Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames
Flame111

Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

If you listen to the full thing, he says a lot of things.

He says there will be changes for sure.

He says that they don't know to what extent.

 

You keep talking about the team as if it's exactly the same every year and they sucked last two years.

I get that, same core players, except for the goalie and a top 4 D-man.  

Every year the team is different.

Did we underperform?  Of course we did.  You can look at every player except maybe 2 and find they dropped a bunch.

We stopped being able to score for a long stretch.  Killed the season.

 

The bottom line is we were 5 points out of the playoffs in a 7 team division.  If we had normal years from Monahan or Gaudreau, we are in the playoffs.

We don't lose Markstrom to injury, we are in the playoffs.

 

I want to see changes next season, but that's because they are not built to go far in the playoffs.  BT said exactly that too.

 


but you talk as if the changes are a big deal. Like as if the changes make a big difference. The majority of the core stayed the same, minus Brodie, and add in Tanev and you pretty much have the same team. Some improvements made while we lost in other ways. So yes, the major players and the ones who average the most ice time are the same every year, and they didn’t perform well enough, like they haven’t in the past few. 
 

The trade off in the changes are all surface for the most part. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


but you talk as if the changes are a big deal. Like as if the changes make a big difference. The majority of the core stayed the same, minus Brodie, and add in Tanev and you pretty much have the same team. Some improvements made while we lost in other ways. So yes, the major players and the ones who average the most ice time are the same every year, and they didn’t perform well enough, like they haven’t in the past few. 
 

The trade off in the changes are all surface for the most part. 

 

rent-a-goalie

rent-a-coach

play same core

 

fire coach mid-season and buy yourself another year

 

Happy Birthday Lol GIF by Brenroy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, robrob74 said:


but you talk as if the changes are a big deal. Like as if the changes make a big difference. The majority of the core stayed the same, minus Brodie, and add in Tanev and you pretty much have the same team. Some improvements made while we lost in other ways. So yes, the major players and the ones who average the most ice time are the same every year, and they didn’t perform well enough, like they haven’t in the past few. 
 

The trade off in the changes are all surface for the most part. 

 

Neal was a big part of the lineup that ended up being scratched.  He was at worst 3rd line.

Lucic brought in to replace him and played top 6 minutes a lot of nights.

Hamonic playing top 4 minutes, then not playing at all last playoffs.

Frolik a big part of the 3M line then traded.

Janko and Hathaway were not major pieces last year, but they were replaced with PTO's and league minimum players.

 

Overall, you are correct in that Gio, Hanifin and Ras were here last year.

3M line replaced by Tkachuk-Lindholm-Dube.

Gaterade line replaced by Gaudreau-Monahan-Simon/Leivo/Ritchie

Lucic-Bennett-Dube replace by Lucic-Backlund-Mangiapane

 

Most of the same top 6 and top 4D.

Different starter.

 

I guess all I am really saying is that we had about 50% different players between years.  Sure, the "core" players don't change much, but not the only reason why we don't go further.  I harp on Gio and Backlund more than Gaudreau, since they have been so effective in the regular season, but shells in the playoffs.  You need your top guys to produce, but you also have to adjust to strategies of playing best on best.  It doesn't always work.  Would we ever think about playing a Lomberg or Hathaway against Mackinnon or Benn?  I doubt it.  

 

Circling back to my bolded point.  We don't have a roster built for the playoffs.  No #1C and #1D.  No backup.  No shutdown line that can handle every situation.  Ineffective PP personnel or strategy.  While I would love to see BT address that, it's not easy to do and painful to execute.  It means trading a Backlund and a Gio to try and get back a #1D.  It means trading a Tkachuk or Gaudreau or Monahan (or combo) to get a #1C.  It means overpaying Hyman to be that wrench you need.  It means using guys on ELC's to balance the other costs.  And finding bargains.     

Share this post


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

 

That's what you said to me about Giordano and Brodie, like, recently.  Not years ago, but months ago (more than 12 months but all the same).  You were defending Treliving so this is how I took it, as I feel we're all kind of just...past that now.  Unless it's the arguement that it's actually a problem higher up.  Which might be true.

 

For forwards the candle burns faster.   So no, I disagree that basic math is dumb, or laughable.    Math is just math.

 

https://www.tsn.ca/yost-nhl-rosters-continue-to-trend-younger-1.1465718

 

So you are saying that a 25 year old Draisaitl is exiting his prime because math.

McDavid has two good years left.

Poor Crosby and Kane, too far over the hill to compete.

Because math.

 

Slow burning candles?  Elite players are different?  Far fewer exceptions over the norm?

Sure, I get the argument.

But you speak in absolutes.  

And your evidence is a Yost story?

Stats can be used to prove any point.

 

Maybe there is a connection between salary cap and younger players.

The growth of the game in other countries has definitely had an impact on drafted players.

Basement teams playing 18 year olds in their draft season.

Big draft years players aging out of their primes (32+).

D-men coming into the NHL at a much younger age.

Lots of reasons, eh?

 

If you want top talk about the Flames needing to change the team dynamics or get rid of certain players because you feel they are preventing us from getting to the next level, fine.  If you feel that Gaudreau and Monahan have to be moved because they are too soft or too lazy to bring it, fine.  The age argument doesn't fly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

So you are saying that a 25 year old Draisaitl is exiting his prime because math.

McDavid has two good years left.

Poor Crosby and Kane, too far over the hill to compete.

Because math.

 

Slow burning candles?  Elite players are different?  Far fewer exceptions over the norm?

Sure, I get the argument.

But you speak in absolutes.  

And your evidence is a Yost story?

Stats can be used to prove any point.

 

Maybe there is a connection between salary cap and younger players.

The growth of the game in other countries has definitely had an impact on drafted players.

Basement teams playing 18 year olds in their draft season.

Big draft years players aging out of their primes (32+).

D-men coming into the NHL at a much younger age.

Lots of reasons, eh?

 

If you want top talk about the Flames needing to change the team dynamics or get rid of certain players because you feel they are preventing us from getting to the next level, fine.  If you feel that Gaudreau and Monahan have to be moved because they are too soft or too lazy to bring it, fine.  The age argument doesn't fly.

 

 

No matter how much you disagree please never put me in a position where my only defence is the Oilers did things better.

 

It's not worth it I'll just let you win lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might have been a no brainer but BT got the exposure list correct.

 

I am hopeful he doesn't make a last minute move and waste any picks on protecting players.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Might have been a no brainer but BT got the exposure list correct.

 

I am hopeful he doesn't make a last minute move and waste any picks on protecting players.

That last part is kinda the key part of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He got it correct, not considering that he had a couple years to plan and adjust for it without losing a core player for nothing.

 

So from a now perspective, did he get it right?  100%.

 

From a planning perspective?   Far from it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

He got it correct, not considering that he had a couple years to plan and adjust for it without losing a core player for nothing.

 

So from a now perspective, did he get it right?  100%.

 

From a planning perspective?   Far from it


I agree, but I think that it’s the previous years not getting D in last year’s draft or enough in others to make up for “the now” that we are in need of today.
 

It’s no different than when we lost Iginla and Kipper. There has been no succession plans. I am happy Giordano was taken in the Expansion Draft. Glad we got a bit for Bennett. But we now have a big hole or two in the top2D. We have a hole in bottom pair RD if we use Tanev or Andersson in the top pair… Bottom pair is easier to fill, but then we’d typically like that spot for a young up and comer D to gain experience (maybe). 
 

Then RHS wingers or forwards, no plans there either, nor one for a #1C. 
 

we can say all we want that Monahan would be that, i always saw him as a 2C and only got the 1C for playing with Johnny and Hudler. He’s a 45-50 point guy without them, sort of a better scorer than Langkow, without langkow’s two-way game. He’d have gotten there if he’d shut things down once injured… 

 

so I agree with the lack of planning… 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the last few comments, in building and retaining core guys BT did a 100% good job, but he did fail 100% on succession planing…

 

having said that, it’s a tunnel vision and/or near sightedness which we are far too often and it’s very apparent with BT come UFA season…the past two and now

leading into the expansion draft and entry draft he failed to get anything done, my suspicion is he was focused in on a particular deal and missed others like Dunn and Reinhart (and a few other great moves by other teams).  Those deals were fro younger players that can contribute now and for 5-6 years from now so those are the deals and moves that make sense for all teams, and more so exactly what Cgy needs to be making, but I think BT is looking for the “home run” deal for Eichel type which while it could be good it’s a huge risk and huge cost, which ultimately makes no sense for Cgy, especially where it’s giving up soooo much futures that it over steps the possible 5-7 good years you could get (very much a could with his injury) where as 2022 and 2023 first rounders (at least the cost of Eichel) would open a window of 10+ years x2 players of around Lindholm/Monahan quality in that draft plus had they dealt for Reinhart sooner, that would have cost us our 2021 pick who’s great and all, but also adding 2 from the draft + Reinhart, so 3 players at Reinhart call abut or better or An injured 10mil + Eichel…which is better?

 

Reinhart was a home run for Fla and add Bennet they are gonna a crazy good team…I’m still not good with the Bennet trade he should have stayed, they should have locked him in at 3rd line Ctr last year, kept Lindholm at RW and had Backlund at 2nd line Ctr and told Bennet 2nd line can be yours if you lift lift this 3rd line this year..they failed at that, had they down that I believe we would be talking about how great Bennet is as a 2nd line Ctr 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, MP5029 said:

I agree with the last few comments, in building and retaining core guys BT did a 100% good job, but he did fail 100% on succession planing…

 

having said that, it’s a tunnel vision and/or near sightedness which we are far too often and it’s very apparent with BT come UFA season…the past two and now

leading into the expansion draft and entry draft he failed to get anything done, my suspicion is he was focused in on a particular deal and missed others like Dunn and Reinhart (and a few other great moves by other teams).  Those deals were fro younger players that can contribute now and for 5-6 years from now so those are the deals and moves that make sense for all teams, and more so exactly what Cgy needs to be making, but I think BT is looking for the “home run” deal for Eichel type which while it could be good it’s a huge risk and huge cost, which ultimately makes no sense for Cgy, especially where it’s giving up soooo much futures that it over steps the possible 5-7 good years you could get (very much a could with his injury) where as 2022 and 2023 first rounders (at least the cost of Eichel) would open a window of 10+ years x2 players of around Lindholm/Monahan quality in that draft plus had they dealt for Reinhart sooner, that would have cost us our 2021 pick who’s great and all, but also adding 2 from the draft + Reinhart, so 3 players at Reinhart call abut or better or An injured 10mil + Eichel…which is better?

 

Reinhart was a home run for Fla and add Bennet they are gonna a crazy good team…I’m still not good with the Bennet trade he should have stayed, they should have locked him in at 3rd line Ctr last year, kept Lindholm at RW and had Backlund at 2nd line Ctr and told Bennet 2nd line can be yours if you lift lift this 3rd line this year..they failed at that, had they down that I believe we would be talking about how great Bennet is as a 2nd line Ctr 

 

Shoulda woulda coulda.

Bennett had years to prove he was a top C and never came close.

As much poor development as misuse by coaches.

On rare occasions he looked like a top 6 player, but very rare.

He's gone.

 

For me, the failure comes from trades we missed out on and picks wasted for players we targeted.

Hamonic, Lazar, Gustafsson, Forbort, Smith, Elliott, etc.

Missing out on Stone.

Being snubbed by Kadri.

Being in on everything, but not being able to land an impact player.

 

We lost one year of Gio, and while it stings, not much you can do about it.

Hard to offload his salary at TDL.

Do you try to trade him after a Norris season where he is still a big part of the team?

Hindsight, yes.

Realistic?  Not really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2021 at 12:41 PM, travel_dude said:

 

Shoulda woulda coulda.

Bennett had years to prove he was a top C and never came close.

As much poor development as misuse by coaches.

On rare occasions he looked like a top 6 player, but very rare.

He's gone.

 

For me, the failure comes from trades we missed out on and picks wasted for players we targeted.

Hamonic, Lazar, Gustafsson, Forbort, Smith, Elliott, etc.

Missing out on Stone.

Being snubbed by Kadri.

Being in on everything, but not being able to land an impact player.

 

We lost one year of Gio, and while it stings, not much you can do about it.

Hard to offload his salary at TDL.

Do you try to trade him after a Norris season where he is still a big part of the team?

Hindsight, yes.

Realistic?  Not really.

Except realistically yes trade him at high value time and many of us said it…took so much flack for it but…not to say we were right but we were…same with Iggy, many of us were saying he’s loosing a step and he bottomed out and also cost us a much better return by holding on far too long…regardless of your not buying into age being a factor…let’s play this game would you rather Crosby and Ovie now or Mackinnon And McDavid now? clearly the latter two, both are well under 30 and the other two are approaching or at mid 30’s…now let’s go back, 25 year old ovie and 23 year old Crosby vs The current McDavid and Mackinnon…well now that’s a tough one I’d probably go with Crosby over any of them…point is as things stand age has clearly caught up with Ovie and Crosby…are that still really good? Yes, are they elite like Mackinnon and McDavid…absolutely not now but they were, and quite possibly much better (well in Crosby’s case fore sure) Father Time catches up with even the best of the best, but when you slow down from elite your still above average and as time

passes you slow more, so above average becomes good and good becomes ok and eventually your not good…nothing lasts forever so the point here is, this is why you move players before they degrade…good GM see when it’s time bad ones hold on and get squat ans are stuck muddled around kinda like Cgy is doing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When was Bennett high value that we didn't still have hope?

How do you trade Gio at the right time when you just had the best seasob in many many years?

We had been trying to get Iggy a C for as long as he played here.

Traded by another GM after he said he would gve the squad a year, since they had earned it.

 

Are you still going on about the expansion draft and Reinhart?

If Buffalo didn't want what we had to offer, what do you do?  Add a better player?

Does the idea of paying Reinhart $7m to be a complentary player warm you up?

Losing a 1st for him?

 

I will be critical when BT makes trades that I don't like or signs a player I hate.

He's done it, so I don''t have blind faith.

Part if the job a GM needs to do well is negotiate deals.

Easy to do that in Tampa, when players are willing to take a pay cut.

And taxes work in your favor.

 

Not so easy to do the right thing if owners have any say in who gets dealt.

I think there are things BT may not be allowed to do.

Was Gio one of them?

It's one thimg to not spend assets to keep, but another thing to trade him.

 

 

Share this post


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

When was Bennett high value that we didn't still have hope?

How do you trade Gio at the right time when you just had the best seasob in many many years?

We had been trying to get Iggy a C for as long as he played here.

Traded by another GM after he said he would gve the squad a year, since they had earned it.

 

Are you still going on about the expansion draft and Reinhart?

If Buffalo didn't want what we had to offer, what do you do?  Add a better player?

Does the idea of paying Reinhart $7m to be a complentary player warm you up?

Losing a 1st for him?

 

I will be critical when BT makes trades that I don't like or signs a player I hate.

He's done it, so I don''t have blind faith.

Part if the job a GM needs to do well is negotiate deals.

Easy to do that in Tampa, when players are willing to take a pay cut.

And taxes work in your favor.

 

Not so easy to do the right thing if owners have any say in who gets dealt.

I think there are things BT may not be allowed to do.

Was Gio one of them?

It's one thimg to not spend assets to keep, but another thing to trade him.

 

 

Nope not at all Reinhart was a huge miss but as you said maybe Buf liked Fla’s young G better than say Wolf…but on that note I’m sure Cgy could have sweetens that deal a bit had they really wanted him…anyway that ship has sailed, like Stone a few years ago and many other like last year with Hall…but again, that was then this is now…the major issues are we have and continue to hold on to aging players far too long…I had thought the age thing and holding on to players was pretty clear, I even drew some compassion to aging players 30+ vs under 30 with some well known players from other teams…the point is, as I mentioned before, this team has a terrible history of having GM’s with the inability to see 30+ is decline of players, and yes sure  31 year old Iggy was still solid, 32 not too bad, 33 he lost 1/2 a step, even announcers were starting to notice, 34 a full step but still serviceable 35 started loosing 1 and 1/2 steps…anyway the point is 1. Age is clearly a factor, and holding on to 30+ players is risky business as they are on the decline…sure Gio had a Norris year but also that same year Monahan, Gaudreau and Lindholm were having career years and probably the best trio in the NHL…that one year so sure Gio is gonna get inflated stats…but if memory serves, that same year some said he looked to be loosing a full step at times, the year after he was totally loosing a full step and everyone could see that, so why was he not dealt at the TDL we were clearly out of the post season…this is what many of us are getting at…a monkey souls have seen the TDL after his Norris year was the time to trade him…granted yes Cgy has had a history of owners meddling and not letting a player be traded, is this the case with Gio, Possibly but I don’t think so. The time to trade Gio was when they let Brodie walk…I believe I actually mentioned this last year, I believe I even said Brodie was worth keeping over Gio back then…and now look, which D would you rather Brodie or Gio…Brodie though he’s now getting up in age but quite  a few years younger than Gio…both should have been traded the TDL before Brodie walked out the FA door 

 

anyway my main issue is BT keeps bringing 30 or just about 30 ish players on or about to decline, while

true the odd player can go a bit past 30, the vast majority start declining and we seem to keep picking them up and holding on to them past 35…where what we should be doing is much like the Chi trade…he’s a heck of a D add and is just hitting his prime…I could

see a Chara Jr over the next 4-5 seasons…and if that’s the case the time to trade him will be 4 years, but here in Cgy he will hold on till he’s like 38…again, that’s if he reaches that potential…but please save this conversation, one to see if this Russian Monster of a D turns out and also, if he dose, see how long we hold on to him…heck any of our young prospects for that matter Anderson, Hanifin or even Valimaki if they hit their stride we are probably gonna keep them till 35+ 
 

now, having said all that, look at what Fla is doing, that’s gotta be one of the best rosters in the NHL next season and best part is they have only 1 or two 30 or 30+ players and not one over 33…that’s how you build a team, and they did It by trading off golden oldies for youth, so it’s gonna be a tough Fla team for a few years…TB did the same

thing, though they are starting to age already so I see a fall from grace here next year…TB is a first round drop out, LaK Anh are on the brink and if Col can get a solid goalie they are gonna be a top 4 team same with LVK, what do they all have in common…young healthy talent..Eichel is indeed young and talented but healthy? well let’s just say there is a good reason he’s still in Buf…I’m thinking the asking price is overshadowed by the huge injury risk…Buf will be luck to land a 1st + a solid prospect…that’s where I think this Eichel thing will end up, having said that it will be very close to training camp unless Buf sees that the injury is drastically reducing Eichel’s value…and they may given NYR, Min, Anh and LAK all seem to have backed off of him…anyway the point to this rant is yes a healthy Eichel ie exactly what we should be targeting…but he’s not so we shouldn’t, if he was it would cost Tachuck + 2022 and 2203 first rounders…that’s not a price I’m ok with but I’m guessing a healthy top end talent like Eichel will

pro get that….anyway the point to all that is, that’s why I had been so admitted about Reinhart he’s a better fit for Cgy as they could have afforded a 1st rounder, Wolf and heck even Dube would be a reasonable price for Reinhart level talent…many reasons why have already been mentioned so leave it be, anyway we can’t afford A healthy Eichel level talent, we can’t take the Rick on a injured level talent so we are stuck with trying to find Reinhart level talent…or if you like Lindholm level talents and also in those age ranges as we need to keep them together for 4 years to get the most out of them..then 29/30 y/o start trading them…keep that pattern then you start to build a prospect pool that you can either be like Anh or LAK ans afford to trade for healthy Eichel leve talent or who knows, maybe even draft one…it’s called succession planning…keeping a 38 year old D is just plain being blinded by misplaced loyalty…hockey is a business you let your assets rot you have nothing of value to sell that’s Cgy now but 2 years ago you trade Brodie and Gio for a 1st each your looking at 4 first rounders over the past 2 drafts…maybe trade one or two this year for first rounders next year or 1 + for a reinhart or 3 for a healthy eichel and then your adding to the team not subtract to add in another area  point is Cgy mgt and or owners are not seeing the Forrest through the trees and it’s killing the team 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MP5029 said:

Nope not at all Reinhart was a huge miss but as you said maybe Buf liked Fla’s young G better than say Wolf…

For what it's worth, I read the ask of Calgary for Reinhart was our 1st, Mangiapane and a prospect .. pass

I also would not have included Dube 

Share this post


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

For what it's worth, I read the ask of Calgary for Reinhart was our 1st, Mangiapane and a prospect .. pass

I also would not have included Dube 

I’m pretty sure they would have done Manji + 1st for him and that’s a trade I’d do…as much as I love Manji < Reinhart…

 

moot point though…he’s in Fla with Bennett, be interesting  to see both of them on a line together which may happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...