Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
I have said for some time now that I think the turnover of GMs in the NHL is too high, and I think you answered your own question: Seven years is definitely enough time to evaluate, and to judge whether the Manager has the team moving in the right direction. I guess where you and I differ is in our evaluation vs. results: they are not there on the ice, but I like what Treliving has been working toward. It is happening slower than I would have hoped, but I think he sees pretty clearly the problems with the team, and I like the way he has tried to address these issues; I like the way that he evaluates players, and I tend to like the players that he targets; I like that he owns his mistakes and works to correct them.
And this is the bottom line I keep coming back to: who is the best person to improve the team? Right now, I don't see a better option than Treliving for the Flames. While I am not convinced that high-profile figures like Lombardi and Rutherford are realistic options, I also don't believe they provide any improvement.
|
Reasonable people can disagree and the bolded is where our views differ. I'm not seeing much of that and IMO he has been focusing on the wrong areas and made some poor decisions.
As for a replacement, and who could be better. Admittedly I don't have a pool of candidates but since I consider the current GM to be average to below average, I can't imagine he would be that difficult to upgrade. And rather than thinking disruption would be bad, I tend to think some change would be beneficial in this case.
But I tend to agree with most posters who believe Treliving survives into next year. It's just hard to imagine him hiring yet another coach, that would be almost unheard of burning through four coaching hires in 8 years by one GM.