Neal is not a particularly good hockey player. He is better than Lucic, and that's why Edmonton had to give up a player making quite a bit less cash than Neal to get Neal.
Calgary wanted the cash savings (and the small cap savings) and was willing to get the lesser player because Neal did not fit well with them and they hoped that Lucic would give them some small value.
None of that has really changed. Neal got off to a great start goal wise, but he still isn't a particularly effective player. he wouldn't be doing this with Calgary, and I think everyone knows that.
Treliving's bad decision was signing Neal in the first place. His decision tor trade him for Lucic was not something that really hurts Calgary; in fact, the cash savings continues to help them.
I think those who are roasting Treliving for the trade are really misplacing their criticism.
In magnitude of suckiness:
(1) Signing Neal.
(2) Keeping Neal.
(3) Trading Neal for Lucic.
Having committed Sin #1, Treliving did the best he could to get to #3. because staying at #2 was a very poor choice.
|