This is not true. Many of us were happy with the Tatar trade. Many of us praised this summer's draft. The issue is plenty of people will come to Holland's defense when it is totally illogical. This thread is on how bad Ken Holland has been at drafting his way back into contention over the past 15 years and the best the Holland supporters can do is throw shade at successful general managers or talk about how Ken Holland was forced down this path by ownership, despite the fact it has been a well known fact Holland has complete autonomy to run the franchise as he sees fit.
Even when we do get elite talent like Zadina it's fairly unlikely Holland will do well enough with his 1st through 3 round draft picks to build out a competitive team. Veleno may be a steal, or those other 14 or so GMs who passed on him may know something Holland does not. The past 15 years should give anyone pause who expects Holland to build out a competitive team. Hell, he hasn't even drafted a first pairing d-man since Niklas Kronwall 18 years ago.
The larger point is that there isn't much to indicate Holland is still a good NHL general manager. His drafting is poor, his free agent contracts have largely been awful, and he never traded roster players until the bottom had fallen out. He belongs in the hockey Hall of Fame and no one can take 1998-2008 from him when a loaded roster and some draft luck put him in a perfect position to maintain an elite franchise. As soon as the elite talent retired and he was forced to replenish that talent through the draft the bottom fell out. It took awhile but when you can't draft a #1 dman, a PPG forward or a goalie who can steal a playoff series over a 15 year period it's no surprise the franchise has fallen on hard times. To be clear the Holland defenders have gotten every single thing they wanted,as they have more or less never criticized a single thing Holland has done. If it's uncomfortable and painful to acknowledge that it resulted in an elite franchise turning into one of the league's true bottom dwellers well that's just the way it goes.
You appear to have misinterpreted my point.
I said it is pointless to debate with those who loathe Ken Holland because it doesn't matter what you say, there opinion will not change.
You seem to have interpreted my point as if I said:
"There is no point, the Holland debate just goes on in the same repetitive loop, thread after thread after thread after thread. Those who hate Holland will never say a good thing, about him."
If the bold is what i said, your statemnt would be a good counter point, but it is not.
My post is not even me trying to defend Holland. I am not sure if you are aware of my posting history, or have no clue who I am, but I feel that those who never criticize Holland are just as ridiculous as those who go to extreme's to bash him.
I'm just sick of the same tired argument in every single thread. I think the reason why those who criticize Holland annoy me more, is they have a tendency to turn every conversation into an opportunity to take little jabs and derail the topic, and while sometimes it may be true, I'd prefer it to be left in a single thread dedicated to Holland opposed a repetitive loop all over the board.
For the record, as far as negatives go, all the bolded points in your quote I agree with. The stuff I don't agree with, I dont care to debate because again, its done to death.
