View Single Post
02-22-2013, 07:31 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,748
vCash: 67
That's a tough one. Let's consider drafting. So while you could say GM Johnny has a draft success rate of 15% (ie, 15% of all draftees make the NHL for 100+ games), that tells you nothing.

Someone who drafts a bunch of 4th liners is better than someone who drafts 1st liners less frequently? Do they force these guys ice-time to up the success rate? What about the scouts and development team?

Who won a trade? Very subjective, where do you start? Even if you clearly won a trade, but that player help win you a stanley cup, was not that a good move for a GM (ie, Kaberle)?

Wins? Perhaps, but assume the Tambellini loses his job today, and while he was present during the years the Oilers went downhill, the next GM would reap the rewards of the team going up hill. And that doesn't credit the coach. Dave Tippett, for example, coaches a poor (fiscally) hockey club to be successful.

Tenure? This assumes a president keeps a GM because he's doing his job well. But then you see guys like Kevin Lowe get promoted or Doug Mclean last nearly 10 years (no offense Oilers & Jackets fans).

Stanely Cup? Well, what if Mike Gillis or Paul Holmgren never win a Cup? Better yet, what if the Oilers do it with Tambellini?

I'm not sure how you would figure this out...

Last edited by MarkGio: 02-22-2013 at 10:25 PM.
MarkGio is offline   Reply With Quote