You get to choose and you can only choose one: Mike Babcock or Ken Holland.

[Run the Jewels]

Super simple and straight forward.

Click to read more...

 

[MBauer]

Babcock and it's not remotely close, I don't agree with all his decisions but I disagree with most of Holland's these days.

 

[RedHawkDown]

Babcock, and it's not close for me. I disagree with almost everything Holland does and expect him to make bad decisions. I'm actually pleasantly surprised when Holland does something sensible.

Babcock, on the other hand, has really stupid line pairings every now and then but is a master strategist and I agree with most of his personnel choices (other than the obvious Tatar over Cleary which he remedied anyways...Holland has remedied none of his mistakes).

 

[DatsDeking]

I take Babcock easily and without hesitation. Unless I could do some power move where I move Holland to scouting, Babs to GM, and the Blashill to coach. Even then I'd rather have Babs GM and no Holland than any Holland at all.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Babcock

I think KH is fantastic at drafting but he has become very stale and cant think outside the box and that will only become worse as we move forward, he is the GM version of Don Cherry.

A new coach will have absolutely no barring whatsoever on how we develop a winning team

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Both of these guys have left me scratching my head far too often for how good they are.

Can I:

- keep Holland to run and organize scouting, drafting, development, and player contracts

- keep Babcock to develop and deploy scemes, X's and O's, and practice while being a respected voice in the locker room

While I get to decide who's on the roster and who gets to play with who?

 

[Crymson]

I'll take Babcock. Holland is a reactionary tool. Unless the Ilitches are content with perpetual mediocrity, he is not the GM to lead this team. Success in the post-lockout era requires risk-taking, and he refuses to engage in such.

 

[Vladdy84]

See ya Babs. The Wings have a replacement ready to step-in.

 

[Flowah]

Ughughugh.

They both have some excellent strengths and glaring weaknesses. I still think Holland is one of the best in the business at drafting and developing, right up to the point where people need to start getting integrated into the NHL club. He just picks so many winners in the draft and since that's what's most important to long term club health, I think I have to go with Holland.

You could have Scotty Bowman as your head coach and you'd still get nowhere if your GM was garbage at drafting. Meanwhile, you can have Bylsma as your head coach and win if you've assembled a strong team and some things bounce your way.

It's real close though.

 

[ricky0034]

can I keep neither?

 

[WingedWheel1987]

I have no faith in Holland being a good GM again.

I still believe Babcock knows how to coach a team to another Cup.

 

[Vladdy84]

I have no faith in Holland being a good GM again.

I still believe Babcock knows how to coach a team to another Cup.

I think we've focused on the negatives and glossed over some positives recently.

A lot of Kenny's alleged failures in FA have very little to do with him IMO.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

For the record I'd take Holland. Drafting and developing and having such a strong, well run organization from top to bottom is more important to long term success than a head coach is IMO.

A lot of Holland's moves have really pissed me off lately, but I have a feeling that if Babcock was running a team it would be completely littered with players like Abdelkader, Cleary, and Glendening and be much less skilled.

 

[FlashyG]

Holland has done WAY more for this franchise than Babcock has.

He's had a trainwreck of an off-season and a lackluster couple of years but a GM is much harder to replace than a coach.

Sorry Babs if we can only keep one its a no brainer that he's the one going elsewhere.

 

[Winger98]

I'd take Holland. I think it's harder to find a good GM than a good coach. I have more faith in Holland continuing to rebuild the club, signing a new quality coach, and grooming his own successor than I do in rolling with Babs as coach and plucking another quality GM from somewhere else to do all of those things.

 

[Vladdy84]

Exactly. We have Blash to take over for Babcock.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

I think we've focused on the negatives and glossed over some positives recently.

A lot of Kenny's alleged failures in FA have very little to do with him IMO.

Extending Bertuzzi and Cleary.

Signing Sammy, Quincey and Tootoo

Mishandling NHL ready prospects.

Giving multi year contracts to bottom six talent.

Followed by doing a whole lot of nothing in between bad signings.

I think Kenny should have the lions share of the blame when it comes to trying to explain what went wrong during the past five seasons.

Babcock has been far from perfect, but i trust that he can still get the job done if the GM isn't using all of the teams available cap space on crap.

 

[Heaton]

I'd take Holland. I think it's harder to find a good GM than a good coach. I have more faith in Holland continuing to rebuild the club, signing a new quality coach, and grooming his own successor than I do in rolling with Babs as coach and plucking another quality GM from somewhere else to do all of those things.

My issue with Holland has to do with his inability to use his assets properly, who cares if we have a full shelf if continue to eat left overs? The teams growth has been stunted due to Holland's unwillingness to let his development program prove their worth.

 

[Winger98]

My issue with Holland has to do with his inability to use his assets properly, who cares if we have a full shelf if continue to eat left overs? The teams growth has been stunted due to Holland's unwillingness to let his development program prove their worth.

I don't disagree that Holland hasn't marshaled his assets well, but I see too many clubs around the league who lack those assets entirely. While I think a number of guys could be brought up sooner, Holland has shown the ability to keep the guys who are worth something, and not losing good assets for nothing (Jarnkrok being one of the few possible exceptions).

If we still had Nill, or even Yzerman, sitting on the shelf waiting to be slid into the GM job it would be a harder choice for me. I'm not sure from where we would pull Holland's replacement right now, though.

 

[Frk It]

My issue with Holland has to do with his inability to use his assets properly, who cares if we have a full shelf if continue to eat left overs? The teams growth has been stunted due to Holland's unwillingness to let his development program prove their worth.

This is my take as well.

I would take Babcock, because I think he's still good at his job. Even if he throws together some annoying lines. He took a shaky goalie tandem, a sketchy defense, and an injury-ridden offense and rallied the troops and got them to the playoffs. Don't think a lot of coaches do that.

Holland can draft, but he negates the work he does there just being so downright awful at managing the roster. Couple that with multiple off seasons without improving the defense at all, and showing no creativity via trade, and it's an easy call for me

 

[Heaton]

I don't disagree that Holland hasn't marshaled his assets well, but I see too many clubs around the league who lack those assets entirely. While I think a number of guys could be brought up sooner, Holland has shown the ability to keep the guys who are worth something, and not losing good assets for nothing (Jarnkrok being one of the few possible exceptions).

If we still had Nill, or even Yzerman, sitting on the shelf waiting to be slid into the GM job it would be a harder choice for me. I'm not sure from where we would pull Holland's replacement right now, though.

Holland doesn't really use his assets as a strength though. There is zero reason to not upgrade the roster when you have more assets than potential spots. Does anyone really think we'll have a team with Marchenko, Sproul, XO and Backman on it? I'm not saying he needs to decide instantly, but GMs in this league have to be able to maximize their trade assets. Holland doesn't trade, period. So we're stuck in a state that shows really no signs of reaching a next level.

Can anyone sit here and tell me they're comfortable with the direction of this team regardless of Babcock's personnel decisions? So Holland is here next year and Babcock is gone. Just because Cleary leaves with him doesn't mean Mantha is on the team or more kids are promoted more frequently. Holland hoards players until they're supposed to be or past their peaks (22-24 years old). Why can other contenders find room for their waiver eligible players but Holland can't? I believe he still thinks he can stick a veteran (regardless of their ability) and 'teach' the kids something. It's not how to win, because this team would've been better off over the years incorporating more kids more often. That still isn't happening on purpose and that's my issue.

So to answer this question? I'd probably keep Babcock, when Babcock had more good players, his lines didn't look like this, so all of the joking about how if would stick grinders everywhere if he were GM is silly. His lines looked great when Holland gave him a great lineup.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Failure to use assets properly?

Oh, you mean like:

- playing Cleary and to a lesser extent Abdelkader in roles well above their ability

- Cleary-Datsyuk-Abdelkader

- blowing up the lines that ultimately won 4 games in a row to get you into the playoffs

- Cleary-Andersson-Bertuzzi with Tatar in the press box while you complain about team speed

- Smith's usage or lack thereof

- Legwand as a 4th line wing

- Weiss getting seemingly getting shafted

And on and on?

Look, neither of these guys are perfect, that's for certain. Holland himself has really lost with many of his personal decisions in recent years. But the organization structure is still fantastic. That doesn't happen overnight and that doesn't happen for most organizations.

And in the long term, organizational structure trumps a head coach.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

I'll keep Hakan Andersson.

Wait, that's not the choice?

Mike Babcock.

 

[Crymson]

Holland has done WAY more for this franchise than Babcock has.

And he did most of it with a combination of money and luck. He rode the team's pre-lockout resources to post-lockout success, and then became less and less effective as his resources bled away.

How much he was actually involved in selecting draft picks is debatable, but that has been his main area of success. And it's not enough.

Whatever the case, how much he has done for the franchise is irrelevant in the NOW. In the NOW, he's ineffective and has been for five seasons. And he's not changing his ways in the least.

 

[RayMoonDoh]

I voted babs expecting to be in the minority, and then....