Treliving’s UFA signings……. Starting to look like a strength

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah still only a month and change into season two, but through two years he's providing top pairing work on a 4/5 salary.

He is going to have to decline a lot in the rest of his contract to not be worth the dollars given the value he's booked already.

I was iffy on the signing too as I thought he was going to be more a 4 in years one and two and a 6 in years 3 and 4.

I'm just checking what my reaction to the signing was:

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

He's a downgrade on Brodie

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

So here are my thoughts on this signing:

- I used to really liked Chris Tanev's defensive play
- I don't know if he's still that good, because I barely watched the Canucks last year. when I did I was too busy oohing and aahing about Pettersson and shutting the game off because I want Pettersson on my team
- The numbers suggest he's declined rapidly
- Maybe he has, or maybe Gaudette, Sutter, beagle etc... - the Canucks' bottom sixers - are responsible for the decline in the shot metrics.
- I'm curious to see stats on zone entry denial. To me this is what separates wheat from the chaff for defensemen - gap control.
- hearing his skating has declined is concerning. Giordano's skating hasn't exactlty improved either
- Right now, I'm hopeful Tanev can slot in across from Valimaki or Kylington as those two can really glide around
- the AAV seems a bit steep for a defensive defenseman.
- the term might be a year too much
- i don't trust Flames pro scouting, but I also know I used to like the player every time I watched him, and not for those silly heart and soul nonsense reasons but because he had a fantastic stick and positioning. But if his skating has really declined that may not be the case.

So going back to that - I think the fact that Gaudette, Sutter, Beagle etc were so bad, helped us get Tanev on a very solid deal.

It's awesome how I wanted him across from Kylington, and we're getting that this year and it's been a perfect fit.

In retrospect, I'm pretty happy with the AAV and term. I think he's shown enough offense that he's not a liability in the O-zone, and I expect him to age gracefully considering his skating is just fine.

[FlamesAddiction]

Markstrom was a great signing. He was the premier goalie available that year and was wanted by multiple teams - the big fish if you will. He was one of the biggest free agent signings in franchise history. Even if he wasn't producing results, you can't argue with the signing at the time. At this point, that is moot since he is performing up to expectations.

That's the thing with the Brouwer and Neal signings at the time as well. The team needed those types of players at the time and the logic of signing them was sound. It's too bad that they didn't work out, but I can't fault Treliving for what he was thinking at the time.

[dino7c]

Markstrom would be with the Oilers right now if the Flames didn't step up

[Kipper_3434]

Frolik had nothing to do with Tkachuks contract. It all comes down to buying out brouwer to sign Neal. That had me so mad . Let's pay Brouwer to not play for us (should have waited 1 more season for buyout as it would remove 2 years of the buyout hit) and use all that money to replace him with a worse player. If ever there was a time to fire Treliving, that was it.

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

That's the thing with the Brouwer and Neal signings at the time as well. The team needed those types of players at the time and the logic of signing them was sound. It's too bad that they didn't work out, but I can't fault Treliving for what he was thinking at the time.

We bought out Brouwer to sign Neal. That was dumb. How many teams buyout a player use the money to sign another player that needs to be traded for a cap dump. You absolutely can fault Treliving for signing playersbthat most teams gave up on.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

We bought out Brouwer to sign Neal. That was dumb. How many teams buyout a player use the money to sign another player that needs to be traded for a cap dump. You absolutely can fault Treliving for signing playersbthat most teams gave up on.

Neal was the most sought-after RW in free agency that year. He was not a player that ‘most teams gave up on’. Treliving knew the team needed shoring up on the right side, and rolled the dice on the only free agent who looked like he could fill the gap. He crapped out.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

We bought out Brouwer to sign Neal. That was dumb. How many teams buyout a player use the money to sign another player that needs to be traded for a cap dump. You absolutely can fault Treliving for signing playersbthat most teams gave up on.

I'm against buyouts almost every time, but that is a different issue.

I don't think anyone would have predicted that Neal would drop off that much. Yes, it ended up being a terrible signing and is why it's wise to wait and see before declaring any signing is a win or not. In the moment though, it was justifiable.

I can go outside for a walk and if I get hit by a car, does that mean that it was a bad decision in the moment? I mean, sure it ended up being a bad decision, but you can't predict if other humans are going to crap the bed on you. The Neal signing turning out to be bad is on Neal more than Treliving.

[blankall]

Markstom was the best possible goalie signing we could have gotten. It's very rare that a legit #1 becomes available as a UFA. Markstrom is a bit older, but also doesn't really have that many miles on him.

With any UFA signing you're pretty much guaranteed to be paying for 2-3 years of uncertain past their prime years. That's just how it works. You're bidding against other teams, and a major factor for the player is contract length. Every single player is going want to sign past what they expect their prime to be. A player like Markstrom is simply not going to sign a contract that only brings him to the end of his expected prime.

The Flames have had a revolving set of goalies for a while now, and simply needed more certainty. They got it with Markstrom.

I was opposed to the Neal and Brouwer signings from the start. It was obvious neither player had the complete all around game to do anything but bump in rebounds. Both were useless skaters. Both were fake tough guys too. Coleman IMO looks different. He can actually play up and down the lineup and has good hustle and defensive game.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

Frolik had nothing to do with Tkachuks contract. It all comes down to buying out brouwer to sign Neal. That had me so mad . Let's pay Brouwer to not play for us (should have waited 1 more season for buyout as it would remove 2 years of the buyout hit) and use all that money to replace him with a worse player. If ever there was a time to fire Treliving, that was it.

So you don’t think the Flames try and go longer term with Tkachuk if they didn’t have Frolik’s 4.3M on the books for another year? Flames would of had the cash for a 5-8 year deal if that was the case

[activeStick]

Of the ones listed, Raymond was the only one I wasn't crazy about at the time. Neal - even Brouwer - were all signings I was happy about. Especially Neal. I'm on record that I think Tre has been an excellent GM from the return on his draft picks, to his free agent deals, as well as his trades. The one area where I give him a a below average grading is his coach hirings, but even then, I was happy with Peters and very happy with Sutter. Was not crazy about Gulutzan though and was indifferent about extending Ward, removing his interim title. But even with the Ward case, it sounds like instead of going out and bringing in someone from the outside, maybe he was hoping that Sutter would be ready sooner than later.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I'm against buyouts almost every time, but that is a different issue.

I don't think anyone would have predicted that Neal would drop off that much. Yes, it ended up being a terrible signing and is why it's wise to wait and see before declaring any signing is a win or not. In the moment though, it was justifiable.

I can go outside for a walk and if I get hit by a car, does that mean that it was a bad decision in the moment? I mean, sure it ended up being a bad decision, but you can't predict if other humans are going to crap the bed on you. The Neal signing turning out to be bad is on Neal more than Treliving.

Then, you can't really credit Treliving with the good signings either, as they are really a function of those players doing well.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Then, you can't really credit Treliving with the good signings either, as they are really a function of those players doing well.

If he signs a player with a track record of producing and the player lives up to that, I would give both him and the player credit.

If he signs a player with a track record of producing and that player doesn't even give the effort, I put the blame on the player.

If he signs a player to a dollar amount that assumes production but the player has a sketchy record of producing and the player fails to live up to it, I would put that on Treliving alone.

[DeluxeMoustache]

To be quite honest, I thought this thread may have been looking at not just the Coleman addition (I like how he plays) but how the Flames are playing with guys like Lewis, Pitlick and Richardson vs, say, Nordstrom, Leivo and Simon

I’ve noticed a difference.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

To be quite honest, I thought this thread may have been looking at not just the Coleman addition (I like how he plays) but how the Flames are playing with guys like Lewis, Pitlick and Richardson vs, say, Nordstrom, Leivo and Simon

I’ve noticed a difference.

Lewis has been great as an energy player, which is justified by his contract. I would call that a good signing so far. Hard to get a read on Richardson yet, but he has one goal in two games, so trending well so far. Pitlick was technically a trade and not a UFA signing. I don't know what to really think about him yet.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I'm less concerned about Markstrom than I am Coleman. Goalies seem to play well into their later 30s, I think because so much of the position is positioning rather than athleticism, and it's more about the team not allowing royal road crossing passes. Though, and I'm digressing here, over-35 goalies don't seem to be able to perform in the Stanley Cup Finals in the cap era, I think because the opponents are really good and force them to use their athleticism.

With Markstrom it's really just health. When he got hurt last year he flatout cost us games.

Many goalies play well into their mid thirties. Halak, Khubodin, Greiss, and others have held up surprisingly well.

Many formerly elite goalies fall clips by their early thirties. Quick, Crawford and Holtby come to mind. And like you said, that's often to do problems with health.

Markstrom could play well when he's 36. But there's no doubt risk there. I wouldn't be surprised if Markstrom, like Bishop, plays well, but is frequently injured.

Yes, younger goalies tend to play better in finals. No cup winning goalie in NHL history was a UFA signing with prior NHL experience. Most are homegrown and under the age of 30. But producing elite goalies is easier said than done.

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I find it hard to see an argument where “Tanev might be good”

The guy was a top pairing shutdown Dman last year at 4.5M. He has been a stabilizing partner for whoever he has played with. Hanifin and Gio in year 1 and Kylington this year. If it wasn’t for Tanev the Flames likely still have Gio and Kylington may be in Seattle. His impact has helped this organization so much.

Fair point. I'll say that he'll probably be a good signing.
Even if his play were to fall off of a cliff next year, it would still be a decent signing at worst.
I also think he's been great for development.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Lewis has been great as an energy player, which is justified by his contract. I would call that a good signing so far. Hard to get a read on Richardson yet, but he has one goal in two games, so trending well so far. Pitlick was technically a trade and not a UFA signing. I don't know what to really think about him yet.

On paper Pitlick is the best of those six players, but so far he's hardly done anything Nordstrom didn't do.

The other four, IMO are pretty fillery. I'm hoping Lewis and Richardson are outplayed by prospects. Simon was the worst signing, and Leivo had some moments but never really lived up to expectation.

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I'm against buyouts almost every time, but that is a different issue.

I don't think anyone would have predicted that Neal would drop off that much. Yes, it ended up being a terrible signing and is why it's wise to wait and see before declaring any signing is a win or not. In the moment though, it was justifiable.

I can go outside for a walk and if I get hit by a car, does that mean that it was a bad decision in the moment? I mean, sure it ended up being a bad decision, but you can't predict if other humans are going to crap the bed on you. The Neal signing turning out to be bad is on Neal more than Treliving.

There is no scenario where Neal earns his contract AND the brouwer buyout amount, which is my point . Neal was basically signed as a 7m player when factoring in the buyout. Your analogy has nothing to do with hockey. Worst analogy ever.

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

So you don’t think the Flames try and go longer term with Tkachuk if they didn’t have Frolik’s 4.3M on the books for another year? Flames would of had the cash for a 5-8 year deal if that was the case

yeah maybe they would have. But frolik isn't the big mistake Raymond, brouwer, and Neal were the big mistakes. Those moves deserve more blame than keeping frolik imo .

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Neal was the most sought-after RW in free agency that year. He was not a player that ‘most teams gave up on’. Treliving knew the team needed shoring up on the right side, and rolled the dice on the only free agent who looked like he could fill the gap. He crapped out.

I agree I loved the Neal signing when it was announced. The flames came off a brutal year offensively the previous year and needed some top 6 help. Lindholm was added at the cost of Ferland but there were no other upgrades. Neal represented the 25 goals/50 points the Flames were missing the previous year.

I was a big fan of that summer. Hamilton/Ferland for Hanifin/Lindholm was a move I liked and adding Ryan and Czarnik had promise but I still thought they needed more.

When the Flames got Neal I figured they added a sniper with some edge to his game who would fit amazing with Monahan and Gaudreau. When Lindholm took the spot it is quick to see Neal was not a fit with Backlund and Tkachuk and it failed miserably from there

[Dan403]

We need to lock this thread now and ban all these posters.

It completely goes against the Brad Sucks narrative.

We won't stand for this.

There will be pitchforks!!