[Lanny_McDonald]

Few things:

Originally Posted by TOfan

Dismissing the comparisons doesn't really add up to a whole lot. Every ufa is different; different players, different people, different markets, different time, different cap, different circumstances all together. Seems like your argument basically amounts to Monday is different than Tuesday. The point being made is teams lose ufa's. That's it, and that won't change. The Flames are not the only team that loses players 'for nothing'. They are not the first, nor will they be the last.

The point being that good teams manage their assets well and don't let their top talent walk without a contingency plan in place. Losing a top player for nothing is crippling blow to the team, especially one as asset poor as the Flames. With the conditions under which the Canadian teams are forced to play, they can't afford to let their best players walk away for nothing.

The loss of Brodie may have resulted in a downgrade of Gio's play but on the flip side you could say the addition of Tanev appears to be of great benefit to Hanifin and Kylington and, in my mind, the Flames are better off today than they would be with a Gio-Brodie tandem. So, what are we bemoaning? the lost step of a, at the time, 37 year old D? Okay. I will go out on a limb and say that had the Flames resigned Brodie Treliving would still be getting pinned to the wall here for one reason or another. You suggest the Flames should have dealt Brodie at the TDL but, as pointed out by JayDub, Brodie was hurt at the time. So what were the offers on Treliving's table? Neither you or I know that. Did Treliving even have license to sell at that deadline? Was this his own decision? What else don't we know?

A little window dressing. The fact is that Treliving allowed Brodie and Hamonic to walk for zero return. What were considered two of the top four/five defensemen were removed from the team with no assets to show for it. That is a mistake.

Regarding Tanev-Brodie, what I recall is that the Flames were in conversations with Brodie on a new deal but when they prioritized Markstrom, Brodie took what he had on the table with the Leafs. The Flames then signed Tanev. Not bad work for a guy who I am told doesn't have a plan, repeatedly.

Considering the time frame of the signings, and the small gap between the two, it is unlikely that the Flames made a snap offer to Tanev. They obviously saw him as a priority player and were focused on he and Markstrom first and foremost. This is also kind of the point. If you aren't sold on a player on your roster, and making him a priority to sign, then you should be making a move to recoup assets.

Pretty easy to say things like "Treliving should have had a deal in place before Gaudreau's NTC kicked in". I'm fairly sure everything you say in your last paragraph Treliving understands.

Does he though? Because there doesn't seem to be any indication that he does. Zero urgency allowed a very important date to slide by. This isn't just some bull#### self-imposed date, this is a date where the team loses all control over the player and where he can possibly be traded to. Instead of a 31 team trade pool, the number s trimmed to five. All control is now in the player's hands. The teams return is now dictated to them. Again, a big mistake.

You might not like him, but he is not an idiot lost in the woods. You point to him not having a plan, yet wouldn't the Tanev signing suggest he absolutely had a plan in the event Brodie left?

I would say just the opposite. He had Markstrom and Tanev as the priorities, and Brodie as the backup plan. He had months to make a move on Brodie, but kept him on hold. That means his priorities were focused elsewhere. That was more of his plan. If he knew that Brodie was a second or third tier concern, then deal the soon to be UFA and get something out of the mix.

Lets also bare in mind that your heavy criticism on a supposed lack of foresight should be balanced with other previous statments we've seen from yourself. What was that trade you were advocating for so strongly summer of '20? Gaudreau to Philadelphia for Voracheck, Frost and a 1st? Woof. Talk about inexcusable.

And I stand by that deal (there was retention suggested as well). At the time we saw Gaudreau headed in a flat to negative direction. There were strong rumblings of him being interested in getting back east. His value was based solely on his potential performance, which we were concerned about.
There was no way we could have predicted this season and it was trying to look down the line and see what the future would look like without Gaudreau. That deal would have accrued a top line RW playmaker with size, and then two quality youngsters to supplement our think prospect pool. Was t perfect? No. But it beats the hell out of what we're likely looking at if we're forced to trade him now. As it currently sits, Gaudreau controls if he will sign, and if he won't, who we get to trade him to. Because of the limited pool of teams, three assets in return is likely a pipe dream. The team's hands are now tied.

We can say these things, Flames should have traded Gaudreau, but we don't know what deals could have been had. We don't know how other GM's valued Gaudreau. I do think it is a reasonable assumption that if Treliving was presented with a deal he couldn't refuse, he would have moved him.

I disagree. What we have learned about Treliving is he tends to over-value his players and what they should likely return. We've heard about lots of players being dangled, but no deals being made. I think that is indicative of a guy who thinks his guys are worth more than the market will bear.

You're not alone but I don't understand why some people around here assume Treliving hasn't thought of the things they seem to get hot and bothered by. Fairly sure Treliving knows what is at stake. Why would he behave any differently than any other reasonable person would? In my profession, which is regulated by law, I am held to a standard of reasonable care. What would have other registered professionals have done in my shoes? Did I meet that standard? I have a hard time believing Treliving isn't held to standard himself. He is employed by some fairly intelligent people with experience. I doubt very much Treliving is acting as a rouge agent and on the brink of losing, arguably, the organizations most prized on ice asset without discussing all scenarios extensively with his staff and employers.

Desperation? Incompetence? Both? Because he is on the brink of losing, arguably, the organizations most prized on ice asset. I don't care who else he's discussed this with, the bottom line is he is responsible and accountable for managing the team's assets. No one else. Brad Treliving. Letting it get to this point does not instill confidence this is going to play out well for the team. Gaudreau is now on the radar of every team in the league and will only drive up the cost of the contract come July 1st (or whenever free agency is this summer).