GM Craig Conroy

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

you probably understand what I meant there, but I think Gaudreau's size is more the reason for where he was drafted opposed to his ability. We heard that many teams salivated over him but they were all gambling on when to bite. They knew the talent was there but just didn't know if it would translate.

 

but it is hard to determine who would nowadays that deep in the draft. 
 

Kucherov was a Flames' guy but they gambled too. They were high on him but didn't know which rounds and we took Wotherspoon instead. Imagine if they gambled on him instead of going their safe pic?

 

yeah.

 

Never go with the safe option in late rounds.    I'm not even sure you do it in the first round but at least you can have Some standards in the first round lol.

 

We should have picked Kucherov, and we were right to pick Gaudreau.   ignore those warts, go for traits that stand out.   The thing is, with Gaudreau we should have traded him the moment he hit 100 points (if not sooner).

 

And, not for the purpose of a rebuild.  Rather, to prevent a rebuild.

 

All those reasons teams had for passing on Gaudreau, were actually valid and are things which will prevent him from having a major roll in a cup win.    But asset-wise, oh yeah you draft him.

[420since1974]

13 hours ago, redfire11 said:

or Hull for Ramage

If this trade had not happened, I feel that Calgary would not have won the Stanley Cup in 1989.

Gary Suter broke his jaw in the opening round against Vancouver and without Ramage being available to step in, I think that the Flames would have been doomed.

[Thebrewcrew]

Conroy mentioned the Dallas model.

 

If the Flames want to fast-track the rebuild, they're probably going to look like LA.

 

Like the Flames, the Kings had some very good veterans when the team entered it's decline. Better veterans, hall of famers in fact. 

 

The core of the Cup teams got old. The Kings ended up picking top ten for three straight years and top eleven in four of five drafts. The Flames look to be trending that way.

 

The Kings return to relevance hasn't really been due to their drafting and development. It's been due to (primarily) Kopitar and Doughty still playing well and the organization speeding things along by trading picks and young players for immediate help. Dubois/Arvidsson/Fiala/Gavrikov. They traded a likely Calder finalist in Brock Faber.

 

On the surface, there's nothing really wrong with the LA model. They've had good regular seasons and made the playoffs three consecutive years. Something Calgary hasn't done since the Iggy/Kipper era. 

 

The LA model is really a matter of philosophy. Do you want to be a playoff team, or do you want to be a contender? LA is a playoff team. They're nowhere near a threat in the West. If you're an owner you're probably ok with your two or three home playoff dates a season. LA relies so heavily on Doughty and Kopitar, when they decline/retire, I think they are a team in no-mans land. I like Byfield but he's not a Kopitar and I like Clarke but he's no Doughty. Because they elected to speed things up, they've traded a lot of futures and haven't drafted all that well recently.  They sped it up and it worked, it's just not something built to last IMO.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Conroy mentioned the Dallas model.

 

That was the most disappointing comment I heard during the entire exit meetings.

 

DAL drafted Heiskanen, Oettinger, and Robertson in one draft.  That still required sinking to 3rd overall pick.  They also had a star veteran group in Benn and Seguin to make a quick bounce back.  You mentioned LA... Kopitar and Doughty are hall of famers.  Both teams similar in that the core veterans are superstars to create that V-shaped recovery from the basement.

 

Unless we think Huberdeau is a hall of fame superstar and Kadri/Weegar belong in the same conversation as those mentioned above, the Flames shouldn't expect a quick bounce back next season.

 

It's a disappointing comments because it shows Conroy/ownership isn't committed to a patient rebuild and will rush things along as quickly as possible.

[cross16]

9 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Conroy mentioned the Dallas model.

 

If the Flames want to fast-track the rebuild, they're probably going to look like LA.

 

Like the Flames, the Kings had some very good veterans when the team entered it's decline. Better veterans, hall of famers in fact. 

 

The core of the Cup teams got old. The Kings ended up picking top ten for three straight years and top eleven in four of five drafts. The Flames look to be trending that way.

 

The Kings return to relevance hasn't really been due to their drafting and development. It's been due to (primarily) Kopitar and Doughty still playing well and the organization speeding things along by trading picks and young players for immediate help. Dubois/Arvidsson/Fiala/Gavrikov. They traded a likely Calder finalist in Brock Faber.

 

On the surface, there's nothing really wrong with the LA model. They've had good regular seasons and made the playoffs three consecutive years. Something Calgary hasn't done since the Iggy/Kipper era. 

 

The LA model is really a matter of philosophy. Do you want to be a playoff team, or do you want to be a contender? LA is a playoff team. They're nowhere near a threat in the West. If you're an owner you're probably ok with your two or three home playoff dates a season. LA relies so heavily on Doughty and Kopitar, when they decline/retire, I think they are a team in no-mans land. I like Byfield but he's not a Kopitar and I like Clarke but he's no Doughty. Because they elected to speed things up, they've traded a lot of futures and haven't drafted all that well recently.  They sped it up and it worked, it's just not something built to last IMO.

 

I agree with the conclusion and honestly i'm not even sure if the Flames do this they can wind up as good as LA because Kopitar/Doughty are quite a bit better than anything the Flames have. could make a case Weegar is closer to Doughty sure but Kopitar is head and shoulders above the Flames best center IMO. 

 

But agree if the Flames stick to this path, baring getting really lucky in the lottery, I think their going to wind up looking like the New York Islanders.  While possible to build in the Dallas model, the challenge with that one is your margin for error is razor thin. Look at Dallas right now. They don't have those 1-2 game breaking type players so Vegas plays a good game against them and they are searching for answers. That's your challenge with building a team based on depth as opposed to high end skill. The success of that model rests on your ability to draft a superstar late in the draft. Possible yes, likely? guess we'll see. 

 

This shouldn't come as a surprise. As i've been saying for years now,  it's never been this organization's intention to rebuild for multiple seasons. They don't believe in it. 

[sak22]

8 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

That was the most disappointing comment I heard during the entire exit meetings.

 

DAL drafted Heiskanen, Oettinger, and Robertson in one draft.  That still required sinking to 3rd overall pick.  They also had a star veteran group in Benn and Seguin to make a quick bounce back.  You mentioned LA... Kopitar and Doughty are hall of famers.  Both teams similar in that the core veterans are superstars to create that V-shaped recovery from the basement.

 

Unless we think Huberdeau is a hall of fame superstar and Kadri/Weegar belong in the same conversation as those mentioned above, the Flames shouldn't expect a quick bounce back next season.

 

It's a disappointing comments because it shows Conroy/ownership isn't committed to a patient rebuild and will rush things along as quickly as possible.

They sunk nowhere, they won 3rd in the lottery and by the time any of those guys broke out Benn and Seguin were in a decline with bad contracts.

 

Of course a GM is going to make comments like that, how many GM's survive the other types of builds.  Should he really say that he wants to join to club of Craig Patrick, Dale Tallon, Jay Feaster/Brian Lawton (heck even Yzerman did the heavy lifting in Tampa only for someone else to get the glory), George McPhee, or Greg Sherman.  Even if Edmonton or Vancouver do Steve Tambelini, Mac-T, Chia, or Benning get their dues?  Only you think it was all part of the plan and all these guys sacrifice their careers for another organizations greater good.  But the are only words, don't know why everything said in this town to hacks like Francis is treated as gospel.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

This shouldn't come as a surprise. As i've been saying for years now,  it's never been this organization's intention to rebuild for multiple seasons. They don't believe in it. 

 

I wonder if it's more likely that they can't afford it.  Season ticket holders can forgive one year in the basement but you start to lose them after multiple years there.  And ownership is just about making money and not about making legacy.

 

Tanking for years is effective, if not just a natural cycle of a team.  Just embrace the tank.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

They sunk nowhere, they won 3rd in the lottery and by the time any of those guys broke out Benn and Seguin were in a decline with bad contracts.

 

Of course a GM is going to make comments like that, how many GM's survive the other types of builds.  Should he really say that he wants to join to club of Craig Patrick, Dale Tallon, Jay Feaster/Brian Lawton (heck even Yzerman did the heavy lifting in Tampa only for someone else to get the glory), George McPhee, or Greg Sherman.  Even if Edmonton or Vancouver do Steve Tambelini, Mac-T, Chia, or Benning get their dues?  Only you think it was all part of the plan and all these guys sacrifice their careers for another organizations greater good.  But the are only words, don't know why everything said in this town to hacks like Francis is treated as gospel.

 

That's fair.  Conroy can't say the Flames are going to clean house and trade everybody because that just causes every player to feel disenfranchised and you lose trust with the players.

 

Unfortunately, it's going to get ugly for a year or two before it gets better.

[jjgallow]

55 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

That's fair.  Conroy can't say the Flames are going to clean house and trade everybody because that just causes every player to feel disenfranchised and you lose trust with the players.

 

Unfortunately, it's going to get ugly for a year or two before it gets better.

 

Yeah I am not overly concerned with what Conroy says, but quite interested in what he does.

 

"Our assets have little value" is something he is unlikely to say nor do I ever want him to say , even if it's true.

[jjgallow]

13 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Conroy mentioned the Dallas model.

 

If the Flames want to fast-track the rebuild, they're probably going to look like LA.

 

Like the Flames, the Kings had some very good veterans when the team entered it's decline. Better veterans, hall of famers in fact. 

 

The core of the Cup teams got old. The Kings ended up picking top ten for three straight years and top eleven in four of five drafts. The Flames look to be trending that way.

 

The Kings return to relevance hasn't really been due to their drafting and development. It's been due to (primarily) Kopitar and Doughty still playing well and the organization speeding things along by trading picks and young players for immediate help. Dubois/Arvidsson/Fiala/Gavrikov. They traded a likely Calder finalist in Brock Faber.

 

On the surface, there's nothing really wrong with the LA model. They've had good regular seasons and made the playoffs three consecutive years. Something Calgary hasn't done since the Iggy/Kipper era. 

 

The LA model is really a matter of philosophy. Do you want to be a playoff team, or do you want to be a contender? LA is a playoff team. They're nowhere near a threat in the West. If you're an owner you're probably ok with your two or three home playoff dates a season. LA relies so heavily on Doughty and Kopitar, when they decline/retire, I think they are a team in no-mans land. I like Byfield but he's not a Kopitar and I like Clarke but he's no Doughty. Because they elected to speed things up, they've traded a lot of futures and haven't drafted all that well recently.  They sped it up and it worked, it's just not something built to last IMO.

 

Very well said.

 

I would not personally be okay with the LA model, we need a cup.   However....

 

I do think....when you go into a draft, you need to be really honest and say "are we good at drafting this year?"

 

If for whatever reason the answer is no, sell those picks.   But, fix it for next year.

[sak22]

58 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

That's fair.  Conroy can't say the Flames are going to clean house and trade everybody because that just causes every player to feel disenfranchised and you lose trust with the players.

 

Unfortunately, it's going to get ugly for a year or two before it gets better.

I think your right, I don't get the point in comparisons now as we have no idea where the team is going one week after the end of the season.  On the surface I look at a team that finished the season 7-13 and with only a couple wins in the last week against teams that have packed it in and one where a goalie didn't bother showing up.  I don't look at this and see a quick fix, and can honestly see a further drop as there are a lot of performances from last year that are not likely to repeat, some drops from veterans will likely be covered by growth in the likes of Zary, Pospisil, Coronato, Pelletier, but you could also possibly see a sophomore slump out of Zary.  Conroy would like to add a young C in a trade, the extent he follows through remains to be seen.  There is room to be a player in UFA, but that has proven to be detrimental to this team as often as it has been beneficial

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, sak22 said:

I think your right, I don't get the point in comparisons now as we have no idea where the team is going one week after the end of the season.  On the surface I look at a team that finished the season 7-13 and with only a couple wins in the last week against teams that have packed it in and one where a goalie didn't bother showing up.  I don't look at this and see a quick fix, and can honestly see a further drop as there are a lot of performances from last year that are not likely to repeat, some drops from veterans will likely be covered by growth in the likes of Zary, Pospisil, Coronato, Pelletier, but you could also possibly see a sophomore slump out of Zary.  Conroy would like to add a young C in a trade, the extent he follows through remains to be seen.  There is room to be a player in UFA, but that has proven to be detrimental to this team as often as it has been beneficial

 

I guess what disappoints me the most is that he said "Dallas" but Dallas didn't win a Cup.  So are we mimicking models that bounce back into the playoffs quickly but don't necessarily win Cups?  But ya, maybe DAL wins a Cup here this year.  Still possible.  We shall see.

[sak22]

25 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I guess what disappoints me the most is that he said "Dallas" but Dallas didn't win a Cup.  So are we mimicking models that bounce back into the playoffs quickly but don't necessarily win Cups?  But ya, maybe DAL wins a Cup here this year.  Still possible.  We shall see.

It's a wide open window though, if not this year they will still enter next year with good odds.  But the Vegas model isn't one that they will be able to follow, and the St. Louis model doesn't have the same appeal considering they haven't done much since 2019.  I don't care about whose model to follow, I would hope in some years people are talking about the Flames model.  There is one element lost on the Tampa model I wish the Flames could have and that's a compliance buyout.

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I guess what disappoints me the most is that he said "Dallas" but Dallas didn't win a Cup.  So are we mimicking models that bounce back into the playoffs quickly but don't necessarily win Cups?  But ya, maybe DAL wins a Cup here this year.  Still possible.  We shall see.

 

You don't think....there's any chance at all, he's referring to Niewendyk?   It would have been a prominent thing for him when he entered the league.   In any case, I don't really care what he says, because he's surely smart enough to not show his hand.    I somehow believe he's quite good at compartmentalising conversations and which one goes where.  Or he probably wouldn't be able to maintain all the relationships that he does.

[Sarasti]

19 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

You don't think....there's any chance at all, he's referring to Niewendyk?   It would have been a prominent thing for him when he entered the league.   In any case, I don't really care what he says, because he's surely smart enough to not show his hand.    I somehow believe he's quite good at compartmentalising conversations and which one goes where.  Or he probably wouldn't be able to maintain all the relationships that he does.

 

Conroy is an intelligent man for sure.

He doesn't say things that could blow up in his face almost immediately like other GMs we have had *cough* Feaster *cough* 

[conundrumed]

On 4/25/2024 at 5:15 PM, The_People1 said:

 

I guess what disappoints me the most is that he said "Dallas" but Dallas didn't win a Cup.  So are we mimicking models that bounce back into the playoffs quickly but don't necessarily win Cups?  But ya, maybe DAL wins a Cup here this year.  Still possible.  We shall see.

Every good team is the flavour of the month sometimes. Next month we'll be hitching our wagon to the Avs build, because that's what everyone wants to hear.

[robrob74]

On 4/25/2024 at 2:15 PM, The_People1 said:

 

I guess what disappoints me the most is that he said "Dallas" but Dallas didn't win a Cup.  So are we mimicking models that bounce back into the playoffs quickly but don't necessarily win Cups?  But ya, maybe DAL wins a Cup here this year.  Still possible.  We shall see.

depends on your analysis. You're looking at it with one lens, Cup. I get it's the ultimate goal. Should be. 
 

What I see is a team that drafted well and hit on three very very good players in one draft, and so I think he is referring to scouting and drafting and hitting on multiple players in a draft and then developing into a top team. 
 

how many years are top teams top teams without winning the cup? And how many go deep many times without winning? 
 

how many go the, if we could just get in and then we have a chance model? 
 

which of the two question would you prefer? sustained excellence or just get in and you have a chance??

 

to me, you're sounding a bit of both? Do you want division winner and consistent playoffs and not a in one year miss a year out two and back in again kind of team? 
 

We all want a team like Tampa who has a bunch of chances or Pittsburgh... 

 

i want to see a huge shift in philosophy. I want to see a good plan. I want to see things change. Sure we "draft well." We draft nhlers. But I sometimes think, ok we have nhl players who can play in the league. Sure that is a measurement of success, but how do you measure impact players teams draft? 
 

i measure success similarly to you, only difference is I would settle for not winning and having a team that is relevant and committed to excellence at all times. Gretzky didn't win after leaving Edmonton. Does that make his time in La a failure? Should he be considered the GOAT, or should it be Richard or Messier or others? Gretz wasn't able to do it without a stacked team... 

 

just meaning a team can be great and win once. 80's Flames... 

[cross16]

On 4/25/2024 at 10:46 AM, The_People1 said:

 

I wonder if it's more likely that they can't afford it.  Season ticket holders can forgive one year in the basement but you start to lose them after multiple years there.  And ownership is just about making money and not about making legacy.

 

Tanking for years is effective, if not just a natural cycle of a team.  Just embrace the tank.

 

I have some complaints about ownership but IMO this one is totally unfair. 

 

If they were just about making money then I think they would do things very differently. They don't agree with you on the method of building a winner but I think it's unfair to suggest that means they value money over winning. I don't think for a second that is the case. 

[cross16]

This is an interesting thread related to the "Dallas Model" idea and what the Stars did to have some success. Talks about some trends that the Stars used.  Long story short, you arn't going to get there by taking long shots and flyers, you need to take players who had a good chance to hit. 

 

The good news story is the Flames are pretty good in this area.  Sure they have some misses (Kuznetsov, Boltmann, Stormgren are the primary outliers here) but what is really key to point out about the Stars is they made their headway in the first 2 rounds. That's where you can avoid the flyers and bet on talent so if the Flames can keep acquiring more picks in this area they've got a shot. 

 

 

[conundrumed]

4 minutes ago, cross16 said:

This is an interesting thread related to the "Dallas Model" idea and what the Stars did to have some success. Talks about some trends that the Stars used.  Long story short, you arn't going to get there by taking long shots and flyers, you need to take players who had a good chance to hit. 

 

The good news story is the Flames are pretty good in this area.  Sure they have some misses (Kuznetsov, Boltmann, Stormgren are the primary outliers here) but what is really key to point out about the Stars is they made their headway in the first 2 rounds. That's where you can avoid the flyers and bet on talent so if the Flames can keep acquiring more picks in this area they've got a shot. 

 

 

I totally agree with the "flyers" comment. Don't take flyers with our first 5-6 picks. Take established talent, and see growth, even in the last 4 months.

Growth is what intrigues me about Jesse Pulkkinen. Wish I knew the details.

Here's a guy that was undrafted last year, and decided, F%$^ this, I'm done with hockey".

I have zero idea who his support is that said, "look man...".

Whatever the cause of the attitude adjustment, just wow. That's a helluva'n offseason.

Tries again. "Well, he's going to the low rung". Shreds. "He's too good for that, move him up to our version of the A". Shreds. "Yeah, call him up permanently" (Liiga).

That is massive growth in the course of a year.

Whatever triggered him, he's there now. I'd take some of that action.

 

 

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

This is an interesting thread related to the "Dallas Model" idea and what the Stars did to have some success. Talks about some trends that the Stars used.  Long story short, you arn't going to get there by taking long shots and flyers, you need to take players who had a good chance to hit. 

 

The good news story is the Flames are pretty good in this area.  Sure they have some misses (Kuznetsov, Boltmann, Stormgren are the primary outliers here) but what is really key to point out about the Stars is they made their headway in the first 2 rounds. That's where you can avoid the flyers and bet on talent so if the Flames can keep acquiring more picks in this area they've got a shot. 

 

 

 

It doesn't really say much about their scouting, other than the fact they picked those picks at those draft positions. What were the players rankings? Ok, they draft well. It isn't actually saying what they say, that there is something telling about their picks?

[jjgallow]

51 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

It doesn't really say much about their scouting, other than the fact they picked those picks at those draft positions. What were the players rankings? Ok, they draft well. It isn't actually saying what they say, that there is something telling about their picks?

 

they like their centers

 

[The_People1]

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I have some complaints about ownership but IMO this one is totally unfair. 

 

If they were just about making money then I think they would do things very differently. They don't agree with you on the method of building a winner but I think it's unfair to suggest that means they value money over winning. I don't think for a second that is the case. 

 

Okay I take some of that back.  I would re-word that to say the ownership group does both.  However, losing up the draft ranks hurts the bottom line at the end of the day and ownership would not be willing to invest in consecutive losing seasons for very long.  They try a bit more than what I was saying.

[The_People1]

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

This is an interesting thread related to the "Dallas Model" idea and what the Stars did to have some success. Talks about some trends that the Stars used.  Long story short, you arn't going to get there by taking long shots and flyers, you need to take players who had a good chance to hit. 

 

The good news story is the Flames are pretty good in this area.  Sure they have some misses (Kuznetsov, Boltmann, Stormgren are the primary outliers here) but what is really key to point out about the Stars is they made their headway in the first 2 rounds. That's where you can avoid the flyers and bet on talent so if the Flames can keep acquiring more picks in this area they've got a shot. 

 

 

 

They also picked Heiskanen and passed on the future greatest Defenseman of all mother time.  It may go down as the biggest missed draft opportunity in Dallas Stars franchise history.

 

But ya, get lots of 1st and 2nd round picks and draft safe.  Take the obvious pick and don't outsmart yourself.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

They also picked Heiskanen and passed on the future greatest Defenseman of all mother time.  It may go down as the biggest missed draft opportunity in Dallas Stars franchise history.

 

But ya, get lots of 1st and 2nd round picks and draft safe.  Take the obvious pick and don't outsmart yourself.

 

who did they skip on?