Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
I don’t blame the owners for the terrible Travis Hamonic trade. That’s on Treliving. That Lazar trade? Treliving. That Elliott trade? Treliving - there were better goalies in free agency (…literally anything would have been better than Elliott that season).
Even if the owners mandate aggression, the GM has to do a MUCH better job at being aggressive than Treliving has. In the ones mentioned above Treliving dealt a 1st round pick and four 2nd round picks for a bottom pairing defenceman (we played him as a bad top four defenceman), a 13th forward, and a goalie who was absolutely horrendous in his year here. That’s all just horrible work by Treliving.
|
I think that's more of an indicator of poor pro scouting. Elliott put up some crazy good numbers in STL, and I thought we got a number 1 goalie for cheap. Especially after the ask for Bishop was a 1st(Tkachuk I believe). The Hamonic trade seemed like a decent trade because I thought the Hamilton trade was a home run, so I trusted management. He was on a good contract, and just came off a playoff run where he contained Crosby(could be off on that) pretty well. Lazar was definitely a case of someone in the organization being high on the prospect. I don't know how much player watching does Tre actually do. From his interviews he said that was the biggest change from the switch from an AGM to a GM. He said specifically that he didn't get to watch players as much, and had to rely on other people a lot more.
You make a good point, and I agree Tre had made a lot of mistakes that seemed like good trades at the time. He is the one to ultimately carry the responsibility, but something is certainly lacking in the scouting of NHL players. And before I get flamed for being a hater, I recognize the good scouting to. Tanev was a great add, so were Lindholm and Hanifin, etc. Bottom line it's not all bad, but there's definite room for improvement.