks more like he is floating, yet he is in position.

I just think coaching/management didn't like him. He came into camp with an attitude and it cost him. Maybe without the attitude that one development camp and he might have been given the same leeway as Monahan got.

We all see it subjectively different and that's how I see that situation. I may not be right to some but to others, they may see it the same way.

I think Baertschi isn't an in your face guy and that's what they want, but that's not him as a player. His 2-way game is fine, it's just not in your face aggressive.

I am going by 2 incidents re Baer:

 

BB calling him out for not playing in all 3 zones.

 

Baer got benched same time as Backs for same reason. Not taking care of his defensive responsibilities. Backs responded and Baer got sent back to Baby Flames shortly after.

[kehatch]

I am going by 2 incidents re Baer:

BB calling him out for not playing in all 3 zones.

Baer got benched same time as Backs for same reason. Not taking care of his defensive responsibilities. Backs responded and Baer got sent back to Baby Flames shortly after.

That is all accurate. But coaching does have a huge impact on the play of a young player. Baertschi doesn't look like a superstar but he does look like an NHL player in Vancouver.

I really do wonder what Baertschi might look like if there was another coach in Calgary.

That said, other young guys are flourishing in Calgary and did under Hartley so I am not saying it's all on the coach. But Hartley didn't seem to give Baertschi the same opportunities that he is getting in Vancouver.

[robrob1974]

That is all accurate. But coaching does have a huge impact on the play of a young player. Baertschi doesn't look like a superstar but he does look like an NHL player in Vancouver.

I really do wonder what Baertschi might look like if there was another coach in Calgary.

That said, other young guys are flourishing in Calgary and did under Hartley so I am not saying it's all on the coach. But Hartley didn't seem to give Baertschi the same opportunities that he is getting in Vancouver.

Baerstchi is comfortable now too, so he feels safe to play his game.

This is what I think coaches should do, play their players to their strengths.

[cross16]

We got pretty amazing goaltending from Ramo and he managed to get us back into a playoff spot for what a day? two?

He got hurt and neither of Hiller and Ortio was able to keep us in the running.

He did but I'm pretty sure the last time the flames were in a playoff spot was December. When Ramo went down with the knee they were 9 points out of a playoff spot IIRC.

[Carty]

Here's a fun mental exercise. Put our goaltenders onto a current playoff team for this regular season. Does that team make the playoffs still? Is it the system or is it the goaltending?

 

How about if a current playoff team use the same strategies that Hartley employed, over and over, even when it stopped working...   What would that do to their chance of winning the series?...

 

Then have the coach start utilizing players in ways that limit their chance to succeed, while at the same time affecting the other players on the ice when things start to fall apart...    Then maybe the coach could start juggling lines even when he had a line combination that was working...

 

Add in a defensive strategy that increases the amount of quality shots on your goalie, just to make things more exciting...

 

Through in poor goaltending for good measure, and it would start to look pretty familiar...

[jjgallow]

Considering I never said anything about goaltending i would agree. I'm leaving it alone as my thoughts on goaltending I think you know full well by now as you and I have discussed it.

 

 

Hey...again...sorry to cut your post off.....again...have had no time....just wanted to say sorry on this part...totally confused you for traveldude lol.   my bad.

[jjgallow]

 Last year they moved into elite category but IMO that not a surprise. 

.....

 

either way, that is not the main point I am trying to make and I don't want to get into a argument or semantics. My point is you do not necessarily need to drastically improve your skill in order to create more puck possession. As teams like Carolina and Toronto .....

 

imho, moving into elite category is almost Always a surprise.   Especially for those two.   And even if it's your pedigree.   There's a handfull of players who it wouldn't be a surprise for.  Ie., McDavid.  Crosby.

 

I agree on the puck possession, actually.  But I don't feel it's entirely fair to use teams who...literally couldn't get much worse, as examples of how easy improvement can be.

 

Anyway, it's true.   A coaching change could, theoretically, improve puck possession.  If that's what Treliving feels is the root of the problem. 

 

But Could Any coaching change, if made this season, gotten this team into the playoffs with the roster Treliving designed?

 

Nope.  Don't see it.

 

And I'm okay with that, because I've liked most of the moves Treliving made.  But they were not moves to make the Flames a winner this year at all.   So it's funny that he would use that as the excuse to fire the coach.

[kehatch]

imho, moving into elite category is almost Always a surprise.   Especially for those two.   And even if it's your pedigree.   There's a handfull of players who it wouldn't be a surprise for.  Ie., McDavid.  Crosby.

 

I agree on the puck possession, actually.  But I don't feel it's entirely fair to use teams who...literally couldn't get much worse, as examples of how easy improvement can be.

 

Anyway, it's true.   A coaching change could, theoretically, improve puck possession.  If that's what Treliving feels is the root of the problem. 

 

But Could Any coaching change, if made this season, gotten this team into the playoffs with the roster Treliving designed?

 

Nope.  Don't see it.

 

And I'm okay with that, because I've liked most of the moves Treliving made.  But they were not moves to make the Flames a winner this year at all.   So it's funny that he would use that as the excuse to fire the coach.

 

I agree that this team isn't a strong puck possession team or one that should be shocked they didn't make the playoffs, regardless of coach.  I disagree on two key points. 

 

The first (and this isn't a disagreement with you) is that just because the Flames aren't world beaters on paper that a coaching change shouldn't have been done.  If the coach and the GM are not on the same page about how players should be used or how the team should play then changing the coach is the right thing to do.  Even if you have the worst roster in the NHL. 

 

The second is that Hartley is taking a bullet for the failure of the GM.  This isn't a decision based purely on season end results.  There is clearly a disconnect between GM and coach, from everything I have heard the players weren't responding to the coaches message anymore (guys like Hartley have a shelf life), and the Flames did under perform using a lot of metrics unrelated to goal tending or season finish.  

 

Could they have said in the media that there were philosophical differences and left it at that?  I guess.  But that is only because some of the hard core fans are hyper sensitive and taking under performing = taking bullet for a poor finish with bad goal tending.  Which isn't what the Flames are saying at all.  

[travel_dude]

imho, moving into elite category is almost Always a surprise.   Especially for those two.   And even if it's your pedigree.   There's a handfull of players who it wouldn't be a surprise for.  Ie., McDavid.  Crosby.

 

I agree on the puck possession, actually.  But I don't feel it's entirely fair to use teams who...literally couldn't get much worse, as examples of how easy improvement can be.

 

Anyway, it's true.   A coaching change could, theoretically, improve puck possession.  If that's what Treliving feels is the root of the problem. 

 

But Could Any coaching change, if made this season, gotten this team into the playoffs with the roster Treliving designed?

 

Nope.  Don't see it.

 

And I'm okay with that, because I've liked most of the moves Treliving made.  But they were not moves to make the Flames a winner this year at all.   So it's funny that he would use that as the excuse to fire the coach.

 

Let me throw out a hypothetical....

 

Scenario #1

Coach Newguy appears at training camp in September 2015.

He evaluates three goalies he has to work with during pre-season games.

Instead of running with Ramo and Hiller for the first month, he decides to play Ortio for a few games.

 

Scenario #2

Coach Newguy shows up.  His marching orders include improving the puck possession of the team.  He looks at game films and determines some areas that can be changed to improve possession.  He implements them.  Less reliance on shot blocking and more placed on keeping the puck.  Possible result, less injuries from shot blocking.

 

In scenario #1, there was a certain amount of loyalty given to the goalies from last year.  BT had to waive Ramo just to have the coach entertain even starting Ortio.  I think you would agree that Ortio might have played better had he been given a chance before the end of October, and then only because Hiller was injured in a game.

[cross16]

 

I agree on the puck possession, actually.  But I don't feel it's entirely fair to use teams who...literally couldn't get much worse, as examples of how easy improvement can be.

 

Anyway, it's true.   A coaching change could, theoretically, improve puck possession.  If that's what Treliving feels is the root of the problem. 

 

But Could Any coaching change, if made this season, gotten this team into the playoffs with the roster Treliving designed?

 

Nope.  Don't see it.

 

And I'm okay with that, because I've liked most of the moves Treliving made.  But they were not moves to make the Flames a winner this year at all.   So it's funny that he would use that as the excuse to fire the coach.

 

1- Well keep in mind the Flames really can't be any worse at puck posession either. They were a bottom 5 team last year so comparing them to other teams like that is very fair actually. 

 

2- I don't care what system you play you arn't making the playoffs when you have the 30th ranked goaltending or special teams so no I dont' think a better coach gets them in the playoffs last year. But that's also something that Treliving has never said either and in fact has said goaltending was the primary issue and thats on him. Hartley wasn't fired becuase of last season, he was fired for 2 reasons. 1 - Treliving didn't see him as the guy and they wren't on the same page and 2- his overall body of work over 4 years is not very impressive, especially when you factor in possession and defensive play and those are 2 things that really matter to Treliving. 

[jjgallow]

 

In scenario #1, there was a certain amount of loyalty given to the goalies from last year.  BT had to waive Ramo just to have the coach entertain even starting Ortio.  I think you would agree that Ortio might have played better had he been given a chance before the end of October, and then only because Hiller was injured in a game.

 

Well I absolutely agree with this, yes.    Make no mistake, I had my issues with BH, especially regarding his loyalty system with underperforming and aging goaltenders. 

 

All I'm saying, is that I don't think either of those scenarios, or even a combination of them, were enough to put the Flames in the playoffs (this year).  And even if I AM wrong about that, they would not have made it far.   That's all I'm getting at, really.   And it would concern me, if BT really thought otherwise, given the team he put together this year.  (which, long term, I fully support)

[jjgallow]

 1 - Treliving didn't see him as the guy and they wren't on the same page and

 

2- his overall body of work over 4 years is not very impressive, especially when you factor in possession and defensive play and those are 2 things that really matter to Treliving. 

 

Totally agree on point 1.   I just wish that's what BT said.

 

Point 2....again...he really Wasn't given a lot to work with.  Not that he's my favourite....but I think it's a Very fuzzy line and if "body of work" is the measuring stick over 4 years...I think you look more to the GM and less to the Coach...to be honest.    I like point 1 a lot better.

[travel_dude]

Well I absolutely agree with this, yes.    Make no mistake, I had my issues with BH, especially regarding his loyalty system with underperforming and aging goaltenders. 

 

All I'm saying, is that I don't think either of those scenarios, or even a combination of them, were enough to put the Flames in the playoffs (this year).  And even if I AM wrong about that, they would not have made it far.   That's all I'm getting at, really.   And it would concern me, if BT really thought otherwise, given the team he put together this year.  (which, long term, I fully support)

 

There are examples of teams that have brought in new coaches and they had immediate impact on puck possession.  Look at Pitts.  Almost no change to the roster, but possession jumped by quite a lot.

 

As far as goalies go, we were 10 points out.  Take out about 5 games of Hiller that were about 4 GA, and replace with a reasonable average of 2-3 GA, and we could have had 5 more wins.  You don't even have to look much past his last 5 games as a Flame.  

5, 4, 5, 3, 3 (the last one was 3 GA on 5 shots).  

[AlbertaBoy12]

Totally agree on point 1.   I just wish that's what BT said.

 

Point 2....again...he really Wasn't given a lot to work with.  Not that he's my favourite....but I think it's a Very fuzzy line and if "body of work" is the measuring stick over 4 years...I think you look more to the GM and less to the Coach...to be honest.    I like point 1 a lot better.

Except I would say its hard to argue that he wasent given alot to work with, the team got alot better on paper in the 4 years he was behind the bench, but the team didnt get any better numbers wise. The only thing that happened was he got a cinderella run to the playoffs out of this team in year 3, but the underlying numbers were always there and they were complete garbage.

 

Could he have had better pieces? sure he could have, but I think the arguement that toronto had better possession numbers with an AHL roster holds true no matter how you look at it.

[conundrumed]

Except I would say its hard to argue that he wasent given alot to work with, the team got alot better on paper in the 4 years he was behind the bench, but the team didnt get any better numbers wise. The only thing that happened was he got a cinderella run to the playoffs out of this team in year 3, but the underlying numbers were always there and they were complete garbage.

 

Could he have had better pieces? sure he could have, but I think the arguement that toronto had better possession numbers with an AHL roster holds true no matter how you look at it.

But it's true. The roster is not very good. There are some nice pieces, sure. But it isn't a roster that gets you to the playoffs.

[AlbertaBoy12]

But it's true. The roster is not very good. There are some nice pieces, sure. But it isn't a roster that gets you to the playoffs.

ya but its not as bad as it turned out this season or last season. Regardless if you think last season was good, we got lucky we didnt play well, I would say we had a much better team then alot of other teams that didnt make the playoffs.

[conundrumed]

ya but its not as bad as it turned out this season or last season. Regardless if you think last season was good, we got lucky we didnt play well, I would say we had a much better team then alot of other teams that didnt make the playoffs.

That's little consolation. Yet, why do you think that? Winnipeg and Columbus look a lot better to me, the Oilers look close. Arizona has a ton of young depth. How are we in better shape?

Not to mention, those teams have goalies. I love how we treat that as, yeah but...

Yeah but what? It's a huge issue. Huge.

[AlbertaBoy12]

That's little consolation. Yet, why do you think that? Winnipeg and Columbus look a lot better to me, the Oilers look close. Arizona has a ton of young depth. How are we in better shape?

Not to mention, those teams have goalies. I love how we treat that as, yeah but...

Yeah but what? It's a huge issue. Huge.

I dont see how the blue jackets or winnipeg are alot better, blue jackets are lacking on D and winnipeg has good players up front but I think we have more high end talent at this point they have lots of young players with potential though. So you think if we had better goalies, BH suddenly becomes a better coach? Yes we have a goaltending issue, but that doesnt explain the other seasons that BH was the coach of this team.