38Curtis Lazar Profile
Photo Credit: Sergei Belski-USA TODAY Sports

Season in review: Brad Treliving

Coming into the 2016-17 season, Brad Treliving was also entering the final year of his first deal as the Calgary Flames’ general manager. In the first year, his team made the playoffs (albeit more thanks to a season-long stretch of incredible luck than anything else). In his second year, they did not.

Not that his third year was a make or break year for him or anything, but it turned out okay when all was said and done.

From 2015-16’s end to the draft

Most of the time, we aren’t focused on what the general manager is doing. He assembles the team, and then we watch the team, and we analyze the team, and most things are about what’s happening on the ice.

When the team’s season ends, though, and there’s no more play to watch or analyze, all eyes turn to what’s going on off the ice. The offseason is really the general manager’s time to shine, and between needing a new head coach and having the sixth overall pick, Treliving had a fair bit to do once his team was eliminated.

Moves he made included:

  • April 29: Signing Czech free agent and former Montreal draft pick Daniel Pribyl to a two-year deal.
  • May 5: Firing Bob Hartley, as well as assistant coach Jacques Cloutier.
  • June 10: Returning to the Czech league, this time to pick up free agent goaltender David Rittich.
  • June 17: Hiring Glen Gulutzan to replace Hartley as head coach.
  • June 24: Drafting Matthew Tkachuk with the sixth overall pick.
    • Almost immediately after, he swapped the 25th overall pick and a conditional 2018 third to the St. Louis Blues for Brian Elliott.
  • June 25: Drafting another nine players. The Flames selected Tyler Parsons, Dillon Dube, Adam Fox, Linus Lindstrom, Mitchell Mattson, Eetu Tuulola, Matthew Phillips, and Stepan Falkovsky over rounds two through seven.

Treliving had a modest start to his offseason. The biggest move he made was firing the Flames’ coach of the past four seasons and gambling on Glen Gulutzan to take over and improve his club. So far, it looks like that’s paid off, but there’s still much to be seen.

His second biggest move was to fix the Flames’ goaltending. Free of all NHL goalie contracts, he had a clean slate to work with and quickly turned to the cost-effective netminder who had held excellent numbers over the past half decade in Elliott. It was a cheap pick up, both in payroll and in terms of acquisition cost – especially when you consider the asking price for Ben Bishop was the sixth overall pick. (Speaking of, selecting Tkachuk was a no brainer for Treliving as soon as he fell to the Flames, but it can’t go understated how good of a June 24 Treliving had.)

Everything else was pretty minor, but had the potential for big payoff. Pribyl unforunately spent his first season in North America hurt, but Rittich surpassed expectations, to the point where he’s complicated the Flames’ goaltending prospect pool by not just pushing Jon Gillies, but establishing himself as a quality option on his own. As for the rest of the draft, Treliving picked up one of the top minor goalies in Parsons, one of the top rookie college defencemen ever in Fox, and made a slew of other good selections, including some potential late round steals.

The big moves look to have paid off for the most part, or at the very least, weren’t damaging in the long term. The smaller moves look to perhaps have bigger payoffs down the line.

Free agents and re-signings

The draft over, Treliving’s next duties were to take care of his team’s restricted free agents – the Flames had 13 of them – and focus on addressing his roster’s weakness, particularly via free agency.

  • June 27: Nine RFAs – Kenny Agostino, Bill Arnold, Joe Colborne, Turner Elson, Josh Jooris, Joni Ortio, Drew Shore, and Bryce Van Brabant – weren’t qualified, and released to the wilds of free agency.
    • Four RFAs – Johnny Gaudreau, Freddie Hamilton, Sean Monahan, and Tyler Wotherspoon – were qualified.
    • The Flames’ 2012 second round selection, Patrick Sieloff, was traded for Alex Chiasson.
  • June 29: Mason Raymond’s contract was bought out. He had one year left on his deal worth $3.15 million.
  • July 1: Troy Brouwer and Chad Johnson were signed as free agents.
  • July 5: Linden Vey was signed as a free agent.
  • July 6: Dave Cameron and Paul Jerrard were hired as assistant coaches.
  • Aug. 15: Wotherspoon was re-signed.
  • Aug. 16: The Flames declined to sign 2013 seventh round pick John Gilmour, letting him go.
  • Aug. 19: Monahan was re-signed.
  • Sept. 23: Hamilton was re-signed.
  • Oct. 10: Gaudreau was re-signed.
    • Brandon Bollig was waived.
  • Oct. 11: Nicklas Grossmann and Kris Versteeg were signed as free agents.

A number of players left the Flames organization, and none of them were really missed. Agostino had an astounding AHL season, scoring 83 points in 65 games, but Arnold dropped out of hockey all together. Elson played 13 games for a different AHL team, Gilmour played the full season in the AHL, and Van Brabant split time between the AHL and ECHL. Shore played 50 games in Switzerland (and apparently 14 games for the Canucks at some point?), while Ortio spent the season in Sweden. Colborne and Jooris scored 20 points between them.

Monahan’s seven-year, $6.375 million AAV deal was done in timely fashion, while Gaudreau’s six-year, $6.75 million contract came down to the wire, causing a lot of angst and a totally missed training camp. It also looks to be a bargain of a cap hit considering Gaudreau’s point-per-game potential, though. Hamilton was signed for cheap and earned his way into the 13th forward role, while Wotherspoon failed to crack the NHL lineup and spent his season being one of Stockton’s top defencemen. Vey joined him as an extremely effective AHLer.

Trading Sieloff for Chiasson gave the Flames an immediate upgrade in the sense that Sieloff is not particularly likely to ever be an NHLer, while Chiasson is, at worst, a good depth player. Raymond’s days in the NHL unceremoniously ended, but at least the Flames didn’t have to worry about fitting him in the lineup anywhere.

No, that struggle is now in Brouwer’s name, as Treliving made perhaps the worst blunder of his GM career to date in signing an aging forward with red flags as far as the eye could see to a four-year, $4.5 million AAV deal: a deal that’s going to cause even more problems down the line if it can’t be made to go away somehow.

But at least the one-year, $1.7 million deal for Johnson was good, as was Versteeg’s last minute $950k contract. There was some skepticism around the Cameron hire, but the Flames’ special teams did improve under him and Jerrard, so like with Gulutzan, the book is still out. Meanwhile, the Grossmann contract proved to be bad, but the Flames finally took a major step forward in sending Bollig to the AHL, effectively ending his time in Calgary. For the first time in a long time, the Flames had a lineup filled with guys who could all actually play a regular shift.

The 2016-17 season

Treliving didn’t have too much to do as the season started, letting the year play out and only making minor moves when necessary.

  • Oct. 15: Tom McCollum was signed as a free agent, for expansion draft purposes.
  • Nov. 12: Grossmann was released from his contract.
  • Feb. 16: Matt Bartkowski was signed as a free agent, for expansion draft purposes.
  • Feb. 20: Michael Stone was acquired for a 2017 third round pick, as well as a conditional 2018 fifth rounder, pending Stone’s potential re-signing in Calgary.
  • March 1: Curtis Lazar and Mike Kostka were acquired for a 2017 second round pick and Jyrki Jokipakka.
  • March 19: Ryan Lomberg and Parsons were signed to entry-level contracts.
  • March 24: Dube was signed to an entry-level contract.
  • March 25: NCAA free agent defenceman Josh Healey was signed to an entry-level contract.
  • May 1: Treliving re-signed with the Flames, reportedly picking up more autonomy for himself in the process.

The season was a mixed bag. Treliving set his team up to be free of any expansion draft drama or struggles relatively early on, taking one thing off his plate. Grossmann, who played three NHL games, headed off to play in Sweden, and Treliving locked up a couple of Flames prospects.

The trade deadline was the big one, and the time during the season a general manager tends to leave his mark. The logic in Treliving’s moves was sound – the defence needs upgrading so here’s Stone; Lazar should be able to do more than he’s shown and fits in with the team’s age group – but left the Flames with just one pick in the top 100 of this year’s draft. Not just that, but it removed the flexibility those picks could have offered. The price for the rights to Scott Darling was a third round pick; the Flames gave it up on a mediocre defenceman who didn’t really do much to actually improve the backend. A second round pick should have more flexible value; instead, Treliving decided to gamble it on a young player who really hasn’t shown much throughout his hockey playing career, but was mishandled by Ottawa and is apparently a nice kid. The Flames decided they were going to be buyers to an extent, half-assed it, and lost in the first round of the playoffs: a very mediocre sequence overall.

The good and the bad

Treliving didn’t have a perfect year, but he didn’t have a bad one, either. He locked up his team’s top two offensive players to reasonable to great deals, and did a great job bolstering his prospect pool, as well as his NHL club’s depth.

On the other hand, he signed Brouwer, a deal that looked bad at the time, and is probably going to get worse as it continues – after an already incredibly poor first season. That’s a major low point that can’t be overlooked, even as most other moves appear to be on their way to panning out.

Replacing Hartley with Gulutzan was an upgrade, and the Flames had a good draft and did a good job replenishing their NHL goaltenders, getting a decent tandem for a relatively low price and risk-free term. On the other hand, he depleted his draft picks for moves that either didn’t actually do anything or are going to take some time – and a lot of hoping – to actually work out.

So how was Treliving’s season? The highs aren’t as apparent as the lows, but it was a solid, drama-free year that still has the team set up well for the future, and that alone is worth Treliving’s extension.

  • Raffydog

    “It also looks to be a bargain of a cap hit considering Gaudreau’s point-per-game potential”
    Lol sorry that just makes me laugh, chicken little will never be a point per game player, not in this universe anyways.

  • Puckhead

    Once prospects from Stockton graduate to the NHL it will take some heat off of BT for a while and he can focus on restocking the prospect pool again. Hopefully it will also give fans more faith in the development system.

  • Southboy

    Yes he was 1pt off of being a pt/game player, but so was Jordan eberle ( 2pts off a pt/game ) in his 2nd year. (Spits) JH is actually a .87pts/game career right now, and said Boiler was a .80pts/game in his st 3 years, and even after a year that is about to run him out of town he is a career .75pts/game. Not down on JH because he has way more talent than Eberle, but to hate on someones comment about not being a pt/game player by stating one year that could potentially be an anomally ( see Eberle’s ) second year is a biased opinion without using career stats. That was off topic of the article, so on target. I would rate BT a ‘C’ on all moves mentioned above.

  • buts

    To me the book is still out on BT for the following reasons, Raymond, wideman, huska, goaltending, GG cuz of player usage and because of his track record (bad) in dallas and van, bollig, bad free agents like brouwer and prybil, the 10 million 4th line etc. I hope he learns from his mistakes because the flames are very close and with a few strategic moves in goal, on D and up front by BT will be contenders for years to come. I’ve got my fingers crossed.

  • Southboy

    I agree ‘buts’ that hopefully he can learn from his mistakes, and that starts this offseason. If he does not shore up the goaltending, add a top 4dman on value (not named Stone footed Stone) and add to our top 6, his previous blunders in those 3 areas will be his undoing

  • Skylardog

    The big mistake by BT will always be the mishandling of the Hartley firing and the hiring of GG.
    Few of us if any could see the firing coming, although there were signs. The issue that has to be addressed is the timeline.

    The season ended April 10, 2016. 25 days later, BH is fired. This is a decision that was made far too late. Why, because several teams were already well into the process of locking up the elite available coaches in the league. Lets timeline it:

    May 5, BH is fired.
    May 7, just 2 days later, Boudreau is hired by Minny
    May 8, just 3 days after BH is gone, Boucher is hired by Ottawa.
    June 14, Carlyle is hired by Anaheim.
    June 17, GG is hired.

    The Flames had barely even started the process when Boudreau and Boucher are locked up and off the market.
    Does anyone else find it strange that the Flames signed GG just 3 days after Carlyle is hired in Anaheim?
    It smells so much like the best 3 available guys all were either locked up before the Flames knew they were looking for a coach, or signed somewhere else leaving GG as a “settle with” guy. Flames management dropped the ball on the whole process, and the failure is near unforgivable.
    If it had been this year, 4 coaches would have been hired in the month of April. Gallant, Hitchcock, Stevens and Green. It should be obvious that getting the jump in replacing a coach is a game that must be played the day after the season ends. Gallant and Hitchcock were hired 4 days after the season ended. Waiting until May to fire BH is simply not acceptable in a professional organization.

    And that applies, even if GG was, at the end of the day, the Flames number 1 choice.

    • Sober rock guy

      With that logic Hartley should have been fired two seasons ago and then Treliving could have convinced ownership to back the money truck up to Babcock.

  • Puckhead

    Tre is doing fine for a guy who was tasked with making a depleted club into something respectable. The pieces are falling into place and this may be a very good team in the not too distant future. He’s made his mistakes but those things happen when you have a bunch of other clubs vying for limited resources.

  • BringtheFire

    I’m beginning to look at this year as like, I guess kind of a non-event. There’s a lot of “but” attached to it…Johnny would have been better out of the gate but he missed camp…they would have played better but they had to learn the systems…Treliving is a good GM but there were too many cooks in the kitchen…it can go on and on.

    So, let’s say that next season, as fans, we’re not that interested in “but”.

    (“insert” juvenile comment here)

  • KH44

    That Brouwer signing looks worse and worse. That 4.5 mil could be used in so many ways right now, its really painful, and it will be painful for the next three years. If Treliving is a better than average GM (which is what we should obviously be hoping he is, or else why have him?), getting rid of his Brouwer mistake and not making more like that, old, overpaid, long term, but high ‘intangibles’ players, will be the way to judge him moving forward.

  • Skylardog

    This is a long read, but you will find it worthwhile!

    How important is coaching and how important is the pedigree of the coach? What are the chances that a coach wins a Stanley Cup without being an elite coach or having what I call a pedigree? The chances are limited without one.

    This is why BT and Flames management has failed us so badly.

    There are really 2 conditions that lead coaches to win cups. The quality of the team is extremely important, but so is the coach’s history.

    Elite coaches win cups. They either figure out how it is done as a player first, learn from an Elite coach as an assistant, or take a team that is loaded with talent and figure out how to win by getting there with a great team. Some have all those attributes, only on occasion, does a coach win without the above pedigree.

    Over the last 45 years, here is the record.

    Of multi cup winning coaches, Bowman with 9 cups, Sather and Arbour with 4 each, and Shero with 2 each coached in a different time, but they also had great teams and great backgrounds. They are historic coaches.
    In more recent times, Quenneville won 3 and Sutter won 2. Quenneville took 10 playoff years and 3 organizations before winning his first cup – He then had a great team to win with. He is Elite, but it took years to get there. Sutter actually has a better pedigree than Quenneville. He took 10 playoff seasons, 4 organizations, a Stanley Cup loss (Flames) before winning, and was in an org with a pedigree coach Mike Keenan.
    All the rest are 1 cup winners, 19 of them, and after this year, there will only be 18 as both coaches this year have cups under their belt. But what are their pedigrees?

    NHL Player Pedigrees
    L. Robinson, and J. Lemaire have strong pedigrees with Montreal and played for Bowman. Won Cups, multiple. Montreal in the hey days is also a pedigree apparently.
    Terry Crisp, coaching was in 2nd year, but was a player under Shero winning 2 cups. Had a Great team.
    Carlyle was a great player but had little proof as a coach. He did have a loaded Anaheim team and went to the finals the year before winning. He is actually a weak pedigree.
    Dan Bylsma. Few would think he had a pedigree, and he did have a great Pittsburgh team, but he has 2 other pedigrees, a cup final as a player in Anaheim in 02/03, where he played for a pedigree coach, Mike Babcock.

    Cup winning coaches with ties to pedigree coaches:
    Muckler, linked to Sather, and great Edmonton teams
    Perron, Montreal is in itself a pedigree before 1995, but also an assistant under J. Lemaire.
    Mike Sullivan – Again a loaded team with Crosby, Malkin, and others, but he also coached with Tortorella and was in the Chicago organization in the past few years.

    Coaches that earned it.
    Pat Burns – Lost in finals in Montreal in first year, but took 9 playoff years and 4 organizations to finally win.
    J. Demers – Took 7 playoff appearances and 4 organizations to win in Montreal.
    M. Keenan – 9 playoff appearances and 3 organizations. Lost 3 times in the finals before winning.
    C. Julien – 5 playoff appearances and 3 organizations before winning with Boston. Has moved again.
    B. Johnson – 6 playoff appearances. 2 organizations. Wins in 2nd trip to the finals, but really had teams that should have won many cups.
    Laviolette – 3 playoff appearances, wins with 2nd organization. Been to finals since and is there now.
    Babcock – coming in he looks weak, and he is as far as pedigrees go. 4 playoff appearances, 2 organizations, and a loss in the finals in his first year. But when hired by Detroit, which was loaded, he had a pedigree. And a cup.

    That leaves 4 coaches that have won with what looks like weak pedigrees. But are they – Look at the names.
    Hartley – wins in his first gig in 3rd season, but it was a loaded team – Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Ray Bourque
    Hitchcock – wins in his first gig, but it was a loaded team – Modano, Nieuwendyk, B. Hull, Carbonneau, Belfour
    Crawford – wins in his first gig, but it was a loaded team – Sakic, Forsberg, Roy…
    Tortorella – No pedigree, no evidence, Never played in the NHL. It took him 5 seasons and his second NHL organization to win. His team was a loaded Tampa Bay team that Calgary should have beaten.

    So for GG, the closest comparison is Torts. But for the 1 Torts, there are hundreds of unproven, non NHL playing, no pedigree mentors that have failed in the NHL. GG has no pedigree coming in. He matches 1 example in the last 45 years of a coach with zero pedigree that was able to win a cup.
    One may argue that 4 coaches fall into the lack of pedigree category, but 3 had great teams when they came in and won.

    This is why BT hiring GG is a mistake. BT fails on all counts for this one error, because he had no clue as to what attributes make a coach a success. And lets be clear. GG’s days in Dallas are enough to show he is the wrong guy. He lacks the pedigree.

    2 years in Dallas, no playoff appearances. Strike 1, coached under an Elite Pedigree coach – No (sorry Willy D, you haven’t proven you are pedigree either), Strike 2. A retired NHL player with success and cup wins – you have to play an NHL game to fall into that category – Strike 3. Wrong guy. Never should have been hired. He has NONE of the attributes that make coaches successful in the NHL.

    • Jessemadnote

      Bob Hartley and Ken Hitchcock don’t count because they had Roy and Sakic and Modano. Quenneville and Sutter count because they’re great coaches even though they have toews, kane, and doughty. Weak thesis bud.

      • Skylardog

        No – You are missing the point. Quenneville and Sutter took 10 years in the playoffs to develop enough to win a cup, and were in 3 and 4 organizations respectively before they won a cup. They were also NHL players (but never went to a Stanley cup final). Hartley and Hitchcock did not play in the NHL, never coached as an assistant for a coach that had won a Stanley Cup. But both won in their first gig as an NHL coach. They didn’t have the background that normally spells success, but what they did have were amazing teams. In Hartley’s case he inherited a team that had won a Stanley cup only 4 years earlier, a team that was coached by Marc Crawford, and was loaded.
        What success would Hartley of had if put with a team that did not have that level of talent, a team that had not won 4 years earlier? My guess is he would have floundered.

        On very rare occasions, coaches that have not played in the NHL, coaches that have not been to Stanley Cup finals as players, coaches that have not coached in multiple organizations over multiple season in multiple playoffs, or coaches that have not been mentored by coaches that have won a Stanley Cup before: On very rare occasions does a coach not have at least one of these attributes go on to win a cup. Tortorella is the most like GG. He came out of nowhere to win. Hitchcock, Hartley, and Crawford have also won without these attributes, but had better resumes than GG, and likely the key, they had teams that were far an above better than almost all of the other teams in the NHL.

        I am not saying that GG will not win a cup. I am not saying that he is not going to be a great coach. What I am saying, is that history says, it will not happen as a Flames coach. It is not likely to happen in his next gig as a coach for another organization. The only way it would happen as a Flames coach is if his team was far and above a team with better talent than all but maybe 1 or 2 other teams in the NHL. The Flames don’t fit that bill.
        We are going to go thorugh the growing pains of GG as he learns. But all we are doing is helping him develop for when he is a coach for his 3rd or 4th organization. Why would we want to go through that, when there are coaches out there that have played in the NHL, played and won in Cup finals, coached in the playoffs for multiple seasons, coached as assistants for coaches that have won cups. Why would we not have chosen a coach with these attributes, attributes that lead to proven success?

        GG has more in common with Dallas Eakins than any of the cup winning coaches on this list.

  • L.Kolkind

    I still have no idea why you say trading for Elliot was good. The Flames were a rebuilding team and even if Elliot stood on his head in the playoffs Calgary wouldn’t have won. We only got one season out of him, instead of a high-end prospect in a very good draft year. Treliving said he values draft picks, but in the past 3 years he has traded away 4 2nd picks.

    2 of them were for Hamilton who I agree is fantastic and while the trade did cost a lot, finding another defenceman of Hamilton’s calibre with those picks wasn’t likely. The 2nd round pick for Elliot looks bad considering the players available 2nd looked really good, and we only got one mediocre season out of Elliot. We could have had Enroth, and Johnson tandem and have finished roughly in the same position draft wise. This means we would have had last year’s 2nd maybe a better a draft position this season. So why was this a good trade? We lost a 2nd and got essentially a few postseason games for it. Postseason games, Elliot lost for us and was among the weakest links on the team.

    Stop justifying it with well we needed a goalie. Yes, we needed a goalie, but goalies with similar stats that were less likely to have an offseason, as they were younger. Plus backups lately have been the stars of goaltending, lately look at Talbot, Schneider, Andersson (both of them,) Neuvirth, and now we want Grubbrauer or Raanta who are also backups. Putting any one of these guys in a position to succeed would give the Flames a decent starter. The point being that good goalies are not worth giving up assets to get. Unless that goalie is the young and among the top 10 goalies in the league. Elliot was not worth it, he was quite old, like Hiller who flamed out. He did have good stats the season prior, but betting on veterans is something you ragged on him for Brouwer, Engelland, and Hiller. Why is he getting a pass for wasting a 2nd on a veteran goalie?

    • DKramer

      Because coming into the season you didn’t know he would have an average season. Had he played with his career numbers from the last 5 years you wouldn’t be complaining about the trade.

      • L.Kolkind

        I was complaining the second that trade was made. There were plenty of cheap great options to tandem on very affordable contracts. We could have saved $1 million and had enough cap space for a better RW than Brouwer. Brian Elliot was getting old for a goalie and if history has taught us anything players past 30 can get bad suddenly. This is a trend with all players, saying you couldn’t predict Elliot having a down season is wrong. He was simply too old to keep up his pace, look at Hiller who very quickly became awful after he hit 30.

        We could have drafted Debrincat, who had 127 pts in the regular season playing 63 games. He did almost as well in the playoffs with 38 points in 22 games and 10 points in the memorial cup in 5 games. He is NHL ready next season and would be our 2nd best RW behind Frolik. Remember Treliving hasn’t drafted any RW’s in the first 3 rounds except for Poirier.

        Now would you rather have him and potentially slightly worse goaltending for 1 season that the Flames were just exciting a rebuild and weren’t going to win the cup. Or are you happy that we spent that pick on one season of Brian Elliot and the mediocre goaltending he provided?

        I know I think it was poor asset management for a team that should have been collecting assets and building it’s prospect pool. Our RW prospect pool is almost completely dry we have two 6th round picks as our only hopes. Rebuilding teams as always should be the ones collecting assets not spending them. Trading to upgrade a position when you are competing for the cup is much different than spending assets to upgrade a position temporarily as even if Elliot did have a good season, he wouldn’t be our starter when the team is ready to compete. We aren’t even a cup contender this season and we already need a new goalie, that is horrible asset management. Spending a 2nd for only one season on any player that isn’t a star and you don’t win the cup is a bad trade. Drafting builds long-term success, trading is for short-term success.

        Nashville has the majority of their players drafted, because like with Pittsburg and Chicago they have their 4th line of players on their ELC’s. We need a cheap 3rd and 4th line to be competitive, to get a cheap 4th you need players on their ELC’s. Veterans of this league get paid quite a bit more and having a 4th line making $10 million is holding the team back. Drafting is much more valuable than Treliving realises, and if he continues not building through the draft, the team will not be a contender.

    • Kevin R

      Well as much of his feel the Flames should be run to the fans liking reality is that the Flames have Owners that playoffs= $$$ & that’s what Tre accomplished. I don’t think Owners are going to tell Tre that was a bad trade because we only made 1 round of the playoffs, we should have kept the 2nd round lottery ticket & forgo the profits.

    • Jessemadnote

      Because making the playoffs when the majority of your core is 23-28 years old is so important. Despite what you say, Calgary is no longer rebuilding, we can’t be taking chances on Enroth or Rittich or whatever, we need to get serious about goaltending.

  • Derzie

    We are not winning anything with Brad and GG. Middle of the road guys with middle of the road results. The Hamilton trade was good but there is a lot of meh and bad as well.

    • Kevin R

      So he took a team at ground zero of a rebuild & during the 3 years of his term, this rebuilding team only made the playoffs twice, once to the 2nd round. Yeah that GM is a real meh slug alright. Might want to tell that to Buffalo fans, Colorado fans, Arizona fans, Winnipeg fans (need I list more?)

  • Just.Visiting

    Every move that is made at this stage should be in the context of taking us from a pretender contender to a serious contender for 2018-2019. This requires a greater emphasis on developing some of the Stockton talent in the NHL and not getting deal fever on July 1st to sign more third line type “character players” for too much money. Something must be done about the $10MM line too. I like the drafting in the last couple of years a lot more than in the post Sam picks in the Sam year. It’s going to be a very interesting month.

  • Puckhead

    It’s so easy to armchair micro-manage in hindsight. There are so many positives when you look at the big picture. The ship is getting righted and it’s going to be a good ride.

    Go ?Go!

    Oil burns ?

  • freethe flames

    Much of what BT has done I like but in many ways last year was a bit of head scratcher. Yes we made the playoffs but some of the choices I really question. I was against the Brouwer signing the moment it was rumored and suggested multiple alternatives to it. Seems like I was correct in my reservations. I was okay with Chaisson and when they finally found the right role for him he was fine. I was okay with Johnson signing but would have preferred a different option over Elliott (I suggested Raanta at the time and still think he is a good choice) but was hopeful he could help the team. The Stone move was okay and helped solidify the D and that helped us make the playoffs; if he can be resigned at a salary that reflects him being a 5/6 I would be okay with that. I am still puzzled by the Lazar trade but am hopeful he can be worth the deal. my big concern with it is that 2nd rounder could be better used right now prior to the expansion draft than Lazar. My judgement on BT in many ways rests on what he gets done in the next 10 days prior to the expansion draft. I think there is an opportunity here to move this team significantly forward if he can make the right moves.

  • C Watson

    The three second round picks, Parsons, Dube and Fox are all looking like blue chippers at this point. Tuulola probably has an outside chance and wouldn’t it be a sweet steal if Falkovsky developed into a version of Zdeno Chara.

  • Kent Nilsson

    I’m pretty sure GM’s don’t call up others and tell them they made a bad draft or deal for a player! There are other days coming that they may want to do business with the same person they insulted! Tre has been ok for us in finding some quick fixes but I think alot of fans, myself included, would like to see Tre once in a while , jump at an available player and cause some excitement rather than wait until there is little left and take the best of what is left over. I’m not sure this is his nature or someone higher up is holding him back?