View Single Post
Old
11-26-2010, 06:59 AM
  #83
chaosof99*
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 16,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft View Post
Yeah well its true that every Gm has flaws. I have no idea who could replace Holmgren at this moment.

This is my favorite Holmgren tale of crap:

Starts off in the off season. He signs Jones to a 2 year 2.75 million per deal, way more than he is/was worth. The trades a first for Eminger.

A couple of months later Briere and Jones are both on the LTIR, Holmgren not really understanding that they will come back at some point trades Eminger for Carle (adding over 2 million $, not that the trade value was bad) and trades for Alberts, adding even more back.

Briere and Jones come back, as predicted, and he is forced to waive Metropolit and Vaananen just to get them under the cap by a smidge.

This smidge is so small that in order to call up Syvret when Timonen gets the flu, he has to send Giroux to the AHL. Then to make himself more cap space, instead of ditching Jones and using Syvret (who played better) he trades Upshall and a 2nd for Carcillo (only clearing 350k).

This still leaves us with little to no wiggle room for injuries, that for the last 2 games of the year he had to find a CBA loophole to sign 2 college UFAs to try out contracts who are both in the ECHL now.
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=81068
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=93658

That is the worst streak of moves Holmgren has done by far. (like I said Carle trade was good value, but it caused all the rest of the cap **** storm for the rest of the year
Sorry, but half of that is BS.

Eminger simply didn't work out. Jones and Briere being on LTIR didn't have anything to do with it. I remember quite clearly that Eminger was pretty bad on this team, and particularly in the game against Ottawa before he traded he was horrendous. It's still stuck in my head.

But this is in my opinion a "have your cake and eat it too" situation. You said yourself that it is lucky that Bobrovsky showed dividends way earlier than expected. You can equally chalk up the fact that Eminger didn't show what Holmgren hoped he would after the trade to luck just as well. I just do not get how when one prospect works out it's luck, and when another hopeful player doesn't it's all on Holmgren.

Getting rid of Eminger was a good thing and getting back Carle was great. That the room to make this move ate into the space created from Briere and Jones being on LTIR doesn't detract from it being a good move.

And I still stand by my opinion that Alberts was a good acquisition for us. He added some needed grit and toughness on the blue line, which the team didn't have. He played well here, though his reputation got a little bit worse since then.

I liked Väänänen too, but something had to give. He simply was the odd man out because he didn't necessarily offer anything the rest of the defense didn't provide. Pretty much the same with Metro. I do agree though that it might have been better to part with Jones then and there.

Giroux only missed a single game from that incident you are talking about, so I really have no clue what the big complaint there is.


Basically, this entire tirade can be summed up in "he should have traded Jones" and I agree with that. However, it doesn't change that Holmgren is a good GM and that the team has become successful under his watch and largely because of his moves.

What I don't see is the point of bringing all this up in a thread entitled "I love this team".


Last edited by chaosof99*: 11-26-2010 at 07:05 AM.
chaosof99* is offline