Actual Thought*
Guest
I am calling that one a league wide draw..
Just checkin
I am calling that one a league wide draw..
to be honest I think the kings made HUGE additions to complement their existing core, with those additions being huge long term assets
I look at quick, doughty and kopitar being like our lidstrom, datsyuk and zetterberg in our 2008 cup. now the kings also added carter, williams, stoll and richards and its those moves that i think make lombardi great over the last 5 years. For holland to be great in those years(2006-2009) he would have to make simmilar sized moves(in my opinion) for guys who dont just have short term benefits but and more important long term benefits to the success of your club. I just dont see holland making moves like that during that time period to warrant calling him "great" at that time
Cleary.
to be honest I think the kings made HUGE additions to complement their existing core, with those additions being huge long term assets
I look at quick, doughty and kopitar being like our lidstrom, datsyuk and zetterberg in our 2008 cup. now the kings also added carter, williams, stoll and richards and its those moves that i think make lombardi great over the last 5 years. For holland to be great in those years(2006-2009) he would have to make simmilar sized moves(in my opinion) for guys who dont just have short term benefits but and more important long term benefits to the success of your club. I just dont see holland making moves like that during that time period to warrant calling him "great" at that time
Who would take Weiss after his last two years and at 4.9m a year?
Wait, didn't we sign Hossa to like a really below market deal during those years? Why are blockbuster deals the definition of great? The Wings were stacked during that time period. Why were blockbuster deals necessary? He went to back to back finals in that time frame.
From name point of view I agree. I was talking about removing significant pieces in order to bring back significant pieces. Rafalski, Stuart, White. (Not all necessarily tipped us to a cup win but, they were strong additions) Hossa was a good addition but we suffered huge set-backs in 09... Him not making huger noise, I would think comes from the fact that in his previous years, he had already set the team on the right path. He just had to address smaller issues at the time to get the team over the top.
His work specifically led to what happened in those years. Now we face our 'down-time' so the question becomes whether he's doing a good job steering the ship in the right path. I think he is. By all means I agree that he had a great team to work with in those years but it was him that had a lot to do with it. He didn't need to fix anything that wasn't broken. Like most things in business, impacts are rarely seen at the point when action is taken.
I think the ability to add long term core elements to a team is the definition of the job of a GM and the more such players you can add the better you're or the more likely you're to earn the title "great"
Imagine yourself at the point where our team is successful. We don't get to be ahead of the line for draft picks because we're at the top of the charts. In order to get great futures, (Futures tend to be big 'IFS' no matter how good they look) you have to give up talent. How do you propose Holland should have balance that out?
You see the soultions but you're not flexible on understanding the obstacles. What do you give up at that time to set your team to be still top-notch in a few years ahead? This is the question that all these complaints don't seem to even try to address. You have to give something to get. You also have to convince other GMs to give up what they have... These are huge hurdles.
I am pretty flexible
a GM has three equal abilities to improve his team
1. the draft
2. through trade
3. through free agency
all three avenues must be explored and exhausted
i think its a red wing fan phenoma only where people believe nobody wants to trade with us or they demand more from us than anyone else.
its his job and its the ability to navigate those avenues with success that defines greatness
I challenge any of those defending Holland to explain away the Dan Cleary saga, most immediately his current presence on the NHL roster.
Yeah, Dan Cleary is bad, I get it.I challenge any of those defending Holland to explain away the Dan Cleary saga, most immediately his current presence on the NHL roster.
I think you have to consider where their clubs are in that 5 years vs where the Wings are. The Wings 5 years ago were at the tail end of an era. They didn't just load up with lottery picks and climb out of the cellar. Very different situations.
IMO what Holland has tried to do is maintain some stability while rebuilding. He has managed to replace almost half the roster with kids and not miss the playoffs. I think he likes to keep vets around because they add stability, consistency, and provide an example for the kids of how to be an every day NHL player. This is his second go around at retooling on the fly and this time the holes were much bigger with the loss of Lidstrom in particular. I know it isn't popular here but I think we are a team on the rise.
So you're basically saying that it doesn't matter if Quincey is the better player now. Nor does it matter whether it stays that way or not. You have a hunch that our youngster will become better and therefore Quincey should be off the team. This is what I'm getting from you. I don't necessarily disagree. However, with that, do you not see the logic of not relying on this idea from Holland? Believing that our kids need more time in AHL and have Quincey take up the spot for a couple years before we figure out whether they make it or not? I don't follow the business aspects of the game much but, if one or more of our kids play extremely well, do we have the option of putting Quincey in the press box to play one of them instead? If so, I really don't see a problem at all. (I understand that he would be quite an expensive seat-warmer if that becomes the case)
I understand what your saying. I think Holland has a different mentality that I don't think is wrong either. His mentality is more of a 'hope for the best, prepare for the worst.'