Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
Feaster' impact was getting rid of aging stars and creating a lottery team. I guess that's something. I think Treliving has added more positive players in the last few years. I also think he's had much more of a plan in place. He's made some errors in executing that plan, in goal and in getting secondary scoring for example. But he knew what he wanted to do. His player choices didn't pan out in a few instances.
Feaster had a home run late round pick. He also made a couple really bad trades that set back the rebuilding not adding good enough assets.
You've repeated that you do t have confidence but you really don't distinguish between what Treliving has and hasn't done versus his predecessors, other than in very vague terms.
|
No I haven’t repeated that, it’s the first time I said it. Maybe you are confusing me with someone else. I said a few other things in post 531.
I don’t blame Feaster as much as some do for the Iggy return, obviously Iggy chose his destination and that tied his hands.
Treliving has made some good moves and some bad moves for sure.
The goalie issue as you note was very bad. It created a distraction and a practical problem for the coach executing practices.
His coaching hire stinks in my eyes.
Feaster had an identity involving speed, hockey IQ and work ethic that had teeth as it was reinforced by decisions like Jooris. These things vanished under Tre and have not been replaced.
Again, something as simple and silly as going from ‘always earned never given’ to ‘It’s go time’ moves from a substantial actionable mantra to Izzy Mandelbaum.
It started when he could not re-sign departing Cammalleri, and he said that he signed Mason Raymond as a NHLer was required in that slot.
His latest move was Chris Stewart - getting this guy in the first place and then having a coach who would actually start him on the top line rewards precisely nobody on the team or in the stands.
The team has prospects that look good on paper, I like the D drafting so far, but the on ice product, which matters, was a disaster and with a far better roster than Hartley had, played an uninspired brand of hockey that was so bad it has a lot of long time die hard fans that have stopped watching. Really, the bottom should have been in the past, as his job was to build after Feaster did the dirty work.
His professional scouting results look poor, and his hand picked coach is seeing significant performance hits on existing assets, which one could argue devalues them, and constitutes poor asset management.
Just a few unstructured remarks off the top of my head.