HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

So...you still wanna fire Homer?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-24-2010, 03:06 PM
  #76
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
I wrote an article the other day where I likened the Holmgren hate to the beat writers theory that Richards and Pronger secretly want to kill each other; basically scapegoating and creating drama for the sake of just having an opinion of the situation.
Well that is a terrible comparison. shooter created his own drama and has done a poor job. You think he can do almost no wrong and are happy to have a gm like him. good for you. It isnt hate either, it is the fact he has done a very bad job.

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 03:08 PM
  #77
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The fact that Eminger was a RFA makes it even more criminal. And, sure, we may not have selected Carlson with that pick and whatever else... but, seriously, WTF was he thinking?

And without even getting into what happened with the next trade, they almost immediately decided that they'd effed up. The very fact that we followed up that trade with another is evidence of how much of an abject **** up that deal was.
I've never seen a team do a 180 on a trade so quickly. It's almost like they hadn't watched him play hockey at the NHL level over his first 4 seasons in the NHL. It's really an admission that you had no idea what you were doing in the first place (or at least so misguided in your thinking that your credibility as a professional general manager should definitely be called into question).

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 03:09 PM
  #78
dawkins121
Registered User
 
dawkins121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,420
vCash: 500
my first gut reaction was yup, still want to fire him. Then i saw jester post about some of the things he's done including the Eminger trade (which i had completely forgotten about) and now.... still want to fire him.

holmgren has done some nice things and has put together a pretty good team on paper (which, like has been mentioned, means nothing), but he has made a few too many "uhhh what the hell, is he serious?" moves for me to have any sort of faith in him.

The Jones debacle, the Eminger trade, the handicapping our future cap/prospect situation with the Briere (too long, too much money for someone who clearly looks like he will be useless in his mid thirties), Hartnell (a little overpaid, NTC really?), and Pronger (clearly just didn't understand CBA) contracts.

like i said, he's done some good things and made some ballsy moves (like the pronger deal which i absolutely loved and am loving even more now in the playoffs), but the fact that i just don't trust him to make good decisions and am actually scared of what he might do next just screams that something needs to be done.

dawkins121 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 03:14 PM
  #79
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The fact that Eminger was a RFA makes it even more criminal. And, sure, we may not have selected Carlson with that pick and whatever else... but, seriously, WTF was he thinking?

And without even getting into what happened with the next trade, they almost immediately decided that they'd effed up. The very fact that we followed up that trade with another is evidence of how much of an abject **** up that deal was.
Eminger was nto going to be tendered at all and be a free agent. Fro arguments s ake give him an offer sheet for a 2nd rd pick at best, they wouldnt have matched. a low rd pick would have been plenty for a guy they were cuttign loose.

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 03:16 PM
  #80
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
When shooter took over he was in a great situation (prospects, picks, cap flexibilty,good young players). Now look at it, would you say it is still great?

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 03:21 PM
  #81
xifentoozlerix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: staten island
Posts: 778
vCash: 500
Every single team has holes on it when there is a cap.

Reading this thread, you would think that there exists people capable of building a team without any holes, and that they could do so without making a few mistakes. That person must also be able to accurately predict whether or not players will get injured, whether players will improve, or whether they will regress. Any miscalculation on any of these fronts, whatsoever, is grounds for removal. Every trade must work out in such a way that their team "won". If the coach is the problem, this must be identified immediately and a change must be made. If you do not win the Stanley Cup, your GM probably should be fired. 29 teams each year had a crappy GM.

Of course, I have exaggerated a bit here, but the point remains: every GM has made mistakes, and every team has holes. I do not see how one could justify firing Holmgren based on his body of work. To all of the people who wish to see him go after the season, I ask a few questions:
1. Does your feelings on the matter change if the Flyers make the Finals?
2. What team has a GM that hasn't made any mistakes, or a GM who managed to build a team without any holes on it?
3. Who is available? Is the grass always greener on the other side? Is there not a possibility that changing the GM will leave the team worse off? After all, the same person who hired Holmgren would be doing the hiring of his replacement.

xifentoozlerix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 03:41 PM
  #82
chimrichalds18
the key
 
chimrichalds18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,775
vCash: 500
Again, my biggest problem with Holmgren is his inability to see the big picture. Take the Eminger trade, for example. It was completely unnecessary, even baffling in that we have had pretty good success drafting in the mid-20s region. Now, if we were Steve Eminger/a depth dman away from winning the Cup, there's no problem with that trade. Yet that wasn't the case. It shows a level of impatience/lack of a plan (I remember several people here likening Holmgren's strategy that offseason to throwing **** against wall and seeing what sticks). That's not the kind of "plan" you want your GM to have, I'm sorry.

The same could be said about the Pronger trade this past offseason. I'm all for getting Pronger -- who wouldn't be? (though I don't like the 2 1st rounders). That being said, we were not a Chris Pronger away from winning the Cup with a ? in net coupled with losing Lupul/Knuble and a lack of a gameplan up front -- I'm specifically referencing the 7-8 capable top 9 forwards and our inability to field a true 3rd line.

Some of Holmgren's mistakes are more glaring in retrospect, but that's not always the case. Holmgren's plan hinges a lot on luck and chance (see Leighton, Michael). I can see aspects of the GM business being chance, but Holmgren relies way too much on it. I can't get behind that, and I can't get behind the organization's low valuing of draft picks.

chimrichalds18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 04:11 PM
  #83
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amateur Hour View Post
I'll lambast this trade until the day I die, and especially over the course of the next 10-15 years as Carlson develops into a top-pairing defenseman. It's made even worse by the fact that I wanted the Flyers to take him at #27 (cue FlyHigh's diatribe about not possibly being able to know that Carlson would turn out the way he is). But, no, let's trade for an underachieving BUST of a defenseman, only to realize a month into the season why Washington couldn't wait to unload his sorry ass. Acquiring Eminger in the first place ended up costing us Carlson AND Downie (yes, I know we got Matt Carle as a result, too... whoopdie freakin' doo) -- a failure of such epic proportions that I actually believe it's a fireable offense. I wonder if McPhee could stifle his laughter on the phone when consummating the deal with Homer. Seriously, I rarely get this angry over anything, but I feel I am more than justified here.
Haha, I owned up to you on this one in a different thread a while ago, you must have missed it.

But yes, I was 110% wrong and you were 110% right, I completely admit it.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 04:11 PM
  #84
xifentoozlerix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: staten island
Posts: 778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chimrichalds18 View Post
Again, my biggest problem with Holmgren is his inability to see the big picture. Take the Eminger trade, for example. It was completely unnecessary, even baffling in that we have had pretty good success drafting in the mid-20s region. Now, if we were Steve Eminger/a depth dman away from winning the Cup, there's no problem with that trade. Yet that wasn't the case. It shows a level of impatience/lack of a plan (I remember several people here likening Holmgren's strategy that offseason to throwing **** against wall and seeing what sticks). That's not the kind of "plan" you want your GM to have, I'm sorry.
Holmgren made a mistake with the Eminger situation. No doubt about it. But this was still only a mistake in retrospect. The speed at which Eminger left the organization is evidence of that, but I will say that Matt Carle, for all his detractors, has been worth it. It is quite easy to look at some trade, after the fact, and decide who "won". The grass will always be greener on the other side, but "what if" is part of a losing mentality, IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimrichalds18 View Post
The same could be said about the Pronger trade this past offseason. I'm all for getting Pronger -- who wouldn't be? (though I don't like the 2 1st rounders). That being said, we were not a Chris Pronger away from winning the Cup with a ? in net coupled with losing Lupul/Knuble and a lack of a gameplan up front -- I'm specifically referencing the 7-8 capable top 9 forwards and our inability to field a true 3rd line.
This is premature. For all we know, we were a Pronger away from the cup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chimrichalds18 View Post
Some of Holmgren's mistakes are more glaring in retrospect, but that's not always the case. Holmgren's plan hinges a lot on luck and chance (see Leighton, Michael). I can see aspects of the GM business being chance, but Holmgren relies way too much on it. I can't get behind that, and I can't get behind the organization's low valuing of draft picks.
In a cap world, you must ALWAYS take chances. You take a chance on cheap guys to fill holes which are unavoidable under a cap. Also, you take a chance on long term contracts to mitigate the affect on the cap. It is completely unfair to judge a signing years after the fact. It is completely unfair to judge a trade years after the fact. As for the draft picks, that is something which will always be an issue when you are charged with building a contending team year-in and year-out. Whether or not the organization should be trying to do so is another question, but Holmgren is doing the job Snider expects of him.

xifentoozlerix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 05:09 PM
  #85
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xifentoozlerix View Post
Holmgren made a mistake with the Eminger situation. No doubt about it. But this was still only a mistake in retrospect. The speed at which Eminger left the organization is evidence of that, but I will say that Matt Carle, for all his detractors, has been worth it. It is quite easy to look at some trade, after the fact, and decide who "won". The grass will always be greener on the other side, but "what if" is part of a losing mentality, IMO.
No, trading a 1st for a marginal defenseman that was a RFA was a mistake right from the outset.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 06:53 PM
  #86
xifentoozlerix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: staten island
Posts: 778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, trading a 1st for a marginal defenseman that was a RFA was a mistake right from the outset.
Even so, Holmgren has done his job relatively well. I fail to see where this mythical better GM will come from...a GM who will almost never make a bad trade or signing, and who accurately predicts what type of season a player will have or whether or not they will become injured. It is easy to assume that getting rid of Holmgren would lead to getting someone better, but that is not always the case.



Also, it is funny how it was widely considered to be Holmgren's "luck" that Leighton performed so well, but "luck" (or the lack thereof) seemingly played no part in Emery and Leighton getting hurt, along with Hartnell sucking. Apparently, Holmgren should've known better (as to the argument about perhaps playing Emery too much: that's on Stevens). I think the only thing he should've done differently this season was get rid of Stevens sooner and, of course, the Jones debacle. Otherwise, the Pronger trade, Laperriere and Betts signings, Leighton waiver pickup, Krajicek pickup, and Leino trade were all good moves. The Pyorala signing was solid, though it didn't work out. Tollefson was pretty bad, but he got Leino out of it. All in all, he did a good job. The under-performing team during the regular season was not his fault.

edit: I forgot Boucher. He has turned out to be OK. I don't think anyone felt it was a bad move to bring him in as the back-up. He didn't light the world on fire when Emery went down, but that whole losing spell was widely recognized as moreso a scoring problem than a goaltending problem. He certainly is earning his money now.

xifentoozlerix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 07:18 PM
  #87
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 112,366
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, trading a 1st for a marginal defenseman that was a RFA was a mistake right from the outset.
The biggest problem I had with Eminger was if they REALLY wanted him, they could have signed him to an offer sheet. That would have required:

-Actually doing it (how DARE one sign another teams RFA to an offer sheet. Burn in hell, you shall)

-Doing something else with Gauthier (such as not including a 2nd round pick just to dump him, leaving in the minors -- oh no!, or...not being so god damn desperate to be rid of him on July 1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by xifentoozlerix View Post
Even so, Holmgren has done his job relatively well. I fail to see where this mythical better GM will come from...a GM who will almost never make a bad trade or signing, and who accurately predicts what type of season a player will have or whether or not they will become injured. It is easy to assume that getting rid of Holmgren would lead to getting someone better, but that is not always the case.
The problems are we're seeing the problems Holmgren has to deal with, in some cases years, before they actually happen.

When Jones was signed to that stupid contract, this whole board was keenly aware from the start that we were going to get screwed - complete disregard for the salary cap. This alone to me proves that he is not qualified to be a GM of a team in the salary cap era.

And I'm convinced that it won't be very hard to find who would do a better job, and a few of those people I probably never heard of.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 07:29 PM
  #88
MojoJojo
Registered User
 
MojoJojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 9,351
vCash: 500
The only reason this thread exists is because Boucher got hot at the right time.

Homers biggest weakness, as it was for Clarke, is an under appreciation for the role of the starting goaltender. He cheaped out on goal to spend his assets and resources on skaters. Homer happened to get lucky with a strong performance by a guy who has been a marginal NHL player for the last 5 years.

MojoJojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 08:14 PM
  #89
flyersfan1221
Registered User
 
flyersfan1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 165
vCash: 500
Management team

My original question in the OP was: so...do you still wanna fire Homer?

I'd say the thread generally favors getting rid of him unless we win the cup. That's a bad beat for Homer. Who will replace him? Give me three names from the professional hockey world that will do a better job. To many posters use the benefit of hindsight to formulate their opinions.

Also, do you really believe that Homer acts alone? Of course not. Every decision is happening with input from 15-20 members of the management team. Luko, Homer, Clarke, HC, Scouting dept., even Big Ed is likely briefed on potential moves. If you fire Homer your also talking about axing the entire management team? If you don't...Your new GM will still have to work under the club philosophy supported by Ed Snider and his cronnies.

I really am impressed with how knowledgeable so many of you are with regard to past deals, Flyers capology and some of you are just sick with your knowledge of the entire league, including prospects...

...But really, The front office needs to be given some credit for giving us winner to cheer for all these years...

Finally, I seem to remember that Clarke left a pretty big mess for Homer to clean up...not to mention dealing with the new cap world.

I still like Homer to stick around for a few years. I feel he deserves a chance to build without handcuffs like Rathje and Preimeau.

GO FLYERS

flyersfan1221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 08:16 PM
  #90
xifentoozlerix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: staten island
Posts: 778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
The problems are we're seeing the problems Holmgren has to deal with, in some cases years, before they actually happen.

When Jones was signed to that stupid contract, this whole board was keenly aware from the start that we were going to get screwed - complete disregard for the salary cap. This alone to me proves that he is not qualified to be a GM of a team in the salary cap era.
Jones was a whipping boy. Not always deservedly so, and alot of his detractors were mad at his contract moreso than his play. Were he not playing injured, who knows what could have happened with him. I am pretty sure if he stays healthy Holmgren would have been able to get something for him in a trade, or he could have played as a decent #4 or 5 d-man on the team. No question he was making too much for a third pairing role, but that is assuming they projected him to play on the third pairing. The contract they gave him indicates otherwise...I think it is obvious they saw him as an adequate #4 guy until he got hurt and starting looking like Bambi out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
And I'm convinced that it won't be very hard to find who would do a better job, and a few of those people I probably never heard of.
Yet there is no way to guarantee such a thing happening. It is entirely within the realm of possibility that Holmgren would be replaced by someone worse.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MojoJojo View Post
The only reason this thread exists is because Boucher got hot at the right time.

Homers biggest weakness, as it was for Clarke, is an under appreciation for the role of the starting goaltender. He cheaped out on goal to spend his assets and resources on skaters. Homer happened to get lucky with a strong performance by a guy who has been a marginal NHL player for the last 5 years.
Boucher was signed as a back-up. Emery was on a bargain contract for a guy of his skill and experience. His off ice issues were the only question mark with him...and this season he proved he was a solid #1 goaltender. He was playing extremely well until he got hurt. That he was injured does not mean Holmgren cheaped out on the position. He actually got a bargain. Also, if Leighton doesn't play like he did, you would have seen a goalie come over at the deadline. The team had confidence with him in net and he was winning games, despite what anyone feels about how long he could consistently play at that level. You don't destroy his confidence and give up assets to bring in a deadline goalie acquisition. What if Holmgren picked up Harding (for example) and he ended up getting injured? You would have got people crying about how the Flyers didn't need a goalie since Leighton was playing so well, and now the team is out a draft pick/roster player on top of that. He was in a no-win situation once Leighton went down.

xifentoozlerix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2010, 08:18 PM
  #91
flyersfan1221
Registered User
 
flyersfan1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 165
vCash: 500
Actually...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MojoJojo View Post
The only reason this thread exists is because Boucher got hot at the right time.

Homers biggest weakness, as it was for Clarke, is an under appreciation for the role of the starting goaltender. He cheaped out on goal to spend his assets and resources on skaters. Homer happened to get lucky with a strong performance by a guy who has been a marginal NHL player for the last 5 years.
I started this thread to pay tribute to Lappy for his on ice leadership and self sacrifice for the benefit of the team. I also felt Homer deserved credit for signing a player like Lappy. (did you watch the attached video)?

I really just wanted to celebrate the series win

flyersfan1221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2010, 01:26 PM
  #92
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xifentoozlerix View Post
Even so, Holmgren has done his job relatively well. I fail to see where this mythical better GM will come from...a GM who will almost never make a bad trade or signing, and who accurately predicts what type of season a player will have or whether or not they will become injured. It is easy to assume that getting rid of Holmgren would lead to getting someone better, but that is not always the case.
No, it is not easy to assume that getting rid of Homer would lead to getting someone better...you could hire someone just as pitiful at managing the salary cap with much poorer talent evaluation skills (something Homer does quite well). It's lazy to assume that Homer's detractors assume he is the worst possible GM...

However, to the larger point, he hasn't done relatively well at his job for some time. He had the season from hell where he made some good trades, then spent a ****ing fortune the following offseason, and since then this team has not improved relative to the league. Throughout that time he's proven to be absolutely terrible at managing the salary cap, one of the key elements to a GM under the salary cap.

No one is going to be perfect. Mistakes will be made. But with Holmgren there is a consistent series of poor decisions being made, and it is handicapping this team. What is really scary is that Homer is quickly approaching offseasons where he's going to have to make very hard decisions based entirely on the salary cap, and not on talent evaluation.

Quote:
Also, it is funny how it was widely considered to be Holmgren's "luck" that Leighton performed so well, but "luck" (or the lack thereof) seemingly played no part in Emery and Leighton getting hurt, along with Hartnell sucking. Apparently, Holmgren should've known better (as to the argument about perhaps playing Emery too much: that's on Stevens). I think the only thing he should've done differently this season was get rid of Stevens sooner and, of course, the Jones debacle. Otherwise, the Pronger trade, Laperriere and Betts signings, Leighton waiver pickup, Krajicek pickup, and Leino trade were all good moves. The Pyorala signing was solid, though it didn't work out. Tollefson was pretty bad, but he got Leino out of it. All in all, he did a good job. The under-performing team during the regular season was not his fault.
So, he didn't fire a coach (who should have been fired last spring, and, IMO, sooner...) which handicapped us this season and played a large role in the midseason struggles that made us go blood and guts all spring to make the playoffs...

And he made an absurdly stupid decision...

You have confidence in his decision making? That's before addressing his **** ups in previous seasons.

And, no, bad luck does not absolve you of your sins. It sux that he had rotten luck, but we have poor decisions happening independent of anything to do with that.

Quote:
edit: I forgot Boucher. He has turned out to be OK. I don't think anyone felt it was a bad move to bring him in as the back-up. He didn't light the world on fire when Emery went down, but that whole losing spell was widely recognized as moreso a scoring problem than a goaltending problem. He certainly is earning his money now.
Actually, there were plenty of people who had a problem with Boucher being the backup. I'm not one of 'em, and I was a consistent defender of Boucher throughout this season based on how he was used...but Emery was an unmitigated disaster, which even Homer has publicly admitted.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2010, 02:43 PM
  #93
El Emperor
Registered User
 
El Emperor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodstown, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,300
vCash: 500
After reading through most of this forum, my question is...

How would bringing in another GM fix anything?

I mean, honestly, in order for this team to get back on track and actually become Stanley Cup ready with a #1 netminder, salaries MUST be cut (e.g. Briere and Hartnell).

Homer has made mistakes and you can argue whether or not those mistakes were necessary to bring the team out of suck for the 07-08 season. He works for Ed Snider that wants a winning team each year. Any GM this team would hire will be making moves to win, not rebuild. Homer is here to stay and his only option at this point is to move on from his mistakes and learn from them.

Let's look at the facts:
-Briere is untradable at this point. In three years when his actual salary is only 3 million, there might be a team trying to save a buck willing to take him on... hopefully by that point, he will be tired of the crap he's taking from us "terrible" Philly fans and allow the trade to happen.
-Hartnell unfortunately will probably not be moved either and his contract expires in 3 years. Maybe he will bounce back next season?

So hopefully we can look forward to 3 years from now when the Flyers can make some real moves and bring in real talent. Also, let's hope Giroux and JVR can remain here on RFA contracts until then. In the meantime, we are going to have to live with what we have and hope for the best. The only way the Flyers could possibly open up space for a #1 netminder would be to somehow trade Gagne. Other than that, what kind of trick could Homer make without giving up our entire future of talent?

In summary, there really is no point to fire Homer. All we can hope for is that he doesn't use picks or top prospects to do anything but secure a top goalie that isn't close to retirement. If he can lay off using draft picks (as if there were any left to use anyways) for one offseason, I think it would be a good show of faith that he has learned his lesson and can start planning for the future when there is no longer #48 and #19 on the ice making mistakes and wasting cap space.

El Emperor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2010, 02:47 PM
  #94
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Perhaps another GM can't fix Holmgren's mistakes, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable with another GM making the tough decisions rather than leaving them to Holmgren who in my mind is not a good GM.

I think this team would benefit from a fresh set of eyes to make the decisions going forward. Unfortunately I think we're stuck with Holmgren for now because the first round win saved his job.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2010, 03:13 PM
  #95
El Emperor
Registered User
 
El Emperor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodstown, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
Perhaps another GM can't fix Holmgren's mistakes, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable with another GM making the tough decisions rather than leaving them to Holmgren who in my mind is not a good GM.

I think this team would benefit from a fresh set of eyes to make the decisions going forward. Unfortunately I think we're stuck with Holmgren for now because the first round win saved his job.
Like I said before, any new GM they bring in would have the same set of expectations that Homer has had. Even the best GMs with an excellent "get-well" plan won't be able to use it because their plan is not realistic to upper management's view of things.

What we could hope for is the if they did go the new GM route, that new GM could sit down and explain to upper management that teams like the Pens, Caps, etc needed a couple years before they could become highly competitive.

The sad truth is that the Flyers probably could have put a decent team on the ice in 2007-08 without Briere, Hartnell, Lupul, etc etc. Probably could have even made the playoffs. Out of all the guys they overpaid and gave NTC to, Timonen was the only acceptable addition. I could even live with Briere if the contract was only 5 years.

Not giving a complete excuse for Homer, but his decisions are from a straight and narrow view of "WIN NOW! WIN NOW! REBUILDING FOR EVEN ONE YEAR IS UNACCEPTABLE!"

If your boss was asking for immediate results in production NOW, are you honestly going to come back at him with a line such as "we must invest in research and capital before expecting dividends?"

El Emperor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2010, 03:23 PM
  #96
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
I am willing to give him one last chance. He really needs to restock on prospects and address the goalie situation once and for all.

He has done some really good stuff and some seriously stupid ****. I don't think up to now it warrants him being fired, but that is just my opinion.

But if he messes this off season up, then it is time to go.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2010, 04:54 PM
  #97
CantSeeColors
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Seychelles
Posts: 5,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan333 View Post
Like I said before, any new GM they bring in would have the same set of expectations that Homer has had. Even the best GMs with an excellent "get-well" plan won't be able to use it because their plan is not realistic to upper management's view of things.

What we could hope for is the if they did go the new GM route, that new GM could sit down and explain to upper management that teams like the Pens, Caps, etc needed a couple years before they could become highly competitive.

The sad truth is that the Flyers probably could have put a decent team on the ice in 2007-08 without Briere, Hartnell, Lupul, etc etc. Probably could have even made the playoffs. Out of all the guys they overpaid and gave NTC to, Timonen was the only acceptable addition. I could even live with Briere if the contract was only 5 years.

Not giving a complete excuse for Homer, but his decisions are from a straight and narrow view of "WIN NOW! WIN NOW! REBUILDING FOR EVEN ONE YEAR IS UNACCEPTABLE!"

If your boss was asking for immediate results in production NOW, are you honestly going to come back at him with a line such as "we must invest in research and capital before expecting dividends?"
A new GM could be an upgrade simply by not doing blatantly stupid things like recalling Randy Jones, even if Snider insists on doing things the same way as before. The big picture might not change, but the day to day could.

CantSeeColors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2010, 08:05 PM
  #98
flyersfan1221
Registered User
 
flyersfan1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 165
vCash: 500
restock...yes / Goalie ...Who?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
I am willing to give him one last chance. He really needs to restock on prospects and address the goalie situation once and for all.

He has done some really good stuff and some seriously stupid ****. I don't think up to now it warrants him being fired, but that is just my opinion.

But if he messes this off season up, then it is time to go.
I agree that our minor system has been bled off rather significantly and needs to be restocked.

What goalie do you think we can find that will fit into the cap without first addressing the overloaded contracts of the aformentioned forwards?

flyersfan1221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 04:17 AM
  #99
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
Haha, I owned up to you on this one in a different thread a while ago, you must have missed it.

But yes, I was 110% wrong and you were 110% right, I completely admit it.
You're right, I must have. My bad. Anyway, apology accepted. Lord knows I've been wrong my fair share, as well.

I just can't help but toot my own horn when I'm right about a prospect, and I'm very far from being that kind of person in general. It happens so rarely -- even for scouts and GMs -- that you SHOULD pat yourself on the back if it turns out you have a keen eye for talent. It'd be the same way if you made a shrewd financial investment and watched it pay off over the ensuing years, right? I don't know a single person who wouldn't proudly say "I told you so" in such an instance -- even now, I have a bet with a friend that Nate Allen will turn out to be a better pro player than Taylor Mays (I'm feeling pretty good about that one, seeing as how I all but got him to admit he hadn't seen Mays play his senior season and was obviously just enamored with his combine numbers). We've got a round of beers riding on it. ****, I called into WIP the day the 2007 NFL draft concluded and praised the Eagles for taking Stewart Bradley and Brent Celek, saying I thought both would be starters in a few years. I guess just sometimes when you know, you know.

That said... you got any guys from the 2010 NFL draft who you're really high on? How about this upcoming NHL draft?

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 04:40 AM
  #100
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,234
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Actually, there were plenty of people who had a problem with Boucher being the backup. I'm not one of 'em, and I was a consistent defender of Boucher throughout this season based on how he was used...but Emery was an unmitigated disaster, which even Homer has publicly admitted.
When has he said that? I think Emery's injury was a disaster. You could make the case that Emery's results shouldn't be evaluated with out considering his injury, but I'm not buying that.

The effect of the "disaster" that was Ray Emery's season on my evaluation of Holmgren's performance is mitigated by the freak nature of his injury. Had Emery's season gone awry for foreseeable reasons, then it would be different.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:45 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.