Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[redfire11]

I'm a big fan of BT.

His drafting and contract negotiating has been terrific. His pick up of Brouwer was a shot for the fences that turned out to be a foul ball but Brouwer didn't come as advertised and still might work out. The Hamilton, Smith and Harmonic trades in my opinion were lights out. Can you imagine spending more than what was paid for Hamilton or Harmonic to land McDonagh or Nash or Tatar. From all sources he is one of the hardest working GM's in the league. BT will also learn that your on ice product is only as good as your coaching staff managing them.

[MAC331]

11 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I am really starting to wonder how much influence Burke has over the construction of this team. I could be wrong on this but I think BT gets his marching orders from Burke, and Burke decides what kind of team he wants. The problem is that I think Treliving and Gulutzan have different views of how to construct a roster than Burke does. 

 

I am not so sure that it isn't Brian Burke that has to go and bring in someone that values speed and youth to be the president of hockey ops. Al MacInnis is a guy that jumps to mind, he has been working in management under Armstrong as vice president of hockey ops for quite awhile, and might be ready for the next phase of his management career, he also has ties to Calgary.

As much as I think Burke is a moron I don't think he is a stupid hockey mind. He could stay or go as I don't see a lot of his influence on the ice. They seem to do the odd stupid thing like Brouwer and Jagr with this need of big bodies idea. Given our draft positions lately I think they have done a good job with the selections. I understand the thinking to surround the young players with seasoned vets for a certain period but I think we are real close to the young core taking over the ship. Now we could use a few better complimentary players down the RW side. Signing Backlund will prove to be a good move.

[phoenix66]

20 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I am really starting to wonder how much influence Burke has over the construction of this team. I could be wrong on this but I think BT gets his marching orders from Burke, and Burke decides what kind of team he wants. The problem is that I think Treliving and Gulutzan have different views of how to construct a roster than Burke does. 

 

I am not so sure that it isn't Brian Burke that has to go and bring in someone that values speed and youth to be the president of hockey ops. Al MacInnis is a guy that jumps to mind, he has been working in management under Armstrong as vice president of hockey ops for quite awhile, and might be ready for the next phase of his management career, he also has ties to Calgary.

from what I can see he gives BT free reign. Hes said more than once BT will consult with him , or ask his opinion etc.. but one of the reasons he hired him was the vision he presented, they were already on the same page. He's also said he lets BT drive the Bus, just because BT gets a "truculent" player from time to time, doesnt mean hes being told what to do.. its because BT knows we need those players too.

[redfire11]

20 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

I am really starting to wonder how much influence Burke has over the construction of this team. I could be wrong on this but I think BT gets his marching orders from Burke, and Burke decides what kind of team he wants. The problem is that I think Treliving and Gulutzan have different views of how to construct a roster than Burke does. 

 

I am not so sure that it isn't Brian Burke that has to go and bring in someone that values speed and youth to be the president of hockey ops. Al MacInnis is a guy that jumps to mind, he has been working in management under Armstrong as vice president of hockey ops for quite awhile, and might be ready for the next phase of his management career, he also has ties to Calgary.

I have wondered for a while what benefit Burke has to this team( see Burke thread). I could see giving BT POHO and GM duties and add Al MacInnis as a assistant GM.

[JTech780]

6 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

from what I can see he gives BT free reign. Hes said more than once BT will consult with him , or ask his opinion etc.. but one of the reasons he hired him was the vision he presented, they were already on the same page. He's also said he lets BT drive the Bus, just because BT gets a "truculent" player from time to time, doesnt mean hes being told what to do.. its because BT knows we need those players too.

 

Do we need truculance anymore? Look at Edmonton, they went all in on the truculance and where are they sitting. Teams like LA and Anaheim have had truculance as their calling card for years and now they are struggling to make the playoffs. Both Chiarelli and Blake have said that their teams need to get faster. Vegas is annihilating our division with speed. If BT's vision for winning is to get big, slow, physical players than he is the wrong guy for the job and this team is going to get left behind.

 

Speed is much more intimidating than size. Just for the record I am not saying that you don't be physical, but it is hard to be physical when you can't catch the opposition.

[cross16]

I would agree you really only need some level of truculance it doens't need to be up and down your lineup. If you can get effective toughness which guys that can play and be physical ie Ferland, Bennett, Tkachuk, Hamonic, Gio etc i'm all for it. But if the choice is speed/skill and truculance you have to go with speed and skill in today's game. Flames need more speed/skill they don't need more truculence or to play a heavier game, they can play that already. If Burke is demanding that, so far at least pubically he isn't, then I would agree he needs to go. 

 

I'm not sure I see Burke's influence that much here. Burke in his history has tended to hire people that match his philosophy and then let them work, so I think if Treliving is here and wants to be here its because he agrees with how Burke wants to run the team. Burke understand heiarchy but I also think he hates meddling so I don't get the sense he would tell Treliving how to do his job. could be wrong, but that's just how I see it. 

 

I think the biggest reason why I think Treliving is a good GM and needs to stay is you look at the direction of the organization. They are drafting more on speed/skill, with some truculence mixed in, they are seeing results of their drafting, the development seems to be getting better and generally speaking his trades/FA signings are targeting the right kind of player. Yes he missed on Brouwer but that happens and like I said every GM misses. Say what you want about Gulutzan but I think the plan behind his hire was right. Whether or not you think they hit on the coach, I truly believe the way the Flames play the game, in terms of their structure and philosophy, is what you want to see in today's NHL. so for me, Treliving vision and plan for the organization is right and he sees the game the right way IMO. You'll make mistakes along the way that happens, but when the direction and plan is there and I believe it's right it doesn't make sense for me to change that. 

[phoenix66]

19 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Do we need truculance anymore? Look at Edmonton, they went all in on the truculance and where are they sitting. Teams like LA and Anaheim have had truculance as their calling card for years and now they are struggling to make the playoffs. Both Chiarelli and Blake have said that their teams need to get faster. Vegas is annihilating our division with speed. If BT's vision for winning is to get big, slow, physical players than he is the wrong guy for the job and this team is going to get left behind.

 

Speed is much more intimidating than size. Just for the record I am not saying that you don't be physical, but it is hard to be physical when you can't catch the opposition.

this is where peoples differing opinions of the definition of truculence comes in .. i'm not talking knuckle dragging morons.. i'm talking physical that can play and play well. Take Anaheim as a great example, whos their best player ?  Getzlaf.. he has it in spades, we miss Engelland but hes also a good dman .. its one thing to have a 5 minute guy like Lombard running around that will fight but lose.. there has to be that feeling that you just cant take liberties or you'll pay for it 

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I believe regardless of this season this coach and team are going through the growing pains together. This team is not at the stage of a SC challenger and this is where some get messed up with expectations, right or wrong. I didn't like the Cameron hire ad maybe that would be a change that could be made. Besides this we need better players in places in order to become faster and more skilled within our forward group. I honestly think we have a chance to do this in the offseason. If I could point to the one area of weakness it would have to be on defense, specifically the play of Brodie and Hamonic together but others are not far behind. We can't get rid of them all but I would start with trading Brodie and Stone. The other order of the day is to unload Brouwer any way possible so he is gone and out of the way.

 

Even Engelland is playing better than our bottom 3-6D. The only D guys playing better are Hamilton and Giordano. 

 

The thing that I am really mad at isnt the pick we gave up for Hamonic, but the fact it was not lottery protected.

 

the amount of picks given up the past few years is appalling and we will see the effects of it in about 4-5 years. 

[travel_dude]

50 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Even Engelland is playing better than our bottom 3-6D. The only D guys playing better are Hamilton and Giordano. 

 

The thing that I am really mad at isnt the pick we gave up for Hamonic, but the fact it was not lottery protected.

 

the amount of picks given up the past few years is appalling and we will see the effects of it in about 4-5 years. 

 

The odds of a Flames pick being more than top 10 are pretty low.

I'm not really that concerned over using a 1st for Hamonic.  He's better IMHO than the sum of him and Brodie.

Truly believe he will be that much better next season.

 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

Even Engelland is playing better than our bottom 3-6D. The only D guys playing better are Hamilton and Giordano. 

 

The thing that I am really mad at isnt the pick we gave up for Hamonic, but the fact it was not lottery protected.

 

the amount of picks given up the past few years is appalling and we will see the effects of it in about 4-5 years. 

Maybe, a lot can happen in 5 years to make up for those used picks. You also have to take into account we already have a young team and a good pipeline built.

if we can only find room for Dube on our 4th line we must be in good shape right ?

[robrob74]

14 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Maybe, a lot can happen in 5 years to make up for those used picks. You also have to take into account we already have a young team and a good pipeline built.

if we can only find room for Dube on our 4th line we must be in good shape right ?

 

Well, that depends on whether Dube is NHL ready. Our depth is a problem and yet we can’t find spots for some of the youth now. 

[420since1974]

I'd prefer that the Flames do not rush Dube into the NHL.

IMO, a year in the AHL would be better for his development.

At worst, he might not ever make the NHL, but I think that his ceiling is on the 2nd line at C or LW.

I'd be disappointed if he doesn't become at least a 3rd line forward for Calgary. 

[cccsberg]

On 2018-03-01 at 8:59 AM, cross16 said:

There is zero point in having a discussion with you. All you will do is get mad, yell back and provide no facts or data. Your opinion is your opinion and I respect that, but that really isn't anything to discuss here.

 

Yes I think Treliving should remain the GM. All GMs make mistakes, all GMs make big mistakes the key is to learn and grow and i've seen him do that. Give me a GM and i'll show you a big mistake, probably more than 1. Flames need to stop with the knee jerk reactions and finding a scapegoat for every season. Successful organization do not do that. 

I agree BT should get another chance, but, to be sure BT owns this mess and its his fingerprints all over it.  He came in and wanted a Corsi possession team.  He's got it. He went all-in this season and this is the result.  BT is great at contract negotiations and drafting too, but outside of that he's been meh, at best and verging on terrible.  Just like the team , the gM/management need to be firing on pretty much all cylinders to be successful.  BT is not.  GG HAS TO GO, at the very minimum, and let's give BT another chance and see what he's learned.

[The_People1]

To date, I can only give BT a grade of 6.5/10.  Some of his downfall was circumstantial and he did the best he could've in those situations but still, he has to take some blame for the results.

 

His greatest achievements to date is stocking up on good young RHS RD like Hamilton, Hamonic, Stone, Andersson, and Fox.  Frolik was a sweet UFA signing.  Locked up Gio, Johnny, and Monny long term to stellar cap hits and that wasn't easy either.

 

But there have been lots of misses as well.  I will start off with Dave Cameron who has been a controversial hire since day one.  Our PP sucks and no one is surprised.  Goaltending has been a revolving door with Hiller, Ramo, Ortio, Elliott, Johnson, Smith, etc.  After that, the team continues with a lack of RHS forwards and we were only able to notably add Brouwer via UFA and he's been a disaster.  That bottom 6 in general needs a purge.

 

I also felt his first draft, the Bennett draft, was a huge wasted opportunity.  I know he just joined the team but that's what we get when we insert an inexperienced GM into the position.

 

Last but not least, this team is clearly more than one or two pieces away from Cup contention and so BT's willingness to spend picks for players is impatience at it's core.  Yet, it's too late to turn back the clock and stock pile picks and prospects.

[cross16]

7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

I also felt his first draft, the Bennett draft, was a huge wasted opportunity.  I know he just joined the team but that's what we get when we insert an inexperienced GM into the position.

 

 

I feel you nailed most of your analysis and I agree with most of it. I'd probably give him a slightly higher grade, probably 7.5, but that's a bit of splitting hairs. In fairness to Treliving he was close to acquiring both Martin Jones and Fredrick Andersson, and by all reports the flames had the better offers on the table, but in both cases the teams dealt them elsewhere because they were Western teams dealing to the East and didn't want their goalies in the West. I think he's done everything he can to fix it but he was left with a mess and nothing to work with. 

 

2014 is also looking like a pretty down draft year.  Are you saying that the waster opportunity was Bennett or the rest of the draft? I get we can critique Bennett but to say the Flames should have taken someone else I think is complete revisionist history. There was no way they weren't taking him at 4 that year. They missed some opportunities late for sure, but at the same time there isn't a lot of talent that seems to becoming out of that draft either. 

 

2013 was to me the biggest wasted opportunity this Franchise as seen at the draft in it's history. Seems dramatic but to have 3 first round picks in what was a fiarly deep draft and to take Porier when they did was such a waste. Maybe Klimchukc still pans out but man if the Flames had Theordore, Bowey, Hartman, Burakowsky or Compher things would be pretty different I think. 

[MAC331]

25 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I feel you nailed most of your analysis and I agree with most of it. I'd probably give him a slightly higher grade, probably 7.5, but that's a bit of splitting hairs. In fairness to Treliving he was close to acquiring both Martin Jones and Fredrick Andersson, and by all reports the flames had the better offers on the table, but in both cases the teams dealt them elsewhere because they were Western teams dealing to the East and didn't want their goalies in the West. I think he's done everything he can to fix it but he was left with a mess and nothing to work with. 

 

2014 is also looking like a pretty down draft year.  Are you saying that the waster opportunity was Bennett or the rest of the draft? I get we can critique Bennett but to say the Flames should have taken someone else I think is complete revisionist history. There was no way they weren't taking him at 4 that year. They missed some opportunities late for sure, but at the same time there isn't a lot of talent that seems to becoming out of that draft either. 

 

2013 was to me the biggest wasted opportunity this Franchise as seen at the draft in it's history. Seems dramatic but to have 3 first round picks in what was a fiarly deep draft and to take Porier when they did was such a waste. Maybe Klimchukc still pans out but man if the Flames had Theordore, Bowey, Hartman, Burakowsky or Compher things would be pretty different I think. 

WOW it seems everyone has their pet peeves and they are all over the place. I wonder what they would have to say about Bowman in CHI and the knife job he has had to do. A team has to build up to being a consistent winning franchise and it seems to me most fail or won't admit this team is still in a building phase. I think the team will be better next season simply by being another year experienced with some maturity. Sure BT as made some blunders but show me a GM that hasn't. Correct them and do it as soon as possible is the only remedy.

The blame game is just another excuse in recognizing where this team is at currently. I said this before in defense of GG in that he and his players are going through these necessary growing together. In some ways I don't think BT has made his job any easier with some of the adds like Brouwer, Versteeg and Jagr which IMO did nothing but lead to make shift line arrangements. I hope the younger players learned something from all 3 of those players.

All I will say now is get on with the task by taking advantage of those leaving and those who can be traded so we have a better roster next season.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

2014 is also looking like a pretty down draft year.  Are you saying that the waster opportunity was Bennett or the rest of the draft? I get we can critique Bennett but to say the Flames should have taken someone else I think is complete revisionist history. There was no way they weren't taking him at 4 that year. They missed some opportunities late for sure, but at the same time there isn't a lot of talent that seems to becoming out of that draft either. 

 

No I didn't mean Bennett specifically but rather BT was an inexperienced GM at the time so we as a team lost an opportunity.  I believe Burke mostly ran that draft and we ended up with the players we picked as a result.  And consistent with his other mistakes, it was largely inexperience that did him in.

 

I agree we had to draft Bennett and he could still turn out serviceable but nothing much else to show for it.

 

Something similar happened to Craig Button and Jay Feaster in their first years.  They both spent their first year, "seeing what we had before making moves." And yet the results of that first year counted towards their cumulative results and counted towards their dismissal.

 

It could be argued that BT didn't have much of a say in how we scouted and who we targeted in the 2014 draft but it will still count as his first draft.  In other words, had we hired an experienced GM who knew the league better, already had the rapport with other GMs, already had scouting data from previous jobs and ran a good scouting/development program, etc, then we'd be one year ahead of where we are now.  His subsequent drafts targeted skill over size and that didn't appear to happen in 2014.

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

No I didn't mean Bennett specifically but rather BT was an inexperienced GM at the time so we as a team lost an opportunity.  I believe Burke mostly ran that draft and we ended up with the players we picked as a result.  And consistent with his other mistakes, it was largely inexperience that did him in.

 

I agree we had to draft Bennett and he could still turn out serviceable but nothing much else to show for it.

 

Something similar happened to Craig Button and Jay Feaster in their first years.  They both spent their first year, "seeing what we had before making moves." And yet the results of that first year counted towards their cumulative results and counted towards their dismissal.

 

It could be argued that BT didn't have much of a say in how we scouted and who we targeted in the 2014 draft but it will still count as his first draft.  In other words, had we hired an experienced GM who knew the league better, already had the rapport with other GMs, already had scouting data from previous jobs and ran a good scouting/development program, etc, then we'd be one year ahead of where we are now.  His subsequent drafts targeted skill over size and that didn't appear to happen in 2014.

I think that is a cop out that BT wouldn't have known the league or which players were worth targeting in that draft. It isn't like they brought him in from Siberia. If our scouts messed up you live with it. We still have the makings of a very good team here and a good pipeline to feed it. Get on with the job because we have good people in place to do it.

[cross16]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

No I didn't mean Bennett specifically but rather BT was an inexperienced GM at the time so we as a team lost an opportunity.  I believe Burke mostly ran that draft and we ended up with the players we picked as a result.  And consistent with his other mistakes, it was largely inexperience that did him in.

 

I agree we had to draft Bennett and he could still turn out serviceable but nothing much else to show for it.

 

Something similar happened to Craig Button and Jay Feaster in their first years.  They both spent their first year, "seeing what we had before making moves." And yet the results of that first year counted towards their cumulative results and counted towards their dismissal.

 

It could be argued that BT didn't have much of a say in how we scouted and who we targeted in the 2014 draft but it will still count as his first draft.  In other words, had we hired an experienced GM who knew the league better, already had the rapport with other GMs, already had scouting data from previous jobs and ran a good scouting/development program, etc, then we'd be one year ahead of where we are now.  His subsequent drafts targeted skill over size and that didn't appear to happen in 2014.

 

Ok that's fair I wouldn't disagree with much of that. I think you are being a little harsh but I also understand where you are coming from. I personally find it's pretty typical that the first draft for a GM, especially one hired at that point, is a little off because of the turnover and the fact you don't have time to install any concepts the new GM wants. I also think with Treliving having worked in the league for as long as he did I thikn the rapport would already be there but hard to say for sure.

 

I think conceptually your bang on and it's why I strongly advocate that Treliving stay as the GM and I don't think people realize enough that when you change GMs it's a bit change to the organization and it's one that if probably going to set you back. If you have a GM that is mostly doing a good job you keep him and let him work out the issues because if you keep turning over GMs, something the Flames have done a lot,  you lose a lot of opportunities as a franchise. 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

2013 was to me the biggest wasted opportunity this Franchise as seen at the draft in it's history. Seems dramatic but to have 3 first round picks in what was a fiarly deep draft and to take Porier when they did was such a waste. Maybe Klimchukc still pans out but man if the Flames had Theordore, Bowey, Hartman, Burakowsky or Compher things would be pretty different I think. 

 

Ya agreed 2013 was a huge wasted opportunity for sure.  Its just BT wasn't involved.  I remember calling that 2013 draft the most important draft in franchise history.  We were rebuilding with no real core pieces and had 3 picks in the first round.  We had to nail them all.

 

Feaster tried to trade all 3 picks for the #1 pick but failed.  Wish he was able to trade the latter two picks to move up into the early teens.  But no.

 

 

[Cowtownguy]

On March 2, 2018 at 1:28 PM, cross16 said:

 

Ok that's fair I wouldn't disagree with much of that. I think you are being a little harsh but I also understand where you are coming from. I personally find it's pretty typical that the first draft for a GM, especially one hired at that point, is a little off because of the turnover and the fact you don't have time to install any concepts the new GM wants. I also think with Treliving having worked in the league for as long as he did I thikn the rapport would already be there but hard to say for sure.

 

I think conceptually your bang on and it's why I strongly advocate that Treliving stay as the GM and I don't think people realize enough that when you change GMs it's a bit change to the organization and it's one that if probably going to set you back. If you have a GM that is mostly doing a good job you keep him and let him work out the issues because if you keep turning over GMs, something the Flames have done a lot,  you lose a lot of opportunities as a franchise. 

I am gonna give you an out. If NYI manage to swing the 1st pick overall, do you still support Treliving?

[The_People1]

13 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am gonna give you an out. If NYI manage to swing the 1st pick overall, do you still support Treliving?

 

Does it matter though?  He has one year to get us back into the playoffs.  If he fails, then he's fired.

[MAC331]

15 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am gonna give you an out. If NYI manage to swing the 1st pick overall, do you still support Treliving?

Why bother looking backwards ? Move on, we have Hamonic and hopefully he has better years for us.

[xstrike]

55 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am gonna give you an out. If NYI manage to swing the 1st pick overall, do you still support Treliving?

If NYI get a top 3 pick, I think that's a fireable offense. We are also making it more likely too with each passing game.

[travel_dude]

5 minutes ago, xstrike said:

If NYI get a top 3 pick, I think that's a fireable offense. We are also making it more likely too with each passing game.

 

How is a lotto win by another team a fireable offence?

He brought in a top D-man onto a strong defensive team.

We were 19th in goals against, but 26th in goals for.

Most penalties (toss up with ANA) in the league.

We are bottom 5 in home wins.

 

You can blame the signings, trades, FA signings, etc. on the GM, but I think the blame for a lotto picks falls elsewhere.