Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Set deadlines for high risk assets to either extend or be traded.
It might not be fair, but the NHL isn't a fair league. The Flames, being a small market Western Canadian franchise, have to manage themselves differently than say New York or Florida. The bottom line is that you don't set yourself up to lose an asset for nothing. There were many red flags with Gaudreau being a flight risk and how it played out was pretty predictable. I totally get not trading Gaudreau mid-season with the team doing well, but the minute he said he didn't want to discuss contracts until after the season, he should have been treated as a tradable asset. Treliving displayed an inappropriate tolerance for risk IMO. I can accept that ownership may have enabled that though.
Again, not saying he should have been fired, but I don't see why he should be beyond criticism either. His job is literally to manage and protect the assets of the team, so losing a prime asset for nothing has to be considered a failure for the club.
|
And what would have happened differently if he had set those deadlines?