Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
That last sentence is just false.
There is an objective and very accurate measuring stick for the impact a GM makes, and that's the standings. If Treliving had been a net positive impact, that should be visible in the standings. So far that just hasn't been the case. He inherited a team that did better than anything he's managed to put together, that's just a fact. It's not even close, his teams have bombed completely twice.
Now, just because he has so far failed to have an objectively net positive impact doesn't mean he's a bad GM, or that he has made more bad moves than good. Not everything is the GMs fault. For all I know he might turn us into the next dynasty team.
But right now the jury is still out. For all we know, Carolina could have gotten the three best players in a five player deal, and he just hired another bad coach. Or maybe we got the two best players in that deal and he hired a future hall of famer.
What bugs me is the certainty with which people are proclaiming him a great GM when objectively his teams have been between mediocre and bad.
|
I do not agree with this take. A GM has to build for the future, not just this season, and not all moves he makes will impact this season positively. For a rebuilding team, that fact is even more prevalent - many moves can actually hurt the current roster, in favour of future dividends.
I look at the results of the current season as being primarily on the coaches and players - did they perform to expectations, or did they under/over perform?
Whereas with the GM, I rate them based on the direction of the team, the vision, and the cumulative moves as they build and plan for the coming seasons. And in that regard, I think Treliving has done a fantastic job so far, regardless of the less than stellar on-ice results to date.
Obviously, of course, there must be a reconciliation over time between the moves and strategies of the GM and the overall results of the team on the ice. But that reconciliation needs to be cognizant of where in the cycle, the team is - simply looking at the standings and judging from there is far too short-sighted.