Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
So that’s a no. I wish a Treliving supporter would give a meaty defense of his overall plan instead of a plea for stability or asserting more good than bad moves.
I’d argue he has been following a vision of sorts, that hasn’t worked too well. He has a pattern of making certain types of moves (stopgaps for goalies, investing heavy in defense, trade picks for players, use of buyouts, UFA signings, spend to the cap, commitment to the current core, hire coaches who preach possession hockey).
I guess you can give him credit for all the attempted moves. Every GM has trades that don’t come to fruition but for some reason, Calgary’s seem to be out in the open. So I don’t know which attempted moves to give him credit for and which you don’t.
I agree the future is more important than the past and I’m sure Treliving is informing his superiors of his plans. What I wouldn’t give to know what he has been saying for last 6 years. Unfortunately we only have his past actions on which to form an opinion.
When he was hired, I thought we were getting a moneyball style GM who would find value in players that may be under appreciated in some ways. The Drew Shore trade was going to be an example of that. Unfortunately there haven’t been many successes here and worse, seems to overpay far too often for such players (Lazar, Stone come to mind). Meanwhile the Canadiens have benefitted from two players who would have fit this bill but we sent packing.
Personally I have limited confidence in his approach but under no illusions he is going anywhere. So we’ll just have to evaluate what he does this off season. If he wasn’t so good with the media, I believe he’d be under a lot more scrutiny.
|
How is it a no? What are you looking for, and what do you think a GM does?
Do you want to see a player list of the Flames' next Stanley Cup team?