Does Treliving deserve to be extended?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Treliving wanted to buy out Neal with four years left on his deal and ownership nixed it. That's the story I heard. Signing Neal was bad enough, but imagine that buyout hanging around for 8 years. Maybe we should be glad some business people are involved in certain decisions.

Plus we wouldn’t have Looch.

[dino7c]

Does Gaudreau get 115 with the stellar defensive play if he wasn't in a contract year?

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

The GMs job isn’t (usually) to do the best asset management . It is usually to try and win a cup

But good asset management is how you win a cup...

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by shadowlord

One thing I've noticed about Tre is that he seems to identify that team needs and what we, as fans, seem to think and then goes out and gets them.

When CP thought we needed a goalie, he went out and got Markstrom. When we thought we needed a RW and a 3rd line centre, he got Toffoli and Jarnkrok. Now, not all the deals have ended up working out the way we'd all hoped, but at the time they were made, there was agreement that Brad had made the right move.

I found this to be more encouraging as a fan than when Feaster or Sutter's (as GM) big move would be get some depth defenseman or something.

Its funny cause I think thats a knock against him. I think its horrible that a GM acts like what the majority of fans hope for. What do any of us really know about running a team or building a roster long term? He waits until the fan base is foaming at the mouth for a solution to an issue and over pays to aquire the biggest name available in that position and then we all collectively circle jerk over it until down the road we all realize it was a poor decision in hindsight. Can anyone clearly explain what his plan has been or what he has been building us up to be? Because all I see is him ever doing is damage control when an issue becomes big enough it cannot be left be. We've bled picks to stay relevant in the moment yet never really internally adressing the issue or looking too long term fixes.

Looking back what trade did he outright win and it helped the team? Only one I can think of is Hamilton for Hanifin and Lindholm (Lucic/Neal im not giving credit for because it was still a bad overpaid player coming back to fix a error he already made). Everything else we gave away picks because Treliving cherishes what he has on the team, never shook up the core until it literally moved itself. And look where its gotten us? Is anyone happy with where we are? Or that this is all part of some master plan?

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

But good asset management is how you win a cup...

The recent Stanley Cup winners were sure trading a lot of their to be free agents for futures . Or was it the other way around…

Despite what you may want , the Flames are not rebuilding / in a rebuild phase

Rightfully or wrongfully they are in their win the cup phase right now . You don’t trade to be free agents for asset management .

It’s been the opposite - Picks to get rid of Monahan and acquire players like Toffoli

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Its funny cause I think thats a knock against him. I think its horrible that a GM acts like what the majority of fans hope for. What do any of us really know about running a team or building a roster long term? He waits until the fan base is foaming at the mouth for a solution to an issue and over pays to aquire the biggest name available in that position and then we all collectively circle jerk over it until down the road we all realize it was a poor decision in hindsight. Can anyone clearly explain what his plan has been or what he has been building us up to be? Because all I see is him ever doing is damage control when an issue becomes big enough it cannot be left be. We've bled picks to stay relevant in the moment yet never really internally adressing the issue or looking too long term fixes.

Looking back what trade did he outright win and it helped the team? Only one I can think of is Hamilton for Hanifin and Lindholm (Lucic/Neal im not giving credit for because it was still a bad overpaid player coming back to fix a error he already made). Everything else we gave away picks because Treliving cherishes what he has on the team, never shook up the core until it literally moved itself. And look where its gotten us? Is anyone happy with where we are? Or that this is all part of some master plan?

The only "pick bleeding" I can think of is trading to get Hamonic and Elliott. In hindsight those were mistakes, but that's going back 5-6 years. He's done a much better job since then. Sure he traded a first for Toffoli, but that was an excellent trade as Toffoli has been one of the best players on the team this year.

Tre's work this offseason was a masterstroke. If Kylington had been with the team playing all season, this team likely has 8-10 additional points in the standings and we're not here having this discussion.

Originally Posted by Jason14h

The recent Stanley Cup winners were sure trading a lot of their to be free agents for futures . Or was it the other way around…

Despite what you may want , the Flames are not rebuilding / in a rebuild phase

Rightfully or wrongfully they are in their win the cup phase right now . You don’t trade to be free agents for asset management .

It’s been the opposite - Picks to get rid of Monahan and acquire players like Toffoli

There are times for selling and there are times for buying. Teams in their contention window tend to buy. It's no surprise.

I'm not equating 'buying' with 'bad asset management'. They are two different things.

[Jason14h]

8-10 extra points through half a season

That would make him the most valuable player in the league , or at least very close

[Mathgod]

The Flames lead the league in games decided by 1 goal, do they not? A speedy defenseman like Kylly would have helped get this team over the hump in a lot of games.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The Flames lead the league in games decided by 1 goal, do they not? A speedy defenseman like Kylly would have helped get this team over the hump in a lot of games.

They were a different team when Kylington was in the lineup. They played with more pace.

They were missing one of their top-4 D nearly every night, sometimes more than one. It would explain some of why Markstrom has been off.

Kylington is worth an extra win, sure. He’s a good player. But he wouldn’t make this team 4 wins better - figuring out how a group of veterans work together for the first time is (shoot me) a process.

They need another forward, as always. You may never get a better look at it than this year when Huberdeau and Weegar combine to make less than $9M.

You have to get them one of Patrick Kane or JVR. It’s a pure rental. You can’t go to war for four rounds with Milan Lucic on the other side of Jonathan Huberdeau. You need to get them another elite player to work with.

All in. Draft picks are for losers.

[Flaming Horse]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Its funny cause I think thats a knock against him. I think its horrible that a GM acts like what the majority of fans hope for. What do any of us really know about running a team or building a roster long term? He waits until the fan base is foaming at the mouth for a solution to an issue and over pays to aquire the biggest name available in that position and then we all collectively circle jerk over it until down the road we all realize it was a poor decision in hindsight. Can anyone clearly explain what his plan has been or what he has been building us up to be? Because all I see is him ever doing is damage control when an issue becomes big enough it cannot be left be. We've bled picks to stay relevant in the moment yet never really internally adressing the issue or looking too long term fixes.

Looking back what trade did he outright win and it helped the team? Only one I can think of is Hamilton for Hanifin and Lindholm (Lucic/Neal im not giving credit for because it was still a bad overpaid player coming back to fix a error he already made). Everything else we gave away picks because Treliving cherishes what he has on the team, never shook up the core until it literally moved itself. And look where its gotten us? Is anyone happy with where we are? Or that this is all part of some master plan?

well said. I have thought the same thing. I mean the team did not even have a identity until Sutter arrived. The team has only won 2 rounds of hockey in the 9 yrs of him being gm.Not even close to good enough.Just stuck in mediocrity and he keeps telling us the team is good enough and it hasn't been.They rushed the rebuild and just have not been good enough.Comparing him with Feaster and saying he has done better is setting the bar pretty low.The drafting is not good enough. I really don't like the type of players the team has been drafting. Small and slow. If you go small you at least need to be fast.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Not re-signing Gaudreau early wasn't the main issue. The main issue was letting him walk to free agency. As soon as Gaudreau said he didn't want to talk contract until the end of the season, he should have been traded. Calgary is not a team that can afford to let franchise players in the prime go for nothing. You just don't take those risks as if you are a New York or Miami that can always lure a replacement.

I realize it would have been unpopular with some fans, but the GM's job is to make the best asset management decisions and not fan-pleasing. He took a huge risk and it backfired.

I completely disagree. At the trade deadline last year, Calgary had the best line in hockey, and a team that was clicking both offensively and defensively. Add to that, they had arguably the easiest path to the conference finals due to how weak the Pacific division was. There was no way it made any sense to trade Johnny at that point and cut off one of their better chances to win a cup. That is not how a team should be operating unless you want to be the Coyotes.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I completely disagree. At the trade deadline last year, Calgary had the best line in hockey, and a team that was clicking both offensively and defensively. Add to that, they had arguably the easiest path to the conference finals due to how weak the Pacific division was. There was no way it made any sense to trade Johnny at that point and cut off one of their better chances to win a cup. That is not how a team should be operating unless you want to be the Coyotes.

No, it didn't make sense to trade him then. Like I said in the part of my post that wasn't quoted, once the season was underway, it was too late. He should have been traded before the season began right after he said he didn't want to negotiate. Or sooner.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

So you would be have patted him on the back in August 2021 if he signed a small player who was pacing at 60 points the past 3 seasons to a 8 year deal at 9 million per season?

Or would you have thought it was mistake at the time? This is prior to him having everything come together with his 115 point season.

It wasn't just his on ice performance that sucked, his off ice commitment to training and everything else has been questionable.

Gaudreau had 207 points in 208 games the previous 3 seasons before last season. By my rough math that is a PPG player, so unless the NHL is only playing 60 games a season that is a bit more than a 60 point guy.

[Enoch Root]

I would be happy to see him extended (and think he will be), but I would also like to see the organization add some depth to the scouting, coaching and development staff.

I would also like to see the organization place a higher value on draft picks, and less value on deadline acquisitions.

But as for who is driving the bus? I think Treliving is a great choice.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Gaudreau had 207 points in 208 games the previous 3 seasons before last season. By my rough math that is a PPG player, so unless the NHL is only playing 60 games a season that is a bit more than a 60 point guy.

26 points in 37 games to end the 18/19 season. Was on a tailspin after that.

Roughly a 65 point pace a season and what was it 5 playoff points?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

26 points in 37 games to end the 18/19 season. Was on a tailspin after that.

Roughly a 65 point pace a season and what was it 5 playoff points?

26 points in 31 games to end the 18/19 season. Then he put up seasons that over 82 games would be 68 points and 72 points, so still don’t think that is a 60 point pace. Maybe if you take his worst 82 games over that time period you could get a 60 point player if you want to try that.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

26 points in 31 games to end the 18/19 season. Then he put up seasons that over 82 games would be 68 points and 72 points, so still don’t think that is a 60 point pace. Maybe if you take his worst 82 games over that time period you could get a 60 point player if you want to try that.

So we are talking about a player playing at 65-68 point pace and paying him 9-10 million on a long term deal.

Do you believe it was worth the risk?

Does he have his 115 point dream season last year?

Lots to look back at but at the time did anyone see the season he had coming? He was on the second line in camp because how bad he was the previous seasons. He had some serious questions surrounding his off ice training and nutrition.

[Toonage]

I have no reason at this point to think he won't be extended, but if he decides to move on, or ownership wants someone who will just carry out what Darryl wants then come on down Mike Futa.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

So we are talking about a player playing at 65-68 point pace and paying him 9-10 million on a long term deal.

Do you believe it was worth the risk?

Does he have his 115 point dream season last year?

Lots to look back at but at the time did anyone see the season he had coming? He was on the second line in camp because how bad he was the previous seasons. He had some serious questions surrounding his off ice training and nutrition.

You’ve just made me realize, even if Johnny Re-signing had no impact
On Tkachuk’s desire to stay, we could’ve still done the deal for Weegar and Huberdeau.

Then we would’ve had Johnny and Jonathan. The Johns.

Gaudreau might score 60 on a line with Huberdeau.

What might have been.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You’ve just made me realize, even if Johnny Re-signing had no impact
On Tkachuk’s desire to stay, we could’ve still done the deal for Weegar and Huberdeau.

Then we would’ve had Johnny and Jonathan. The Johns.

Gaudreau might score 60 on a line with Huberdeau.

What might have been.

Could have been interesting but he decided that being in Columbus and winning hockey games was what is most important to him.