Brad Treliving is doing a great job.

[Dekes For Days]

I think it is a good signing, but based on the other thread on the first page and how much people complain about him not performing in the playoffs, this can likely go under "terrible", right?

I don't mind the deal either, and I'd personally mark it as a positive for Treliving, but I do find it odd that the same people who spent half a decade arguing the previous Matthews signing to be a massive negative because of cap hit and term (despite both being consistent with the history of post-ELC contracts) are now considering a Matthews signing with a higher cap hit and less term as a positive.

 

[DarkKnight]

He might be good to grab a surprisingly respectable offensive depth player on a buriable wage in case of injuries from a team that is in a better place to pursue value in continuing the project.

Fine player and hope he does well but for Leafs there is a Girard-Avs-Exit defensive risk that doesn't work for us right now.

Do people remember the AHL stiff we traded him for last year, he has no value whatsoever?

 

[Zybalto]

What is this even supposed to mean? What "subtle changes"? What "key players"? What impact on the rest of the lineup?
Because whatever you intended to say with this vague statement, and whatever you think is happening, the fact remains that objectively, we have not been better.

Point percentage is what determines the standings, but it is not the only thing that matters to look at.
And even by that one specific metric, being slightly worse in it doesn't equate to being "unquestionably improved over last season".

It feels like I'm still waiting to get a read on this team.

Despite the fact underlying numbers are far worse than previous seasons, Samsonov not being the same goalie and the numerous injuries on the back end combined with all the new faces and constant line juggling has me not trying to pass juudgement too hard quite yet.

December has certainly been better overall which is goving me hope as is the fact they have been finding ways to steal points even when they have looked rough led by the big four.

 

[Evilhomer]

What is this even supposed to mean? What "subtle changes"? What "key players"? What impact on the rest of the lineup?
Because whatever you intended to say with this vague statement, and whatever you think is happening, the fact remains that objectively, we have not been better.

This is a more mature group. We have seen it in the way that they handle themselves after games where they have looked less than perfect. You can't give weight to underlying numbers after a 25 game sample size. Those stats will even themselves out over time as more games are played.

 

[Suntouchable13]

Give me a long playoff run this spring. If they only win a round, at best, how is he better than the other guy?

 

[Evilhomer]

Give me a long playoff run this spring. If they only win a round, at best, how is he better than the other guy?

If people are positioning it as one being better than the other, they are looking at it the wrong way. Success is always the result of multiple factors. It is possible that they could have both done a good job, even with a couple of mistakes along the way. This hardly seems like an earth-shattering revelation.

 

[notbias]

Benoit and Lagesson are way ahead of Timmins and Lajoie at this point. If I had to pick between Benoit and Lagesson as the 6th, might lean Benoit just on experience, but Lagesson has really shown something. Timmins probably clears waivers anyways.

The issue with this is that by every metric Timmins is helping the team more than Benoit/Lagesson (this includes "real" and "fake" metrics).

I think this is where the "eye test" falls short... because he is high risk, high reward, people see all the negatives and think he is not playing well.

It's a nice problem to have, but I think it comes down to needs, and who plays well together.

Puck mover is likely the biggest need so Timmins is probably option #1.

Also, I don't think he clears waivers.

Timmins also has the most potential (Benoit is the same age, but more NHL experience).

Luckily, we can carry all 3 since Klingberg is LTIR.

 

[Suntouchable13]

If people are positioning it as one being better than the other, they are looking at it the wrong way. Success is always the result of multiple factors. It is possible that they could have both done a good job, even with a couple of mistakes along the way. This hardly seems like an earth-shattering revelation.

Ok, we can’t say he is doing a good job then until we see success in the spring. That’s what the past few seasons have been about. They are going to get their 110+ points, that’s not the issue. Issue has always been the team’s performance, and preparedness come drop of the puck for game 1 in April.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It feels like I'm still waiting to get a read on this team.
Despite the fact underlying numbers are far worse than previous seasons, Samsonov not being the same goalie and the numerous injuries on the back end combined with all the new faces and constant line juggling has me not trying to pass juudgement too hard quite yet.
December has certainly been better overall which is goving me hope as is the fact they have been finding ways to steal points even when they have looked rough led by the big four.

Finding ways to steal points or get points off gimmicks while playing poorly is great, as long as the poor play is a temporary blip, and not representative of the team you have. I don't think we're as bad as we were at the start of the season, and there have been better signs in more recent games (in part because there's been a lot less Klingberg and Reaves), but I'm not sure how anybody could remotely claim we're better than last year so far. It's true that Samsonov has had a rocky start, but we're still getting +4.3 GSAx goaltending on the season, and we set a franchise record with horrific bottom of the league goaltending a couple years ago, so I'm not sure that can be used as an excuse. Yes, we've had defensive injuries, but we had similar defensive injuries last year and still did really well. Yes, we have some new faces, but not an unusual amount for us or leaguewide. Hopefully we keep improving, because we really should have seen an improvement this year.

This is a more mature group. We have seen it in the way that they handle themselves after games where they have looked less than perfect. You can't give weight to underlying numbers after a 25 game sample size.

They've handled themselves the same as previous years, and there's no evidence of any significant maturity change. Either way, fact remains that whatever you think happened, it hasn't translated to a better team thus far. Representative value will increase as the sample increases, but all of the various metrics for evaluating teams holds a lot more weight than you just arbitrarily making a contrary claim that cannot be justified or supported.

 

[ACC1224]

Ok, we can’t say he is doing a good job then until we see success in the spring. That’s what the past few seasons have been about. They are going to get their 110+ points, that’s not the issue. Issue has always been the team’s performance, and preparedness come drop of the puck for game 1 in April.

I don't think there is any doubt this team appears better than the previous Regular Season versions and (hopefully) seems better built for when the playoffs which is all that matters.
End of the day though you're right, it doesn't matter unless they prove it in the post season.

 

[Mess]

Give me a long playoff run this spring. If they only win a round, at best, how is he better than the other guy?

The "Better" measure is defined as 6 playoff wins in a single season as the last GM took 5 years to win 5 games in a single playoff year.

I suspect Tree to beat that mark in his very first season.

 

[Evilhomer]

The "Better" measure is defined as 6 playoff wins in a single season as the last GM took 5 years to win 5 games in a single playoff year.

I suspect Tree to beat that mark in his very first season.

It will be because of the success of all of the general managers, including Lou, not one over the others. Pick a percentage, but the vast majority of the players causing this team to win were brought in by people who preceded Treliving.

 

[notbias]

The "Better" measure is defined as 6 playoff wins in a single season as the last GM took 5 years to win 5 games in a single playoff year.

I suspect Tree to beat that mark in his very first season.

This is such a loser mentality.

"6 wins is success"

There is a lot wrong with this post but why do you only care about the success of the GM?

The team fails losing in any round.

Also, this team is 90% previous regimes... Treliving has barely touched this team

 

[LeafEgo]

It will be because of the success of all of the general managers, including Lou, not one over the others. Pick a percentage, but the vast majority of the players causing this team to win were brought in by people who preceded Treliving.

Something like 50% Lou, -25% Dubie, 75% Tre could work.

 

[DarkKnight]

Against the Isles for instance, Benoit started in the 0 zone 14 percent of the time, Timmins 79. Then factor in quality of competition and the “stats” are mostly voodoo. When we get healthy and Timmins is sitting, perhaps reality will set in.

All this said I hope he improves, I’m just noting how horrible he is in our end. Thats kind of why the coach doesn’t trust him there.

 

[Apex Predator]

Something like 50% Lou, -25% Dubie, 75% Tre could work.

Gotta give Burke some credit for taking Morgan Rielly. I remember him saying they had him number one on their list.

 

[Evilhomer]

If you factor the importance of the player Lou and Burke should get a bigger portion than 25%. Credit to Dubas and Tre for sticking with the core if they do win it all.

The single biggest factor to this team winning the Cup will be the patience displayed by management in not making knee-jerk trades.

 

[Suntouchable13]

The single biggest factor to this team winning the Cup will be the patience displayed by management in not making knee-jerk trades.

After 8 seasons with the same core (5 with JT), to shake it up wouldn’t be considered “knee jerk”. The other team that shares SBA with the Leafs, after several years of failure in the playoffs they were not afraid to shake up the core and it got them a ring. NBA, different sport, different league but the point still stands. I don’t want to stick with the same core for years and years if they can’t deliver in the playoffs.

 

[ToneDog]

If you factor the importance of the player Lou and Burke should get a bigger portion than 25%. Credit to Dubas and Tre for sticking with the core if they do win it all.


I don’t get why he wouldn’t do any interviews. The media took it very easy on him. All his buddies are still here. They would give him easy lay up questions to make him look good.

Clearly wants to avoid explaining his side of the firing or stirring the shit. I personally do not see any reason to show that Shanny was the bad guy, other than Shanny interfering. Even so, that does not negate his actions.

 

[Sypher04]

If you’re referring to AM, I would have moved him before signing that contract.

Trading Matthews when he wanted to stay would have been straight up lunacy.

 

[ToneDog]

Trading Matthews when he wanted to stay would have been straight up lunacy.

Depends on the return. Suppose Tre gets a return similar to the one he got for Tkachuk (a 100+ point forward (Ranta), a top 4 dman (Byram/Toews), a 1st and a top prospect?

 

[ToneDog]

With Berube available, I wonder if Tre should do what the Hawks did when the Blues fired Quenneville. Immediately fire Denis Savard and hire Q.

 

[thusk]

If you factor the importance of the player Lou and Burke should get a bigger portion than 25%. Credit to Dubas and Tre for sticking with the core if they do win it all.


I don’t get why he wouldn’t do any interviews. The media took it very easy on him. All his buddies are still here. They would give him easy lay up questions to make him look good.

yeah thats exactly why i added it was core

its just % of player in the line up.

If you’re referring to AM, I would have moved him before signing that contract.

if anyone would just be agree to move Matthews, he should never get a NHL job of his life. Its kind of player you will just become worst trading him.

 

[ToneDog]

yeah thats exactly why i added it was core

its just % of player in the line up.


if anyone would just be agree to move Matthews, he should never get a NHL job of his life. Its kind of player you will just become worst trading him.

Odds are against you but they are not zero. How did Quebec do when they traded Lindros? Edmonton won the cup the year they traded 99. Bruins traded Phil Esposito for Ratelle and Park and won a cup after trading Jumbo.

 

[thusk]

Odds are against you but they are not zero. How did Quebec do when they traded Lindros? Edmonton won the cup the year they traded 99. Bruins traded Phil Esposito for Ratelle and Park and won a cup after trading Jumbo.

Lindros never wanted to play in QC, not a great exemple

how many cup wings won by keeping yzerman? washington with ovechkin?
avs with mackinnon they didn't trades him because they didn't had any kind of succes first 8 years
florida with barkov after won only 1 series in first 9 barkov season?

Your better to keep your best player especially when this player could maybe become one day best goal scorer in NHL history