Ken Holland's Achievements

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

29 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

Well till I've seen a source claiming that he ownership is putting any constraints on Holland I have a hard time believing it. But even if it isn't I don't think Holland is the guy for a real rebuild. Look at Toronto under Burke the team needed a rebuild and he just wouldn't admit it or act in the best longterm interests because he never had to do one.

Botterill has seen the Pittsburgh rebuild, Brisebois the Tampa Bay one and Armstrong the Blues. Of course the guy I would really really want is under contract and might even sign an extension after his current one is up but there are options, that have experienced a rebuild. Yeah, the Wings are an Original 6 team and should get the best of the best but sadly neither the best coach nor GM are available.

Youre not not going to gut your franchise without asking your owner first. Just like when Bowman wanted to trade Yzerman and Mrs Illitch was like heck na. Its one thing to make minor trades, its another to completely revamp the philosophy of ur business. You ask for the owners input.

Edited December 27, 2016 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

54 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

Well till I've seen a source claiming that he ownership is putting any constraints on Holland I have a hard time believing it. But even if it isn't I don't think Holland is the guy for a real rebuild. Look at Toronto under Burke the team needed a rebuild and he just wouldn't admit it or act in the best longterm interests because he never had to do one.

Botterill has seen the Pittsburgh rebuild, Brisebois the Tampa Bay one and Armstrong the Blues. Of course the guy I would really really want is under contract and might even sign an extension after his current one is up but there are options, that have experienced a rebuild. Yeah, the Wings are an Original 6 team and should get the best of the best but sadly neither the best coach nor GM are available.

Crosby and Malkin were there before Botterhill so no I wouldn't say he oversaw the rebuild. Tampa and St Louis never went through a rebuild in the years those guys were there. At least not in the sense we're talking about.

 

[kliq 3,763]

 

1 minute ago, Son of a Wing said:

Crosby and Malkin were there before Botterhill so no I wouldn't say he oversaw the rebuild. Tampa and St Louis never went through a rebuild in the years those guys were there. At least not in the sense we're talking about.

 

Ya its really not fair to compare to alot of those teams. I will give Yzerman his due, but its not as hard to rebuild a team when you have a young franchise forward in Stamkos and a young franchise D-man in Hedman coming in. Same goes for Botterhill coming in with Crosby/Malkin.

As far as the Blues go, would this team really be considered a success? Sure they have had great regular seasons, but they have been a bust in the playoffs. Some teams are just not built for post season hockey. Both the Blues and Caps seem to be in that boat.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Well seems like getting those guys isn't as easy as some people think it is. You need to finish bottom 3, draft and develop them and surround the elite guys with solid players which Yzerman, Botterill and Armstrong have done. Yeah the Blues haven't won anything but given where they were and the place they are now, so Armstrong did a good job. MacKenzie talked about how difficult a rebuild is and that you need more phases than just starting over and drafting high. But if a GM isn't willing to do a scorched earth one the rebuild never reaches phase one so it doesn't even start, see Burke and Toronto, Benning and Vancouver, Wilson and the Sharks

Of course the GM has to ask the owner because it's their money and if I were Mr. I I would have stepped in and declined some trades, signings.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

40 minutes ago, kliq said:

 

Ya its really not fair to compare to alot of those teams. I will give Yzerman his due, but its not as hard to rebuild a team when you have a young franchise forward in Stamkos and a young franchise D-man in Hedman coming in. Same goes for Botterhill coming in with Crosby/Malkin.

As far as the Blues go, would this team really be considered a success? Sure they have had great regular seasons, but they have been a bust in the playoffs. Some teams are just not built for post season hockey. Both the Blues and Caps seem to be in that boat.

Yzerman obtained Ben Bishop in exchange for Cory Conacher and a 4th round pick.  He also traded Kyle Quincey in exchange for a 1st round pick, to some dumb ass GM (I forgot his name).  He signed Tyler Johnson, who was a player nobody ever heard of.  He drafted Palat in the 7th round.  He signed Stralman, who's been a very good player for them.  He also obtained Brian Boyle for cheap, who's been a major contributor to their team.  

There's more to Tampa's success besides Stamkos and Hedman.  While Yzerman has been doing these things, Holland has made a fool of himself and now runs one of the costliest rosters in the league, despite severely lacking talent at every position.  I know this thread is about Holland's entire history, and not just the last 5 years, but it's easy to see that Holland surrounded himself with smart people who have either retired or went to other organizations.  

Edited December 27, 2016 by GMRwings1983

[kickazz 5,459]

When is Nill's contract up? Can we bring that guy?

[kliq 3,763]

6 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Yzerman obtained Ben Bishop in exchange for Cory Conacher and a 4th round pick.  He also traded Kyle Quincey in exchange for a 1st round pick, to some dumb ass GM (I forgot his name).  He signed Tyler Johnson, who was a player nobody ever heard of.  He drafted Palat in the 7th round.  He signed Stralman, who's been a very good player for them.  He also obtained Brian Boyle for cheap, who's been a major contributor to their team.  

There's more to Tampa's success besides Stamkos and Hedman.  

Agreed, I am not taking anything away from Yzerman as he has made some really good moves. My point was that starting with an elite forward and d-man is a huge help.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

3 minutes ago, kliq said:

Agreed, I am not taking anything away from Yzerman as he has made some really good moves. My point was that starting with an elite forward and d-man is a huge help.

As the second part of my post suggested, having a Hall of Fame roster, coached by the best coach in hockey, with the highest payroll in the league, the best international scouting, and guys like Devellano and Nill around you, also is a huge help.  Holland has been lucky to surround himself with that group.  

[kliq 3,763]

15 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

Well seems like getting those guys isn't as easy as some people think it is. You need to finish bottom 3, draft and develop them and surround the elite guys with solid players which Yzerman, Botterill and Armstrong have done. Yeah the Blues haven't won anything but given where they were and the place they are now, so Armstrong did a good job. MacKenzie talked about how difficult a rebuild is and that you need more phases than just starting over and drafting high. But if a GM isn't willing to do a scorched earth one the rebuild never reaches phase one so it doesn't even start, see Burke and Toronto, Benning and Vancouver, Wilson and the Sharks

So you consider the Blues a success, but list the Sharks as a problem? The Sharks have accomplished a hell of a lot more then the Blues, even dating back to last year as they were the one's that eliminated the Blues and reached the conference finals. Even this year the Sharks sit #1 in their division. 

When you evaluate a team like the Blues, are you calling them a success because of anything they have actually accomplished? Or is it based on your personal preference of their style of play? Same goes for the Sharks, but on the other side of the spectrum.

[kickazz 5,459]

2 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Holland has been lucky to surround himself with that group.  

Or a smart businessman. Generally top CEOs and GMs tend to surround themselves with the best.

This seems exactly like what Toronto is doing atm. Lots of big names there.

Edited December 27, 2016 by kickazz

[kliq 3,763]

1 minute ago, GMRwings1983 said:

As the second part of my post suggested, having a Hall of Fame roster, coached by the best coach in hockey, with the highest payroll in the league, the best international scouting, and guys like Devellano and Nill around you, also is a huge help.  Holland has been lucky to surround himself with that group.  

Your not wrong, but isn't that the job of a GM to surround themselves with good management, good coaching, good scouting, and good players? That is literally a GM's job.

If a GM surrounds themselves with bad management,, hires bad scouts, signs bad players etc. Would you not say the GM is doing a bad job?

[frankgrimes 1,836]

So you consider the Blues a success, but list the Sharks as a problem? The Sharks have accomplished a hell of a lot more then the Blues, even dating back to last year as they were the one's that eliminated the Blues and reached the conference finals. Even this year the Sharks sit #1 in their division. 
When you evaluate a team like the Blues, are you calling them a success because of anything they have actually accomplished? Or is it based on your personal preference of their style of play? Same goes for the Sharks, but on the other side of the spectrum.

Wanna know what increased the Sharks window? The emergence of Burns. As soon as Thornton hangs the skates up it's rebuild time Burns, Pavelski and Couture can't carry the load all alone.
I list the Blues as a success because they never had as high expectations as the sharks did.

To me the job of a GM is to oversee the organization from top to bottom, surround himself with the right people (see Toronto), have an honest view on where the team is and act accordingly. Is it a lot to ask for? Of course but it's a very well paid job with a lot of power so it's not going to be easy.

[kliq 3,763]

11 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

Wanna know what increased the Sharks window? The emergence of Burns. As soon as Thornton hangs the skates up it's rebuild time Burns, Pavelski and Couture can't carry the load all alone.
I list the Blues as a success because they never had as high expectations as the sharks did.

So if Thornton were to retire at the end of this season, you would trade away Burns, Pavelski, and Couture? Despite the team being a contender?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

16 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

 

Wanna know what increased the Sharks window? The emergence of Burns. As soon as Thornton hangs the skates up it's rebuild time Burns, Pavelski and Couture can't carry the load all alone.
I list the Blues as a success because they never had as high expectations as the sharks did.

To me the job of a GM is to oversee the organization from top to bottom, surround himself with the right people (see Toronto), have an honest view on where the team is and act accordingly. Is it a lot to ask for? Of course but it's a very well paid job with a lot of power so it's not going to be easy.
 

 

Burns is a forward playing D. He needs a shutdown guy with him to cover his ace at all times or hes no good. I definately wouldnt rebuild just because Jumbo retires. We didnt when Stevie retired. 

[frankgrimes 1,836]

So if Thornton were to retire at the end of this season, you would trade away Burns, Pavelski, and Couture? Despite the team being a contender?

Did I say that? No, but I would look at possible solutions including getting a top pick. Of course Burns just signed an extension so he is going nowhere.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

2 hours ago, kliq said:

Your not wrong, but isn't that the job of a GM to surround themselves with good management, good coaching, good scouting, and good players? That is literally a GM's job.

If a GM surrounds themselves with bad management,, hires bad scouts, signs bad players etc. Would you not say the GM is doing a bad job?

My point is that Holland was only as good as the sum of the parts around him.  No wonder he's failing now when everyone else is gone.  

Edited December 28, 2016 by GMRwings1983

[kliq 3,763]

2 hours ago, frankgrimes said:

Did I say that? No, but I would look at possible solutions including getting a top pick. Of course Burns just signed an extension so he is going nowhere.

You said: 

"As soon as Thornton hangs the skates up it's rebuild time Burns, Pavelski and Couture can't carry the load all alone."

Based on your posting history, in your mind "rebuild" means trading everyone, anything else you have coined "retooling". Because of this, when you said "its re-build time" my assumption was that you meant trade away all their top players. 

43 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

My point is that Holland was only as good as the sum of the parts around him.  No wonder he's failing now when everyone else is gone.  

Name me one GM in NHL history who kept their team a contender for more then 13 years? If any GM stays on for the long haul, they are going to struggle at some point, especially in a post cap world. Same thing happened to Lou in NJ. Also name me a GM who has had success without good people/players/coaches around them?

Again, this is not me saying that Holland can do no wrong, he has made a lot of bad moves in the past few years. 

Edited December 28, 2016 by kliq

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

4 minutes ago, kliq said:

You said: 

"As soon as Thornton hangs the skates up it's rebuild time Burns, Pavelski and Couture can't carry the load all alone."

Based on your posting history, in your mind "rebuild" means trading everyone, anything else you have coined "retooling". Because of this, when you said "its re-build time" my assumption was that you meant trade away all their top players. 

Name me one GM in NHL history who kept their team a contender for more then 13 years? Any GM stays on for the long haul and they are going to struggle at some point, especially in a post cap world. Also name me a GM who has had success without good people/players/coaches around them?

It's what have you done for me lately?  Holland can take his impressive resume elsewhere.  The struggles lately are his fault.  Don't blame time or trends.  He's overpaid players and made some bad roster moves.  Blashill will take the brunt when he's fired, but Holland should take the main blame for this roster.    

[kliq 3,763]

9 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

It's what have you done for me lately?  Holland can take his impressive resume elsewhere.  The struggles lately are his fault.  Don't blame time or trends.  He's overpaid players and made some bad roster moves.  Blashill will take the brunt when he's fired, but Holland should take the main blame for this roster.    

The argument here is whether or not Holland has accomplished anything as some have said that he deserves zero credit. You seem to be taking the conversation elsewhere. "What has Ken Holland accomplished" and "Should Ken Holland still be our GM" are two different questions. 

As far as "what have you done for me lately" it is not for you to say. It is all about the perception of the owner and nothing to do with the perception of GMRwings1983 or myself. If Illitch is the person making the decisions, its whatever criteria he chooses.

I'm still waiting for you to name me one GM in NHL history who kept their team a contender for more then 13 years, and to name me a GM who has had success without good people/players/coaches around them?

Edited December 28, 2016 by kliq

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

5 minutes ago, kliq said:

The argument here is whether or not Holland has accomplished anything as some have said that he deserves zero credit. You seem to be taking the conversation elsewhere. "What has Ken Holland accomplished" and "Should Ken Holland still be our GM" are two different questions. 

As far as "what have you done for me lately" it is not for you to say. It is all about the perception of the owner and nothing to do with the perception of GMRwings1983 or myself. If Illitch is the person making the decisions, its whatever criteria he chooses.

I'm still waiting for you to name me one GM in NHL history who kept their team a contender for more then 13 years, and to name me a GM who has had success without good people/players/coaches around them?

Frank Selke, Glen Sather, Lou Lamoriello, Keith Allen.  Not a long list, but it's been done.  

The second question, I'm guessing, is a trick question that has no answer.  

[kliq 3,763]

4 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Frank Selke, Glen Sather, Lou Lamoriello, Keith Allen.  Not a long list, but it's been done.  

The second question, I'm guessing, is a trick question that has no answer.  

Im not sure I agree that all those GM's had a contender for every one of the 13 years, but that is besides the point. My point is that every GM will eventually have a down swing.

The second is not so much a trick question, but a point that every successful GM surrounds themselves with good players/coaches/management. If they didnt they wouldn't be a good GM. Ok, I guess that was a trick question lol.

[Richdg 267]

Just and FYI, if you go to Kenny Holland on wiki and scroll to the bottom it lists the GM before Kenny Holland and that GM is Jimmy D and Scotty Bowman.

Now it has been 20 years but seems to ring true in my memory. Scotty made the roster decisions and Jimmy added/subtracted the guys Scotty wanted to bring in or have moved. Scotty couldn't have threatened Stevie with trading him if he didn't play defense if he didn't have the juice.

Scotty was the one that drove Coffey out of town. Scotty was publicly wanting Shanahan for weeks before he was brought in. Ramsey, Rouse, and Murphy were all brought here because Scotty wanted them.

None of that is new. All has been beaten to death over the years. The part that changed is who builds the roster. Scotty used to make the decisions and the GM's would go get his players. Now Holland makes those decisions and forces (not meant as a negative) the players on the coach.

[Buppy 1,720]

2 hours ago, Richdg said:

Just and FYI, if you go to Kenny Holland on wiki and scroll to the bottom it lists the GM before Kenny Holland and that GM is Jimmy D and Scotty Bowman.

Now it has been 20 years but seems to ring true in my memory. Scotty made the roster decisions and Jimmy added/subtracted the guys Scotty wanted to bring in or have moved. Scotty couldn't have threatened Stevie with trading him if he didn't play defense if he didn't have the juice.

Scotty was the one that drove Coffey out of town. Scotty was publicly wanting Shanahan for weeks before he was brought in. Ramsey, Rouse, and Murphy were all brought here because Scotty wanted them.

None of that is new. All has been beaten to death over the years. The part that changed is who builds the roster. Scotty used to make the decisions and the GM's would go get his players. Now Holland makes those decisions and forces (not meant as a negative) the players on the coach.

Scotty was director of player personnel. If he wanted someone he could do it himself. Since he was also the coach, he might not have done all the leg-work, but yeah, he was making roster decisions. It was literally part of his job description. That's all common knowledge. I don't know what point you're trying to make. 

[Richdg 267]

20 hours ago, Buppy said:

Scotty was director of player personnel. If he wanted someone he could do it himself. Since he was also the coach, he might not have done all the leg-work, but yeah, he was making roster decisions. It was literally part of his job description. That's all common knowledge. I don't know what point you're trying to make. 

Because there are still those that think he wasn't the one building the team from 95 through 2002....... Scotty decided who can stay, who needs to go, and what players need to be brought in. Now this is where Kenny needs his due, he was very good at bringing in those players without giving away a bunch of future stars. That is something Holland should be praised for. All the players and picks we have traded away over the last 25 years and very few of them turned into great players for other teams, We kept the good and moved the bad.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 minutes ago, Richdg said:

Because there are still those that think he wasn't the one building the team from 95 through 2002....... Scotty decided who can stay, who needs to go, and what players need to be brought in. Now this is where Kenny needs his due, he was very good at bringing in those players without giving away a bunch of future stars. That is something Holland should be praised for. All the players and picks we have traded away over the last 25 years and very few of them turned into great players for other teams, We kept the good and moved the bad.

I dont think anyone disagrees with you. That doesnt mean Devellano wasnt getting plenty of his 2 cents in either. Same with Holland. Just cause a man has final say doesnt mean decisions are all and only him. Only a fool ignores the other great minds around him.