Ongoing thread for Neal/Lucic discussion

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Look around the league.

I'd bet 24/31 teams have a contract they wish they hadn't signed. The other 7 finally just got theirs off the books.

I wonder how many of those contracts came from signing UFA’s. The vast majority I suspect as UFA season is just a killing field of franchise crippling deals. Crappy UFA deals that I can think of include

Lucic
Neal
Ericsson
Clarkson
Alzner
Okposo
Tyler Myers
Jack Johnson
Frans Nielsen
Kovalchuk
Tyler Bozak
Parise
Andrew Ladd
Shattenkirk
Van Riemsdyk
Kevin hayes (eventually)

That does not include buyouts which also seem to be predominantly UFA signings.

[TheScorpion]

Yeah, Bingo, I'd love to see a poll on this deal.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by zamler

I'd like to see a poll, maybe I'm out to lunch thinking this is a terrible deal.

Don't be hard on yourself.

This isn't a "man am I excited the Flames have Lucic!" day. So questioning this mess is logical. But to me the action means the options were exhausted.

I can add a poll but what's the structure, I don't want to sway it by having the wrong question or options up.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

It's late July.

This was the only option he had. It was move Neal for Lucic, or bring Neal back. That's pretty obvious given the deal itself.

What would you do?

Was it? By all accounts Neal was embarrassed for his performance last season and has been working out hard with Gary Roberts. Sounds like a guy that was putting in as much effort as possible in the offseason to ensure he performed better next season. So lets say in year two he rebounds nicely to the point where even if he's not a great fit with the coach that that everyone is a pro about it and with three years left on the deal coming off a bounce back year that contract is maybe more admissible for another team to accept in a trade where the Flames retain some salary and take on some salary back. There's little doubt if all else fails Lucic would still be available next offseason and by then maybe Holland is even more desperate to unload him to the point were Treliving can dictate the return.

I just think once you sign a player for 5 years you owe it to the process to at least give it a 2nd season before declaring it a failure. I keep coming back to believing that the GM felt the coach and player could not coexist and in his mind the player had to go and if that's the case I guess I can understand it but then shame on him and his pro scouts for handing out that contract to a player that really didn't see eye to eye with the coach from day one. There needs to be some evaluation with pro scouting department with the Brouwer and Neal contracts being immediate poor fits in the locker room. It's one thing to sign players that don't live up to their contracts but bringing in square pegs for round holes tells me some people aren't doing enough homework.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Bingo

When Thelma and Louise drove off the cliff when pursued by state troopers I think we can assume they were down to two options.

1) stop and get arrested
2) end life in a dramatic way

When Treliving acquires Lucic from the Oilers for Neal and limited sweetners?

Same thing.

1) keep Neal
2) do the Edmonton deal

Are you saying Tre made a series of bad decisions to the point where he backed himself into a corner and had no choice but to take the worst and only choice available to him? Or is keeping Neal driving off the cliff.

Originally Posted by Bingo

Don't be hard on yourself.

This isn't a "man am I excited the Flames have Lucic!" day. So questioning this mess is logical. But to me the action means the options were exhausted.

I can add a poll but what's the structure, I don't want to sway it by having the wrong question or options up.

I'm not "hard on myself" I'm baffled so many people appear to agree with this deal. On a poll, simple question do you like the deal yes/no.

[MisterJoji]

The level of hyperbole in this thread is ridiculous. Here’s just a couple quotes from the first page of Bill Peters’ hiring:

Here comes some more wasted years1

ya, screw interviewing other potential candidates. The guy who just ended a mediocre tenure in Carolina gets an immediate job with the Flames. Treliving better have a lot of faith in Peters, because his job is on the line with this hire.

Classic Flames hire

I would hate this hiring passionately. If he hires Peters - a coach that has nothing going for him - after all the crap we've had this season with GG, my liking of Treliving's hockey business sense would be at zero.

Seems like a play for Jack Hughes, probably need to make a few more moves to increase our odds, but this is a good start.

Yuck, do not want.

Expect more of the same. This organization is a mess from the top down and it doesn't look like it will get any better. It is becoming so easy to dislike this team as there is very little worth liking (bad owners/management/more useless players than good/####ty arena). We almost need a full organizational reset as we have been stuck in this rut of mediocrity for close to 3 decades minus a couple flashes

And a few from the Lindholm trade:

If Fox is involved this is a major loss for Calgary

Edit: AND FERLAND? RIP Brad Treliving

I feel like I’m going to be sick.

We lose this trade by a mile if it’s true

Wtf if that is the Final trade Treliving can pack his #### and hit the road.

The posts specifically calling out Treliving aged especially poorly. Maybe, just maybe we should see how this plays out on the ice before concluding it is an abject failure?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Was it? By all accounts Neal was embarrassed for his performance last season and has been working out hard with Gary Roberts. Sounds like a guy that was putting in as much effort as possible in the offseason to ensure he performed better next season. So lets say in year two he rebounds nicely to the point where even if he's not a great fit with the coach that that everyone is a pro about it and with three years left on the deal coming off a bounce back year that contract is maybe more admissible for another team to accept in a trade where the Flames retain some salary and take on some salary back. There's little doubt if all else fails Lucic would still be available next offseason and by then maybe Holland is even more desperate to unload him to the point were Treliving can dictate the return.

I just think once you sign a player for 5 years you owe it to the process to at least give it a 2nd season before declaring it a failure. I keep coming back to believing that the GM felt the coach and player could not coexist and this was in his mind the player had to go and if that's the case I guess I can understand it but then shame on him and his pro scouts for handing out that contract to a player that really didn't see eye to eye with the coach from day one. There needs to be some evaluation with pro scouting department with the Brouwer and Neal contracts being immediate poor fits in the locker room. It's one thing to sign players that don't live up to their contracts but bringing in square pegs for round holes tells me some people aren't doing enough homework.

For sure.

But one of my assumptions in doing this was that they wanted Neal gone. Period.

A combination of

a) not being sure he can rebound
b) not being sure he will have the role to rebound
c) not being a fit in the dressing room
d) Peters wanting him out
e) player requesting a trade

had this whole thing down to take the only option available and make the most out of it.

[neo45]

I don’t think conditioning is going to help a player who’s legs are just straight up gone and doesn’t have the hockey sense to change his game. Neal looked like Jagr out there without the puck control, I don’t think cross fit can help that


Iginla was 10x the player Neal ever was, and never let himself get out of shape in the offseason. Once his legs were gone they were gone though, even if he was in the best shape on his whole team.

[Gaskal]

I am having the exact same reaction as the Lindholm/Hanifin trade. Deep, utter disbelieving shock, followed by disappointment. Then after watching highlights of him punching faces and crushing dmen, warming up slowly to it.

[sa226]

I don't even blame Treliving for signing Neal. The idea seemed like a perfect fit.

He was exactly what the team needed. A veteran scoring winger with some grit, that has a ton of playoff experience. You can't really fault him for the term, you don't get UFA's of that status for less than 3 years. Who saw this imploding like it has? In my mind, last summer the worst case scenario for the signing was an overpaid aging player in years 4 and 5 of the deal. Yet here we are.

Compounding the problem is that this wasn't a guy who wanted to be here but had a bad year and was gearing up for a rebound year. He wanted out, so how do you keep him and hope he rebounds? Kudos to those involved for keeping the situation under wraps. This sounded like a terrible situation that could have become worse.

You're not just going to trade Neal for a 7th and reap the rewards of the cap space. It was a problem contract for a problem contract. I don't buy the buyout implications, they weren't going to buyout Neal anytime soon anyways. You can't carry that much dead weight.

I'm not happy about it. But I think its trying to make the best of a crappy situation. At least with Lucic we now hopefully will have a motivated player who understands and accepts his fit on the team and can maybe provide a little what the team is lacking.

As far as Trelivings track record goes, I don't think its as tainted as people seem to be suggesting. I don't blame him for Raymond, a 3 year 3aav contract was not a big deal and the team needed NHL players in the post Feaster era. I don't blame him for Bollig, same reason.

It started with Brouwer. Terrible signing and people were concerned about his underlying numbers. But really the team needed a player like the one they thought they were getting. I wonder how Brouwer would have fit, if he didn't play under Gulutzan.

Frolik was a good signing.

And Neal. 2 big misses on the UFA front. Do you blame the pro scouts? I don't know. To me the team needed those types of players when the signings happened, many predicted below average performances, but who foresaw to complete crash and burn?

I just don't really lay the UFA signing at the feet of Treliving as grounds for the hot seat. If anything its the Goaltending situation that could come back to bite him.

Anyhoo, this trade is ugly. But its not franchise crippling. Its fermenting garbage for motivated, and good fit garbage at a 500K discount.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by zamler

Are you saying Tre made a series of bad decisions to the point where he backed himself into a corner and had no choice but to take the worst and only choice available to him?

I think you've totally nailed it here.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

There's little doubt if all else fails Lucic would still be available next offseason and by then maybe Holland is even more desperate to unload him to the point were Treliving can dictate the return.

This is where I'm at. I don't accept this deal was the only deal possible until the end of time, that seems like a cop out and an attempt to shut down any criticisms.

[TheSquatch]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Was it? By all accounts Neal was embarrassed for his performance last season and has been working out hard with Gary Roberts. Sounds like a guy that was putting in as much effort as possible in the offseason to ensure he performed better next season. So lets say in year two he rebounds nicely to the point where even if he's not a great fit with the coach that that everyone is a pro about it and with three years left on the deal coming off a bounce back year that contract is maybe more admissible for another team to accept in a trade where the Flames retain some salary and take on some salary back. There's little doubt if all else fails Lucic would still be available next offseason and by then maybe Holland is even more desperate to unload him to the point were Treliving can dictate the return.

I just think once you sign a player for 5 years you owe it to the process to at least give it a 2nd season before declaring it a failure. I keep coming back to believing that the GM felt the coach and player could not coexist and in his mind the player had to go and if that's the case I guess I can understand it but then shame on him and his pro scouts for handing out that contract to a player that really didn't see eye to eye with the coach from day one. There needs to be some evaluation with pro scouting department with the Brouwer and Neal contracts being immediate poor fits in the locker room. It's one thing to sign players that don't live up to their contracts but bringing in square pegs for round holes tells me some people aren't doing enough homework.

One of the things that has mystified me for years is how Tod Button has a job, honestly. I do not (and am not) like calling for someone's head, but years and years and years of utter mediocrity (at best) in the draft, and basically one late-round home-run in Gaudreau, and a monster pile of utter misses. This is amateur rather than pro scouting, but obviously the team puts only so much into scouting, and... I think arguably it ain't enough.

Somebody isn't doing enough research about who gets brought in, and the UFA signings have been... honestly pretty bad. "Oh I knew that guy back in Hanoi in 68, he's real solid." doesn't get the job done.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by zamler

This is where I'm at. I don't accept this deal was the only deal possible until the end of time, that seems like a cop out and an attempt to shut down any criticisms.

So better options were available, but Treliving chose not to exercise them?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by the2bears

So better options were available, but Treliving chose not to exercise them?

Every GM makes the best decision they can though, even the awful ones.

There are always options IMO.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by zamler

Are you saying Tre made a series of bad decisions to the point where he backed himself into a corner and had no choice but to take the worst and only choice available to him? Or is keeping Neal driving off the cliff.

More or less, yeah.

The Neal contract was the mistake. I think there were many reasons to support the signing itself when it was signed, so I don't think it was terrible hockey management, but more a terrible result.

I know I was in the camp of thinking it would be 18-22 goals for two years, one at 17, then a decline to say 15 and 10 for the final two years.

But given the fact that it didn't work out, this was the only option.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by zamler

This is where I'm at. I don't accept this deal was the only deal possible until the end of time, that seems like a cop out and an attempt to shut down any criticisms.

Who said until the end of time.

In three years one year of Neal isn't that hard to move.

He wanted him gone now, in my mind ... not some day.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by TheSquatch

One of the things that has mystified me for years is how Tod Button has a job, honestly. I do not (and am not) like calling for someone's head, but years and years and years of utter mediocrity (at best) in the draft, and basically one late-round home-run in Gaudreau, and a monster pile of utter misses. This is amateur rather than pro scouting, but obviously the team puts only so much into scouting, and... I think arguably it ain't enough.

Somebody isn't doing enough research about who gets brought in, and the UFA signings have been... honestly pretty bad. "Oh I knew that guy back in Hanoi in 68, he's real solid." doesn't get the job done.

Tod Button is the head of amateur scouting, and has nothing to do with UFA decisions.

And the Flames have been drafting much better in the last four years under Treliving.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Every GM makes the best decision they can though, even the awful ones.

There are always options IMO.

Yep.

Keep Neal
Trade him for Lucic

Honestly I think that was it.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

The biggest winners in this trade are the Flames owners. They saved $7 Million in cold, hard, cash. (Plus a small amount of cap relief.)

This is not a "fan" or a "hockey" trade...it's a "money" trade. Pure and simple. The hope (on both teams) is that the savings for the Flames comes with some bonus toughness, and for the Greasers that they get some scoring for what they paid.

One way or another the Flames come out ahead.

Whether we, as fans, will be better off we will need to wait to see.

Originally Posted by Bingo

Don't be hard on yourself.

This isn't a "man am I excited the Flames have Lucic!" day. So questioning this mess is logical. But to me the action means the options were exhausted.

I can add a poll but what's the structure, I don't want to sway it by having the wrong question or options up.

I think it has to remain simple, as there's too many moving parts to unpack (the NMC, the rumours of needing to shed Neal due to fractured relationship etc)

Given what we know do you agree the Flames needed to trade James Neal to the Oilers for Lucic this offseason?

Or something simple like that.