New Poll: Should/Will the Flames Keep Treliving

[Dragomir]

Boot him and start fresh, it’s the only logical next step.

[Kipper_3434]

It's not the gm IMHO. This team has always been impatient and quite simply never sucked quite bad enough to land a top player through the draft. This has happened consistently through the years and I can only assume management demands it. We never needed to sign hiller and make the playoffs in 15. Sure it was fun but it wasn't glorious. I think management should take away Brad's spending account in F.A. and lay out an internal cap that leaves 5 mil on the table to acquire assets via trade.

I don't want treliving during a rebuild , but I don't think the owners have ever wanted to go that rout. Wish they woulda 6 years ago.

[JohnnyB]

Treliving fired my favourite coach since Sutter and replaced him with my most hated coach of all time, then replaced him with a more reputed version of my most hated coach of all time who also turned out to be a pretty awful person.

He has made some good trades and contract extensions, but based on his coaching hires I don't like what seems to be his vision of how hockey should be played.

I never felt encouraged by bringing in a GM from a franchise with a history of failure, and he has turned this from a team I loved left for him by Burke and Feaster into a team I have no enthusiasm for. He has 100% made being a fan of the Flames less enjoyable for me.

[Sandman]

When he signed Brouwer, he was one of the top FA's in that year's crop. Most of us were
pretty happy we got him (nobody will admit it though). With all the teams looking into
Brouwer, it was a coup to get him.
When he signed Jagr, we were all extatic. It was a coup to get him.
When we signed Neal, the vast majority of us were very excited. Finally, we had a RW
who could possibly complement Mony and Johnny. He had many suitors, so it was a
coup to get him.
Same can be said with our aquisitions of Elliott and Smith. I doubt many people (including the pundits) could've predicted they all could turn out so bad, in fact-Tre was universally praised in the Hockey world for these moves. I think he should get another chance to right the ship.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Sandman

When he signed Brouwer, he was one of the top FA's in that year's crop. Most of us were
pretty happy we got him (nobody will admit it though). With all the teams looking into
Brouwer, it was a coup to get him.
When he signed Jagr, we were all extatic. It was a coup to get him.
When we signed Neal, the vast majority of us were very excited. Finally, we had a RW
who could possibly complement Mony and Johnny. He had many suitors, so it was a
coup to get him.
Same can be said with our aquisitions of Elliott and Smith. I doubt many people (including the pundits) could've predicted they all could turn out so bad, in fact-Tre was universally praised in the Hockey world for these moves. I think he should get another chance to right the ship.

I agree that it's tough to argue with a lot of his moves with players. He mostly has done well with players. I don't like what he's done with coaches, but I honestly don't mind him having another try at hiring a coach either. Tre is not the root of the organizations mediocrity. One more chance to hire a coach and make big moves with players is okay with me even though I'm not really much of a fan of his.

[btimbit]

Thanks for the new poll.
I voted keep. The big move I don't like is the Hamonic trade. Even the Free Agent signings seemed like good moves at the time, they just didn't work out.

Other than that I'll just copy and paste my reply from the other thread

I'm torn. I really like Treliving, some of his moves have been great. But the proof is in the pudding and the results have not been there. Colour me not impressed overall I suppose, but I'm not against letting him go to the end of his contract at least before deciding.

The coaching is one thing. GG was a big whiff but I feel he should get a pass for Peters. The full year he had here, the team did well.He wasn't fired for something he did on-ice or in Calgary so while I absolutely agree with the firing, I don't think you pin that one on Treliving.

[kyuss275]

Keep him.
This is a big off season where we will be trading at least one core piece out. Tre is very good at trades. A new gm probably doesn’t make a big trade until he sees what the team dynamic is like on the ice. I’m not worried about Tre making a deal out of desperation to save his job. The mandate on what we should look for on a return will come from owners. It won’t change with a new gm or not.

[Enoch Root]

It is a results league, yes. But results are ultimately at the hands of the players and coaches.

For the GM, I think the pertinent question is: is he putting the pieces in place to set the team up for success? Does he have a good vision, and plan to execute it? Are they doing a good job with scouting and developing players? Does he manage the cap well? Is he capable of making good trades to fill holes and improve the team?

And in attempting to determine those things, it is important to separate the decisions and the process from the actual results. If you do everything right, but then a couple key players just lose their mojo, or there are key injuries, or other things like that which are beyond the control of the GM, they need to be filtered out. Conversely, sometimes you just get lucky and a 6th round pick turns out to be a top 6 winger. Those things also need to be filtered out.

Stability, and consistent execution over the long term, are vital elements that fans often don't consider enough. IMO, those are the things that matter for a GM. Stability is huge.

If you are confident that the GM and the management team are doing things they are supposed to be doing, and doing them well, I think it is important to be patient, and allow that stability to solidify your franchise. Management's job is to create the environment that will allow success to happen.

IMO, Treliving and his team are doing those things. There are problems with the lineup, and the coaching, and there have been a couple bad decisions on the free agency front, but I think we have solid and stable management.

IMO, Treliving is doing a good job and is not the problem. Having said that, he has to get the coaching right, and I don't know how much more leeway you can give him on that.

[Strange Brew]

Can someone articulate what Treliving's vision has been for the team?

[Erick Estrada]

I think stability is a lame excuse to keep management that hasn't got the job done. Plenty of organizations have turned the corner after changing regimes and plenty that have stuck with continuity have continued to be mediocre. You either have a great GM or you don't end of story. When I look at what Treliving's done there's been a lot of good and a lot of bad and the result has been mediocrity. I don't think keeping him longer is going to lead to him all of a sudden becoming a top shelf GM when he's proven he hasn't been able to solve the goaltending problem or hire the right head coach. I think he is what he is which is an average at best GM with some flawed methodologies as he's put far too many resources into the defense group (Hamilton and Hamonic trades) while not addressing goaltending or the lack of top 6 wingers. Keeping him just means he's going to pour more assets in building a defense that doesn't live up to its billing on paper and a forward group and goaltenders that don't match up against the elite teams. I wouldn't be shocked if he actually tries to retain Hamonic. That's how out of touch he is.

[Roof-Daddy]

The goaltending "problem" is over blown.

The goaltending was stable this season and not the problem at all. The vast majority of goalies are wildly unpredictable at the best of times, and in any given year some nobody can come in and get hot at the right time and carry your team to the promise land, and on the flip side any superstar goalie making $7-10+ million AAV can fall apart and cost your team their playoff lives.

I'm starting to lean towards the mind set of just give me two steady goalies that don't take a huge dent out of your overall salary cap and hope one of them gets hot when it matters the most.

Look at the year to year swings of Carey Price.
Look at what happened to Bobrovsky this year.
Look at Holtby, Vezina winner, cup winner in recent years, now what is he?
Even Kipper, and we all love Kipper, put up inconsistent numbers year after year.

I was a huge "let's get Bishop" guy and Treliving tried a couple times. Well he went to Dallas and he's been great there, but he wasn't even a part of their series win over the Flames, they managed to get adequate enough goaltending from a journeyman back up to move onto round 2.

The Blues have been a strong team for a decade now. Could never get over the hump. Binnington comes in, gets hot and leads them to the promise land. This year? He lost his job back to Jake Allen and neither of them were really very good.

It's a total crap shoot.

Like I said, just give me two solid/steady guys that don't take up a crap ton of cap space and hope for the best, and hope at least one of them is feeling it at any given time, especially crunch time.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Can someone articulate what Treliving's vision has been for the team?

"Heavy Hockey"

[Enoch Root]

Well, they have been one of the smallest, lightest, and softest teams in the league under his tenure, so I am going to go with no' on that one.

[Enoch Root]

What it appears to be to me is:

speed, skill, playing the right way, being good community citizens, being competitive as consistently as possible

(not saying they have achieved all of those things, but I think those are among their goals/vision)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Can someone articulate what Treliving's vision has been for the team?

Can anyone articulate what any GM's vision is for his NHL team? I think it is probably a meaningless question, because these sorts of things tend not to be published, nor are they static and inflexible mandates.

I think Enoch's post is easily the most sober and astute evaluation of the Treliving and his tenure. Contrary to Estrada's contention, stability works at least as often as it does not. New GMs in their first NHL jobs—like Don Sweeney or Joe Sakic—have been frequently panned in the early going for their poor performance, only to see their teams emerge after years of building into NHL powerhouses. By the same token, seasoned GMs brought into an organization—such as Ken Holland in Edmonton or Lou Lamarillo in Toronto—do not always breed success. Like any job, its one that takes time to learn and to be successful in, and I think this is the situation in which the Flames find themselves.

I think the empty "lack of vision" critiques from outside observers stem from watching a first-time GM navigate the learning curve. But I also think that Treliving deserves credit for quickly recognising his own mistakes, and being completely undeterred in correcting them. I think it shows a commitment to making the team as good as possible, and an eagerness to improve on the original plan as he goes. His activity strongly suggests that he recognises the same problems with the team that we all see, and he has been working hard to correct them. For me, a big part of the equation is less so about what Treliving has done in the past as it is about what can be expected moving forward: if Treliving is fired, who is replacing him? A seasoned GM looking for one more shot like Ken Holland? Or another rookie waiting in the wings for his first opportunity like Craig Conroy? I don't see either option as particularly appealing, since there is absolutely no guarantee of success with the former, and another lengthy learning-curve certain to accompany the latter. The Flames have already made a huge investment in Treliving's education, and it seems like a good bet to see it through to the payout—just as Colorado did with Sakic, and Boston with Sweeney.

[bluejays]

I'm a little indifferent to Treliving nowadays. The one thing that has really turned me off appears to be his indifference towards the voice of the players in the past few seasons. There always seems to be a guy pissed off at the coaches or the organization and on a sports team that shouldn't get out. I suspect the reason it gets out is out of desperation as they want to be heard out. I know it's controversial, but there has to be a voice of reason in upper management to listen to all parties as impartial as possible.

Onto his body of work relating to signings and trades, overall, I think he's a good GM. The Hamonic deal wasn't good at the time, but overall I do think when he wants to make the big move he isn't afraid, and for that where you want a big off-season, he's the guy I want in charge. I would be shocked if there aren't at least a couple big moves.

Additionally, I don't think ownership wants to pay yet another guy to sit on the sidelines and get a paycheque, so I'm certain he's not on the chopping block this season.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by fleury

I'm a little indifferent to Treliving nowadays. The one thing that has really turned me off appears to be his indifference towards the voice of the players in the past few seasons. There always seems to be a guy pissed off at the coaches or the organization and on a sports team that shouldn't get out. I suspect the reason it gets out is out of desperation as they want to be heard out. I know it's controversial, but there has to be a voice of reason in upper management to listen to all parties as impartial as possible.

What on earth are you getting at?

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

What on earth are you getting at?

Michael Frolik, James Neal, Johnny Gaudreau


edit: controversy around Hamilton too.

[Enoch Root]

One of the things that fans seem to ignore is that GMs can't simply go out and get whatever players they want, in order to execute their vision. You can have a plan to acquire certain types of players, but you are still limited by what is actually available at the time.

For example, the Flames covet speed. However, in 2013 and 2016, the best player available to them were Monahan and Tkachuk. Neither is a fast skater, but both were correct picks.

That's why it is important to understand that management needs to be flexible, and needs time to execute. Drafting, developing, and trading players is not an exact science. You can make all the right decisions, but how the players, and the team, turn out is still largely up to the players. You simply can't predict development paths.

Which, again, brings it all back to process, vision, and stability.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by fleury

Michael Frolik, James Neal, Johnny Gaudreau


edit: controversy around Hamilton too.

I'm not sure what Gaudreau has to do with this list of other, disgruntled players, but then I also don't see how you connect an individual player's frustration to "indifference" from management. If anything, Treliving's swift action taken to accommodate these players rather strongly suggests the opposite.