View Single Post
12-17-2013, 03:48 PM
Random Forest
aka hockeyfreak7
Random Forest's Avatar
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,074
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by FreshPerspective View Post
So you agreed with his miscalc of holding onto Lavi 3 games into the season as well when it was obvious to anybody with a brain that his time was expired? Not only that he was starting to cause our core to rot. Who is responsible for that gaffe which in retrospect might be the straw that breaks the camel's back in not making the playoffs.
No. Like I said, I'm not advocating hanging onto Holmgren. He's not without his faults. This was a major gaffe, and probably one that could justify him losing his job.

Your initial point was that there is no plan under Holmgren. That things are too reactionary. The Laviolette situation does not prove that point.

My argument is simply that Holmgren does have a plan. Whether you agree with that plan or not, is your opinion, but to argue that the team has no direction is using the same simple logic that main boarders use to argue against Holmgren. Since he blew the team up in the summer of 2011, he's clearly had an agenda he's been maintaining-- sometimes he sticks to that agenda too much. I'd argue that Laviolette was part of his long term plan, and he took too long to realize that it simply wouldn't fit.

There is a host of missteps he's had since the Carter and Richards trades and they were very blatant last offseason in particular. The Parise and Suter sweepstakes was not due diligence ..that was high stakes poker. He lost...especially since he let Jagr and Carle stew and they bolted. The Weber attempt was high stakes but more reasonable since he wanted to come here. With Parise and was always a package deal and even if Parise said he was willing to play here Suter probably wasn' people hanging their hat on that half truth by Parise (about wanting to play for the Flyers) are misguided.
High stakes poker? Are you serious?

First, Carle would cost us more than he would benefit us. He was going to walk simply because he would never justify his cap hit.

So the team gambled Jagr (still debatable) with the potential to land a pair of franchise players. It was low risk, massive reward. Losing Jagr was not a fatal blow. Voracek effectively replaced him immediately after. I am 100% okay with that gamble. I don't see how it is still used against him.

Anyway, holding onto an expired coach was not a path forward. Yeah his get out of jail free cards that he used on Streit, Vinny and Emery were ok but it still didn't put them on a path forward since the contracts to the former 2 will hamstring them later. They were bridge/lateral moves he had to make and luckily he could with the buyouts but it doesn't show him to be some genius. Buying your way out of problems is not exactly great business acumen.
So, again, what exactly could he have done this summer to be on the "path forward"? It appears firing Laviolette earlier is all you have. A valid point, but not a very powerful argument in itself. He had a strong offseason, and it's at least justifiable that he would like to see what a good coach could do with an improved lineup even if it appeared his message was growing stale.

Again..a path forward is to get rid of an inconsistent GM. Not sure what is contradictory about that stance? A measured approach doesn't just mean standing means making precision decisions that have a postive feedback loop. Keeping a mediocre GM whose team might miss the playoffs two years in a row in my book is not measured. It's no different than saying the Flyers should have kept Lavi and been patient with the core when again he was actually being a detriment. That is how I see Holmgren...I would just much rather have Hextall take over at this point since it seems like it will happen anyway especially if they miss the playoffs again.
This is pretty reasonable. I can agree with much of it. Since 2011, Holmgren's clearly had a vision he's tried to adhere to. I don't think we can definitely call it a failure because it was a long term approach, but I would agree that a more meticulous and calculating GM may be a better fit to see that long term approach through its end.

Random Forest is offline   Reply With Quote