Although I voted yes, I do think the statement I'm about to give is contradictory. I do believe Treliving assembled a good team on paper. There have been only a couple deals made which were questionable (primarily Brouwer), but all in all, when you look at the lineup, they should totally be better than they are. What I'm about to say is probably controversial, but I do think the problem has been the system of which he has to assemble. I don't see enough speed and skill on the team, and I do think that's a directive from the top (Burke) on the identity of the team - "truculent". The NHL is quickly moving to more speed and skill and certainly two way play, but the need for guys like Brouwer or guys who are neither here nor there but good two way, is a little outdated. St. Louis tried this approach for a few years, and realized you need a little more speed and top end skill to really contend. While I don't think a full rebuild would even be close in the cards, I do think a team that wants a solid d-man at the deadline can land a top 6 speedy skilled forward and combined with good minor league development, this team could turn around in no time. Burke at the top has to move the team identity away from too much "truculence" to a team with more speed, and if the fans don't push for it a little more, the old man will be set in his ways. Executing on it, Treliving has done a fine job on paper, but he has to be held accountable for the results, which has been underwhelming.
|