Brad Treliving needs to go

[Jiri Hrdina]

Toronto didn’t go through a patient rebuild
They were gifted Matthews and had a premium player sign with them as their priority
Take Matthews out and they are probably no better than the Flames

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TOfan

You say this, but you don’t know what the value of these picks/players were.

You're saying you can't assess a trade involving picks without knowing who would have been picked?

I don't see it that way.

A second for Kiprusoff is an extreme example of a good trade.
A third for Bollig is an example of a bad trade.

Picks have value and while it's subjective, you can certainly make your own conclusion as to the relative values of the players/picks involved.

Slice and dice it all you want. Did trading away picks weaken the team's prospect pipeline? I'd say yes, as expected.

Did it improve the big league roster to the extent you'd like it to? I'd say no.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Simply not true.

The organization is in a much better spot. Not too sure how you could say otherwise.

To say they're in a better position now than when Brad took over is meaningless apples and oranges. Where should a team be in year seven of a rebuild? Probably a strong playoff team, if not Stanley Cup contender?

To look at a year 1 build and a year 7 build and say "the team is in a better spot" is asinine. It's like me failing grade 11 math and saying "yeah, but I'm in a better spot with math than when I was in grade 4".

The metric is where has Brad left the team relative to where a year 7 build should be. And it's beyond failing right now.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I’m not sure I would use the word “stock pile” to describe simply not trading any first round picks over a 3 year period.

And why include a prospect that wasn’t a draft pick?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Because he was a second round pick in 2020 the team had interest in selecting who hasn’t played in North America yet. But if you want to nitpick, go ahead, fill your boots. He technically not a pick, but he’s a half step removed from it.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

You're saying you can't assess a trade involving picks without knowing who would have been picked?

I don't see it that way.

A second for Kiprusoff is an extreme example of a good trade.
A third for Bollig is an example of a bad trade.

Picks have value and while it's subjective, you can certainly make your own conclusion as to the relative values of the players/picks involved.

Slice and dice it all you want. Did trading away picks weaken the team's prospect pipeline? I'd say yes, as expected.

Did it improve the big league roster to the extent you'd like it to? I'd say no.

No, I’m saying we don’t know the market value of the picks are/were. As an example, Treliving gets criticized for trading a 2nd and a 3rd for Elliot. Could he have been had for less? How would we ever know? Was there another team interested and offering up their own package? We only see the result. We don’t know how the price was negotiated.

Another example is the Hamonic trade. The Leafs were also in on Hamonic and apparently offered a 1st and JVR, who was headed into the last year of his deal, set to be a UFA. This was discussed on the Steve Dangle podcast at the time, do it could be incorrect. But, to me, this makes sense as the cost seems to align. The two 2nds were of comparable value to one year of JVR at the time.

I do agree with the bolded.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Toronto didn’t go through a patient rebuild
They were gifted Matthews and had a premium player sign with them as their priority
Take Matthews out and they are probably no better than the Flames

Which is exactly the reason the Flames should position themselves to be gifted a player as good as Matthew's. Otherwise we're no better than thr Flames.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Lindholm and Hanifin were acquired for Hamilton, who was acquired for picks.

Not sure why we threw in Fox and Ferland then if we only needed Hamilton to get those two players.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Toronto didn’t go through a patient rebuild
They were gifted Matthews and had a premium player sign with them as their priority
Take Matthews out and they are probably no better than the Flames

They drafted 16 times in the first 3rounds (all including their own first rounders) from 2014 -2018. They hit big on their top picks, but definitely were patient with the aspect of gaining as many assets in the bottoming out part of the rebuild. They had NO qualms of maximizing lottery odds.

That's as patient as it gets for a Canadian market in my opinion.

Yet, here we are throwing out terms like competitive culture, and trying to get as many wins as possible AFTER being eliminated.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Not sure why we threw in Fox and Ferland then if we only needed Hamilton to get those two players.

Because , basically, Fox was an UFA who the Flames had NO CHANCE of signing.

He told them that.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Simply not true.

The organization is in a much better spot. Not too sure how you could say otherwise.

Well someone will have to tell me which prospects under 24 we currently have who folks think will

A) get 99 points in any season in the NHL and will average 77 points a season over the next 5 yeara
B) score more than 20 goals in each of the next 7 seasons
C) dman who will average 38 points a season for the next 5 seasons.

Because I really want to know who those prospects/young players are and cheer for them.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by timbit

Because , basically, Fox was an UFA who the Flames had NO CHANCE of signing.

He told them that.

I'm pretty sure Fox had only spent 2 seasons in the NCAA at that point, so he was still 2 years from being a UFA.

But yeah it sounds like he said he wasn't going to sign, so he basically gave the Flames a few years to do something about it.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Well someone will have to tell me which prospects under 24 we currently have who folks think will

A) get 99 points in any season in the NHL and will average 77 points a season over the next 5 yeara
B) score more than 20 goals in each of the next 7 seasons
C) dman who will average 38 points a season for the next 5 seasons.

Because I really want to know who those prospects/young players are and cheer for them.

Well, if you predicted Gaudreau would go on to be a 99 point player and Gio a Norris trophy D when they were 21, or so, I guess I just have to tip my hat and ask, how are you not employed by an NHL team somewhere?

Astounding.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Not sure why we threw in Fox and Ferland then if we only needed Hamilton to get those two players.

That’s not the point and you know it.

[edslunch]

It seems like most of the discussion is he’s bad / no he’s not. I’m not satisfied with not bad, we should be arguing is he great or not. Anyone want to take the he’s great side? We need a great GM not just a mediocre or average one.

[1qqaaz]

If you had to choose, who would you rather have as GM, Treliving or Conroy?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Well, if you predicted Gaudreau would go on to be a 99 point player and Gio a Norris trophy D when they were 21, or so, I guess I just have to tip my hat and ask, how are you not employed by an NHL team somewhere?

Astounding.

Well I never included Gio in that list of 3 players and I was responding to your comment that “The organization is in a much better spot. Not sure how you could say otherwise”. I was merely asking which players under 24 we have that fans can expect will accomplish that?

Heck, you could even expand that and ask if we have any 3 players that we can expect to accomplish that over the next 5 years. The answer to any 3 under the age of 24 is definitely no and the chances that anyone can name any 3 players that one could realistically expect to have that type of output over the next 5-7 years is also likely no.

I am actually perplexed when people say the Flames are in a better position in 2021 than they were in 2014.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That’s not the point and you know it.

I am not sure what the point was then? You said he basically broke even on picks, which he has not he has been a net loser of picks. You then said Hanifin and Lindholm were acquired by trading draft picks for Hamilton, which also is not true because the Flames had to add to Hamilton to get those two players. He definitely acquired one of those players for the picks from the Hamilton trade, but not both players.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Well I never included Gio in that list of 3 players and I was responding to your comment that “The organization is in a much better spot. Not sure how you could say otherwise”. I was merely asking which players under 24 we have that fans can expect will accomplish that?

Heck, you could even expand that and ask if we have any 3 players that we can expect to accomplish that over the next 5 years. The answer to any 3 under the age of 24 is definitely no and the chances that anyone can name any 3 players that one could realistically expect to have that type of output over the next 5-7 years is also likely no.

I am actually perplexed when people say the Flames are in a better position in 2021 than they were in 2014.

How good is Zary going to be? What about Wolf or Poirier? You sure?

Point taken, but it’s not as though the flames are completely devoid of any valuable assets.

Suggesting they won’t have any players who are of the caliber you reference is a little undercooked in my mind. Not only that, those are three pretty arbitrary measures you’re pointing out.

[jayswin]

Kudos to Aarongavey for his patience with two different posters at the same time. I'd be banging my head against the wall.

[VladtheImpaler]

One thing people (myself included) give Treliving credit for is greatly improving the drafting, and being able to hit on winners outside of top 15. So... if that is the primary strength of your franchise, shouldn't you be doing whatever you can to draft as often as possible??? Think about simple logic: UFAs generally don't want to come here, unless you overpay and over-commit; many players have us on "no trade" lists; yet we continuously spent picks to fill short-term holes with mediocre players, when picks are our only real source of high-end talent. We got absolutely nothing for trading our picks, aside from the Hamilton trade tree. NOTHING. How many more Mangiapanes and Dubes could we have if we simply used them? I would venture a guess more than nothing...
You should never spend assets on depth, unless you a bone fide Cup contender. All that depth should be in your system. I would make the following hypothesis - if Treliving did nothing in the last 7 years, except trade pending UFA's, we would be much closer to winning a Cup. If you are good at something, do it as much as possible.