[PGT] Yep, we’re as soft as toilet paper. Flames lose to bottom feeding Sharks 3-1.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You just called me a homer ... something about dripping homerism, and being jaded by a rivalry.

Now you're telling me not to make it personal. Do you ever proofread yourself?

I tried over and over to give my Draisaitl reasoning, you just ignored it and marginalized my opinion.

On you man.

These aren't the same things.

Aarongavey is making a well reasoned argument challenging your unreasoned argument that Treliving is not a really great at RFA signings compared to his peers.

You admit you can't be bothered to compare him against his peers and re-state your original opinion that hes great.

Aarongavey provides further evidence and context for his claims and your response is that he must not like Treliving as a way to marginalize his well thought out argument in favour of your admittedly not well thought argument.

I'm calling you a homer in this discussion because without giving us an argument for why you think the 26th highest cap hit leading the league in points is not a good deal, homerism is all I'm left to deduce.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

These aren't the same things.

Aarongavey is making a well reasoned argument challenging your unreasoned argument that Treliving is not a really great at RFA signings compared to his peers.

You admit you can't be bothered to compare him against his peers and re-state your original opinion that hes great.

Aarongavey provides further evidence and context for his claims and your response is that he must not like Treliving as a way to marginalize his well thought out argument in favour of your admittedly not well thought argument.

I'm calling you a homer in this discussion because without giving us an argument for why you think the 26th highest cap hit leading the league in points is not a good deal, homerism is all I'm left to deduce.

Way to double down!

Call me a homer again, and now say I'm unreasoned.

You don't have to agree with my reasons, in fact I'm getting to the point that I feel better if you don't, but don't say they're unreasoned.

I provided a back and forth about how they paid for a role before he achieved it. He wasn't carrying a line but was paid like an elite play driving center. Some would agree with me.

For a guy that gets touchy whenever someone wonders if you're a fan you sure are loose with label terms the other way.

[Rando]

I'm at a loss as to why you even engage with him, Bingo.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Rando

Player A
Year One - 8 Goals 24 Points
Y2 - 16G 36 Points
Y3 - 28G 59P
Total - 52G 119P

Player B
Y1 - 24G 63P
Y2 - 14G 38P
Y3 - 21G 52P
Total - 59G 153P

Player C
Y1 - 22G 34P
Y2 - 31G 62P
Y3 - 27G 62P
Total - 80G 159P

Player C had the highest goal total of the three players and also the most points. Also the only one to break 30 goals in nine combined seasons. Which one should've gotten the bigger contract?

Important to note player A is a UFA in 2022, players B and C one year later in 2023. Should that not be a major factor when comparing contracts?

Your point is well taken.

But stat totals like this are kind of useless without providing the number of games played. That's an extremely important part of the context.

This is just me complaining in general. People exclude games played all the time, and it bugs me

[Rando]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Your point is well taken.

But stat totals like this are kind of useless without providing the number of games played. That's an extremely important part of the context.

This is just me complaining in general. People exclude games played all the time, and it bugs me

Goals and points are how guys get paid. It's not like either guy missed an entire season. Monahan played more than MacKimmon who played more than Barkov.. but being in the line up and healthy is just another positive check mark. I didn't include games played to remove context, I didn't include it because it doesn't matter.

The bigger context removal was Barkov's contract having one less year of course.

[united]

Originally Posted by Rando

Player A
Year One - 8 Goals 24 Points
Y2 - 16G 36 Points
Y3 - 28G 59P
Total - 52G 119P

Player B
Y1 - 24G 63P
Y2 - 14G 38P
Y3 - 21G 52P
Total - 59G 153P

Player C
Y1 - 22G 34P
Y2 - 31G 62P
Y3 - 27G 62P
Total - 80G 159P

Player C had the highest goal total of the three players and also the most points. Also the only one to break 30 goals in nine combined seasons. Which one should've gotten the bigger contract?

Important to note player A is a UFA in 2022, players B and C one year later in 2023. Should that not be a major factor when comparing contracts?

Great question. You are allowed to use their names, though. Curiously you didn't list games played either, for whatever reason, which is obviously important when using raw numbers instead of rate numbers. Finally, mystery Player A, if it is who I suspect it is, was a mid-season signing so you may want to adjust those boxcars numbers for Y3.

Here is a snapshot of what was known at the time of signing for each player:



Barkov
Just his third season in the league and already a dominant two-way force at even-strength and isn't getting the spoon-fed even-strength situations most young players enjoy. Good scoring generation rates for his age however it is notable that comes with very low powerplay usage for a forward which bodes well once he gets more. Clearly more of a playmaker than a goal scorer. Despite tough assignments and age, somehow draws more penalties than he takes. Coupled with organic development, he is on track to become a premier two-way number one centre with Selke potential.

MacKinnon
Generates an astounding number of shots for himself, however has a woefully low shooting percentage. From watching him since he was 16, we know that is going to rebound making him a big breakout candidate at some point (note that didn't happen for another season still). Despite that, his scoring generation rate is very good and he isn't powerplay-reliant, either. He also generates about 20 powerplays per year more than he causes which is remarkable and a big asset. Finally, while getting put in mostly offensive situations at even-strength as most young players do, he has performed very well. Coupled with organic development, he has a very bright future and will explode in the next 1-3 years once his shooting percentage levels.

Monahan
Obviously the first thing that stands out is his goalscoring ability. Many basic "stats guys" (and girls) around this time were proclaiming that his shooting percentage was bound to plummet, however from watching him since he was 16 we recognize his incredibly unique release combined with his ability to find channels will likely mean a shooting percentage that is in the top tier of the league for his career. Unfortunately despite getting put in mostly offensive situations at even-strength as most young player do, he hasn't been able to excel - but didn't flouder, either. His 30% powerplay utilization is right where you would expect it to be so he is unlikely to see his scoring generation increase there. Monahan represents the abnormal case where what you see is likely what you will get going forward, with some organic development factored in.


Based on the eye test and the numbers test, Barkov and MacKinnon are the clear one-two with Monahan behind in third. Personally, at the time I would have had Barkov as the highest-paid, followed closely by MacKinnon, and finally Monahan 500-750k behind. But I could certainly see the argument for MacKinnon first, or MacKinnon and Barkov equal.

As you noted, Barkov's contract has an additional year which you can adjust AAV as you see fit. Or just compare MacKinnon and Monahan.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Draisaitl was paid as if he carried a line when he had zero history of doing that.

When did I mention 15 GMs? You have an issue with me saying "it is pretty much agreed" in the same post where you claim "nobody agrees". That's pretty rich.

But as I said I couldn't care less that you don't like Treliving. It's a defendable position in my mind. I don't have to agree with it though, or do I not count enough to flip that switch away from "nobody"?

Can you name any general managers other than Dubas that he is better than? Your consistent argument that he is great at RFA signings is an article of faith, you have never provided any proof that he is greater than his counterparts.

Earlier I asked if you thought he was greater than Poile or Tallon or Chevy?

How about Sweeney with Pastrnak, Krug and Heinan? Those are 3 pretty good RFA contracts as well.

Or how about Waddell with Carolina with Slavin, Pesce, Teravaiinen (I will leave Aho out as he did not sign the original contract) those are 3 pretty good contracts.

I think I have the list up to double digits for GM’s who are likely better than Brad Treliving at signing RFA contracts. It is just hard to see how he is greater than his peers or even significantly better than his peers at signing RFA contracts.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Can you name any general managers other than Dubas that he is better than? Your consistent argument that he is great at RFA signings is an article of faith, you have never provided any proof that he is greater than his counterparts.

Earlier I asked if you thought he was greater than Poile or Tallon or Chevy?

How about Sweeney with Pastrnak, Krug and Heinan? Those are 3 pretty good RFA contracts as well.

Or how about Waddell with Carolina with Slavin, Pesce, Teravaiinen (I will leave Aho out as he did not sign the original contract) those are 3 pretty good contracts.

I think I have the list up to double digits for GM’s who are likely better than Brad Treliving at signing RFA contracts. It is just hard to see how he is greater than his peers or even significantly better than his peers at signing RFA contracts.

Jesus guys let it go.

Thing whole thing started with me saying it's fair not to be a Treliving fan and want him replaced.

I went on to explain why I think he's more good than bad and listed RFA signings as great. You don't have to agree, I'm fine with that. If you don't like the word great, I'm fine with that too.

But I haven't just ignored you. I looked into Bennett's market value when discussed, I answered you on your Lindholm and Andersson questions and tried to show some patience on the Draisaitl discussion despite my "shadow" getting involved and looking to score cheap points.

Never said his being great has to be mean he's the best in the league, or top five, nor the magic 15 that you attributed to me that I never said.

Is it me or is this looking like a bit of a witch hunt? Is it personal, or are you just chaffed that someone doesn't hate Treliving? Because to me it's getting a bit weird.

[Bingo]

Here was my original thought on this ...

With Treliving I personally see a guy that has improved the drafting, the development, has been great on RFA signings and has a decent trade record.

Was this really all that controversial?

[VladtheImpaler]

Well, nice debate. I think Treliving is competent, which for the Flames since 1990 is something of a high-water mark. Relative to peers, he is somewhere in the mushy middle I would say. Is it better to replace or let him "grow"? I don't know - Fletcher was good for Calgary because he got to suck and learn on the job in Atlanta, so there is something to be said for continuity, though these are different times that require instant gratification.

The other thing is that we are not privy to what happens behind the curtain. If Edwards' response to any proposal is "playoffs!", Treliving is rather limited in his options.

The main things that bug me are the "0-for" coaching hires and the wasting of picks and cap space on moves that don't move the needle. If you are going to spend capital, you might as well use it on something "big" rather than a series of insignificant, yet cumulatively costly moves.

[Rando]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Is it me or is this looking like a bit of a witch hunt? Is it personal, or are you just chaffed that someone doesn't hate Treliving? Because to me it's getting a bit weird.

Wouldn't take it personal Bingo, that's his MO. When someone has the audacity to have a different opinion he resorts to ad hominem attacks, faux outrage and cops a condescending attitude. For a guy that continually has the biggest head scratching takes the way he lol's at others is especially puzzling.

He's toxic. It takes a day of his overly dramatic posts to see that.

[Strange Brew]

Treliving over the last 12 months is like a team with a 5 on 3 power play, passing and passing looking for the tap in to an open net. There is still time to score or maybe you take a bad shot when you realize the clock is winding down.

Or maybe you don’t get a shot off and later realize that sometimes it’s better to take a few chances and see what happens.

I’m not a big fan of his personally but that’s just me.

[Gaskal]

Flash, if you're gonna be doing the online version of plugging one's fingers in their ears and humming loudly, don't hide behind other posters and have them carry your water for you.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Flash, if you're gonna be doing the online version of plugging one's fingers in their ears and humming loudly, don't hide behind other posters and have them carry your water for you.

What?

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

What?

Let me put it in a haiku for you, might be easier to understand:


Flash attacks the team
Bingo prepares a defense
Bingo now "homer"

[Red Potato Standing By]

Just because someone is not the best, doesn’t mean they are not great at it.Yes Brad probably isn’t the best at RFA contracts that does not mean that he is not great at it.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Here was my original thought on this ...



Was this really all that controversial?

I was merely asking how you defined greatness. If everyone is worse at something then you are probably great. If everyone is better than you at something you are probably not great. There is obviously a line between there where greatness probably falls off to being good, then average, then below average and finally terrible.

If there was quintiles for ability regarding RFA signings I would say BT is somewhere between average and very good or above average. I personally feel that there is an undeniable upper tier with Chevy, Sweeney, Tallon, Yzerman, Poile, Waddell, Sakic that have a number of great signings with no real duds included. BT would likely fall in with Jim Benning, Chiarelli, McPhee/mcrimmon, Fletcher/hextall in a next category.

But I will let it go because I doubt you are going to engage in that discussion. Somehow that simple question turned into a discussion about whether Draisaitl was signed as a winger or a center. Or that Bennett was signed for market rate (which is a little off because Tallon somehow signed a better player in Frank Vatrano this year to a longer contract for over 400K less a year so I would think that Bennett may be signed a bit above market rate).

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Red Potato Standing By

Just because someone is not the best, doesn’t mean they are not great at it.Yes Brad probably isn’t the best at RFA contracts that does not mean that he is not great at it.

Agreed. To prove he is great at it, you’d probably have to prove that he is better than about 22 other GM’s at negotiating RFA contracts. To be great at something you should be probably be about top quartile of your group. At least top third.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Jekyl and Hyde, more often Hyde. Actually it's like Hyde is taking over more and more often too.

Sure, but even Bennett's Jekyl is merely a passable NHL forward. It's not looking good for him.

[Rando]

Originally Posted by united

Great question. You are allowed to use their names, though. Curiously you didn't list games played either, for whatever reason, which is obviously important when using raw numbers instead of rate numbers. Finally, mystery Player A, if it is who I suspect it is, was a mid-season signing so you may want to adjust those boxcars numbers for Y3..

Lots to digest here! Trimmed down the entire post, didn't want to quote the entire thing in full.

A couple quick points.. I addressed why I left out Games Played in the post right above yours. It wasn't to omit context, it just doesn't matter. Points and goals matter when players get paid. Other factors are certainly considered but it's points that write cheques. That's the way it used to be, that's the way it is now and it looks to be that way for the foreseeable future. Points-Per-Game is a nice argument for fans but GMs aren't paying for mystery prorated production.

Totally forgot Barkov signed his contract midseason as well. History has always shown the sooner you get a deal done the better it looks (if the player continues on a solid projection). Buying into elite talent always pays off. Treliving didn't do that with Tkachuk and it cost him last summer.

To be perfectly clear I think both are in a clear league above Monahan. MacKinnon is a game breaking center, one of the best point producers in the NHL. Barkov is a two-way elite stud, capable of a point-per-game, captain of his team. Both are easily better than Monahan. That doesn't change what happened the winter/summer they signed their deals though. Monahan had the most goals, the highest points, (with MacKinnon).. and that's what gets you paid.

Plenty of people were lamenting MacKinnon's deal in the first year when he put up another 50 points, then he broke out again.