Brad Treliving needs to go

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Almost exclusively when a GM is newly hired, he takes time to make an evaluation of his players both through interviews and watching them for a period of time to determine who does and doesnt fit his vision for the team.

That cannot happen after the season.

I said at the time that Sutter was hired and BT was not canned, that it meant he (BT) was staying on past the off season. If that change was to happen it almost had to happen when Darryl came in to give his replacement the time to make those evaluations...take the team through the TD and able to have his information for the draft when bigger deals are more likely to happen. Nevermind time to get together with the scouting staff and formulate their approach with all that stuff.


So a new GM may make a couple minor moves/signings here and there but really unlikely to dig into the core players. Which is something that HAS to happen with this group with contract statuses and all the other stuff going on with this club.

It was pretty clear when Sutter was hired that the next evaluation was on the players. He said it. Treliving said it. And for all the talk about Treliving’s demeanour in the press conference, the only time he seemed POd to me was when they asked about player responsibility.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

So if Treliving can't create options, he should get a pass?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

People say the team would have been better. OK, so how?

But yeah, if there was no trade that made sense, Monahan should not have been traded. Or any player.

[zamler]

Has anyone considered the possibility that the last few coaches permanently damaged the culture of this team?

[Kovaz]

I think it's very important, when evaluating Treliving, to separate two things: the decision to build around the core he inherited, and the roster moves that followed. In hindsight, I think the core not being good enough is the primary reason for the team's failure, but I'm not sure I disagree with the choice to build around them.


If you rewind the clock to the 2015 off-season, it certainly looked like a team on the rise. Giordano's coming off back-to-back Norris-calibre seasons cut short by injuries. Gaudreau looks like Patrick Kane v2. Monahan's taken a big leap. Brodie's come into his own as a top-pairing defenseman. Backlund's turning replacement-level wingers into top-6 scorers.


I think the biggest problem was Giordano: in 2015 he's 31, and every year we wait is a bigger risk of father time catching up to him. If we stay patient and build through the draft for 3-4 more years, is Giordano still an elite #1 at 35? With the power of hindsight, we can say yes - but how confident are you making that assertion in 2015? I think there was a reasonable urgency to try to compete during the Giordano Norris window.


And when I look at Treliving's tenure through that lens, I don't think things are as bad as they might seem. Outside of the performance of the guys he inherited, I think the roster has pretty consistently improved. I think Tkachuk and Lindholm are great if they're your 3rd/4th best forwards behind two stars. Hanifin and Tanev would be the best second D pair in the league. Mangiapane and Dube are awesome depth to have in the middle 6. Ryan is a great 4C and really stabilizes the bottom 6.


But no matter how you slice it, when your 2 stars are a complete liability without a Goldilocks perfect fit at RW, there's only so much you can do. And now that Giordano's finally slowing down, we don't have the dominant top pair we used to rely on either, so we've got a roster with arguably the depth to complete, but we're missing an entire top unit that we had two years ago.

[Reign of Fire]

Originally Posted by zamler

Has anyone considered the possibility that the last few coaches permanently damaged the culture of this team?

Yeap, and we all know who picked those coaches...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by zamler

Has anyone considered the possibility that the last few coaches permanently damaged the culture of this team?

Yes. The coaching decisions did a lot of damage.

Trying to create a culture with accountability has gone out the window

[Saqe]

Would like to point out that Dale Tallon hired Quenneville to the Panthers with mostly former connections from their Chicago days. This was a highly lauded reunion between pals who were supposedly going to make magic together for a long time. A year later Tallon was out the door.


Things change rapidly in this business. Maybe Treliving gets yet another year to mold the team but I don't think his job security is great at all.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by zamler

Has anyone considered the possibility that the last few coaches permanently damaged the culture of this team?

Ah so we are going to continue to blame the past coaches even for current performance?

I suppose it's possible but for me would just reinforce that this team is mentally soft if that's the case.

At some point the players have to be held accountability for their remarkable decline in performance.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

Yeap, and we all know who picked those coaches...

Hire a bunch of below average coaches watch the team flame out in the post season. Get a legit coach, watch the demoralized and aging team crap the bed, throw your hand up in the air and say well it wasn't the coach.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Kovaz

I think it's very important, when evaluating Treliving, to separate two things: the decision to build around the core he inherited, and the roster moves that followed. In hindsight, I think the core not being good enough is the primary reason for the team's failure, but I'm not sure I disagree with the choice to build around them.


If you rewind the clock to the 2015 off-season, it certainly looked like a team on the rise. Giordano's coming off back-to-back Norris-calibre seasons cut short by injuries. Gaudreau looks like Patrick Kane v2. Monahan's taken a big leap. Brodie's come into his own as a top-pairing defenseman. Backlund's turning replacement-level wingers into top-6 scorers.


I think the biggest problem was Giordano: in 2015 he's 31, and every year we wait is a bigger risk of father time catching up to him. If we stay patient and build through the draft for 3-4 more years, is Giordano still an elite #1 at 35? With the power of hindsight, we can say yes - but how confident are you making that assertion in 2015? I think there was a reasonable urgency to try to compete during the Giordano Norris window.


And when I look at Treliving's tenure through that lens, I don't think things are as bad as they might seem. Outside of the performance of the guys he inherited, I think the roster has pretty consistently improved. I think Tkachuk and Lindholm are great if they're your 3rd/4th best forwards behind two stars. Hanifin and Tanev would be the best second D pair in the league. Mangiapane and Dube are awesome depth to have in the middle 6. Ryan is a great 4C and really stabilizes the bottom 6.


But no matter how you slice it, when your 2 stars are a complete liability without a Goldilocks perfect fit at RW, there's only so much you can do. And now that Giordano's finally slowing down, we don't have the dominant top pair we used to rely on either, so we've got a roster with arguably the depth to complete, but we're missing an entire top unit that we had two years ago.

Right, so the big thing was that he, in hindsight, should have not worked around Gaudreau and Monahan. The trick is, though, that he would have had to know that at a time when they were actually performing well and I still can’t see how any trade of those two actually improves the team. Because what you get for each of those guys is not a better C or LW.

Unless you decide sometime before last season that it’s all been a failure and burn it down then to start from scratch.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Ah so we are going to continue to blame the past coaches even for current performance?

I suppose it's possible but for me would just reinforce that this team is mentally soft if that's the case.

At some point the players have to be held accountability for their remarkable decline in performance.

How do you hold the players accountable?

Geoff Ward: “Matthew has been terrible this year. Sam, you’re watching from above tonight. Matthew will take his regular shift”

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

Just don't read the thread and welcome the activity.

I've been out of work for two plus months so I'm bored!

But I don't get into it much ... I've said pretty much I can on this topic. I skim every few days for something new and interesting that will get me engaged.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Ah so we are going to continue to blame the past coaches even for current performance?

I suppose it's possible but for me would just reinforce that this team is mentally soft if that's the case.

At some point the players have to be held accountability for their remarkable decline in performance.

I think it's both, but the crappy coaches made things far worse.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I've been out of work for two plus months so I'm bored!

But I don't get into it much ... I've said pretty much I can on this topic. I skim every few days for something new and interesting that will get me engaged.

Every game is a bellows for the rage furnace.

edit: justifiably, this situation is abysmal.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I am unsure whether I agree with transplant on this, but I could see a new GM taking a year to evaluate what is here.

Well there is quality of change and quantity of change. I guess the argument over a different GM making "better" changes is a different one.

Referring strictly to quantity, transplant presented a choice of changing players vs. changing GM, and that you couldn't have both. I strongly disagree with the premise.

Is there an argument over whether Treliving will make more changes than a new GM? IMO that depends a whole lot on who the new GM is. No competent GM is standing pat with this roster going into next year.

[FanIn80]

I've always liked and defended Tree, but to me this all about logic: Should the guy who built this team be allowed to build the next one?

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Right, so the big thing was that he, in hindsight, should have not worked around Gaudreau and Monahan. The trick is, though, that he would have had to know that at a time when they were actually performing well and I still can’t see how any trade of those two actually improves the team. Because what you get for each of those guys is not a better C or LW.

Unless you decide sometime before last season that it’s all been a failure and burn it down then to start from scratch.

His biggest failure was not working around Mony, Johnny & Gio since 2015.
It was continuing to bank of them after 2018, 2019 & 2020.

Many people saw it wasn't going to work and was getting worse, he either still believed on them to get it done or he couldn't make trades happen.

The only positive of our situation now is there's no apologists or excuses left for this core (except maybe you).
Even BT will finally know its a failure, even if he was slow to get to this realization.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

If it was my money I would try to determine who the individual was that signed all the wrong people that has forced me to pay people to do nothing. I would get rid of that person, even if I had to pay them, because I would realize that that person would continue to put me in that situation going forward where I had to pay people to do nothing. I would then hire a new person, ask them not to make as many dumb moves as the previous guy, and tell them they could make whatever changes they wanted to the roster after they explained to me their 5 year plan to make us competitive for a Stanley Cup.

But that is just me. They could also keep the individual who has signed people that they have ended up paying to do nothing and hope that it does not happen in the future.

In other words, you would just tell the new guy to 'be smarter'. That's good. Meteoric rise to greatness after that, I'm sure.

Aren't other GM's buying players out, or is it just Treliving?

[Stanley]

I don't even know who else is available that would be a good replacement option for Tre but they may wanna start looking...

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Well there is quality of change and quantity of change. I guess the argument over a different GM making "better" changes is a different one.

Referring strictly to quantity, transplant presented a choice of changing players vs. changing GM, and that you couldn't have both. I strongly disagree with the premise.

Is there an argument over whether Treliving will make more changes than a new GM? IMO that depends a whole lot on who the new GM is. No competent GM is standing pat with this roster going into next year.

Just as an example

Bill Guerin took over the Wild after the 18-19 season where they finished dead last in the Central division.

His first trade wasn't until February of 2020. After enough time to evaluate what he had and what his pieces were worth.

Ken Holland came in after that same 18-19 season with the only team in the West worse than Guerins Wild.

He made one trade that summer. Lucic for Neal.

He didnt make another one until the TD in February of 20.

Maybe Im wrong but I would expect any GM to do the same here....SOP it seems