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

Do we give Holmgren enough credit?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-10-2011, 07:49 PM
  #126
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoFlyers1825 View Post
Yet if we were 0-2 everything would be Homer's fault.
QFT.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-10-2011, 08:18 PM
  #127
Flyersfan139
Registered User
 
Flyersfan139's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Exton, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoFlyers1825 View Post
Yet if we were 0-2 everything would be Homer's fault.
The life of a GM....

lol

Flyersfan139 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-10-2011, 08:24 PM
  #128
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan61290 View Post
I think Homer is an above average GM but nothing more. I just wish he would actually tell the truth and stop avoiding all questions he is asked. Before the Boston game he said that Walker had "stuff to do" or something along those lines. As a result everyone assumed he was injured because Homer wouldn't give a specif reason. Earlier today on CSNphilly.com Tim wrote:


So what is really up with Walker?
Link:http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/flyers...230&feedID=695
Maybe we should have polls where we pit Homer against the other GM's so we could see how people on this forum actually view him. I feel like we might be having another argument where it goes kind of

- Homer isn't the best GM in the league, there's probably around ten teams that have it better than us.
- No way, Homer is doing great. I could easily name ten GM's that are doing a worse job.




As for the second part, maybe they're just having fun with the beat writers. See who can get the most ridiculous quote each week or something like that? Or they are just trying to outdo Pronger. The person on the team who has gotten the most bizarre article/tweet out of Panaccio at season's end gets a prize.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-10-2011, 08:31 PM
  #129
EasyMac
Registered User
 
EasyMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kingston
Country: Canada
Posts: 840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
You do know that both Hatnell and Timonen weren't actually signed until AFTER FA started right??? It's not like trading that 1st to get their "rights" actually got them signed here any earlier. Teams "talk" to pending UFA's starting just after the draft, it's just that they "look the other way". Timone told Holmgren specifically that he wasn't signing here unless we signed a legit #1 center, hence why we HAD to go out and sign Briere. The point is that we COULD have held on to that pick, talked to Timonen and Hartnell "behind closed doors" and STILL signed them on the exact same minute that we did with having traded away that pick.
Actually the deals were done well before the opening of free agency.

http://articles.philly.com/2007-06-1...e-agent-market

EasyMac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-10-2011, 10:45 PM
  #130
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EasyMac View Post
Actually the deals were done well before the opening of free agency.

http://articles.philly.com/2007-06-1...e-agent-market
I know, it's pretty bad when all you can do is cry rivers of tears about freakin' Jon Blum and have to rewrite/ignore what actually happened, which was that Holmgren made a fantastic deal, scooped the most eagerly anticipated UFAs out from under all the other teams that were lining up for them.

The article was from June 18, 2007. That is not, if I understand the calendar correctly, after July 1st, is it?

"Rather than allow the free-agent market to dictate terms and conditions on July 1, the Flyers took matters into their own hands this afternoon, trading for unrestricted free agent defenseman Kimmo Timonen and unrestricted free agent left winger Scott Hartnell of Nashville.

Both players agreed to six-year deals with the Flyers. Timonen's $37.8 million contract will average $6.3 million against the cap while Hartnell's $25.2 million deal averages $4.2 million.

The Predators got back their first-round pick (No. 23 overall) that came to the Flyers last winter during the Peter Forsberg deal."

Blum will have to be all star in the league for the 10 years to have a comparable impact to what Kimmo and Scott have made to the Flyers in the four years they've been here. Great deal by Holmgren in every way. Can we please no longer have to hear garbage and lies like that argument again?

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 04:37 AM
  #131
Mike2000z28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Philly, now montreal
Posts: 869
vCash: 500
Well living here and watching the GM of the Canadians field a crappy team year after year and the fans still selling out. Paul is a much superior GM. At least he tries to field a good team and rides the cap out unlike other teams. He isn't cheap. Sure he does make odd moves, etc but good ones as well.

Mike2000z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 05:57 AM
  #132
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
In Holmgren's first four full years (not counting the year he came in midseason): there have only been 7 teams that made the playoffs each of those years (Washington, Boston, Montreal, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Detroit). In those four years, only 5 teams have made the conference finals twice (Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Philadelphia). Under Paul Holgren, the Flyers have been one of the best teams consistently in the league. That is a fact. This current roster has only two players on it that he did not sign, draft, or trade for so any excuse that the players were here, which is garbage anyway as already shown in this thread, will be gone based on this teams performance. Yes he makes bad moves, but so does Ken Holland and every other gm. It is out weighed by his good moves and shown by the teams actual performance on the ice, not on paper.

Psuhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 07:55 AM
  #133
chimrichalds18
the key
 
chimrichalds18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieParent View Post
It was also a stroke of genius for Holmgren to use that time machine to sign Gretzky out of the WHA and transport his 18-year-old self to today. And I can't say enough about signing Grendel from Norse mythology to be our enforcer.

This alternate-universe thread is brought to you by the makers of Soylent Green.
I think you missed the point completely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoFlyers1825 View Post
Yet if we were 0-2 everything would be Homer's fault.
Only to stupid people. There's never going to be a point in the year where we're going to know everything about this team because of big roles that rookies are going to have, though rookies are fairly predictable. There definitely will be trends that we'll start to see come Thanksgiving, and that may be indicative of a hole that Holmgren addressed or didn't address, but it's dumb to jump to any conclusions after two games, and that includes the notion that a guy like Hartnell is suddenly expendable.

chimrichalds18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 08:59 AM
  #134
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
In Holmgren's first four full years (not counting the year he came in midseason): there have only been 7 teams that made the playoffs each of those years (Washington, Boston, Montreal, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Detroit). In those four years, only 5 teams have made the conference finals twice (Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Philadelphia). Under Paul Holgren, the Flyers have been one of the best teams consistently in the league. That is a fact. This current roster has only two players on it that he did not sign, draft, or trade for so any excuse that the players were here, which is garbage anyway as already shown in this thread, will be gone based on this teams performance. Yes he makes bad moves, but so does Ken Holland and every other gm. It is out weighed by his good moves and shown by the teams actual performance on the ice, not on paper.
Can you believe that idiot Holland let Leino get away? He should be fired immediately.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 09:14 AM
  #135
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
1st for Eminger ---> Eminger/Downie for Carle was the only legitimate (not minor signing/cap related) screw up of Holmgren's career as a GM here.

I will admit though that it was a major **** up.

That said, the same aggressiveness that screwed the pooch on that one was also responsible for Chris Pronger, Timonen/Hartnell, Bryzgalov, Schenn/Simmonds/Couturier/Voracek, etc.

Take everything if you're going to complain. Examine all the facts, not just the ones you don't like.

That same trade we made for Eminger was the same trade we did for Coburn and for Meszaros. Eminger just cost us more and was a much larger disappointment. Coburn and Meszaros though were rehabs/projects that Holmgren was successful with.
I totally disagree that acquiring Eminger was a mistake at the time. He was a high draft pick, RHS offensive Dman, Jr. teammate of Richards in Kitchener in the Memorial Cup, played in the WJC etc. By comparison, he was very much like the Drew Doughty of his day, but got off to a slow start as a pro, like many young D.

He'd played very well in the playoffs and looked like he was ready to blossom. It was a risk, but it was a calculated one. All deals like that are. Unfortunately, the team started in such disarray that Eminger was never allowed to get comfortable or confident, and he has played OK in the league since but didn't turn into anything special. Oh well.

The other thing I can't stand is whining that the Eminger deal cost us John Carlson. First, there is NO evidence that the Flyers were going to pick him. Given our history of using late 1st picks to go off the board and pick a guy ranked in the 80s in the late first round (Downie, Giroux), who knows who the Flyers would've picked.

They traded a pick for a guy a few years further along in his development in the hopes he could help the team sooner. It didn't work out, get over it.

Getting Matt Carle for Eminger and Downie was a steal. An excellent top pairing, minute-eating, puck-moving Dman with character for a failed experiment and troubled psycho who had burned all his bridges with his teammates in the room and the coaches? Great deal. Downie is an OK player but Carle logs as many minutes as Timonen nightly - you can't find guys like that easily.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 09:32 AM
  #136
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I totally disagree that acquiring Eminger was a mistake at the time. He was a high draft pick, RHS offensive Dman, Jr. teammate of Richards in Kitchener in the Memorial Cup, played in the WJC etc. By comparison, he was very much like the Drew Doughty of his day, but got off to a slow start as a pro, like many young D.

He'd played very well in the playoffs and looked like he was ready to blossom. It was a risk, but it was a calculated one. All deals like that are. Unfortunately, the team started in such disarray that Eminger was never allowed to get comfortable or confident, and he has played OK in the league since but didn't turn into anything special. Oh well.

The other thing I can't stand is whining that the Eminger deal cost us John Carlson. First, there is NO evidence that the Flyers were going to pick him. Given our history of using late 1st picks to go off the board and pick a guy ranked in the 80s in the late first round (Downie, Giroux), who knows who the Flyers would've picked.

They traded a pick for a guy a few years further along in his development in the hopes he could help the team sooner. It didn't work out, get over it.

Getting Matt Carle for Eminger and Downie was a steal. An excellent top pairing, minute-eating, puck-moving Dman with character for a failed experiment and troubled psycho who had burned all his bridges with his teammates in the room and the coaches? Great deal. Downie is an OK player but Carle logs as many minutes as Timonen nightly - you can't find guys like that easily.
A 1st rounder for Eminger was poor asset management at the time, regardless of the outcome later on. He'd been the 7th d for Washington the previous season, only getting in to play in the playoffs due to an injury to Schultz iirc (though, as evidenced in the Rinaldo thread, my memory isn't always that reliable). 2 assists in 20 games doesn't exactly scream out offensive stud waiting to break out. He had had 18 pts in his best season and was 24 years old and seemingly regressing. It doesn't exactly compare to Drew Doughty.

He did play fairly well against us, but only saw about 16 minutes per game. Less than Jurcina and Erskine.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 09:36 AM
  #137
chimrichalds18
the key
 
chimrichalds18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,775
vCash: 500
I'm pretty sure that if Holmgren had just waited another week, he could have sent an offer sheet to the Caps that would have cost less than that first. It was a classic case of him overpaying for someone he wanted...something he has done multiple times as GM. Eminger was not worth the 1st, which is why McPhee jumped all over the deal.

A 1st also fetched RJ Umberger the next year, which was a far better deal.

chimrichalds18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 09:48 AM
  #138
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I totally disagree that acquiring Eminger was a mistake at the time. He was a high draft pick, RHS offensive Dman, Jr. teammate of Richards in Kitchener in the Memorial Cup, played in the WJC etc. By comparison, he was very much like the Drew Doughty of his day, but got off to a slow start as a pro, like many young D.

He'd played very well in the playoffs and looked like he was ready to blossom. It was a risk, but it was a calculated one. All deals like that are. Unfortunately, the team started in such disarray that Eminger was never allowed to get comfortable or confident, and he has played OK in the league since but didn't turn into anything special. Oh well.

The other thing I can't stand is whining that the Eminger deal cost us John Carlson. First, there is NO evidence that the Flyers were going to pick him. Given our history of using late 1st picks to go off the board and pick a guy ranked in the 80s in the late first round (Downie, Giroux), who knows who the Flyers would've picked.

They traded a pick for a guy a few years further along in his development in the hopes he could help the team sooner. It didn't work out, get over it.

Getting Matt Carle for Eminger and Downie was a steal. An excellent top pairing, minute-eating, puck-moving Dman with character for a failed experiment and troubled psycho who had burned all his bridges with his teammates in the room and the coaches? Great deal. Downie is an OK player but Carle logs as many minutes as Timonen nightly - you can't find guys like that easily.


Acquiring Eminger wasn't necessarily a mistake. Giving up a first round pick for him certainly was.

I agree that trading Downie and Eminger for Carle was an outstanding trade. Hopefully, they can keep him past this year.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 09:51 AM
  #139
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chimrichalds18 View Post
I'm pretty sure that if Holmgren had just waited another week, he could have sent an offer sheet to the Caps that would have cost less than that first. It was a classic case of him overpaying for someone he wanted...something he has done multiple times as GM. Eminger was not worth the 1st, which is why McPhee jumped all over the deal.

A 1st also fetched RJ Umberger the next year, which was a far better deal.
The deals involving Umberger and Eminger were done the same day I believe, which made it look even worse considering how good Umberger had been in the playoffs.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 10:10 AM
  #140
chimrichalds18
the key
 
chimrichalds18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirimon View Post
The deals involving Umberger and Eminger were done the same day I believe, which made it look even worse considering how good Umberger had been in the playoffs.
You're right...and you said you had a bad memory. But yea, that does look even worse.

chimrichalds18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 10:14 AM
  #141
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanSciver View Post
Acquiring Eminger wasn't necessarily a mistake. Giving up a first round pick for him certainly was.

I agree that trading Downie and Eminger for Carle was an outstanding trade. Hopefully, they can keep him past this year.
Yeah, if we'd gotten Eminger cheaper, at fair value, then I wouldn't have had much to argue against. Then it would just have been a trade that in the end didn't work out. As Larry said, he was a high draft pick and was still fairly young. He might have been able to turn it around. We overpaid badly though.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 01:17 PM
  #142
GoneFullHextall
RIP Andy B.
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 35,984
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
QFT.
yup, if it wasnt for Holmgren being such a great GM we would of been a lottery team the last 6 years, no other GM could of made the moes that Holmgren made the last 6 years.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 01:31 PM
  #143
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 14,329
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
yup, if it wasnt for Holmgren being such a great GM we would of been a lottery team the last 6 years, no other GM could of made the moes that Holmgren made the last 6 years.
Lol. You can do better than that.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 01:36 PM
  #144
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
yup, if it wasnt for Holmgren being such a great GM we would of been a lottery team the last 6 years, no other GM could of made the moes that Holmgren made the last 6 years.
Really? thats the best you could come up with. Again, go ask every other team that has missed the play-offs regularly in the last 6 years

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 01:39 PM
  #145
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 14,329
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Really? thats the best you could come up with. Again, go ask every other team that has missed the play-offs regularly in the last 6 years
Their moves were less obvious. For the Flyers it was obvious to go after Briere and get him to sign for less than what he was offered elsewhere. It was obvious to trade for guys rights to the Flyers, but not other teams. It was obvious to sign guys like Bob to the Flyers. It was obvious make other trades that brought in Coburn and Meszaros and others. So obvious. BUT HE TRADED SCOTTIE UPSHALL!!!!!!

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 02:06 PM
  #146
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Their moves were less obvious. For the Flyers it was obvious to go after Briere and get him to sign for less than what he was offered elsewhere. It was obvious to trade for guys rights to the Flyers, but not other teams. It was obvious to sign guys like Bob to the Flyers. It was obvious make other trades that brought in Coburn and Meszaros and others. So obvious. BUT HE TRADED SCOTTIE UPSHALL!!!!!!
While I know your post was sarcastic, I want to touch on a point there...

Unlike the moves to acquire Coburn, Meszaros, Bobrovsky, Timonen/Hartnell, etc...in fact, go ahead and tell me that moving a potential future top-pairing guy in Sbisa + the house for Chris Pronger was "obvious"...the Scottie Upshall move was actually obvious.

Upshall was a forward who played well but did not produce to his potential. He was going to ask for a big money deal that he hadn't yet deserved, one that would put us in a serious cap bind in the future. The Flyers could've held onto him and not lost a second to pick up Carcillo, but they thought Giroux could help the team more than Upshall could at that point. Plus Giroux would give them even more cap space short-term, let alone the long-term benefits of moving Upshall.

The return sucked ass, but moving Upshall was an obvious move that ANY GM SHOULD'VE AND WOULD'VE DONE.

Going out and getting guys like Timonen, Hartnell, Coburn, Bryzgalov, Meszaros, Bobrovsky, among others are not obvious moves in the least. If they were such obvious moves, other GMs would've pounced on them to make their teams' better.

As always, Holmgren makes extremely gutsy moves that pay off more often than not. When they don't pay off, he is smart enough to make the OBVIOUS moves by fixing his mistakes.

To say that Holmgren's good moves are obvious and his bad moves are not is completely bassackwards and hypocritical.


Last edited by CS: 10-11-2011 at 02:12 PM.
CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 02:08 PM
  #147
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 14,329
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
While I know your post was sarcastic, I want to touch on a point there...

Unlike the moves to acquire Coburn, Meszaros, Bobrovsky, Timonen/Hartnell, etc. the Scottie Upshall move was actually obvious.

Upshall was a forward who played well but did not produce to his potential. He was going to ask for a big money deal that he hadn't yet deserved, one that would put us in a serious cap bind in the future. The Flyers could've held onto him and not lost a second to pick up Carcillo, but they thought Giroux could help the team more than Upshall could at that point. Plus Giroux would give them even more cap space short-term, let alone the long-term benefits of moving Upshall.

The return sucked ass, but moving Upshall was an obvious move that ANY GM SHOULD'VE AND WOULD'VE DONE.

Going out and getting guys like Timonen, Hartnell, Coburn, Bryzgalov, Meszaros, Bobrovsky, among others are not obvious moves in the least. If they were such obvious moves, other GMs would've pounced on them to make their teams' better.
Just so we're clear, you know that I wasn't really saying those other moves were obvious?

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 02:12 PM
  #148
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Just so we're clear, you know that I wasn't really saying those other moves were obvious?
Yeah I was just expanding on what you were saying.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 02:19 PM
  #149
Doyle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,151
vCash: 500
Taking a Flyer: Notes and Observations From First Two Games
http://nhlhotstove.com/taking-a-flye...medium=twitter

Doyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2011, 02:21 PM
  #150
mirimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
While I know your post was sarcastic, I want to touch on a point there...

Unlike the moves to acquire Coburn, Meszaros, Bobrovsky, Timonen/Hartnell, etc.

In fact, go ahead and tell me that moving a potential future top-pairing guy in Sbisa + the house for Chris Pronger was "obvious."

The Scottie Upshall move was actually obvious.

Upshall was a forward who played well but did not produce to his potential. He was going to ask for a big money deal that he hadn't yet deserved, one that would put us in a serious cap bind in the future. The Flyers could've held onto him and not lost a second to pick up Carcillo, but they thought Giroux could help the team more than Upshall could at that point. Plus Giroux would give them even more cap space short-term, let alone the long-term benefits of moving Upshall.

The return sucked ass, but moving Upshall was an obvious move that ANY GM SHOULD'VE AND WOULD'VE DONE.

Going out and getting guys like Timonen, Hartnell, Coburn, Bryzgalov, Meszaros, Bobrovsky, among others are not obvious moves in the least. If they were such obvious moves, other GMs would've pounced on them to make their teams' better.
Homer's dealings that season forced us to move Upshall (or someone else), and still we had to dress players signed to pto contracts in two games. I'm sorry, but if you want to defend Holmgren, and just to make this perfectly clear - I don't see any reason to fire him or anything like that -, but that trade is not something that every GM SHOULD'VE AND WOULD'VE DONE. Given that specific situation, then yes, I'd say most would've. The point is that if Homer had acted smarter earlier on in the season that specific situation wouldn't have occured.

Upshall didn't really fit in with the team moving forward, that I agree with. What you'd expect then is to see him moved for picks/prospects that equals his value somehow, or a player that's paid less and then picks/prospects to make up the value. Not us having to tack on a 2nd rounder just so some team can help us out of cap hell.

Again, it's not as if it's a mistake that Homer deserves to be fired for, but let's not act as if it's something that didn't really matter either.


Last edited by mirimon: 10-11-2011 at 02:24 PM. Reason: acted smarter? does that make sense?
mirimon 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 01:27 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.