Brad Treliving Trade History

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Well considering the pick they traded him for got them Barzal...yes

Crazy what you can do with good management. What's the Flames 4th overall pick from a couple years later doing for them?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Well I said including this years draft as I assume the Islanders will not pick top 4, which would add them in. Current win percentage in the NHL (which is the only way you can determine the top 10 when every team has not played the same number of games) has 5 teams in the top 10 (NYI, Vegas, Washington, Minnesota, Boston) who including the 2021 draft will not have picked in the top 10.

Given the special circumstances of this season, I am fairly hesitant to call Minnesota a top team. They have managed to be for less than 40 games.

One of those teams you have listed won a championship in the last ten years thanks to the best goal-scorer in history, who was drafted #1 overall. Another built their team exclusively through the expansion draft. So, that is three teams.

How many teams win a championship without their own top-four pick in the lineup?

To answer your point, you did not debunk my claim because you did not understand the goalposts and did not use the only way you can determine top 10 teams when every team has not played the same number of games.

You made the point flippantly as if to suggest it is commonplace to become an elite team without drafting in the top-four. I have demonstrated that it most certainly is not.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Given the special circumstances of this season, I am fairly hesitant to call Minnesota a top team. They have managed to be for less than 40 games.

One of those teams you have listed won a championship in the last ten years thanks to the best goal-scorer in history, who was drafted #1 overall. Another built their team exclusively through the expansion draft. So, that is three teams.

How many teams win a championship without their own top-four pick in the lineup?


You made the point flippantly as if to suggest it is commonplace to become an elite team without drafting in the top-four. I have demonstrated that it most certainly is not.

Well I made an error anyway, I thought Griffen Reinhart was in the 2011 draft and he was in the 2012 draft,so they are out either way.

That leaves 4 teams in the top 10 in the league this year who have not had a top 4 pick.

Since 2012, in those 9 drafts 22 teams have had a top 4 pick. 9 teams have not.

27 percent of the teams that had a top 4 pick are in the top 10 in the NHL.

44 percent of the teams that did not are in the top 10 in the NHL.

Having a top 4 pick does not seem to have any statistical edge on the probability of being a top team.

What is common place is most teams will pick top 4 over a 9 year period. It seems just as likely that you can build a top team with or without a top 4 pick.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

What is common place is most teams will pick top 4 over a 9 year period. It seems just as likely that you can build a top team with or without a top 4 pick.

Have the Washington Capitals built a top team without a top-four pick? Has VGK built at all through the draft? Which of these two models would you have preferred the Flames follow?

I think it is abundantly clear that building a top-team without drafting in tbe top-four is very much the exception, and not the rule.


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Have the Washington Capitals built a top team without a top-four pick? Has VGK built at all through the draft? Which of these two models would you have preferred the Flames follow?

I think it is abundantly clear that building a top-team without drafting in tbe top-four is very much the exception, and not the rule.


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Why are we pretending the Flames haven't picked in the top 4 in this argument?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Have the Washington Capitals built a top team without a top-four pick? Has VGK built at all through the draft? Which of these two models would you have preferred the Flames follow?

I think it is abundantly clear that building a top-team without drafting in tbe top-four is very much the exception, and not the rule.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Because basically every team gets a top 4 pick sometime in a ten year stretch. It is also true that if you do not you can also build elite teams. In fact, statistically it seems to be more likely to be elite this year without one, if you have one you have a one in 4 chance of being in the top 10. If you did not have one it is almost a one in two chance.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

Why are we pretending the Flames haven't picked in the top 4 in this argument?

I have not once mentioned the Flames. I am countering the notion that building an elite team outside of the top-four of the draft is commonplace.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have not once mentioned the Flames. I am countering the notion that building an elite team outside of the top-four of the draft is commonplace.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

And I have concedes that for this year it is a bit of a 50/50 chance that you can be top 10 without a top 4 pick. It is about 25% that you are in the top 10 with a top 4 pick. Not common place, more of a coin flip.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

How many elite teams do you think there are in the league? There are 4 currently who did not pick in the top 4 in the past 10 years including the upcoming draft that you deem elite and you have not excluded like Washington. Half of the top 10 teams in the league according to the standings tonight have not had a top 4 pick in the last 9 drafts. The you have to draft high is just an excuse for poor franchises.

As for the arbitrary cutoff, one has to pick a cutoff somewhere.

Top 4 picks picks from 2004 (Ovi, Malkin), 2005 (Crosby), 2006 (Toews, Backstrom), 2007 (Kane), and 2008 (Stamkos, Doughty, Pietrangelo until this year), 2009 (Hedman drafts are all still important players on their original teams. Many of the other picks from that draft are still in the league, and their trade-return-trees are still benefitting their original teams.

Your cutoff isn't arbitrary, it's disingenuous. None of the top 4 drafted since 2018 are impacting good teams except for Svechnikov...the most recent drafts don't really matter yet.

Even though the Islanders ultimately lost Tavares for nothing, you can't ignore the impact he had in moving that decade plus dumpster-fire towards credibility.

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Because basically every team gets a top 4 pick sometime in a ten year stretch. It is also true that if you do not you can also build elite teams. In fact, statistically it seems to be more likely to be elite this year without one, if you have one you have a one in 4 chance of being in the top 10. If you did not have one it is almost a one in two chance.

Every cup winning team in the cap-era has drafted top 2 in their previous ~15 years, and had a top 2* draft pick on their roster.

*The Blues are the lone exception - but they had #3 Bouwmeester, #4 Pietrangelo, and #5 Schenn.

Maybe you can build a contender w/o such a high pick, but the next team to win a cup will be the first** (2nd if you really want to nitpick STL, but they got lots of assets from Erik Johnson).

[Newton]

"Hudler to Florida for a 2nd and a 4th - win at the time but trending like a draw"

I like Jiri Hudler, but whatever comes of the draft picks, getting 2 draft picks for a player who , 12 months later, was no longer able to play in the NHL is pretty good asset management.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Top 4 picks picks from 2004 (Ovi, Malkin), 2005 (Crosby), 2006 (Toews, Backstrom), 2007 (Kane), and 2008 (Stamkos, Doughty, Pietrangelo until this year), 2009 (Hedman drafts are all still important players on their original teams. Many of the other picks from that draft are still in the league, and their trade-return-trees are still benefitting their original teams.

Your cutoff isn't arbitrary, it's disingenuous. None of the top 4 drafted since 2018 are impacting good teams except for Svechnikov...the most recent drafts don't really matter yet.

Even though the Islanders ultimately lost Tavares for nothing, you can't ignore the impact he had in moving that decade plus dumpster-fire towards credibility.



Every cup winning team in the cap-era has drafted top 2 in their previous ~15 years, and had a top 2* draft pick on their roster.

*The Blues are the lone exception - but they had #3 Bouwmeester, #4 Pietrangelo, and #5 Schenn.

Maybe you can build a contender w/o such a high pick, but the next team to win a cup will be the first** (2nd if you really want to nitpick STL, but they got lots of assets from Erik Johnson).

The 2008 Red Wings are an exception to your rule as well.

And do the Bruins win the Cup without Seguin? They certainly do, he was a healthy scratch for the first two rounds and after he drew in because of an injury he went scoreless in 9 of the 13 games he played in. But he qualifies under your rule.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Newton

"Hudler to Florida for a 2nd and a 4th - win at the time but trending like a draw"

I like Jiri Hudler, but whatever comes of the draft picks, getting 2 draft picks for a player who , 12 months later, was no longer able to play in the NHL is pretty good asset management.

I agree. When a team makes a trade involving draft picks, it is the pick that is traded, not the player selected with that pick. There is a difference.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Because it turns out Tom Dundon really is the smartest guy in the room, and not the arrogant meddler who would learn a painful lesson by defying NHL orthodoxy.

The only important player over 27 on the roster is Jordan Staal. They have over $6 mil in cap space. And they have the second highest winning percentage in the NHL.

The Hurricanes have not bled picks to beef up their roster, and their biggest offseason signing was Jesper Fast.

But that only explains how they have space. Not their position.

As for “smartest guy in the room”, I want to compare them with Treliving’s moves. Not Feaster’s.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Minnesota and Vancouver have not been elite teams at any point over that time...

They might not be elite, but both have more playoff wins than us in the last decade, and more recent wins too.

We suck so bad.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Yup starts with ownership and what they are demanding or how they are setting objectives and guard rails
Doesn’t matter who the gm is if the owners set goals that incentivize short term thinking

See how Carolina does in the next season when 4 of their top players need new contracts from their rookie deals or Dougie Hamilton second contract, which was a good contract signed by Treliving. And they have no goalies signed next year at all. That $6M is disappearing in one contract to Svechnikov. They better win now or the owner is dumping everyone again.

[dino7c]

Yeah, let's see if Carolina can win something before crowning them

Easy to be patient when nobody really cares and you can see a game for $20. Will be interesting to see what happens with their roster.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have not once mentioned the Flames. I am countering the notion that building an elite team outside of the top-four of the draft is commonplace.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Your prior post mentioned the Flames. Maybe not once doesn’t mean what I think it does.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Yeah, let's see if Carolina can win something before crowning them

Easy to be patient when nobody really cares and you can see a game for $20. Will be interesting to see what happens with their roster.

I would crown them a contender that has now made the playoffs three straight years and two years ago made the conference finals.

I don’t know if you’re implying that Flames fans compared to Carolina hockey fans are an impatient group that wouldn’t support the team in a down cycle. I don’t agree and sounds like excuse making to me.

[dino7c]

It's not a Flames thing it's been nearly 30 years since a team won a cup in a city where hockey is #1.

Anyway I will give it to them if they win...seems to me they will be good and then blow it up again when it's time to pay their players.

They were also pretty fortunate that Holtby handed them game 7 in what should have been a first round loss 2 years back.

I would certainly trade rosters with them but I think they are over rated and have one real shot at a cup before going back to being okay. If they pull it off though good for them.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Yeah, let's see if Carolina can win something before crowning them

Easy to be patient when nobody really cares and you can see a game for $20. Will be interesting to see what happens with their roster.

I’ve never understood the argument that ownership can be more patient in markets that have lower attendance figures. It’s markets in Canadian cities where fans will show up win or lose that can afford to be patient.