Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Flame111

Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

So Brouwer is the new Stajan.

It just wouldn't be a Flames 4th line without an overpaid player on it :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I am still really confused about how Brouwer was used this year. GG and Treliving have both said that some players did not seem to put out the needed effort for the team to succeed. When I think of insufficient effort on the team, a mental picture of Brouwer quickly emerges. So, did they just recently conclude that a lack of effort was the problem, or did they not notice that Brouwer was playing poorly? Why did Brouwer get so much ice time when he is the quintessential example of weak play? If he was injured all year, the question still remains.

I think you are confused because there is this misconception that Brouwer was lousy every time he stepped on the ice. There where a lot of deficiencies with this team throughout the season and yes GG used Brouwer to cover off a number of them because he has the experience to do it. The plan with the PP seemed to be have a big body in front of the net Ferland and Brouwer are our big bodies but let's not forget everyone else on our PP failed to produce.

I say enough with pounding Brouwer into the ground, we all would like to see him gone and replaced with a much better situation for the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

I think this nails a big point , brings back the "always earned" mantra 

I love listening to Rhett Warrener on 960, he talks candid and gives a great insiders POV..  he was talking about this earlier in the week..

he talked about having guys like Freddie and Bart on the roster .. doesn't matter if you like them , or think they are great guys or teammates .. there will always be an undertone of "why are you here ".. there will be days they play , just to get them in games.. somebody who may have been busting their hump, will sit .. just to get them in 

Those spots should be filled by players who have a legitimate shot at taking somebody's job, i think he used Mangiapane and Wotherspoon as examples (because it made sense for Andersson to get a ton of playing time in the A)

 

same goes for regular players , i seriously dont question Brouwers "try" but rather his ability to perform in the situations hes put in ...  where is the motivation for Bennett to push himself if the same guys keep getting trotted out for the PP, etc... or knowing that Johnny and Mony will always get the top minutes , even on nights they both suck

There were nights that Stone / Kulak were playing way better than TJ and Hamonic.. did they end up with the 2nd most minutes that night ?  nope

 

It may have been garbage time, but i liked Andersson on the PP late season.. he didnt look out of place .. same with Jankowski

our coach is scared to take chances so he just goes with the same options over and over again 

Warrener got to where he did by hard work, never the best player on the ice. I would say in this case he hasn't taken the big picture into account with mention of the players from the AHL. I have no problem with sending Hamilton packing because we had a number of players to work in on the 4th line better than him. In regards to defense Kulak was te project this season while Andersson and Wotherspoon were a pairing that was developing as planned in the AHL. Bartkowski was not harming anything being the 7th man,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The narrative around Brouwre's utilization is getting miss leading. if you look at the shift charts, for most of the season Brouwer actually wasn't used on the PP as much as you think. He was leaned on heavily early, then for much of the seasons would come off an on the PP and then leaned on heavily at the end when injuries struck. The idea that Brouwer was a staple on the PP isn't very accurate. 

 

I don't love that the split up Backlund-Frolik on the PK in favor of Brouwer but at the end of the day I don't think the utilization of Brouwer was a huge issue quite frankly. He was generally deployed in a 4th line role and yes he was moved up more than others but the speaks more to a lack of options on the roster than anything else. there really isn't much reason to believe Lazar would have been any better and I also thought some of the mentaility behind the utilization of Brouwer is trying to tap into what you thought you were getting when you signed.

 

End of the day i think the far greater issue is Brouwer on the roster in the first place, not the utilization of Brouwer

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, cross16 said:

End of the day i think the far greater issue is Brouwer on the roster in the first place, not the utilization of Brouwer

 

The greater issue is his continued presence on the roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

The greater issue is his continued presence on the roster.

It is BT's mistake to correct if he doesn't he would be compounding the mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the answer is that easy. Your asking the owners to cut a 6 million dollar cheque in the offseason on a team they've already given clearance to spend to the cap on. This during a time where they are publicly crying foul about the lack of an arena and basically trying to tell us their profits are in decline and they arn't in great shape. Compound that with the desire of most for a new coach and  new high profile coach and this offseason could wind up being pretty expensive for the owners.  Are they willing to just pay all of this and stay a cap team? does the Brouwer buyout come out of the payroll for next year? does the coach? Would you accept a trade off where Brouwer is bought out but the stipulation is then the payroll is reduced by 6 million?

 

Not a simple equation and depends more on what the owners say than what BT wants to do IMO. That's a tough cheque to write and I wouldn't blame them i the balked at the idea. I don't think we should be shocked if Brouwer is here for at least another year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Warrener got to where he did by hard work, never the best player on the ice. I would say in this case he hasn't taken the big picture into account with mention of the players from the AHL. I have no problem with sending Hamilton packing because we had a number of players to work in on the 4th line better than him. In regards to defense Kulak was te project this season while Andersson and Wotherspoon were a pairing that was developing as planned in the AHL. Bartkowski was not harming anything being the 7th man,

No, disagree 100%, Warrener is right on.  When you reward incompetence/poor play while at the same time ignoring stellar play at lower levels you are responsible for the attitudes of complacency that develop.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cccsberg said:

No, disagree 100%, Warrener is right on.  When you reward incompetence/poor play while at the same time ignoring stellar play at lower levels you are responsible for the attitudes of complacency that develop.  

You think what you want. I pointed out why those playing were where they were for a reason and it isn't like there isn't a progressive plan for these AHL players. Where no one is knocking the door down having players such as Bartkowski and Hamilton eating popcorn is the right way to go. Who are you pointing at for incompetence or poor play on the main team that you would have exchanged one of our AHL players for this season ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory, Warrener is right but pretty much every team in the league carries those types of veterans. Flames carry a couple more than you want for sure but pretty much all teams have 2 or 3. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don't think the answer is that easy. Your asking the owners to cut a 6 million dollar cheque in the offseason on a team they've already given clearance to spend to the cap on. This during a time where they are publicly crying foul about the lack of an arena and basically trying to tell us their profits are in decline and they arn't in great shape. Compound that with the desire of most for a new coach and  new high profile coach and this offseason could wind up being pretty expensive for the owners.  Are they willing to just pay all of this and stay a cap team? does the Brouwer buyout come out of the payroll for next year? does the coach? Would you accept a trade off where Brouwer is bought out but the stipulation is then the payroll is reduced by 6 million?

 

Not a simple equation and depends more on what the owners say than what BT wants to do IMO. That's a tough cheque to write and I wouldn't blame them i the balked at the idea. I don't think we should be shocked if Brouwer is here for at least another year. 

When the owners have to start dipping into personal funds maybe but I don't see that being the case as you make it sound. I still think there is a trade out there for Brouwer with some retained salary. However it happens they need to cut their losses and move on from Brouwer and his presence screwing up our roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

You think what you want. I pointed out why those playing were where they were for a reason and it isn't like there isn't a progressive plan for these AHL players. Where no one is knocking the door down having players such as Bartkowski and Hamilton eating popcorn is the right way to go. Who are you pointing at for incompetence or poor play on the main team that you would have exchanged one of our AHL players for this season ?

personally id have preferred Wotherspoon as my 7th D.. he has nothing left to prove in the A.. i'll actually be surprised if he re-signs with us , 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of catch 22 with Wotherspoon though. What's better having him as the 7th dman where he would never play or having him in Stockton helping the young D down there and improving his own game?

 

I'd pick the later personally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

personally id have preferred Wotherspoon as my 7th D.. he has nothing left to prove in the A.. i'll actually be surprised if he re-signs with us , 

Everything I saw regarding Wotherspoon was the good job he was doing with bringing Andersson along so why disturb this to have him sit. Another thing having him up GG might feel compelled to run a platoon rather than providing Kulak all the playing time this season. I think they made the right call. I hope Wotherspoon doesn't bolt but I would understand if he did. He is replaceable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

You think what you want. I pointed out why those playing were where they were for a reason and it isn't like there isn't a progressive plan for these AHL players. Where no one is knocking the door down having players such as Bartkowski and Hamilton eating popcorn is the right way to go. Who are you pointing at for incompetence or poor play on the main team that you would have exchanged one of our AHL players for this season ?

Mac, You agree with the way it played out with personnel but not with results.  Don’t you think there is a connection?  Virtually every AHL guy that got called up “earned it” prior to the call, as well as deserved to play when called instead of sitting to allow games for Bartkowski... Brouwer, Stajan... do we really need to go over the same things again and again?  

 

The essence of the Warrener comment is playing the best players vs best development, and individual player motivations.  Sure there are valid arguments each way, but to me if there is no valid competition from below it breeds complacency, which is just what Warrener said.  I think you can make a strong argument it has in fact happened with the Flames.... just another thing that needs to be addressed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Mac, You agree with the way it played out with personnel but not with results.  Don’t you think there is a connection?  Virtually every AHL guy that got called up “earned it” prior to the call, as well as deserved to play when called instead of sitting to allow games for Bartkowski... Brouwer, Stajan... do we really need to go over the same things again and again?  

 

The essence of the Warrener comment is playing the best players vs best development, and individual player motivations.  Sure there are valid arguments each way, but to me if there is no valid competition from below it breeds complacency, which is just what Warrener said.  I think you can make a strong argument it has in fact happened with the Flames.... just another thing that needs to be addressed.

I don't think you can argue what you or Warrener are saying at all for this particular season. I wouldn't say Mangiapane belonged in the NHL this season. Was he the best player at the time Jagr and Versteeg went down and the team needed a winger yes. People seem to want to slam the players we had this season and sorry but I didn't witness any complacency. I witnessed a lot of effort without good results. Could Foo have come up and replaced Lazar or Hathaway, maybe but would that have been a good thing to have him on the 4th line action, I think not. When your talent level in the AHL is pushing through with your players at equivalent or better talent than what you have then what you and Warrener are saying becomes relevant. This wasn't the case in our situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On April 10, 2018 at 11:39 AM, cross16 said:

Personally I thought the press conference was exactly what you would want to hear from him, keeping in mind he isn't going to reveal a plan at this point. 

 

- Acknowledged they aren't skilled enough and need to get better here

- Acknowledged their poor PP and basically put it on the coaching staff.

- Acknowledged some players had some down years and it's fair to suggest they'll bounce back, which is accurate IMO. 

- Acknowledged that in their locker room, and seem to suggest this is both a player and coach issue, something is missing and it wasn't good enough. 

- will no he didn't fire Gulutzan on the spot, he made more than a few subtle references to reviewing coaching issues 

- he will Hash Rate every and all angles to gather info before making decisions, which i think is incredibly smart. 

- Gave NO indication (certainly to me) that this past season was good enough, that they are "fine" or that he would not be making changes in the off-season. 

 

Again, I get it everyone wants a quick fix but personally I thought the issues/problems he brought up or spoke to hit the mark in terms of what happened this season. 

 

 

So your GM stands up says yup, we know the problem, employees never put the effort forward, managers couldnt motivate anyone and had no plan in place to correct it... I knew we were trending wrong, and DID NOTHING !!!! So as a business owner your ok with this assesment, i want work for you!!! 

 

By him admitting he knew and addressed it publiclty is huge cause for concern. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tmac70 said:

So your GM stands up says yup, we know the problem, employees never put the effort forward, managers couldnt motivate anyone and had no plan in place to correct it... I knew we were trending wrong, and DID NOTHING !!!! So as a business owner your ok with this assesment, i want work for you!!! 

 

By him admitting he knew and addressed it publiclty is huge cause for concern. 

 

If that is what you take away then sure come work for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

If that is what you take away then sure come work for me. 

Don't you love it when some takes a business analogy to the world of sports and think it applies.

Having said that as a GM like all of us with life you have to be brutally honest about where you are and what measures need to happen in order to make the situation better.

I am quite curious to see what BT does to improve this team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

BT dodged a bullet at the lottery draft.

Funny how we are always the bridesmaid, even when traded away the pick.

2016 - finish behind WPG, they get 2nd overall, just ahead of CBJ, they get 3rd.

2018 - finish one point ahead of CAR, they get 2nd overall.

 

All I can say is good thing we beat Vegas in game 82. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2018 at 3:59 PM, tmac70 said:

So your GM stands up says yup, we know the problem, employees never put the effort forward, managers couldnt motivate anyone and had no plan in place to correct it... I knew we were trending wrong, and DID NOTHING !!!! So as a business owner your ok with this assesment, i want work for you!!! 

 

By him admitting he knew and addressed it publiclty is huge cause for concern. 

At the trade deadline we were right there. In the race.

What help did he(BT) get for the team?? 

Quote

 

So what did he do?

 

He picked up a St Louis waiver claim. Then traded a 7th round pick for Nick Shore. 

 

Just about everyone on the forums here praised him for these moves because it did not cost us..... 

 

Actually :

It cost us big time.....

It cost us our playoff run.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2018 at 3:59 PM, tmac70 said:

So your GM stands up says yup, we know the problem, employees never put the effort forward, managers couldnt motivate anyone and had no plan in place to correct it... I knew we were trending wrong, and DID NOTHING !!!! So as a business owner your ok with this assesment, i want work for you!!! 

 

By him admitting he knew and addressed it publiclty is huge cause for concern. 

He said as much , leading up to the Deadline .. that this team was giving him no reason to make big deals at the deadline 

We didn't have the high picks to give up , and if we did .. do you really think Evander Kane was going to push this team into the playoffs?  or Rick Nash?  And what if we had still missed ? You are normally picking up players that may not be on this team next season . would you have been on with paying what was paid for those rentals ?

 

This team , even it stood.. should have been in the hunt .. this was not a personnel issue, it was a coaching and between-the-ears  issue. I actually applaud him for not diving deep into players that likely would not have changed our situation 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

At the trade deadline we were right there. In the race.

What help did he(BT) get for the team?? 

 

So what did he do?

 

He picked up a St Louis waiver claim. Then traded a 7th round pick for Nick Shore. 

 

Just about everyone on the forums here praised him for these moves because it did not cost us..... 

 

Actually :

It cost us big time.....

It cost us our playoff run.......

 

Such a cop out.

 

St. Louis dealt away a top 6 center, pissed off their players and they still didn't fold like the flames did. What moves did Anaheim make? What move was he suppose to make that would have got the flames into the playoffs. 

 

Flames had more then enough to get into the playoffs but their group, players and coaches, didn't get it done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...