Warrenergate

I touched on the subject during the summer, but once again Sutter has brought himself under fire thanks to his mismanagement of Warrenergate.

There was an anonymous commenter over at Kent's yesterday who in my opinion was either: a) an idiot, b) didn't understand the real issue or c) both.

Now it seems to me his/her position was that Kent et. al had no room to rant because they didn't know the whole story, and there was probably some sort of insider information that was the key variable (they then mocked Kent for not being an insider, which he never claimed to be anyway, SWEET!).

They also then commented that Boyd was going to play tonight anyway, so what was the difference?

I'll handle the second point first because it's the simplest to address. The anger wasn't so much because Boyd was sent to QC, it was because it wasn't a hockey decision. By all rights Boyd deserved to be on the team; he's had a great preseason, he was ok last year and he has a great pedigree.

Now onto the first point. Was there some invisible but still legitimate reason Boyd didn't make the team? Well, it was invisible only in the sense it was such a subtle and long process that most people aren't exactly putting the puzzle pieces together. Was it legitimate? Well, that depends on how you look at things; we KNOW it wasn't a hockey decision in the sense that worse players than Boyd made the team instead of Boyd, but it was a hockey decision in the sense that the Flames wouldn't have been able to play because they were above the cap and therefore wouldn't have been able to play (actually, I don't really know the penalty for being over the cap, anyone want to enlighten me?).

Let's recap the (relevant) events leading up to this incident:

Jun 28, 2007: Primeau signed to three year contract

Ok, first of all, the only thing that can be reasonably said to that is 'what the fuck?' It's not that Primeau is terrible, because he's mostly just bad, and it's not like his contract pay rate is so bad either, but why a three year term? Was it really necessary to get Primeau 'locked up' in the sense that he was such a desired player we didn't want him testing the market for fear of losing him? Could the Flames have not just signed him to a one year deal and then evaluated their coffers the next summer and if they were really desperate for centers resign him at that time?

5 Jul 2007 - Eriksson signs two year contract

The next event is slightly related to an even I've left off the list because it's like a negative event in that something didn't happen when it should have, but this signing was made 'necessary' because the Flames decided not to sign Giordano (Giordano was ahead of the fans as Matt notes here). But again, why did the Flames sign this guy to a two year deal? He was a minor role player in one of Detroit's cup wins, played in the RSL for a while, then apparently he's proved he can play in the NHL so much so that Sutter put two year's worth of faith in him? I mean, Sutter partly solved this little problem by hiding it in the AHL but it's just such a bizarre long shot asset management move that you have to think a lot would have had to go right for it to pay off.

Jul 1, 2008: Prust signed to one way contract

Another head scratcher. What had Prust done that had him deserving of a one way contract? I'm not going to go into it because you can't prove a negative but I'm welcome to someone challenging my point.

Jul 2, 2008: Vandermeer signed to three year contract

I think Flames management at least got an appreciation of what Vandermeer brings to the table, but I would say what he brings most of the time is 'toughness' and inconsistency. His first few games in Calgary I would say he was pretty effective, but by playoff time Keenan was utilizing him as a 13th forward. Utility forward/defenceman aren't exactly the most sought after commodity on the hockey market so one has to wonder why that while the coach wasn't really too interested in Vandermeer's skill set the GM was. And interested in it for 3 freaking years. And remember, this is a guy who was traded to Philadelphia last year who took a 1/3 of a season peek at him and decided to pass, and they're not exactly drowning in veteran NHL defenders there...

Jul 20, 2008:Andre Roy signed to contract

This is probably the most perplexing and infuriating move of them all. The Flames finally let Godard go, and then they pick up Roy. I'm not nearly as against the enforcer as is say, Kent, but why? Who is he even protecting on this team? Everyone on the Flames is a fighter. Iginla will fight. Langkow will fight. Regehr, Sarich, Vandermeer, Phaneuf, Primeau, Bertuzzi (watch out for his hook!) etc. etc. It's not even like the Flames are the Oilers with a bunch of undersized kids - this is pretty much a veteran roster, at least all the key components are. This is pretty much a complete waste of money and roster space.

All summer: not unloading Warrener

I mean, this has been discussed ad naseum but I have to say; Warrener is injured. There is no doubt. But he's been playing injured for at least a year, probably closer to two. The man just looks fragile out there, and although he's got the heart of a lion his body is just clearly unwilling. But he is no more injured today than he was on his last preseason game, and he's probably healthier than he's been other times he's played. My guess is that the LTIR move is simply so that he doesn't have to spend the remainder of his hockey days riding a bus in QC. But really, the simple and smart solution would have been to just buy Warrener out. That way he's totally off the books, doesn't have to play in QC; I mean, is being told your body is so messed that you're no longer of use to the team any more humiliating than being bought out? Is this really about Warrener's ego?

So was there a key variable that I, as a fan, missed that was the reason Boyd was sent to the QC (for a day). Not at all - the reason was lack of smart planning by the GM. Hell, I didn't even assault Sutter for not unloading Aucoin or trading for Aucoin, because at least those moves are moderately defendable.

I have to say, Sutter has his strengths, but this whole incident just makes him look dumb or at least overly and stupidly sentimental.

Time To Hit the Old Dusty Trail...

During the Flames' beauty 2004 Stanley Cup run I couldn't help but think how the city's opinion of management would change down the road. After inheriting the team about a season and a half earlier, Darryl Sutter missed the playoffs for the first time in his career. Flames fans weren't exactly surprised, they had missed the playoffs for 7 straight seasons, but for Darryl it was an embarrassment. Never mind that he only had half a season to turn the team around (and did a hell of a job), it was something he, as a Sutter, wouldn't accept.

He made all the right moves. Signed some goalie named Miikka Kiprusoff who turned out to be somewhat of a saviour. He out coached some of the best minds in the business. He cultivated an unknown but exceptionally effective defensive group. He got the most out of a crop of 3rd liners including Marcus Nilson, Sean Donovan and the irrepressible Ville Niemenen. I'm sure there are coaches out there today still wondering how he Sutter did it.

Sutter was God-Like. He brought Calgary out of the gutters and into the stars, even if only for one season. If a fan questioned Sutter during that time the only thing a rational person could do is roll their eyes and shake their head.

'That will all change one day though' is what I kept thinking. In the world of the hockey GM, today's hero is tomorrow's goat.

Tomorrow is today.

It's not so much that Sutter has been a complete disaster. This team is better now than it was before he manned the helm. They're a perennial playoff team (and will certainly be a contender to make the playoffs this year) and although they've only made it past the first round one time, they have been in two separate 'Game 7s.'

Sutter has some strengths which I think we can all agree on:

• Identifying his core players (Iginla, Regehr, Kipprusoff, Phaneuf)
• Turning trash into treasure (Kipprusoff, Huselius, Nolan, Ference, Hale, Giordano)
• Gets consistently good performances out of top players (Iginla, Langkow, Phaneuf, Regehr)
• OK at developing rookies (Phaneuf, Lombardi)
  

Sutter also has some weaknesses which I think we can generally agree on:

• Allows useful players to leave for nothing (Giordano, Hale, Clark)
• Had a tendency to hire his ex players, seemingly not on merit (Amonte, Friesen, Primeau, Stuart, Nolan, Smith, Marchment, Zyuzin)
• Takes shots in the dark on trades/signings (Amonte, Nolan, Bertuzzi, McCarty, Lundmark)
• Isn't good at identifying coaching talent (Playfair, Keenan)
• Doesn't develop much in house talent (successes include Phaneuf, Lombardi, Moss? Boyd??)
• Tends to prefer old overpriced FA veterans instead (Amonte, McCarty, Aucoin, Leclerc, Weimer, Smith, Primeau, Nolan, Bertuzzi)
• Hasn't restocked the pipeline (top prospect is Backlund but others don't look promising)
  

Is that a fair assessment?

I thought I was a bit tardy with this post, especially since CJ and Duncan have both already had great posts on relatively the same subject.

However, I think Lowe getting bumped upstairs the other day brings new relevance to the idea of Sutter moving on. The team simply hasn't progressed the last 2 seasons, and the shuffling of deck chairs has hardly been useful. Take for instance this offseason. Sutter made a nice move for Glencross to solidify his bottom six forwards up front, but was forced to make a desperate move for Bertuzzi because he has zero youngsters ready to fill a top 6 wing position. Jim Vandermeer gets resigned, probably because the Flames are making a Vandermeer family band, and for some reason Sutter acknowledges that Warrener and Eriksson are useless but doesn't do anything relevant about it besides embarrassing one of the most respected guys in the dressing room.

I think it's time for Sutter to move on.

There is of course no way Sutter gets outright fired. Much like Lowe, the Flames management team is enamoured with Darryl Sutter. For the good of the team though, I thing someone in the ownership group needs to suggest Darryl take a 'promotion' and the Flames hire someone outside the organization who will make (or at least suggest) the hockey decisions from now on.

Beggars Just Can't Be Choosers

I said over in the comments at MG's a while back that Bertuzzi was probably an ok choice for the Flames depending on the cost, and since he's been signed, I would say the price is right.

I think there are basically three schools of thought on Bertuzzi:

1. Bertuzzi is simply an evil person who committed an atrocious act and there's nothing about him that's redeeming.
2. Bertuzzi is a huge victim who made a mistake and have paid his dues
3. Bertuzzi is an ass and probably not a good person but only bad luck has separated him from other heinous acts that have been committed on the ice.

Now, MG seems pretty upset, I would obviously put him in the first category. I think I can categorize the people in the picture in the top of the page as being more in the 2nd category, although probably stupider. I would place myself more in the third category, but I think Matt really expressed my sentiment the best:

"ONE. I don't hate Todd Bertuzzi. Don't think I ever have, though I certainly have no love for the guy. If he was likable at all to we the fan, I would have eventually felt bad for the guy in about 2005, when he was still being portrayed as uniquely evil for committing an act that -- while not commonplace -- is equaled on the Senseless Violence Scale about 5 or 10 times an NHL season, and is surpassed on the Tragic Consequences Scale every so often too." (source)

I've been watching hockey for a long time, and while I won't exactly defend Bertuzzi I'll say I've definitely seen worse. I see something worse probably once a season.

I've never seen worse consequences.

That's the only difference to me.

Not that it's any consolation to Steve Moore.

But in my opinion, this wasn't a bad signing.

I'll agree with Matt on this one. There isn't a lot of risk in a 1 year $1.95 deal. For one, if Bertuzzi plays terrible, both the Flames and the Big Bert can walk away from this amicably. It's already better than Amonte for two years. Secondly, he's not getting paid all that much. Sure, he's the 4th highest paid forward, but he's 10th on the team, and he's only about $500k more than say, Wayne Primeau.

Best case scenario? The guy scores 25 or so goals and draws some of the attention away from Iginla.

The other thing to note about this trade is, as stated before, the Flames absolutely needed someone on the 2nd line. Lombardi is almost a sure bet to be there, but that's about it. Take a look at this chart I made:

Those are the behindthenet.ca numbers for the Flames forward from the preceding season. Obviously it's not a perfect comparison because Bourque, Cammalleri and Bertuzzi were on different teams last year but it at least gives us an idea of where Bertuzzi slots in on the team. In all but two categories, quality of competition and goals/60, Bertuzzi was within the top 6 guys on the Flames. We needed a top 6 guy. Voila.

OK, he was sheltered. Very sheltered. It's not a perfect solution. But it was probably one of the only ones the Flames had left.

I'm no coach, but there has got to be some way to take advantage of this guy's skills.

IMO, this Flames season is shaping up to be a lost cause. There is no reason to hope or expect the Flames to compete for a Cup this spring, and the idea of a playoff spot seems pretty untenable right now. There are too many contracts signed through this year that will anchor this team and too few prospects ready to inject some new blood. It's not a rebuilding season, it's not a bloodletting season. It's a run out the clock season.

Just keep repeating to yourself, it will all (Bertuzzi, Aucoin, Eriksson, Warrener, Nilson, Cammalleri) be over soon.

Calgary Flames: What Can We Expect?

I'm just sitting here watching Hockey Day in Canada and after the events of the past week or so I think the rest of the season is coming into focus for both Calgary and Edmonton, although tonight I will focus exclusively on Calgary.

Of note before I get into it is a conversation I had with a Flames compatriot at the Saddledome regarding Owen Nolan. After being a replacement Tony Amonte for much of the early season (as well as being injury prone), Nolan should be looked at as a pretty successful FA signing if he hits certain criteria. He's got 14G and I think 20G would be a respectable, he's on a pretty close pace. His ES quality of competition is ranked as 6th on the team (I'm going to ignore Ramholt), his CORSI is a +5.0 and he's got a On Ice/Off Ice/60 rating of 0.07, which although paltry compared to Iginla's +2.32, is at least on the positive end of zero. I think we can all agree that although Nolan might not be a captain on the ship, he's certainly not an anchor.

Ok, now onto what we can expect for the final quarter of the season:

A Trade:
MG at Five Hole Fanatics has done a lot of blogging about the Tanguay trade rumors, siding on the 'don't trade Tanguay' and the 'Tanguay is worth more than Huselius' side of the debate. So will Tanguay be traded? I think it was Duncan at Flames Blog who said that more than likely the trade that Sutter will make will be completely unexpected in terms of his target and who he trades. I'll agree. I think though that we can make a couple of statements with an near absolute certainty, and then I'll make a couple of completely speculative comments as well.

Firstly, I think I can safely predict neither Iginla, nor Regehr, nor Kiprussoff, nor Phaneuf will be traded. Secondly, the Flames will not acquire Petr Forsberg.

Now for the speculation: I agree with MG when he says that the Flames biggest problem is not the forward group, its the defence. There are two bonafied defenceman, a couple of guys who are not bad, and then some who are simply too injured or too terrible to be consistently counted upon. Would the Flames have the same record they do today if Giordano and Ference were in the lineup for Ericksson and Warrener or Hale? I know who I'd rather have, given the choice.

So we can speculate about Mats Sundin but for my money I'd rather have Sutter go after a solid defenceman to compliment the group.

Inconsistency:
I like watching Dr. Phil because I think it probably provides the most laughs per minute of any other scripted comedy show, but I think he's right when he says the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. Last year about this time the Flames went on a surge, and then they played terribly through March and then limped into the postseason and got worked by Detroit. This year had a terrible October and November, followed by an outstanding December and pretty good January, now a mediocre February. Can anyone tell me a reason not to expect inconsistency? We've already had the monthly 'Sutter visits the dressing room' event, and we'll probably see a few more.

The Dion Effect:
If there's one singular area where Darryl Sutter has excelled it's that he has very aptly identified the core of his team and rewarded them in terms of dollars. While Calgary's salary is extremely top heavy, it's at least going to the right guys. (Sutter's job identifying value in his perimeter players is less commendable). Now it's time for those core guys to step up. Besides Iginla, I don't think we've seen the other core guys' best this year. I think Regehr can play better, Phaneuf has truly stepped up his game in the past couple of weeks, and it's obvious Miikka Kiprusoff can play better. Alex Tanguay should be in that group too, and despite my concerns about him I know he can put a few more pucks in the net. There's no more money to spend this year, at this point the guys earning the big bucks have to prove they're worth it. It's not just about leadership now, it's about results.

The Goal:
There's been some talk of the goal as being finishing 1st in the conference, but make no mistake about it, the Flames have one single goal in the regular season: DO NOT FINISH 8th. Playing Detroit does not look like it's any better of a matchup this year than it was last year, and I am sure it doesn't matter if the Flames finish 2nd or 7th, the matchups will all probably be pretty even. Obviously the Stanley Cup is the ultimate goal, but after two consecutive first round losses, I think we can qualify this season as a success by winning a playoff round.

It's Just Bad Timing That's All

I never really did much of an analysis of Mike Keenan when he was hired, I think that his history is pretty well publicized and probably speaks for itself. This season will probably be a absolute disaster or a total success; the odds of it falling between those two extremes is, in my opinion, relatively low. I wasn't particularly pleased with Keenan's hiring, and my attitude has changed very little since then. Really, my grudging acceptance of Keenan was based on two factors: Playfair is gone, and there were very few options available in replacing Playfair. It disappointed me that the Flames missed the Andy Murray boat, but that was the past.

There was one other man who I've hoped would be the Flames head coach, but it appeared there were too many obstacles. Brent Sutter was head coach for two very successful Team Canada U-20 incarnations, and even one successful World Junior year usually translates to a head coaching job. Two was unprecedented.

Brent's position with the Red Deer Rebels appeared to be the main obstacle for his inclusion into the NHL head coach rankings. He plays multiple roles for the franchise, including owner, general manager, and head coach. His named had popped up multiple times in the shortlist for NYI coaches (with Ted Nolan eventually taking the reigns). I always felt though that if Sutter did jump to the NHL it would be to a position with his brother Darryl's team.

He would be able to stay close to his ranch, he would be once again coaching Dion Phanuef, he and his brother could act as a true partnered braintrust for the organization. Nowhere would Brent have more control over player movement or be as close to management.

However, it now appears, according to Darren Dreger and Bob Mckenzie, that Brent will leave his GM and coach position with the rebels to join Lou Lamoriello in New Jersey (the man who very unfairly fired Claude Julien near the end of the season, it really pains me that a great coach would still want to work with him).

Of all the lousy luck.

Firstly, if Brent was willing to take a position within the NHL, why NOT the Flames? Was the organization unwilling to meet some sort of demands he had? Did Darryl not know? Was he promised more control in NJ? All of these propositions seem equally unlikely.

The only real explanation I can speculate on is that Darryl knew Brent could be had for the right price, but sincerely felt Keenan was the better coaching option.

If there is one comment you can make about Darryl, it could never be that he tends to play it safe.

Two Sides of Darryl

With yesterdays signing of free agent Owen Nolan, I couldn't help but think there are two sides to Darryl Sutter.

On the one hand, it's almost as if Darryl has some hypnotic power with his voice. I can only imagine him whispering in Iginla's ear, '$7 million dollars for 5 years is a good move for you.' He's managed to convince several guys to repeatedly take well under what they could've got on the free market. Iginla, Regehr, Kipprusoff. If this rumoured Regehr deal turns out to be true, Regehr will be making less money than Roman Hamrlik. Unbelievable.

On the other hand, Darryl has this penchant for going out and getting old end of the career type guys. Amonte. McCarty. Nolan.

If we could just somehow contain the latter Sutter the Flames would be unstoppable.

In regards to Owen Nolan, he might be a step up from Amonte. He might not be though. We'll see how his arthritis goes.

Calgary Flames Aquire Adrian Aucoin

TSN's Darren Dreger had reported earlier today that the Flames were looking to aquire Adrian Aucoin, and it appears exactly that has happened.

TSN:

Chicago defenceman Adrian Aucoin has waived his no-trade clause and is on his way to the Calgary Flames, sources tell TSN.

The Flames were in the market for a defenceman and zeroed in on Aucoin, who has a history with new head coach Mike Keenan. In 1998-99, Aucoin scored 18 of his 23 goals on the powerplay for Keenan's Vancouver Canucks. (Source)

I remember when Aucoin had that great year on the Island, and at the time I coveted him for sure. Over the next two years he suffered catastrophic injuries and only managed to play about 1 full season (over two seasons) for the Blackhawks, who signed him to a multi-year $4 million/year deal.

As the article mentions, Aucoin played under Keenan in Vancouver, so we keep with the Sutter connection theme (as in, everyone aquired by the Flames has some sort of previous connection with the GM or coaching staff).

Aucoin played about 21 minutes of ice time/game last season which ranks him 77th for defenceman, he was a -22, although that statistic is inflated due to the fact he played on Chicago. On the plus side, Aucoin had 3 GWG, tied for 8th among defenceman and was the team captain.

All in all, the Flames got an aging, injury prone, expensive defenceman, who is probably a lateral move from Hamrlik (although he has more potential if he stays healthy in my opinion).

Thoughts?

Update: TSN is now reporting the deal won't be completed until Friday due to paperwork.

Darryl Sutter Press Conference 2:00pm MST

GM Darryl Sutter will talk to the media on Wednesday and is expected to address the issue of whether or not Playfair will return. "It's Jimmy's first year and it's growing pains," forward Craig Conroy said. "Jimmy knows the team, he knows what's going on. I always thought he did a good job handling everybody." We will await the Sutter press conference. Apr. 25 - 8:09 am et


updates to come...

all quotes are paraphrased by myself

regarding Playfair: "The media singles people out, and that's not ok...since I got here, the mantra has been, 'just ok is not ok.'

regarding scoring woes one year ago: "We scored 40 more goals, so the media idea we didn't score enough was bullshit...it's about goals for/against and work ethic."

regarding Jarome Iginla contract extension: "We don't discuss contract negotiations publicly/with the media...July 1st, it goes both ways..."

regarding keeping Iginla and Kipprusoff: "I'll be perfectly honest, its been the speculation for a year, isn't it more about them being under contract and wanting to play here? ...you're isolating 1-2 players...you won't win...the team is what's most important."

regarding aquiring new players: "We have 16 players under contract for next year...quite frankly that's a lot...we''ll look at our guys, look at Omaha..."

regarding speed and skill: "We're above average on both and that's why we're a good hockey club."

regarding Dion: "He had a typical sophomore year. I think he had an outstanding rookie season and he had an outstanding year I think...he played 7 playoff games last year and 6 this year..."

regarding the year: "I'm not gonna say we had a good year I'm not gonna say we had a bad year. We had an ok year...(but ok isn't ok?)...of course, how else are you going to improve in this world?"

Certainly some cryptic comments from Darryl. He seems to be generally satisfied with his on ice personnel, but isn't happy with the overall results.

Let's see SOME fight

If there was ever a kryptonite to the Calgary Flames' Superman (in the last 3-4 years anyway), it has to be the Nashville Predators. Whenever the two teams play, the Flames seem to let Nashville get the best of them. Outshot, outchanced, outscored.

But one fateful game three years ago (one day off of three years EXACTLY) today, the Flames won in one aspect of the game. After conceding to being outscored, (and outshot) the Flames decided they would not be outmuscled and they decided to send a message for the coming game. Not the coming game against the Preds specifically mind you, but the coming game against every team in the NHL.

On that game against the Preds, three years ago, with three seconds left in the game, then Coach Darryl Sutter sent out a foursome (the Flames already had one man in the back) of Robyn Regehr (to take the draw of course), Rhett Warrener and Mike Commodore on defence, and Krzysztof Oliwa on LW. That is, until his man tried to line up on RW, so Oliwa moved over.

A brawl ensued that included goaltenders Tomas Vokoun and Miikka Kiprusoff.

Sutter was suspended for two games and Oliwa for three.

By the time the league returned to play in September 2005, a rule was instated to prevent this from happening again. Automatic suspension for fighting with under 5 minutes left. I call it the Sutter Clause.

The Flames may not win tonight. They may be outchanced, outshot, outscored and outplayed. But let's not be outmuscled. Like three years ago, let's see some fight.

Flames forward Craig Conroy said Sutter didn't send his players out with the instructions to fight. "If anything, Darryl's point after the game was we have to show that kind of emotion before the game is over," Conroy explained. "We gotta bring that emotion every time we play."

What was said three years ago is still relevant today.

The Road Tie

If you watched the Calgary Flames during the Darryl Sutter coaching era you will undoubtedly noticed a certain necktie that Darryl wore on a fairly regular basis. I called it 'the road tie' because you'll notice it's obvious resemblance to a highway with a dotted line. I'm pretty sure Darryl almost never wore it at home games as well. I think he considered it his road tie as well.

To me, the road tie symbolized everything that was great about the Flames. The road tie was hard work. The road tie was perseverance. The road tie was smarts. The road tie was preperation. The road tie...was winning.

The Sutter clan has never been known for clever game strategy, (although Brent is starting to turn that around), but Darryl coached this team very well for his first season and a half. The 2004 playoff run was a stroke of genius in fact. The game was changing, although many coaches refused to acknowledge it. But Darryl figured it out. He knew he had a team that was a bit short on talent but heavy on speed and try. The Flames used a two man forecheck system. There was constant puck pressure on the opposing team's defenceman (or whatever poor soul happened to be trying to break the puck out) and the Flames both scored a lot of goals on that forecheck, and killed off a lot of time defensively. I called our forecheck system 'The Swarm.'

Remember the tandem of Nieminen, Nilson and Donovan? Probably one of the most effective 3rd line groups I have ever seen, which is especially impressive considering the career status of every single individual player from that line has plummeted since that time.

Back in those days, Darryl Sutter was probably the best coach in the NHL. The road tie was a symbol of his prowess.

That was then.

Now, Jim Playfair patrols the Flame's bench. We no longer see perserverence. We no longer see smarts. We certainly no longer see preperation.

I used to take pleasure in a road tie. Now what I'd really like to see is a road win. And I'm no longer just accepting road wins. I will only accept road wins against playoff teams.

Unfortunately, this team, or perhaps this coach, seems unwilling to deliver to my expectations.

The Flames no longer have a system, or at least one that works. This team has enough pure talent to beat any team, which would imply that we should choose a system and use it against every team. Force them to play our game. It's a philosophy that many successful teams abide by. Its a philosophy that took this team (this jersey at least) to the Stanley Cup Finals only a couple of seasons ago.

If we are forcing other teams to play to our strengths, then we're not doing a very good job of it. Firstly, we obviously cannot identify our strengths. Early in the season, Playfair talked about 'building an identity,' or 'playing to our identity.' In fact, he identified the Flames lack of success due to their not playing to their identity. When we went to the finals, our identity, our strength was speed, try, and defence. Now...
Is it:

a) Defence? Despite our abundance of defenceman drafted in the first round, our abundance of defenceman with well known names, our abundance of defenceman with a physical edge, our defenceman with defensive defenceman, our top 5 goaltender...quite simply put, team defence is often a week point in our game. Many of this team's defenders either have major mental lapses in terms of defending, in terms of distributing, or in terms of penalty taking. Therefore, I would say, defence is not our strongpoint. (Despite being ranked 9th in the league in GA).

b) Offense? Iginla, Tanguay, Langkow, Huselius, Lombardi, Moss, Conroy, Phaneuf, Hamrlik, Stuart. This is the offensive core of this team. Pretty big isn't it? Our Goals per Game ranking supports the idea of offense as being this team's strength.

This would imply that the Flames would want to get into high scoring games often (ala the Penguins or Sabres). Instead though, the Flames (or perhaps Playfair) seem to insist on pretending to be a defensively minded team, and instead of playing run and gun hockey (although the Flames occasionally fall back on that strategy). Its a strategy that has in fact succeeded more than it has failed, however, I would argue that this is because of the team's immense talent, rather than the actual efficacy of the strategy.

I have news for Playfair - the Flames identity is offence, and your strategy is playing counter to that.

Even assuming the Flames identity is not offense, Playfair has mangled the job of managing the team. I would postulate the hardest part of coaching is creating offence, that is something thats done mostly through talent. Systems are more likely to ruin offence than create it. Now that Playfair has the talent for offence, that would imply the Flames simply need to take care of their own end of the ice, and the rest of it will take care of itself. However, the coaching staff has refused to make adjustments to improve overall team defence.

Now it's probably a bit unfair to take the offensive credit away from Playfair and put the defensive blame on him. Perhaps I've overly complicated the issue.

But the fact is the Flames are (as many fellow Flames bloggers have pointed out) underachieving to a great degree. Its up to the coaching staff to get the most out of each and every player, and to get the most out of the group as a single unit. That's what Darryl Sutter was so great at in the days of the road tie. Thats what Jim Playfair and crew have failed to do this season.

Hired and Fired

While watching the Buf/Cal game last night, one thought kept popping intrusively into my mind: David Moss is playing far too well to send him back to the minors if/when Chuck Kobasew is able to return. Chuck Kobasew has officially lost his job.

Clearly Darryl Sutter's thoughts had mirrored mine, but he was ahead of me by several steps, as apparently, the trade that sent Kobasew (and disappointingly Andrew Ference) to the Bruins has been in the works for several weeks. To me, Andrew Ference provided the steady depth defenceman that made the deal possible from the Bruins perspective, but David Moss stepping in and providing consistent 2nd line grit and touch made Chuck Kobasew a very overrated, expensive and redundant piece of the puzzle.

In return Calgary gets two players that Darryl Sutter is very familiar with: Brad Stuart and Wayne Primeau, both of whom he coached in San Jose. I like that Sutter is familiar with both players and clearly Sutter feels he knows what type of play he can expect from his most recent acquisitions. They took him to the Western Conference finals in 2004, and although Stuart has never turned into the franchise defenceman everyone expected, Darryl obvious believes he can play a complimentary role in Calgary. Wayne Primeau is a depth forward who brings a physical edge, something the Flames do lack a bit. While guys like Ritchie, Yelle, Lombardi/Conroy, and Nilson are all smart hockey players, its extremely rare you see a big time hit from them. I think the precedent was set last year when Sutter traded Reinprecht for Leclerc for his physical presence late in the season.

Regular readers will know that I have absolutely no sadness to see Chuck Kobasew off this team. He represented the last of the dissapointing 90s draft lot that saw the Flames go with underperformers like Daniel Tkachuk, Rico Fata, Oleg Saprykin and finally, Chuck Kobasew. Andew Ference however, is a different story.

I have a very high regard for Andrew Ference, and if you consider it a one for one deal (Kobasew->Primeau, Ference->Stuart), I don't think we got value in return. Although I hate Michael Farber, I agree with his assesment today: I would not trade Andew Ference for Brad Stuart straight up, especially considering Ference is underpaid and Stuart isn't even signed. Its disappointing to lose a guy who I considered to be a leader of the team, and who seemed to be a true stand up guy on and off the ice. Emotionally, HG sums it up here and here. Really difficult to hear how Ference was pulled off the bus.

I'm a bit confused as to where Stuart fits in on our depth chart. Hamrlik and Phaneuf will be staying together, so will Warrener and Regehr be broken up, or will Stuart be slotted in with Giordano for the 3rd pairing? To me, Stuart is probably a top 4 guy, but I'm not sure he's strong enough defensively to make a good shutdown defensive pairing with Regehr. So either he's not going to be getting enough ice time but will be paired with someone who fits his style, or he's paired with someone who is stylistically different but will be getting appropriate ice time.

Of course there now even more of a crush of centres on this team (Langkow, Conroy, Lombardi, Yelle, (Nilson), and Primeau so its possible that this deal could lead to another couple of minor deals.

You have to give credit to Sutter though, he obviously recognizes this is one of two years we have to go for the Cup. He's identified areas where the team needs improvement, and has acted on it. His timing is right for the push, the only question now is; will it be enough?

You can never come home again...?

Wow. I mean, we all heard the rumours about Conroy coming back to Calgary (they've been around for a solid year or so) but as with every rumour, I just tended to ignore them. I heard an interesting take on the idea of Conroy coming back last time the rumours surfaced (beginning of the season or so I think), and it came from none other than ex-Flames GM Craig Button, the man who aquired Conroy in the first place (in exchange for a still underrated Cory Stillman). I'm paraphrasing here, but he essentially said bringing Conroy back would be a mistake because players never come back the way you remember them. Conroy played a huge role on this team, and because of the 03-04 playoff run, we all remember him with a rosy glow. Conroy will be under intense and perhaps unfair scrutiny to help this team to a similar (read: better) performance again this year, especially considering this time he was shipped into a generally adept team, rather than the rebuilding years mess he was jetisoned into last time around.

There is another peculiar thing thats bothering me about this aquisition. It's not that we had to give up Lundmark and a couple of picks, Jamie just wasn't working out (as I aluded to in my Mid Term Report). Its that when Conroy's contract with the Flames expired, he (as I understand) was basically told that he was not worth the amount of pay he wanted. In the end he saw sunnier skies in L.A., got the big contract, and proceeded to have 1.5 mediocre seasons. Losing Iginla as a linemate probably didn't help Craiger's cause, but we are essentially resigning him for more money than we initially believed he was worth and giving up several draft picks to do it. And, at least statistically, he's a worse player than the one we wern't willing to resign.

If this sounds strange to you, it's because it is strange, or it's at least a poorly executed strategy.

Is Calgary a better team than we were yesterday because of this trade? Absolutely we are. But is paying $3 million for a guy who we plan on slotting in on the third line a smart long term plan, keeping in mind salary cap constraints? You tell me.

Reactions:

hockeygirl from Double D(ion)

metrognome from Five Hole Fanatics

Matt from Battle of Alberta

Lowetide from Lowetide