Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan in Exile
Into the second season and it's quite clear that the plan is for Rittch to be back-up or 1b with no more than a third of the starts regardless of stats and results. Would love to hear a reasonable argument otherwise but can't fathom what it would be.
Being too hard on Treliving? Sure, maybe Rittich gets traded before we lose him for nothing but seems pretty clear he's not in the future plans of the club.
|
I don't think your response had anything to do with my post.
But Treliving has never lost a prospect (or an NHLer) for "nothing" except where he simply cut an RFA or ELC contract loose (like Morrison or Colborne).
You seem to think that Rittich is clearly better. Great. Perhaps management thinks otherwise. Perhaps they think he's hit a ceiling. Maybe they think he's better with fewer starts. Maybe they like him better but want to give Gillies every chance to prove them wrong. Maybe they have him in mind as a tradeable asset and want him to start in the NHL more. Or maybe they want to get Gillies into a game here for the same purpose.
One thing I know - Treliving doesn't sit on his ass - he makes every attempt to get value.