There are many ways in determining what makes a good NHL general manager. Sometimes it's rebuilding an organization that has fallen on hard times and turning it back into a contender. Or it could be maintaining a team that has been successful year in and year out through shrewd drafting and a timely trade.
Among the GMs who have made their mark early in the 2010-11 are the guys in charge of Eastern Conference-leading Philadelphia, which is coming off a Stanley Cup Final appearance, surprising Tampa Bay, looking to get back in the playoffs after a three-season absence, and surging Phoenix, which wants to build off its breakthrough campaign of a season ago.
There are 30 general managers whose work this season has only just begun, but NHL.com's Brian Compton handicaps the early race for top executive.
Winner
Paul Holmgren, Philadelphia Flyers -- The architect of a team that was already built for the Stanley Cup Playoffs, Holmgren found ways to improve his squad both prior to and during the early part of the 2010-11 season. The free-agent signing of Russian goaltender Sergei Bobrovksy could end up being the steal of the century in Philadelphia as Bobrovsky has flourished as the club's No. 1 goaltender. Not only do the Flyers find themselves in a first-place tie in the Eastern Conference, but Holmgren has signed Jeff Carter and Claude Giroux to extensions in the past month.
All this and yet Laviolette is not even mentioned in the coach's award
This kind of reminds me of an Inconvenient Truth when Al Gore says "it's quite complicated so I won't get into it too much but..." and ignores a bunch of ****.
It doesn't mention Shelley/Walker/Gagne
Not that I believe he's a horrible GM, but this is GM of the year...as in what he's done this year. With that in mind, we could likely say the good thing any GM (with a winning record) has done by themselves and winner winner chicken dinner.
Also, I love Bobrovsky, but he's played 18 games. I love all the optimism going around so far, but there seems to be a whole lot of "hype" attributed to this team this year.
All this and yet Laviolette is not even mentioned in the coach's award
Jack Adams is going to be given to the coach of a team that surprises everyone. That's just a reality.
As for GM of the year, I don't think Holmgren deserves it. He's a much better GM than all the haters on this board suggest, but there are some GMs out there who have had stellar offseasons.
I agree, but that's not normally what happens for the coach of the year award. Everyone knew the Flyers were going to be good, but like someone else said, it will be the team no one saw coming whose coach gets coach of the year. My early pick is either Scott Arnielin Columbus or Davis Payne in St. Louis.
I will wait to pass judgment until the end of the year. Homer is a very good GM but I am not ready to anoint him as the best this year. However I am glad we have him. It is nice to see he is getting some props. He is a Flyer to the core. I can still remember him getting interviewed by Gene Hart in Minnesota after he was traded. He was choked up talking about Philly. Does anyone remember the story about Pat Croce his buddy,dropping him with one shot
I don't place much stock into most NHL awards. That article is pretty much why. It looks at how well the team is doing and places all of that as the GM's doing somehow and doesn't mention how much luck was involved (a la Bobrovsky) or the bad stuff either (Shelley, Walker, Leighton, arguably Gagne). The GM of the year award might as well just go to one of top six teams in the standings automatically.
Conversely, Laviolette deserves to be in contention for coach of the year, but won't get it because the team is stacked and because he already has success with it last year.
Oh I know. Only flyers fans really know how lazy our team was under stevens
I agree. This team hadnt had back to back stink jobs this season. The past 2 games was just good goaltending by the other team. Some people want to believe coaching doesnt matter.
I don't place much stock into most NHL awards. That article is pretty much why. It looks at how well the team is doing and places all of that as the GM's doing somehow and doesn't mention how much luck was involved (a la Bobrovsky) or the bad stuff either (Shelley, Walker, Leighton, arguably Gagne). The GM of the year award might as well just go to one of top six teams in the standings automatically.
Conversely, Laviolette deserves to be in contention for coach of the year, but won't get it because the team is stacked and because he already has success with it last year.
Case in point: Charlie Manuel and the Phils this past year... criminal he didn't win Coach of the Year given the injuries that club sustained and still managed to record the best record in baseball.
No, he should be mentioned in the GM of the year talks because the talent he has put together and the record we will hopefully have, but that said I think he is far from the best GM. He has a great eye for talent, but he bucthers contracts, even his good deals are still slight overpays, and throws away draft picks. GM of the year should encompass everything a GM needs to do not just the talent he puts out there.
Whoever is responsible for this quality team that went to the Stanley cup finals last season, and has as good a chance as any other club to get there again this season deserves a lot of credit.A whole lot of other teams would like to be in this organizations shoes.If Homer got GM of the year i have no problem with that, and Homer would be the first person to spread the credit to many others who are part of the success as well.
Whoever is responsible for this quality team that went to the Stanley cup finals last season, and has as good a chance as any other club to get there again this season deserves a lot of credit.A whole lot of other teams would like to be in this organizations shoes.If Homer got GM of the year i have no problem with that, and Homer would be the first person to spread the credit to many others who are part of the success as well.
I agree that Holmgren has done a better job than most GMs in the time-frame since he came to power. You cannot ignore a team that went from last place in 2006-07 to first place by the quarter mark of 2010-11 with two Conference Finals and a Stanley Cup appearance in between.
That said, if Holmgren was going to get GM of the year it should've been in 2007-08, not after he made some minor moves to revamp a roster that went to the Stanley Cup last year.
Whoever is responsible for this quality team that went to the Stanley cup finals last season, and has as good a chance as any other club to get there again this season deserves a lot of credit.A whole lot of other teams would like to be in this organizations shoes.If Homer got GM of the year i have no problem with that, and Homer would be the first person to spread the credit to many others who are part of the success as well.
Do you think that automatically makes him a bad GM ? Coach Lavy certainly had a hand in Mike coming to the Flyers as well i should think?Leighton carried a pretty good load for us when the chips were down late last season.
Do you think that automatically makes him a bad GM ? Coach Lavy certainly had a hand in Mike coming to the Flyers as well i should think?Leighton carried a pretty good load for us when the chips were down late last season.
Not going to get into this debate again. Can't believe some people think that the incredibly irrelevant Walker and Shelley things are that much of a detriment to him.
Not going to get into this debate again. Can't believe some people think that the incredibly irrelevant Walker and Shelley things are that much of a detriment to him.
So instead of one extreme of condemning him for it, you go to the other by saying 2.8 mil in cap space (until 2013) is irrelevant?
I would say at the least its noteworthy, especially considering the topic at hand is "GM of the Year" and those irrelevant signings are the bulk of what he did this summer. I'm not advocating he's a horrible GM, far from it, but let's not enter lollypop land either.
