Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[cross16]

36 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

After Iginla, a rebuild was inevitable so moves were made to rebuild.  It was obvious to everybody.  As soon as we beat the Canucks in the playoffs that one year, we fooled ourselves into thinking we were ready to go for it.

 

Not enough honesty and patience.

 

I'm personally not sure that actually changed anything.  I believe the day after he traded Iginla, or the same day, Jay Feaster said his marching orders were to get into the playoffs the next season. When Brian Burke fired Feaster he was asked point blank if the move was to speed up the rebuild and his answer was "yes".

 

I don't think patience was ever part of the plan. 

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I'm personally not sure that actually changed anything.  I believe the day after he traded Iginla, or the same day, Jay Feaster said his marching orders were to get into the playoffs the next season. When Brian Burke fired Feaster he was asked point blank if the move was to speed up the rebuild and his answer was "yes".

 

I don't think patience was ever part of the plan. 

Trying to be fair, but is there even a plan?

"This will be our core for years to come".

Yup. It always will be. Whittle down value until it's gone.  Until there's nothing left to show for it.

Hamonic's, Neal's and Versteeg's for the incredibly overrated, "veteran presence."

Half-assed plans.

You have to be a young team to rebuild, not a mishmash.

Imho.

 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I'm personally not sure that actually changed anything.  I believe the day after he traded Iginla, or the same day, Jay Feaster said his marching orders were to get into the playoffs the next season. When Brian Burke fired Feaster he was asked point blank if the move was to speed up the rebuild and his answer was "yes".

 

I don't think patience was ever part of the plan. 

 

6 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Trying to be fair, but is there even a plan?

"This will be our core for years to come".

Yup. It always will be. Whittle down value until it's gone.  Until there's nothing left to show for it.

Hamonic's, Neal's and Versteeg's for the incredibly overrated, "veteran presence."

Half-assed plans.

You have to be a young team to rebuild, not a mishmash.

Imho.

 

 

Hindsight is 20/20 but we should've traded Giordano for a 2nd round pick in 2013.  Not that it's a great trade.  No.  It's that Giordano helped us win and we didn't need to win for 5 years.

 

And now our core is 23-25 years old but Giordano is too old to be a key contributor.  Plan...what plan exactly.  

 

A plan would be, target 2025-28 as the window to contend... and building EVERYTHING towards that.  Not this half-tank and half-win stuff. 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

Hindsight is 20/20 but we should've traded Giordano for a 2nd round pick in 2013.  Not that it's a great trade.  No.  It's that Giordano helped us win and we didn't need to win for 5 years.

 

And now our core is 23-25 years old but Giordano is too old to be a key contributor.  Plan...what plan exactly.  

 

A plan would be, target 2025-28 as the window to contend... and building EVERYTHING towards that.  Not this half-tank and half-win stuff. 

 

Seeing as this is not the plan we will take, what is realistic based on what we have still young enough to make a difference.

IF we are going to be a big team, then Gaudreau, Dube, Mangiapane, Ryan and Pelletier are not the answer.

If you want to get fast, trade Gio and Lucic and others.

 

[cross16]

14 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Trying to be fair, but is there even a plan?

"This will be our core for years to come".

Yup. It always will be. Whittle down value until it's gone.  Until there's nothing left to show for it.

Hamonic's, Neal's and Versteeg's for the incredibly overrated, "veteran presence."

Half-assed plans.

You have to be a young team to rebuild, not a mishmash.

Imho.

 

 

That is fair I think. To me the "plan" is get in the playoffs every year because if we don't get in we don't have a shot. 

 

Debatable how much of a plan that is and very wide open to criticism if that is the correct plan or not. 

[robrob74]

46 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

That is fair I think. To me the "plan" is get in the playoffs every year because if we don't get in we don't have a shot. 

 

Debatable how much of a plan that is and very wide open to criticism if that is the correct plan or not. 

 

something that Feaster said was, pick BPA and theyre assets to use later. We seem to do that and then the ones that make it have all been lefties and of one skill set. A few are buzz saws and good at what they do, but not really big enough to make a huge difference.

[rickross]

49 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

That is fair I think. To me the "plan" is get in the playoffs every year because if we don't get in we don't have a shot. 

 

Debatable how much of a plan that is and very wide open to criticism if that is the correct plan or not. 

The playoffs every year is always the plan but the Flames have never had the right plan on how to build a playoff team. It’s been a yo yo of indecision for the Flames. They wanted to be big and hard hitting, then they had to adopt the faster, smaller more skilled approach. Next they went defence 1st and traded away a bunch of futures , that didn’t work so they strived for a mix..they wanted to be “hard to play against”. All while churning through coaches almost annually with the team not progressing at all. Barely playing at a playoff worthy level for years now. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

something that Feaster said was, pick BPA and theyre assets to use later. We seem to do that and then the ones that make it have all been lefties and of one skill set. A few are buzz saws and good at what they do, but not really big enough to make a huge difference.

 

If Janko was SPA, it was only his opinion.

Had he turned out (or actually been BPA), we would be laughing.

As it is, he was let go for nothing.

 

I would suggest that Pelletier and Zary are the only ones not in the AHL that you would consider top prospects.

The others were always going to be risk/reward, so BPA is less of a strategy.

BPA = vanilla in some cases.

 

[sak22]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

something that Feaster said was, pick BPA and theyre assets to use later. We seem to do that and then the ones that make it have all been lefties and of one skill set. A few are buzz saws and good at what they do, but not really big enough to make a huge difference.

I don't really disagree with that mindset, the problems arise when your wrong about who was the BPA ex. Emile Poirier over Shea Theodore.  I wasn't high on Poirier at the time and really wanted Theodore, but at the same time I don't really want to throw that pick under the bus and chalk it in the bad luck category, he was trending decent and had s pretty solid first year pro and I don't know how much the off ice stuff affected his development, I imagine a lot, and just hope he beaten his demons.  But back to BPA, it's term I hate on draft day because its not proven until years down the road, if we picked 10th and all scouted each prospect heavily we all will likely come up with different opinions.

[pikey7883]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I don't really disagree with that mindset, the problems arise when your wrong about who was the BPA ex. Emile Poirier over Shea Theodore.  I wasn't high on Poirier at the time and really wanted Theodore, but at the same time I don't really want to throw that pick under the bus and chalk it in the bad luck category, he was trending decent and had s pretty solid first year pro and I don't know how much the off ice stuff affected his development, I imagine a lot, and just hope he beaten his demons.  But back to BPA, it's term I hate on draft day because its not proven until years down the road, if we picked 10th and all scouted each prospect heavily we all will likely come up with different opinions.

I was recently talking to an Agent whose player is available for this years draft, and he said that Montreal had sent a two hundred question evaluation for him to fill out, as they are beginning to move past the stats, the analytics, and getting into the intangibles of these kids in order to make the least risky pick possible. I don’t know anyone on the Flames Scouting Staff or in Management, but I am wondering with recent drafts we are seeing a trend that way. We saw Peltier be a “good guy” at the WJHC last year with his teammates and Captain of his team this year, Zary has been defined as a high emotion player who was also named captain of his team. Dube was the captain of team Canada a couple years back (I believe). These are guys who are going to be good team guys with a lot of those X factor qualities, and more than likely lifetime NHLers. The only issue I have with that is usually your elite players and young men with size on their side haven’t developed these other qualities prior to the draft because they haven’t had to. They’ve either been able to score because of their physical dominance or their sheer skill excellence. I’m ok drafting the heart and soul guys, but we need to take some shots for some guys with size and some kids who have elite skills that may be underrated abit to compliment the heartbeat of your lineup. 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, sak22 said:

I don't really disagree with that mindset, the problems arise when your wrong about who was the BPA ex. Emile Poirier over Shea Theodore.  I wasn't high on Poirier at the time and really wanted Theodore, but at the same time I don't really want to throw that pick under the bus and chalk it in the bad luck category, he was trending decent and had s pretty solid first year pro and I don't know how much the off ice stuff affected his development, I imagine a lot, and just hope he beaten his demons.  But back to BPA, it's term I hate on draft day because its not proven until years down the road, if we picked 10th and all scouted each prospect heavily we all will likely come up with different opinions.

 

He was a reach at best.  That is just a drafting mistake.  Others were looking better and had less choppy strides.  Poirier did struggloe with off ice stuff, but it could also have been part of being signed and not getting a chance at top 9.  Wasted development.  Klimchuk should have developed better but something happened.  Maybe he was never NHL material but he had the look of a decent bottom 6 prior to AHL.

 

We tend to value things that other teams don't.  We picked Pelletier over Lavoie, though one seems to have a better chance (size) at the NHL.  The other has a better mindset and will have to overcome some odds.  But make no mistake, he is the better player at this point.  Lavoie has attitude issues; well not attitude as much as lack of drive to be better.  Has good numbers as a bigger kid in junior and played in Europe.  Not a tough league, though.      

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, pikey7883 said:

I was recently talking to an Agent whose player is available for this years draft, and he said that Montreal had sent a two hundred question evaluation for him to fill out, as they are beginning to move past the stats, the analytics, and getting into the intangibles of these kids in order to make the least risky pick possible. I don’t know anyone on the Flames Scouting Staff or in Management, but I am wondering with recent drafts we are seeing a trend that way. We saw Peltier be a “good guy” at the WJHC last year with his teammates and Captain of his team this year, Zary has been defined as a high emotion player who was also named captain of his team. Dube was the captain of team Canada a couple years back (I believe). These are guys who are going to be good team guys with a lot of those X factor qualities, and more than likely lifetime NHLers. The only issue I have with that is usually your elite players and young men with size on their side haven’t developed these other qualities prior to the draft because they haven’t had to. They’ve either been able to score because of their physical dominance or their sheer skill excellence. I’m ok drafting the heart and soul guys, but we need to take some shots for some guys with size and some kids who have elite skills that may be underrated abit to compliment the heartbeat of your lineup. 

 

 

It is kind of why I think the Flames go the safe route, yet wonder if they have developed a scouting method to find those players. I think of Benn, or Point. Different players, but players that maybe deserved to take a chance at... I think it was Tmac or Conundrum who talked about knowing Point, being a hop, skip, or a jump away and not taking a flyer on him.... 

[tmac70]

6 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

It is kind of why I think the Flames go the safe route, yet wonder if they have developed a scouting method to find those players. I think of Benn, or Point. Different players, but players that maybe deserved to take a chance at... I think it was Tmac or Conundrum who talked about knowing Point, being a hop, skip, or a jump away and not taking a flyer on him.... 

It was me. My coments were a direct reflection from Tim Hunter, his coach and former flames alumni. Hunter simply said the kid will be a stud in the NHL So you have a local kid playing a province away coached by a former player light up the laegue from 15 on and you miss out on Point thats a huge rec flag for me 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, tmac70 said:

It was me. My coments were a direct reflection from Tim Hunter, his coach and former flames alumni. Hunter simply said the kid will be a stud in the NHL So you have a local kid playing a province away coached by a former player light up the laegue from 15 on and you miss out on Point thats a huge rec flag for me 

when I hear something like this I just think it is ridiculous. Someone isn’t doing their job, or due diligence.

[travel_dude]

17 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

It is kind of why I think the Flames go the safe route, yet wonder if they have developed a scouting method to find those players. I think of Benn, or Point. Different players, but players that maybe deserved to take a chance at... I think it was Tmac or Conundrum who talked about knowing Point, being a hop, skip, or a jump away and not taking a flyer on him.... 

 

10 hours ago, tmac70 said:

It was me. My coments were a direct reflection from Tim Hunter, his coach and former flames alumni. Hunter simply said the kid will be a stud in the NHL So you have a local kid playing a province away coached by a former player light up the laegue from 15 on and you miss out on Point thats a huge rec flag for me 

 

Think back to who was here.

Burke.

He let Feaster decide in 2013 (1 player to actually play in NHL for any amount of time).

He made the call in 2014 (MacDonal, Smith, Kanzig).

You really think and scouts had a chance to decide anything?

Even Hickey seemed like an attempt to sign a bigger player.

I mean it's fine to look at league like AJHL, but why bother if the guy isn't knocking out of the park there?

 

Oganizational.  

[conundrumed]

On 4/30/2021 at 11:17 AM, cross16 said:

 

That is fair I think. To me the "plan" is get in the playoffs every year because if we don't get in we don't have a shot. 

 

Debatable how much of a plan that is and very wide open to criticism if that is the correct plan or not. 

I feel like the Flames are always standing still. Do they not scout the Duclair's, Hinostroza's etc? Guys that are fading into obscurity but young. Not moving the needle huge, but in the right direction potentially.

We seem like a team afraid to make anything more than low level moves. Get Hamilton, trade Hamilton, get Hamonic, get Neal...one big move a year and done.

Like one will do. Then soft moves.

Detroit's my other team. They'll be better than the Flames imho, within 2 years.

I'll be cheering Fla. Was a fan pre-Bennett.

Compare them to the Flames. They're the 180, constantly making moves and taking risks. Good moves, bad moves, but always moving.

They have an explosive team, names don't matter. They run a wonderland of players needing real chances under exceptional coaching. Lomberg, for example.

Flames management and scouting seems like either stuck in the mud or there's a significant disconnect.

Many have said it's ownership, I have no idea.

But Treliving is paralyzed to being active when he should be, for whatever reason.

Maybe I'm talking out my posterior, but the org. seems very rigid and either unwilling or incapable of being progressive.

As of right now, this is a very dark future, imho.

Why don't you and Peeps apply as consultants? lol

Move the needle!

[travel_dude]

26 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I feel like the Flames are always standing still. Do they not scout the Duclair's, Hinostroza's etc? Guys that are fading into obscurity but young. Not moving the needle huge, but in the right direction potentially.

We seem like a team afraid to make anything more than low level moves. Get Hamilton, trade Hamilton, get Hamonic, get Neal...one big move a year and done.

Like one will do. Then soft moves.

Detroit's my other team. They'll be better than the Flames imho, within 2 years.

I'll be cheering Fla. Was a fan pre-Bennett.

Compare them to the Flames. They're the 180, constantly making moves and taking risks. Good moves, bad moves, but always moving.

They have an explosive team, names don't matter. They run a wonderland of players needing real chances under exceptional coaching. Lomberg, for example.

Flames management and scouting seems like either stuck in the mud or there's a significant disconnect.

Many have said it's ownership, I have no idea.

But Treliving is paralyzed to being active when he should be, for whatever reason.

Maybe I'm talking out my posterior, but the org. seems very rigid and either unwilling or incapable of being progressive.

As of right now, this is a very dark future, imho.

Why don't you and Peeps apply as consultants? lol

Move the needle!

 

Calgary, unlike some other teams, is afraid to make any trade of a guy respected in the community.

Subban in Montreal was as big a person as Gio ever was, probalby even more so.

Was there any backlash when he was traded?

Of course, but it was a move that they felt they needed to do.

Subban even kept his word and continued to provide to Montreal.

Not that I'm a big Subban fan, but he has as much class as Gio, maybe even more.

 

We are stuck with Gio's team, whatever that means.

The players he wants here?

The guys that don't piss him off?

Guys that make less?

 

We don't often even take a chance on an AHL guy that we have on a NHL contract.

Gotta have those PTO come in for jobs.

Can't be gifting skilled players we have.

I didn't so much mind the Leivo signing, though he was Warded and Suttered out of the lineup.

 

Unless we trade away Gio, Backlund, Lucic, one of Monahan/Gaudreau/Dube/Tkachuk, we are not going to be able to re-tool.

Every one of them is (in some ways) a usefull player, but most have limited speed.

It's painfully slow to watch some nights.

Exciting as paint drying at times.

 

[jjgallow]

On 5/1/2021 at 8:00 PM, travel_dude said:

 

Calgary, unlike some other teams, is afraid to make any trade of a guy respected in the community.

Subban in Montreal was as big a person as Gio ever was, probalby even more so.

Was there any backlash when he was traded?

Of course, but it was a move that they felt they needed to do.

Subban even kept his word and continued to provide to Montreal.

Not that I'm a big Subban fan, but he has as much class as Gio, maybe even more.

 

We are stuck with Gio's team, whatever that means.

The players he wants here?

The guys that don't piss him off?

Guys that make less?

 

We don't often even take a chance on an AHL guy that we have on a NHL contract.

Gotta have those PTO come in for jobs.

Can't be gifting skilled players we have.

I didn't so much mind the Leivo signing, though he was Warded and Suttered out of the lineup.

 

Unless we trade away Gio, Backlund, Lucic, one of Monahan/Gaudreau/Dube/Tkachuk, we are not going to be able to re-tool.

Every one of them is (in some ways) a usefull player, but most have limited speed.

It's painfully slow to watch some nights.

Exciting as paint drying at times.

 

 

Agreed.   

 

Except, we should have done it 2-3 years ago and imho, no matter what year you do it, it's a rebuild.

 

It just would have been a really successful rebuild 2-3 years ago.

 

Now, it's still a rebuild, because our cupboards are bare.   The only way left to fill them up is a lot of high draft picks.    Granted we could still get something for those players you mentioned that would speed things up substantially.    I guess we'll see.

[jjgallow]

On 4/30/2021 at 10:06 AM, robrob74 said:

 

something that Feaster said was, pick BPA and theyre assets to use later. We seem to do that and then the ones that make it have all been lefties and of one skill set. A few are buzz saws and good at what they do, but not really big enough to make a huge difference.

 

Yeah we forgot the assets part.

 

We never trade the ones that make it, we just reposition them on the team.  Is a strange thing.

[robrob74]

5 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Yeah we forgot the assets part.

 

We never trade the ones that make it, we just reposition them on the team.  Is a strange thing.

realistically though, how much could you get for Dube or Mangiapane? I assume before this season that they’d never trade Tkachuk. And I think the 2019 off season was the time to do a trade of Monahan or Gaudreau to push the team further, but obviously that wasn’t going to happen. To me it was obvious that they were starting to trend PP scoring only and that they can’t play when the games get hard. A 99 point season -  we’d have gotten a haul for Johnny! 
 

the talk of the last two off seasons were of change and improving... 

[travel_dude]

32 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Agreed.   

 

Except, we should have done it 2-3 years ago and imho, no matter what year you do it, it's a rebuild.

 

It just would have been a really successful rebuild 2-3 years ago.

 

Now, it's still a rebuild, because our cupboards are bare.   The only way left to fill them up is a lot of high draft picks.    Granted we could still get something for those players you mentioned that would speed things up substantially.    I guess we'll see.

 

2-3 years ago, it was less pressing.  You don't do a rebuild when you are seeing growth.  If you are talking about the 2018/19 season, there was progression.  The team was winning, even if some would suggest it was a mirage.  We came out of the playoff loss and managed to do nothing to improve the team.  The big improvement was trading a dud for Lucic.  We saw problems in the playoffs and did nothing.  While I don't think it was the right time to rebuild, a re-tool should have been explored.  What was it?  Brodie + somebody for Kadri?  Good start, but Brodie was not the problem.  If anything, it was a recognition that Brodie would not be re-signed.

 

Who else was a problem in 2018/19 playoffs?  Hard to say exactly, since it was a lot of nothing from a lot of people.  Gio's Norris season should have been recognized as a warning signal that he was at his highest value and would only trend down.  The tendency to play Gaudreau and Monahan against MacKinnon doesn't really show that they should have been traded.  

 

We had one really effective line and Tkachuk as real top 6 players.  Failed to have an effective 2nd scoring line.  Tkachuk did well, but 1/3 of his points were on the PP.  He was closer to Backlund at EV.  The vaunted 3M line was fine, but not a true scoring line.  And Frolik was starting to lose his touch.  The 2018/19 season may have been a stepping stone, but we treated it like it was the new normal.  Should have improved it back then, not left it the same and only replace Neal.  

[sak22]

41 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

realistically though, how much could you get for Dube or Mangiapane? I assume before this season that they’d never trade Tkachuk. And I think the 2019 off season was the time to do a trade of Monahan or Gaudreau to push the team further, but obviously that wasn’t going to happen. To me it was obvious that they were starting to trend PP scoring only and that they can’t play when the games get hard. A 99 point season -  we’d have gotten a haul for Johnny! 
 

the talk of the last two off seasons were of change and improving... 

I generally don't agree with that assumption.  What was Joe Thornton's haul?  Or even Gretzky for that matter.  My take is if GM around the league are being offered a 99 point player making less than 7 million a season for 3 more years, the team offering him feels there is something wrong with him so why go overboard with an offer.  Just my take, but I don't know of too many teams getting hauls by trading a player by surprise really exists.

[The_People1]

On 5/1/2021 at 7:20 PM, conundrumed said:

Why don't you and Peeps apply as consultants? lol

Move the needle!

 

I'm trying my best to make $10-billion from cryptocurrencies so I can buy the Calgary Flames.

[robrob74]

42 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I generally don't agree with that assumption.  What was Joe Thornton's haul?  Or even Gretzky for that matter.  My take is if GM around the league are being offered a 99 point player making less than 7 million a season for 3 more years, the team offering him feels there is something wrong with him so why go overboard with an offer.  Just my take, but I don't know of too many teams getting hauls by trading a player by surprise really exists.

its not a norm, but then you look at Sakic with the Duchesne deal and I think they did really well in it. Many thought Sakic was going to be terrible, turns out he was just being patient to get the right deal. So like you said, it’s not the norm and maybe BT wasn’t getting the offers he felt were worth it. In the end, is waiting it out worth it? Will he get what he might have gotten after his 99 point season? 
 

I am with you though, so conflicted with a few thoughts. For me I would have liked to build around Gaudreau with a player that could move with him and help him create space. So for me it was either him, if we couldn’t find someone to compliment him before he (might) bolt to Philly, or Monahan and someone to get him that C that could push the envelope. Who knows, maybe we had it in Bennett but couldn’t ever try it. The consensus around Calgary was always, you could never break up that duo...

 

It isn’t that I want to run him out of town, it’s that I wanted best value for him while he has it, especially IF he is just going to move on at the end of his deal anyway. Like a short term retool to benefit the team in the long run. I think either way, he’s moving on. We won’t know until he does move on. He might stay, but I think the American Fiancé points to moving. Wives and family tend to have a lot of sway.  

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

It isn’t that I want to run him out of town, it’s that I wanted best value for him while he has it, especially IF he is just going to move on at the end of his deal anyway. Like a short term retool to benefit the team in the long run. I think either way, he’s moving on. We won’t know until he does move on. He might stay, but I think the American Fiancé points to moving. Wives and family tend to have a lot of sway.  

 

It's so simple.  Offer Gaudreau an 8-year contract extension this offseason.  All these questions about him wanting to stay or leave, etc, all answered by his actions.

 

If he does the whole, "I don't want to sign after having a bad season, I want to negotiate next summer", then you trade him immediately.  You've got your answer plus we cannot afford to let Johnny walk for nothing next summer.  That would be a fire-able mistake.

 

If he signs, then that stops all rumours about his commitment to the city of Calgary.  Proceed from there.