Wings_Rule_1010 4 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 I wasn't sure if this was posted yet. I was reading about this on ESPN. It is a ranking of the top GMs in sports. General managers were graded on two things: performance vs. the performance of their predecessor, and payroll relative to the league median when compared to their predecessor. Because winning is more important than payroll, Forbes.com double-weighted winning percentage to penalize a GM who cut costs but also hurt his team's winning percentage.... I was surprised to see Kenny Holland at #90. Thought he would have been a little higher. FORBES Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hito 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 (edited) Their methodology is crap, that's why. The ranking are based solely on a comparison to the last GM's final three years, so in the case where a team was flying high, like the red wings, it makes it almost impossible for him to earn more wins. in addition, the wings organization has had more money to play with under his tenure, so he isn't going to spend less. However, someone becoming the GM of a perrenial cellar dwellar can cut costs and get one or two decent seasons in and be ranked much higher. Edited March 5, 2007 by Hito Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 I didn't spend a whole lot of time trying to figure out the rankings, but it is obviously driven off of stats, which is really difficult to do when trying to rank a GM, but whatever. Personally, I do not rank Holland as the best GM in the league, I am no basher, but I do think he gets a little more credit for the Wings success than he really deserves. That said, he is a professional and I would have him on the higher end of NHL GMs. This list looks like it has him around 24 in terms of NHL GMs. You can argue all you want for various reasons, but that fact that Milbury was higher than "ANYONE" on this list pretty much invalidates the list as far as I am concerned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OsGOD 3 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 I feel bad for anyone under 96... boy do you SUCK if millen is ahead of you! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 However, someone becoming the GM of a perrenial cellar dwellar can cut costs and get one or two decent seasons in and be ranked much higher. You make is sound like cutting costs and getting decent success is easy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJmonak10 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Milbury shouldn't even be on the list... what about Garth? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown Red Wings 245 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 This list looks like it has him around 24 in terms of NHL GMs. You can argue all you want for various reasons, but that fact that Milbury was higher than "ANYONE" on this list pretty much invalidates the list as far as I am concerned. I remember when they did this with owners 4 or 5 years back...Mike Illitch was a top 5 owner and a bottom 5 owner at the same time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hito 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 I feel bad for anyone under 96... boy do you SUCK if millen is ahead of you! Oh, im not saying it's easy, but lets face it. If you are one of the worst team in the league, you pretty well have nowhere to go but up (or stay where your at). My point was, that if you became the GM of a team that has floated around, say, 28-30th in the league, and unload all of your talent and play rookies for peanuts, you would have a decent rating in their ranking system. If you manage to crawl your way up to, say, 25th in the league, you would be ranked fairly high. Meanwhile, if you come in with a team that has been ranked #1-3 for a few years and now finds itself with money to spend.....well, you're screwed. You literally CAN'T improve anymore, and if you spend a little extra to keep yourself competative while your farm players develope and your old guard begin to retire, then you get shot down there. Basically, it heavily penalizes GM's that inherit good teams and rewards those that inherit poor ones. Not that that shouldn't be part of the equation (A good team that becomes mediocre under a GM's watch doesn't speak highly of his abilities), but it shouldn't be the entire equation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alienanxiety 23 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 how on Earth is Dave Dombrowski so low on the list??? after what he inherited from Randy Smith, to turn around the Tigers like that in just a few years, he has to be top 3 GM. and how is jay feaster at the top, he has completely handcuffed that team by signing huge contracts to three players. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BeeRYCE 2 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Okay, Jay Feaster and Lou Lamoriello as the top 2 GMs in hockey? What the hell? Didn't both GMs have cap problems with both of their respective teams? Also, good to see Dumars ranked so high, he's a great GM. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wings1936 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 (edited) When I read the article I came running here to post about it (I haven't logged in just under a year). How the hell is Millen 96 and Holland 90? This ranking is a crock Edited March 5, 2007 by wings1936 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kp-Wings 3 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Holland shouldn't be #1, but #90 is just wrong. The Wings have been a great team for a long time now. Don Waddel at number #6? Atlanta has NEVER made the playoffs. This is just bad judgment by whoever made that list. Nobody should be even close to Matt Millen on that list. He's in a catagory of his own (and a bad one at that). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
STICK 1 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 "27 Bobby Clarke 20 143 65 NHL Philadelphia Flyers " Anyone Under 27 Must really suck seeing how Bobby isn't even the GM anymore Millen should be 122nd and John Fergy should be 121 This is just stupid Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlueMonk 102 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Seeing Holland at 90 doesn't bother me nearly as much as Glen Sather at #12. WTF? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bluedevils_13 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Ya this is BS the Timberwolves GM is #1, and he HAS-NOT-done-s***. They havent even been making the playoffs, what a crock. And Jay Feaster is the best NHL GM? WHAT Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Airborn 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 When I saw Kevin McHale was #1 on this list, I stopped reading. He is known as one of the worst GMs in basketball, so how could he be #1 across all sports? Using their formula, I'm surprised Millen wasn't #2! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WingsownNHL 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 not even mad about this list. all i can do is laugh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BeeRYCE 2 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Dave Dombrowski as low as #48 is even more of a crock than Holland at #90, and Millen even on this list. Dombrowski should be top 10. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Winged Scooter 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Yeah, this list is a joke alright, Isiah Thomas is 82, 80 FREAKING TWO, how so? Everytime I hear GM's discussed on sports radio, he is always referred to as the NBA's version of Matt Millen... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lou_Siffer 1 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Dombrowski is WAY too low...Billy Bean should be hell of alot higher as well. They are two of the 2 best imo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Tunbo Batman Report post Posted March 5, 2007 dont you get it guys? theses guys think about NOHTING BUT MONEY. thats really all there is. there is no space for team quality, show quality, fanbase respect, etc etc. THE MORE $$$ YOU RAKE IN THE HIGHER YOU RANK. Lou Lamoriello stinks and has been a plague for our sport for a while now, but hey, he turns in a profit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlueMonk 102 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Lou Lamoriello stinks and has been a plague for our sport for a while now, but hey, he turns in a profit. He also wins. The style of play is ugly, but there is no better GM in the NHL than Lamoriello. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lou_Siffer 1 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Lou Lamoriello stinks and has been a plague for our sport for a while now, but hey, he turns in a profit. WHAT?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NJmonak10 0 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Perfect timing for this list, I just came home to my new issue of the hockey news and they have their 1st annual GM rankings and rated Holland #1! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
superstarsingh 23 Report post Posted March 5, 2007 Mike Milbury and Matt Millen are the two worst GMs in sports history. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
