Brad Treliving Trade History

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Forbort and Gustafsson were two of our better players down the stretch. That pairing was worth what we paid as far as rentals go. If you fail to advance, every rental is a bad trade, but I don't think that is fair.

Both trades involving Hamilton were good. Hamonic and Smith were bad. Everything else is a bunch of meh sprinkled with woof.

The pick that was traded for Hamilton could have turned out to be barzal. He traded 3 quality picks for him

[Strange Brew]

You don’t have to win trades IMO. You have to target the things that your club is lacking and then be prepared to pay the price required to acquire them.

The quality of the roster has decayed over the last two seasons making it that much harder to go out and get what you need.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Red

No, you repeating this over and over is not establishing anything.



There is nothing other that speculation on your part that Stone wasnt going to sign here. In fact, if that were the case and it was known to the insiders, as it would have been, Treliving wouldnt be in on that until the last hour. I mean we had his brother here to verify things. Treliving being in on the deal till the last hour tells us that the deal was close. Otherwise Ottawa would have told him to beat it early on. The "too much for a rental" reasoning is nothing more than an excuse for another failed deal.

Go back and read the trade thread. It's all in there, and it sure as hell is not just me "repeating this over and over is not establishing anything."

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Red]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Go back and read the trade thread. It's all in there, and it sure as hell is not just me "repeating this over and over is not establishing anything."

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

I read it already. Nothing but speculations.

Just think logically. Trelving was in on it till the last moments. How did he stay in the conversation if he was looking at it as a rental deal? Surely Ottawa had better offers.

And Michael Stone was here. Don't tell me he would have been unaware of his brother's plans.

This is one of the scenarios where you put the 2 and 2 together. Just no way Treliving was in on a trade this big for a rental, he hates rentals.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

The pick that was traded for Hamilton could have turned out to be barzal. He traded 3 quality picks for him

True, but it could have also turned out to be Connor, Chabot, Beoser, or Konecny. Ok, good point.

That was a bad year to trade a first. Many homeruns were available in the mid to late round. I take solace knowing we would have selected Travis Merkley or the wrong Svechnikov.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Red

I read it already. Nothing but speculations.

Just think logically. Trelving was in on it till the last moments. How did he stay in the conversation if he was looking at it as a rental deal? Surely Ottawa had better offers.

And Michael Stone was here. Don't tell me he would have been unaware of his brother's plans.

This is one of the scenarios where you put the 2 and 2 together. Just no way Treliving was in on a trade this big for a rental, he hates rentals.

Right. Which is precisely why it did not happen. There was lots of discussion at the time about tagging room, and the longer-term cap implications with Tkachuk coming up as a RFA. Trading for Stone was theoretically possible, but at a cost that I think most would agree that the Flames could not afford at the time.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

The pick that was traded for Hamilton could have turned out to be barzal. He traded 3 quality picks for him

At the time they had Monahan who was looking good. They had Bennett who had just had a really good PO and was about to enter his rookie season. The expectation was that they had a 1C right there. And then they had Backlund, Janko (who was looking good in college) and Colborne who was still promising. They didn’t need a 1C according to plans. And Barzal has played way above his draft position so there’s no telling who they would have picked.

At the time an offensive RHS D was a perceived need. They had Gio, Brodie Wideman and not much else.

[WCW Nitro]

I think a better way to evaluate any gm is to take a macro view, what was the overall plan. In this case, I think the rebuild was ended too soon which hurts the overall growth of the franchise. You can keep winning trades, but if the main issue (lack of elite talent) is not fixed by these trades but may have been with the draft, then it's an overall failure

[Red]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right. Which is precisely why it did not happen. There was lots of discussion at the time about tagging room, and the longer-term cap implications with Tkachuk coming up as a RFA. Trading for Stone was theoretically possible, but at a cost that I think most would agree that the Flanes could not afford at tbe time.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Thats reasonable, but Stone was still an option. Just one that needed further tinkering.
Maybe we don't have a Tkachuk now because of it, but hey, with Stone on the top line RW maybe we aren't looking to trade JG and Monahan for a discount. And we aren't dreading to re-sign Tkachuk for 9+

And this is the point we are making, Treliving is afraid to make a bold move. Today's team is the end result of that.

Sometimes you have to pay up to get the guys that truly make a difference.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Are you doing a trade analysis and/or draft analysis?

For trade you have to look at the value he got in return, not who they picked, otherwise you have to see who else was picked around that pick to see if its a "win".

GMs trade players for late picks and picks for late trades all the time, especially during trade deadline. In his case, they havent worked out for him much. But I'll call it a wash.

For me how did he do in big trades?

Picking up Hamilton was a good move. Even though it was a deep draft. Passing grade

Would NYR trade Fox for Lindholm or Hanifin? don't thinks so
Would Car trade Dougie for Lindholm or Hanifin? don't think so
Top it up losing Ferland in that trade too. Thats a middling grade at best if not a fail one.

Hamonic for that package was a big fail.

So 1 win, 1 tie, 1 loss. Par with this current group and his tenure, just average.

NYR wouldn't trade Fox since he signed with them. Not apples to apples. They fell into a good situation where Carolina had to trade him to them. If the Flames had the option to keep him they probably would have.

That being said I think the Hamilton/Lindholm deal was good for both the canes and the Flames. Win-win in my view.

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by WCW Nitro

I think a better way to evaluate any gm is to take a macro view, what was the overall plan. In this case, I think the rebuild was ended too soon which hurts the overall growth of the franchise. You can keep winning trades, but if the main issue (lack of elite talent) is not fixed by these trades but may have been with the draft, then it's an overall failure

Treliving attempted to shortcut the rebuild with the Hamilton trade. He had a good first couple of years. 2017 was a horrible year (Hamonic was no Hamilton) and apart from the Hamilton to Carolina deal, Treliving is trending downwards in his trades. Pissing away the picks on rentals when we aren’t ready to contend was wasteful. Play the young guys and see what you have. No need to get Gustafson and Forbort when you have a Kylington available. Wrong stage in the cycle to be trading away picks for rentals. Trading picks for Hamilton was acceptable, but too many picks out and not enough picks in. Allocating that gained cap in the frolik trade towards depth defense was a poor use of cap space.

[Jacks]

If we are going to use hindsight then the first Hamilton trade was a loss. The team wasn't ready to exit the rebuilding phase yet and some of the players available with the 1st round pick (not even including the 2nd's) were franchise players. Lindholm is my favorite player at the moment but I'd trade him pretty quick for Barzal or Chabot.

Also, if we didn't start mortgaging the future so quick we would have had a better chance at Matthews the next year. It's all a lot of speculation but they should have done a proper rebuild when they had the chance. That is my biggest criticism of Treliving, the dirty work was already done when he showed up.

[Strange Brew]

I’d argue the Hamilton acquisition was Treliving’s best trade, better than the trade with Carolina. Acquiring a young Norris trophy talent was well worth the cost in draft picks.

Lindholm and Hanifin were great pickups but the price paid was steep as hell. That’s also when we first started seeing evidence of Treliving’s attachment to his players. He is far more comfortable trading guys that have expressed a desire to leave.

How much better off would this team be if a player like Gaudreau had forced his hand and asked for a trade.

[TheScorpion]

Wait, Hamilton "wasn't working out" in Calgary? That's absurd to say. He was one of the better defensemen in the league in his second and third years here.

The Flames traded him to try and address their issues up front and they took a gamble on Hanifin being able to replace him. They paid a pretty huge price to do it. The Flames did well in that deal but let's not act like they didn't give up two tremendous defensemen (and, yes, I know Fox wasn't going to sign, but he still had big trade value).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

Thats reasonable, but Stone was still an option. Just one that needed further tinkering.
Maybe we don't have a Tkachuk now because of it, but hey, with Stone on the top line RW maybe we aren't looking to trade JG and Monahan for a discount. And we aren't dreading to re-sign Tkachuk for 9+

And this is the point we are making, Treliving is afraid to make a bold move. Today's team is the end result of that.

Sometimes you have to pay up to get the guys that truly make a difference.

You could have traded for Stone, but he wasn’t going to be on the Flames after that season.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Wait, Hamilton "wasn't working out" in Calgary? That's absurd to say. He was one of the better defensemen in the league in his second and third years here.

The Flames traded him to try and address their issues up front and they took a gamble on Hanifin being able to replace him. They paid a pretty huge price to do it. The Flames did well in that deal but let's not act like they didn't give up two tremendous defensemen (and, yes, I know Fox wasn't going to sign, but he still had big trade value).

He put up points but he was frustrating as hell. Made stupid defensive decisions often and took bad penalties a lot, especially late in games. I was glad to see him go and was one of the few people who liked the trade to Carolina on day #1.


And Fox didn't have "big trade value", his value was whatever the Rangers were willing to pay.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Forbort and Gustafsson were two of our better players down the stretch. That pairing was worth what we paid as far as rentals go. If you fail to advance, every rental is a bad trade, but I don't think that is fair.

Both trades involving Hamilton were good. Hamonic and Smith were bad. Everything else is a bunch of meh sprinkled with woof.

Forbort's performance in the playoffs was among the worst I've ever seen.
I don't mean to be extreme, but he brought back Anders Eriksson vibes (excuse my foul language).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

I read it already. Nothing but speculations.

Just think logically. Trelving was in on it till the last moments. How did he stay in the conversation if he was looking at it as a rental deal? Surely Ottawa had better offers.

And Michael Stone was here. Don't tell me he would have been unaware of his brother's plans.

This is one of the scenarios where you put the 2 and 2 together. Just no way Treliving was in on a trade this big for a rental, he hates rentals.

He was in it until he figured out there was no way he could re-sign Stone. And Mike Stone had nothing to do with it. Not every player is tied to his brother, and the big reason Mike was here was his wife.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He was in it until he figured out there was no way he could re-sign Stone. And Mike Stone had nothing to do with it. Not every player is tied to his brother, and the big reason Mike was here was his wife.

It wasn't the 3 year $10.5M contract?

[Red]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

You could have traded for Stone, but he wasn’t going to be on the Flames after that season.

Disagree. Nothing there to suggest that.