Brad Treliving - GM Tracking & Evaluation

[conundrumed]

Let's have some fun with this!

D:

Gio-Brodie

Kulak/Val-Hamonic

Kulak/Val-Andersson

Wothers

 

Note, I didn't trade Hamilton lol.

[MAC331]

54 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Exactly.. I mean what would the conversation in here look like if we had traded Fox, Andersson , some picks or even a roster player or 2 and still sit out of the playoffs..with a now UFA or 2 that we may or may not re-sign. We'd be calling for everybody's head.

 

I'll be watching very intently in the offseason.. to date he doesn't have any "hockey trades" on his resume. Meaning trading a roster player to get another roster player back to fill a different need. This will be interesting to see how he makes out , because he likely has to do one or 2.

He also may not have to trade any player for a player if he uses UFA and is successful. Let's dream that he gets John Tavares C and Derek Ryan C. He could then decide on who goes out the door for picks to rebuild the system.

[MAC331]

15 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Let's have some fun with this!

D:

Gio-Brodie

Kulak/Val-Hamonic

Kulak/Val-Andersson

Wothers

 

Note, I didn't trade Hamilton lol.

Where did you put him up on RW ? LOL

[conundrumed]

Just now, MAC331 said:

Where did you put him up on RW ? LOL

Didn't trade him, just his position lol.

In my mind, I had three options

1. This a terrible idea

2. This is a bad idea

3. This is, well, an idea lol

 

It's a slow time for a Flames/Wings fan, tired of redundancy, lol. Didn't someone actually discuss moving Mony to wing?

Too many RD, not enough RS RW, especially that like to shoot and have long sticks.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

Didn't trade him, just his position lol.

In my mind, I had three options

1. This a terrible idea

2. This is a bad idea

3. This is, well, an idea lol

 

It's a slow time for a Flames/Wings fan, tired of redundancy, lol. Didn't someone actually discuss moving Mony to wing?

Too many RD, not enough RS RW, especially that like to shoot and have long sticks.

I think BT with this offseason is only limited to his own imagination. We have assembled some good to great players, now is the time to compliment them and get the best out of them. I know we all have a tendency to get trade happy with the idea of getting rid of what players we think are no longer a fit here. Undoubtedly you have to weed the garden however one has to ask what ingredients are missing in order for us to have a winning team.

One think I noticed from comments made was surrounding Leadership and Emotional Investment from the players as a whole but Tkachuk appeared to escape this criticism. He should get an A or even a C as one of the team Leaders was mentioned and I say we shouldn't put that on him just yet. This is where I think going all out for at least one proven winner such as Tavares or Neal will be money spent wisely.

[phoenix66]

20 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think BT with this offseason is only limited to his own imagination. We have assembled some good to great players, now is the time to compliment them and get the best out of them. I know we all have a tendency to get trade happy with the idea of getting rid of what players we think are no longer a fit here. Undoubtedly you have to weed the garden however one has to ask what ingredients are missing in order for us to have a winning team.

One think I noticed from comments made was surrounding Leadership and Emotional Investment from the players as a whole but Tkachuk appeared to escape this criticism. He should get an A or even a C as one of the team Leaders was mentioned and I say we shouldn't put that on him just yet. This is where I think going all out for at least one proven winner such as Tavares or Neal will be money spent wisely.

This hits on what I'm expecting from Bill Peters. Identify strengths and play to them .

You just need to look at Vegas to see a coach that knows how to do that .he's taken a team of misfits and has them dialled in playing like a powerhouse 

BT has been good getting the talent, just not a coach that knows how to use it .

For that reason I trust him to find the right talent for this team..and he believes he's hitched his wagon to a coach that will finally know how to use it 

 

Use Derek Engelland as an example:

when BT signed him , he became an instant whipping boy .."high paid Goon" they said ..even tho his old coach sang his praises 

BT at  the time described him as untapped potential, able to play more of a role, minutes and responsibility --people laughed - wanted to run him out of town 

Under Hartley..played 3rd pair, 7th defenseman role- 14-15 night -

He improved under Gulutzen..because he knew the player . but was still 3rd pair.. upgrading only to fill with injury,  17-18 min avg.. but in playoffs dropped back to 15 min 

 

Vegas ..he's a leader , 2nd pairing ,   20 min /night..  almost 25/night playoffs -- plays special teams ..and he doesnt look out of place doing it 

I don't think we missed the boat in terms of losing him to Vegas, I think it was a no brainer for him to want to go home.. 

 

the point is BT brought in a talent, identified it on day 1--and 2 coaches proceeded to misuse him

 

I think Lazar , Brouwer , and Bennett especially .. are better than what they have shown , in the way they have been used -- best analogy I have heard is GG likes to cram a square peg in a round hole 

 

 

just using players properly , will improve the buy in.

But , we do still need a talent upgrade in certain areas 

[conundrumed]

59 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think BT with this offseason is only limited to his own imagination. We have assembled some good to great players, now is the time to compliment them and get the best out of them. I know we all have a tendency to get trade happy with the idea of getting rid of what players we think are no longer a fit here. Undoubtedly you have to weed the garden however one has to ask what ingredients are missing in order for us to have a winning team.

One think I noticed from comments made was surrounding Leadership and Emotional Investment from the players as a whole but Tkachuk appeared to escape this criticism. He should get an A or even a C as one of the team Leaders was mentioned and I say we shouldn't put that on him just yet. This is where I think going all out for at least one proven winner such as Tavares or Neal will be money spent wisely.

MAC, do you work for the Flames? Wtf is this hodgepodge?

One think I noticed is the master plan is to get Tavares or Neal?

That isn't a plan, it's a prayer.

If that's what you'd do, look at backend years on Gio, Tavares, Neal on deals you'd have to ink.

Not into that at all, get ahead of the game, don't be the golden years contracts team.

Avoid it like the plague. Too many good, young players. Go that way.

[MAC331]

28 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

MAC, do you work for the Flames? Wtf is this hodgepodge?

One think I noticed is the master plan is to get Tavares or Neal?

That isn't a plan, it's a prayer.

If that's what you'd do, look at backend years on Gio, Tavares, Neal on deals you'd have to ink.

Not into that at all, get ahead of the game, don't be the golden years contracts team.

Avoid it like the plague. Too many good, young players. Go that way.

I thought I had the word "dream" in one of these posts. I don't know that I am that far off with my thinking. It seems everyone wants the team to win and eventually expects them to win but don't ever want the GM to spend o the right player to put us in that position. You want to be patient and wait while all these parts grow into something special, well as admiral as that is others want to see a push. Our glaring weakness IMO is a proven winner with some Leadership for our forward ranks that plays top line be it a C or a RW. Everything else could be managed IMO.

[robrob74]

11 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Didn't trade him, just his position lol.

In my mind, I had three options

1. This a terrible idea

2. This is a bad idea

3. This is, well, an idea lol

 

It's a slow time for a Flames/Wings fan, tired of redundancy, lol. Didn't someone actually discuss moving Mony to wing?

Too many RD, not enough RS RW, especially that like to shoot and have long sticks.

 

What if we moved Brodie to RW instead of Hamilton? He “prefers” the right side, right? He’d be free to roam, but as a forward, he’d have some defensive smarts to him. 

 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Ferland

Tkachuk, Backlund, Brodie

Bennett, Jankowski, Frolik

hathaway, Shore, Lazar

 

again, a bored offseason idea... 

 

mash up up the lines any way we like now! Maybe put Brodie somewhere else?

[Cowtownguy]

On April 29, 2018 at 8:46 PM, DirtyDeeds said:

Hogwash

 

BT could have tried to help instead he did practically nothing.

 

Other teams were able to find help for their playoff runs.

 

Paul Stastny - Jets

While the Jets pretty much had a playoff spot tied up, Laine was injured. Fit was good.

 

 

Evander Kane - Sharks

We had the opportunity for him and it ended up, he did not cost the Sharks much. In the close race in this division He was a really nice pickup, even if he turns out to be a short term pickup.

 

JT Miller - Lightning

12 point in his first 11 games when traded.. Those pickups never work at trade deadline right???

 

BT could have done more.. waiver claim and 4th line center they only played the last what..9 games when it was pretty much a sinking ship?

 

Thank goodness my kids are in their 20 and 30s. I wouldn't want them to experience your potty mouth sir!

[MAC331]

On ‎2018‎-‎05‎-‎02 at 0:44 PM, phoenix66 said:

This hits on what I'm expecting from Bill Peters. Identify strengths and play to them .

You just need to look at Vegas to see a coach that knows how to do that .he's taken a team of misfits and has them dialled in playing like a powerhouse 

BT has been good getting the talent, just not a coach that knows how to use it .

For that reason I trust him to find the right talent for this team..and he believes he's hitched his wagon to a coach that will finally know how to use it 

 

Use Derek Engelland as an example:

when BT signed him , he became an instant whipping boy .."high paid Goon" they said ..even tho his old coach sang his praises 

BT at  the time described him as untapped potential, able to play more of a role, minutes and responsibility --people laughed - wanted to run him out of town 

Under Hartley..played 3rd pair, 7th defenseman role- 14-15 night -

He improved under Gulutzen..because he knew the player . but was still 3rd pair.. upgrading only to fill with injury,  17-18 min avg.. but in playoffs dropped back to 15 min 

 

Vegas ..he's a leader , 2nd pairing ,   20 min /night..  almost 25/night playoffs -- plays special teams ..and he doesnt look out of place doing it 

I don't think we missed the boat in terms of losing him to Vegas, I think it was a no brainer for him to want to go home.. 

 

the point is BT brought in a talent, identified it on day 1--and 2 coaches proceeded to misuse him

 

I think Lazar , Brouwer , and Bennett especially .. are better than what they have shown , in the way they have been used -- best analogy I have heard is GG likes to cram a square peg in a round hole 

 

 

just using players properly , will improve the buy in.

But , we do still need a talent upgrade in certain areas 

I also think GG missed the boat on getting the right players together or change fast enough. I do think he had some real challenges trying to get some players the proper amount of ice time in the best positions for effectiveness. You mention Lazar, Brouwer and Bennett which really emphasises the problems with our bottom 6 ineffectiveness. They didn't want Brouwer with Bennett when he was at C so we waited for Jagr which didn't end well. In that arrangement Lazar kept getting pushed out of the picture because you couldn't even play him at 4th line RW or C because of Brouwer and Stajan. In the end they jam Lazar in on LW just to get him some ice time and everyone labels him no good again. To make matters worse for Bennett and Lazar they bring up Jankowski and Hathaway, again not using Lazar on RW. The Jankowski move pushed Bennett to LW (which was good IMO) but again everyone just expects Bennett to excel while learning a new position. By the end of the season with the injuries our forward group was a total mess IMO but also very telling.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing a line of Tkachuk, Jankowski and Lazar this coming season. If we could get Lazar playing with some confidence and scoring he could be the player to take over for someone like Frolik. I think Tkachuk would be the perfect catalyst for such a line. This would allow Bennett with his new found defensive talents to play with Backlund and Frolik removing the excuses for him. Should these two newly formed lines produce a lot more scoring we have a better team by utilizing players properly IMO.

[redfire11]

Watching Lazar play I really like his effort and you see flashes of higher skill. But it just hasn't translated effectively on the ice. With a new coach and some consistent line mates he could realistically be our 2nd or 3rd line RW that we talk so much about trading Brodie for.

[conundrumed]

3 minutes ago, redfire11 said:

Watching Lazar play I really like his effort and you see flashes of higher skill. But it just hasn't translated effectively on the ice. With a new coach and some consistent line mates he could realistically be our 2nd or 3rd line RW that we talk so much about trading Brodie for.

That would be nice. Perhaps it's just a case of him needing to find some swagger, the hard work is there, but the skillset doesn't seem to be.

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, redfire11 said:

Watching Lazar play I really like his effort and you see flashes of higher skill. But it just hasn't translated effectively on the ice. With a new coach and some consistent line mates he could realistically be our 2nd or 3rd line RW that we talk so much about trading Brodie for.

 

I don't know about the higher skill part.  I have watched him double clutch on tap in goals, miss the net on any kind of shot and skate by the puck so many times, I don't know if he can score anymore.  Maybe the coach misused him, but he's got to do something out there positive on the score sheet.  To date, I haven't seen anything from him that demonstrates a higher skill set.  I wouldn't be expecting him to be a regular 3rd line or above.  

 

If he played on the 4th line with a decent center and winger, we might actually have a 4th line that doesn't concern you playing any time in the game.  A secondary shutdown line with speed to transition into scoring.  Between him and Shore, I think they have some of that, they just need to work in the offense side and get the correct winger.

 

As some have pointed out, we aren't that far away from being a good team.  Putrid scoring/luck when we needed it.  Goaltending dropping off the face of the earth to end the season.  Putrid PP numbers.  Etc.  We have enough good players to fill most of the lineup:  JH, Mony, Tkachuk, Backlund, Ferland, Bennett, Janko, Frolik.  A couple of complementary players to balance out the 4th line and extra F:  Lazar, Shore, Hathaway.  To me that seems one top 6 RW and a decent RHS C, and a good 4th line LW short.      

 

Maybe (big maybe) we have a guy from the farm or two that could hop in, but I think at best they would be battling Lazar, Shore and Hathaway for spots.  Maybe battling Ferland and Bennett too.  

 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

That would be nice. Perhaps it's just a case of him needing to find some swagger, the hard work is there, but the skillset doesn't seem to be.

I would say give Lazar first chance at the 3rd line RW and if it isn't working we have Foo, Gawdin and maybe a few others.

Should the speculation of Derek Ryan happen we could have a 4th line of Klimchuk, Ryan and Shore possibly with others as well. Depth is building finally.

[conundrumed]

12 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I would say give Lazar first chance at the 3rd line RW and if it isn't working we have Foo, Gawdin and maybe a few others.

Should the speculation of Derek Ryan happen we could have a 4th line of Klimchuk, Ryan and Shore possibly with others as well. Depth is building finally.

We need to decide on Eatbread likely before anyone you've mentioned. You just have to look at DeBrincat and see how he was able to transition his game, because for all those jr points, I saw an NHL-long shot. I see Mangiapane in a similar way, and Peters sounds like he likes to put young guys in roles they were acquired for.

Mangia doesn't really have much to prove in the A any longer, does he?

[robrob74]

I really hope they go with a smaller group at training camp. I’d prefer them trying things out to get the lines and how we want to play right. Maybe I am too critical of the “1000 player” invites, but I just think the team needs to focus as a smaller group early on. Maybe we did it before BT, but it hasn’t really worked since he got here. 

 

The year we did make the playoffs, we needed a huge winning streak to get back into the playoff race. It was the same this past year. So I think, invite a few extra PTOs who you actually are serious about taking a look at. 

[travel_dude]

52 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

We need to decide on Eatbread likely before anyone you've mentioned. You just have to look at DeBrincat and see how he was able to transition his game, because for all those jr points, I saw an NHL-long shot. I see Mangiapane in a similar way, and Peters sounds like he likes to put young guys in roles they were acquired for.

Mangia doesn't really have much to prove in the A any longer, does he?

 

That's the big thing isn't it.  Breadeater was played in exactly the wrong role in CGY.  He was a leading AHL scorer playing on top lines.  Why would we consider even using him on the 4th line playing 8 minutes?  Perhaps a simple answer is a line of Mangiapane-Janko-Bennett.  Shelter them a little.  We can still upgrade a RW on Backlund's or Monahan's line.

 

It's funny you mentioned DeBrincat.  I was hoping he would be on the board for us in the 2nd round.

Up till we traded with STL for Elliott.  I hadn't heard anything about Kyrou, but probably still would have picked DeBrincat knowing what I know today.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

We need to decide on Eatbread likely before anyone you've mentioned. You just have to look at DeBrincat and see how he was able to transition his game, because for all those jr points, I saw an NHL-long shot. I see Mangiapane in a similar way, and Peters sounds like he likes to put young guys in roles they were acquired for.

Mangia doesn't really have much to prove in the A any longer, does he?

Mangiapane IMO should come in as a LW if we want him to be successful. Why play him on RW which is a disadvantage to him ? I like Lazar initially because he is a RHS and has played both C/RW which works better. If he can regain some confidence and scoring touch we win, if not depth is building in behind him. I think it would ideal to have a line of Mangiapane, Dube and Foo working together in Stockton.

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

I really hope they go with a smaller group at training camp. I’d prefer them trying things out to get the lines and how we want to play right. Maybe I am too critical of the “1000 player” invites, but I just think the team needs to focus as a smaller group early on. Maybe we did it before BT, but it hasn’t really worked since he got here. 

 

The year we did make the playoffs, we needed a huge winning streak to get back into the playoff race. It was the same this past year. So I think, invite a few extra PTOs who you actually are serious about taking a look at. 

I think the China deal will force them into a small group rather quickly.

[conundrumed]

33 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

That's the big thing isn't it.  Breadeater was played in exactly the wrong role in CGY.  He was a leading AHL scorer playing on top lines.  Why would we consider even using him on the 4th line playing 8 minutes?  Perhaps a simple answer is a line of Mangiapane-Janko-Bennett.  Shelter them a little.  We can still upgrade a RW on Backlund's or Monahan's line.

 

It's funny you mentioned DeBrincat.  I was hoping he would be on the board for us in the 2nd round.

Up till we traded with STL for Elliott.  I hadn't heard anything about Kyrou, but probably still would have picked DeBrincat knowing what I know today.

I might be wrong, but I believe DeBrincat spent a lot of time on the Kane-Schmaltz line.

Their coach is Quenneville.

Calgary has a long history of making guys learn the bottom 6 first, I really hope we get away from that.

[travel_dude]

51 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I might be wrong, but I believe DeBrincat spent a lot of time on the Kane-Schmaltz line.

Their coach is Quenneville.

Calgary has a long history of making guys learn the bottom 6 first, I really hope we get away from that.

 

I think he started away from Kane, but impressed.

3rd line I could deal with.  4th line, not so much.

[conundrumed]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think he started away from Kane, but impressed.

3rd line I could deal with.  4th line, not so much.

I know for sure he was 1st line with Toews for a while, I'm just unclear on the bulk of his season.

Mangiapane's usage was retarded, he created a few chances right away, but you've got him with low talent anchors.

The terrible part of that is you put such low expectations on him, for him it's gotta look like little faith and he'll get little chance.

Which is what it was.

[Cowtownguy]

Some of us have significant expectations for Treliving this summer. I would really like him to shore up the RW spot on the first line so that we can move a few players down the lineup. We would still have Ferland as an option to be moved up from time to time. That would give Peters some flexibility and allow him to properly work on/fit in players like Bennett and maybe Lazar.

 

Realistically, however, there are only so many options for him to consider. He cannot force a team trade with him, and very good-excellent RW players are often in short supply at a high cost (prospects, picks, salary). My question is, what exactly are realistic or appropriate expectations for him? If he does not acquire a RW, should this reflect poorly on him? A GM is responsible for providing a winning roster. In this era, can a GM really swing amazing trades that benefit their teams? Lastly, in this era of hockey, is it fair to say that the Winnipeg model of slow and steady team development mostly through the draft is the only one given that we live in an information era? Chiarelli aside, there are not that many chumps left in the league. 

[MAC331]

15 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Some of us have significant expectations for Treliving this summer. I would really like him to shore up the RW spot on the first line so that we can move a few players down the lineup. We would still have Ferland as an option to be moved up from time to time. That would give Peters some flexibility and allow him to properly work on/fit in players like Bennett and maybe Lazar.

 

Realistically, however, there are only so many options for him to consider. He cannot force a team trade with him, and very good-excellent RW players are often in short supply at a high cost (prospects, picks, salary). My question is, what exactly are realistic or appropriate expectations for him? If he does not acquire a RW, should this reflect poorly on him? A GM is responsible for providing a winning roster. In this era, can a GM really swing amazing trades that benefit their teams? Lastly, in this era of hockey, is it fair to say that the Winnipeg model of slow and steady team development mostly through the draft is the only one given that we live in an information era? Chiarelli aside, there are not that many chumps left in the league. 

First of all it takes two to dance with a trade. All GMs have needs or situations they prefer to resolve so moves will happen. Every team needs scoring so any team will be reluctant to give it up which makes trading tight. BT and staff have so far been good at coming up with some good trades.