Paul Holmgren vs Ken Holland
 

i was reading earlier on yahoosports about philly making a run for louongo seeing how bryz isntworking out i guess im wondering would wings fans rather have an aggressive GM like Holmgren or stick with our kenny holland whos not nearly as aggressive and willing to make changes like Holmgren is but may make a few more mistakes??

Bryzgalov is a great goaltender, we saw that in Phoenix. Philadelphia just plays a **** system.

I disagree. Phoenix has a great system, Bryz is not a great goaltender. Mike Smith put up Vezina numbers last year.

I wish KH was more aggressive however not as aggressive as Holmgren. I mean if you look at it, his aggressiveness hasn't really panned out as far as post season success goes. If they had made say the conference finals the last couple years that would be a different story.

this will turn silly very quickly

I agree. Holmgren can be a little crazy at times, but I think he's adapted better the last few years than Holland has. A mix of both would be good, Holland just seems afraid/content/whatever to make any changes.

Pretty much. I mean if there was a level between KH willingness to do nothing and Holmgren's trade away half the team in the off-season that would be ideal.

I like Holmgren, he's willing to take risks (playing 2 rookies on the roster) and he's not afraid to make a big splash (trading Richards and Carter). I wouldn't want KH to be as aggressive as Holmgren, so if KH could be in between his current level and Holmgren's level, I'd be content.

I'd rather have a active GM like Burke or Holmgren, atleast free agent frenzy, the draft and trade deadline would be big highlights of the year.

^^^ I agree

My ideal choice would be a Holmgren-Holland hybrid. Holmgren can be too aggressive sometimes and it's no secret that Holland can be too passive, a mix of both would be good.

I'd take Holmgren even though I'm not really a fan of his I just don't like it when GM's are too passive. I know the wings like to leave their good prospects in the AHL for a long time but this year was time for Nyquist and Tatar to come up and play on the second line. I think Detroit is in for a good rebuild.

A Holmland, if you will. Holgren?

GM's are damned either way because the job doesn't come with HF hindsight glasses (except, ya know, that can see the future...hockey's future). Have one, want the other, greener grass sort of thing.

But yes, at least an active GM gives the impression of taking chances than a more passive/conservative does, and gives us all something more to talk about.

But does Holland really need to do more than bring up prospects just a little bit earlier? If he brought up Smith last year and Nyquist/Tatar this year, would the level of vitriol be the same? Probably not.

Then again, I thought the concept of resigning Bert was solid (except for the 2 year, no trade part). I also thought the Quincey deal was more good than bad at the time when I thought Quincey had a legitimate shot at being a #4 and the pick was going to be mid 20s (not looking too good atm).

So I guess I am a Holland apologist. I hated the Sammy signing though, and wish he brought along prospects a bit faster.

I would lean towards a GM like Holmgren in today's NHL. If Ken Holland was half as aggressive as Holmgren, I would take him over Holmgren.

This.

Peter Chiarelli or Doug Armstrong.

This is the turth for me. Bryz is an okay number one, he isn't great, but while propped up in Phoenix he suffers from an almost reverse problem in Philly where he gets little to no help from their structure.

On a pure Holland vs. Holmgren, I take Holland and it isn't all that close. It would be nice if Holland would get a little more aggressive, but he is still much better at his job than Holmgren. Holland does need to adapt a little bit as he is falling behind the current trend in the NHL.

at the moment i would prefer any gm who would trade some player or buy them out.
the problem is we have nothing to offer if we wanna stick with dats, zetta and flip. maybe helm. every thing else is just rubbish.
so there is no quick solution for this.
this problem was created over 6-7 years. i guess the solution will take the same time.
but for entertainment purposes i would take holmgreen as a gm. at least u can talk about trades then instead of 0-6 losses.

Overall I'd like something in the middle. Both are opposite sides of the spectrum and both are in my opinion too far effective to have any lasting success in the new cap world.

I will say this though, Holmgren has done a great job of securing that team's future and acquiring young talent via trades and if I feel he was our GM right now, he would realize this team is at best a pseudo contender and start working on a full on reload. Look at what he turned Carter and Richards into. Philly is STACKED with young talent.

both needed a top 4 d-man last trade deadline

Holmgren: 2+4 for Grossman. Uses 1st (20th overall) to draft laughton, now playing on the third line

Holland: 1 for Quincey.

So basically its Quincey, Frk and Athanasiou instead of Grossman and Laughton.

someone will find a reason this comparison is unfair, but in my mind, holland has completely lost it. he is now a below average gm and i'd like to see him replaced.

I'd rather have a gm that is overly patient than overly aggressive. Mind you I'd rather have a GM that is in the middle, but to answer your question no I do not want Paul Holmgren as my GM, especially over Holland.

bryzgalov was apparently a demand of ed snider, the flyers' owner.

flyers made finals in '10, but with weak goaltending (leighton, boucher) which sucked in the finals.

leighton in finals: .875 sv%
boucher in finals: .846 sv%

leighton allowed a very soft goal in OT of game 6 to lose the cup.


snider is the only owner flyers have ever had, and he is more involved than an average owner.

i want the guy to have a pulse, Holland is so insanely predictable it's sad. ]

Bingo

Burke went to Toronto to rebuild, and his first move was to give up a huge number of assets - vastly overpaying - to get one player. He got lucky with the Beauchemin trade; he was trying to get Gardiner and the Ducks needed to clear space to make the deal work and simply offered Lupul up. Phaneuf was offered to the Leafs on a platter, he wasn't shopped around.

Burke still managed to keep that team in the basement for several years.

As for Holmgren... everything I read says he shipped out Richards and Carter because of alleged attitude problems. From what I've heard, the problem is that the locker room was becoming splintered into two factions; the "Richards" faction and the "Pronger" faction. No problems there now, with Pronger's career effectively over and Richard/Carter off in LA winning the Cup.

And yet both goalies posted better stats than Chicago's Antti Niemi.

More like a Ray Shero. He needs a top winger to compliment his stars - he trades for Neal. Staal becomes expendable - he trades him for a new 3rd line center and future pieces. He knows his offense is set for a long time, so he drafts up a great prospect pool of defensemen. Addressing the real issues on his team in an unspectacular but effective way.

But when Kenny has gone this far, he might aswell walk the line out. He's built a top prospect pool basically from scratch without high draft picks. If he packages away prospects now, it has to be for under-25 star players and those are almost non-existant on the market. Even if he's concervative with prospects too, the bulk of our top prospects will be in the line-up in the coming 2-3 years.