Ken Holland's Achievements

[chaps80 1,591]

On 19/12/2016 at 4:54 PM, LeftWinger said:

I agree with most of it.....Holland was not GM until July of 1997. So he did not bring them that Cup neither. I don't give him credit for 98, even though he was there as GM. In 99, I give him credit for trying to get the ever elusive triple Cup win. I believe the NHL screwed the Wings that year. I actually do not give him credit for 2002 either. Sure, he made the deals and signed the papers, but Bowman got what Bowman wanted. He built that team with Holland's signature and Mike's wallet. I give him some credit for 08. 

I do give him credit for listening to his scouts and inner circle. To me, Holland is not and was not anywhere near the best GM in the NHL.

 

 

Well said about '97, '98, '02. '98 he inherited the majority of the '97 Cup winning roster. Biggest change he made was trading Vernon and making Osgood starter. And of course he didn't have Vladdy. Brought in Gilchrist, Macoun, Mironov.

For '02, the Hasek for Kozlov trade fell into his lap. Brought in Hull, Robitaille with Illitch's cash. Still had the major pieces of '97-'98 and Chelios, Duchesne who he brought in couple years before. Was Datsyuk's rookie season.

[kliq 3,755]

24 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Well said about '97, '98, '02. '98 he inherited the majority of the '97 Cup winning roster. Biggest change he made was trading Vernon and making Osgood starter. And of course he didn't have Vladdy. Brought in Gilchrist, Macoun, Mironov.

For '02, the Hasek for Kozlov trade fell into his lap. Brought in Hull, Robitaille with Illitch's cash. Still had the major pieces of '97-'98 and Chelios, Duchesne who he brought in couple years before. Was Datsyuk's rookie season.

This is the perfect example to me of how fans will twist anything against Holland. Any other GM makes a UFA signing that contributes to a cup and they are given credit, Holland does it and you say "he used Illitch's cash". 

Holland is not perfect by any means, but its crazy how fans will stretch reality to put him down.

[chaps80 1,591]

2 minutes ago, kliq said:

This is the perfect example to me of how fans will twist anything against Holland. Any other GM makes a UFA signing that contributes to a cup and they are given credit, Holland does it and you say "he used Illitch's cash". 

Holland is not perfect by any means, but its crazy how fans will stretch reality to put him down.

I get what your saying, but since that HOF team was put together it's been said that no other franchise could have afforded to do the same. It was said by some, mostly jealous fans of other teams, that the Wings basically bought the Cup that season (which we know isn't true, they did struggle some). Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Hull, Robitaille, Lidstrom, Chelios, Hasek plus some damn good lesser pieces...that was insane. If Illitch didn't give Holland a blank checkbook, no way he puts it together.

[kliq 3,755]

33 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

I get what your saying, but since that HOF team was put together it's been said that no other franchise could have afforded to do the same. It was said by some, mostly jealous fans of other teams, that the Wings basically bought the Cup that season (which we know isn't true, they did struggle some). Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Hull, Robitaille, Lidstrom, Chelios, Hasek plus some damn good lesser pieces...that was insane. If Illitch didn't give Holland a blank checkbook, no way he puts it together.

It was a hall of fame team, but lets be honest we are not talking all those players during their prime. Either way, I am not saying that money had nothing to do with it as that would be stupid on my part, having money to spend will always be a factor. But money does not equal success as it takes the right players being put in the right system. Just look at the NYR of the early 2000's, a payroll I believe close the Wings but with zero success. Anyone remember the famous Lindros-Fleury-Bure line lol.

I just hate the blind hate of Holland. When people make excuses to give him zero credit, I find it sad. No one person is 100% responsible for any cup, but what some on here do is try to strip him of credit of all of them.

If you really look at it, while not as a GM obviously, but as a head of scouting the guy played a big part in putting the 1997 team together, the 1998 team while he didnt put it together as the GM, he made some minor moves that did work. 2002 had more of his fingerprints, and 2008 from a GM standpoint was on him. 

I just find it hypocritical how people will give Holland zero credit for his '98 and '02 cup wins, but then give Stan Bowman 100% credit for his 3 even though Dick Tallon is the one who acquired Keith, Seabrook, Kane and Towes. Or they will give Yzerman 100% credit for Tampa's success even though he took over a team already having a strong core with Stamkos and Hedman.

I would never sit here and say that Ken Holland is the #1 reason for the Wings success, he was a part of a great organization who dominated this league for almost 25 years. Though to say he had nothing to do with it, is just going to an extreme due to current frustration. 

 

 

[LeftWinger 4,949]

Again, I must dispute the whole "bought the Cup" theory.  Buying the Cup means you gave up nothing and just threw a butt ton of cash at all the top F/A's in order to bring them in to win it all.

 

Let's break it down from the playoff team:

Yzerman - DRAFTED

Shanahan - TRADED for Coffey, Primeau, 1st round pick

Fedorov - DRAFTED

Hull - Signed on August 22nd, 2001, nearly THREE months after any other team could've signed him. Lets note that he took less to come here. His own team didn't want him back, nether did St. Louis.

Lidstrom - DRAFTED

Chelios - TRADED for Eriksson and TWO 1st round picks

Holmstrom - DRAFTED

Robitaille - SIGNED July 5th, 2001, 4 days after UFA started and only after they lost Lapointe. The Kings told him they weren't interested in his services anymore, or he would have re-signed there.

McCarty - DRAFTED

Datsyuk - DRAFTED

Fischer - DRAFTED

Maltby - TRADED for (basically thrown aside by Edmonton) Dan McGillis in 1996

Devereaux - SIGNED as UFA on AUGUST 23, 2000. Again nearly 3 months after all other teams could've signed him. Including his own. Another Edmonton cast off.

Olausson - SIGNED as UFA May 24th, 2001 out the Swiss league.

Duchesne - SIGNED as UFA September 3, 1999 a whole 3 months after anyone else could've signed him. Including his team Philly.

Larionov - TRADED for Ray Sheppard Oct. 24th, 1995 one of our LAST 50 goal scoerer's on this team (52 in 1994) plus he scored 30 goals in the 43 game shortened season before he was dealt. No exactly table scraps. TRADED for Golubovsky from Florida in 2000 after he left UFA that summer. So basically we traded Ray Sheppard and Yan Golubovsky to get Larionov.

Draper - TRADED for ONE Canadian dollar, basically thrown in the garbage by Winnipeg June 30, 1993.

Dandenault - DRAFTED

Hasek - TRADED for Kozlov and a 1st round pick July 1, 2001.

Krupp - Lets just forget this UFA signing, he only played 2 games anyhow

Legace - Claimed of WAIVERS from Vancouver (Oct. 1999.) Who claimed him from us off waivers (Sept. 1999,) after we signed him as a career minor league UFA in August 1999.

Slegr - TRADED for Butsayev and a 2nd round pick from Atlanta at the 2002 deadline.

Williams  - Signed as UFA in September 2000.

 

Honestly that is really not buying The Cup as basically defined by "buying" a Championship, when you are signing players nobody else wanted and giving up multiple assets to acquire players. Plus using your drafted players. I laugh when other fans say that Cup was bought.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Leafs, Rangers and even the Habs had higher payrolls back then.

Buying the cup to me means:
The cup has a price and you pay it without playing. Even if a team has the best roster by far the players still need to go out and do it, they need to be a team and not just a collection of very well paid superstars. Best example of that would be team Canada I mean Bergeron as a fourth line center? And yet everybody buys in.

Tldr: there is no buying the cup

[kliq 3,755]

4 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Again, I must dispute the whole "bought the Cup" theory.  Buying the Cup means you gave up nothing and just threw a butt ton of cash at all the top F/A's in order to bring them in to win it all.

If this is directed to me, I didnt say they bought the cup but I to say money had nothing to do with it is just wrong. Had Ilitch told Holland he had to cut payroll, I dont think those cups happen. But that argument can be made against almost any team with a high payroll.

IMO, the only team I have ever seen buy a championship were the 2009 Yankees.

[LeftWinger 4,949]

10 hours ago, kliq said:

If this is directed to me, I didnt say they bought the cup but I to say money had nothing to do with it is just wrong. Had Ilitch told Holland he had to cut payroll, I dont think those cups happen. But that argument can be made against almost any team with a high payroll.

IMO, the only team I have ever seen buy a championship were the 2009 Yankees.

Not at all towards you. We've been hearing bought the Cup from other fans and non fans from day 1 after that win.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

I think its funny that a ton of fans heap praise towards our scouts and guys like Nill and Yzerman during their time in the front office, but then Holland gets 0 cred for the 97 cup? Hadnt he been scouting for us for a while already? Due to the fact that he was promoted he was probably responible for drafting a lot of our best players in the 90s. Guy deserves cred for all our cups post dead wings.

What's interesting to me is what Holland does with a (hopefully not) non playoff team. He was handed a tier 1 team the day he became GM, and he managed to continually retool that team and achieve championships and po success despite massive league changes to the way the game is played and to the way the business is run (he deserves godly amounts of praise for this IMO its unheard of in most sports and especially in hockey with the massive amount of evolution weve undergone). But 2010 to now has seen us in slow decline. And if we dont make the post season im very intrigued by what he will do. Despite his many years he has no expierence in this situation, and im freightened that he may not adapt. Personally thou i believe we must give him the chance to rebuild this franchise for at least a few years b4 a firing occurs. He is a great hockey mind afterall and i want to see him operate in a new situation b4 hes canned for being too old school.

However i see the otherside of the coin too. Hes had 5+ years to retool us and couldnt. Hes lost touch. Hes also handed out the NTCs that will prevent us from a proper rebuilding. But still i feel he deserves the chance to try. His leadership of this team has given me many great memories and has made me a hockey fan for life.

Ill follow this team to the gates of mordor itself. We have fallen into strange times. May the hockey gods have mercy on our souls.

Merry christmas wing nerds

[chaps80 1,591]

I like how I started a thread without starting a thread. Cool, magic!!

[frankgrimes 1,836]

His leadership of this team has given me many great memories and has made me a hockey fan for life.
Ill follow this team to the gates of mordor itself. We have fallen into strange times. May the hockey gods have mercy on our souls.
Merry christmas wing nerds

As a GM the guy is in over his head, he never had to do a rebuild so I'm not blaming him for that. Holland should have handed the keys over to the captain, move up as a VP and do this thing the right way after Wings failed to land Suter.

Wings need elite prospects to get this team into the next area, right now there are some solid and hopefully 2 very good ones in Mantha and Larkin (also the highest picks). But to get the elite ones a team needs to be bad draft and develop them. It's the current system and until the next cba there is no way around it.

[MileHighWingsGuy 178]

How long do you wait before drawing the conclusion Holland wasn't responsible and has absolutely no plan or vision how to be a winner again. This team has been and is on a downward trajectory for the last 15 years. Debate the past all you want. If he was responsible for success you'd see it again and you don't. This teams fortunes will change when the GM changes.

[kickazz 5,459]

Downward trajectory for 15 years? The 02 and 08 teams were some of the most successful in NHL history.

The only conclusion I draw is fans over-dramatize things too much.

We've been in a downward trajectory since 2010 at best. 6 years.  

Edited December 26, 2016 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Holland did a lot of the GM duties before officially becoming GM so Bowman could focus on coaching and things like painting locker rooms and complaining about short benches.  Saying he doesn't get credit for helping build those teams is ludicrous.  So is the argument that he bought any Cups.  Other teams spent a ton of cash too, and did nothing.  For a good stretch he was the best GM in the NHL.

 

He's slipped though.  I don't know if he got complacent, has people above him interfering with him and telling him to do things he doesn't think will work, or if he really believes that the best way to build a team is to sign a bunch of mediocre at best players to 4+ years.  Regardless of the reason, he's done a bad job the last few years.  Yes, every team goes through bad stretches, and the nature of pro sports is that no team stays on top forever, but his refusal to do a full rebuild is doing nothing but delay them from getting back to the top by extending the mediocre period.

[Richdg 267]

Holland did not build the 97,98, 02 teams. He did what Bowman told him to do. That being said Holland was very good at his job during that period of time. We won Cups and that is all that matters. He has had a HOF career. The questions about Holland in my mind come during the Cap era were he has been subpar. We haven't drafted well over the last 15 years, very few trades in total and none for impact players, very few impact UFA signings, and he has resigned far too many players to big money contracts that are not worth it. For example this is going to happen. Tatar is a RFA this summer. Does anyone think Holland will overpay to resign him? I do. I fully expect Tatar to get a 4+ year deal with an average cap hit of 4.5 million or more. At that point we will have 3 F's making a combined 12+ million that combined can't score 40 goals. (tatar, nyquist, and Helm).

It is time for Holland to retire and take his place in the HOF so we as a team can move on and hopefully upward.

[Dominator2005 558]

On 21/12/2016 at 11:02 PM, kliq said:

This is the perfect example to me of how fans will twist anything against Holland. Any other GM makes a UFA signing that contributes to a cup and they are given credit, Holland does it and you say "he used Illitch's cash". 

Holland is not perfect by any means, but its crazy how fans will stretch reality to put him down.

Well if we want to be honest here:

1. Hasek traded himself to Detroit.

2. KH wanted Luc Robitaille.

3. Brett Hull was signed thanks to Yzerman, Shanahan et Chelios given the fact that they have put a pressure on KH and they even re-structured their contracts to give money to KH.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

1 hour ago, Richdg said:

Holland did not build the 97,98, 02 teams. He did what Bowman told him to do. That being said Holland was very good at his job during that period of time. We won Cups and that is all that matters. He has had a HOF career. The questions about Holland in my mind come during the Cap era were he has been subpar. We haven't drafted well over the last 15 years, very few trades in total and none for impact players, very few impact UFA signings, and he has resigned far too many players to big money contracts that are not worth it. For example this is going to happen. Tatar is a RFA this summer. Does anyone think Holland will overpay to resign him? I do. I fully expect Tatar to get a 4+ year deal with an average cap hit of 4.5 million or more. At that point we will have 3 F's making a combined 12+ million that combined can't score 40 goals. (tatar, nyquist, and Helm).

It is time for Holland to retire and take his place in the HOF so we as a team can move on and hopefully upward.

What exactly are you basing that on? Anything?? Or are you just making stuff up like you usually do?

[kickazz 5,459]

2 hours ago, Richdg said:

Holland did not build the 97,98, 02 teams. He did what Bowman told him to do.

Sources.. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

TIL that despite being hired by the RWs as a scout in 1985, serving as the RWs director of amatuer scouting from 1990 to 1997, and serving as general manager and vice president from 1997 to now, Kenneth Holland did not actually do any work until about 2008ish. Quite a lot of promotions for someone who contributed nothing all those years.

[kickazz 5,459]

10 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

TIL that despite being hired by the RWs as a scout in 1985, serving as the RWs director of amatuer scouting from 1990 to 1997, and serving as general manager and vice president from 1997 to now, Kenneth Holland did not actually do any work until about 2008ish. Quite a lot of promotions for someone who contributed nothing all those years.

"Somewhat" of a contribution to the 2008 roster. Babcock was the genius behind it all.

[kickazz 5,459]

3 hours ago, Dominator2005 said:

Well if we want to be honest here:

1. Hasek traded himself to Detroit.

2. KH wanted Luc Robitaille.

3. Brett Hull was signed thanks to Yzerman, Shanahan et Chelios given the fact that they have put a pressure on KH and they even re-structured their contracts to give money to KH.

Further honesty - I got 10 of em. 

1. Kept Fedorov from signing with Carolina in his rookie year by matching the offer. 

2. Steve Duschesne - yeah that guy was actually our second best defense scorer after Lidstrom in 1999. 

3. Signed Datsyuk to multiple contracts

4. Signed Zetterberg to multiple contracts

5. Re-signed Osgood

6. Re-signed Hasek (twice) 

7. Brought in Mike Babcock (supposedly the best coach in all of hockey) and kept him here for 10 years

8. Kept Nicklas Lidstrom a Red Wing, continued to sign him for 1 year deals 

9. Brian Rafalski

10. Mathew Schneider - didn't really matter he didn't win a cup with us. 

---

I'd like to see the stats of GMs making actual moves which resulted in Stanley Cup wins. We have about 10 we can "somewhat" give credit to Holland for which were "somehow" translated into Stanley Cups. Who else can we look up that's been consistently successful? Pittsburgh? Chicago? LA? Those are the only other 3 repeat winners that I can think of since Holland took over. All 3 came off successful tank jobs when they got Kane, Toews, Crosby, Malkin, Kopitar etc etc. Can tank jobs actually be credited towards a GM? Probably not.

I guess Rutherford in Pittsburgh should get credit for Phil Kessel.. But from what I heard, Kessel WANTED  to go to Pittsburgh so Rutherford TECHNICALLY shouldn't get credit for it. 

Is there really any GM that's done more and resulted in success than Ken Holland? I'm seriously asking. Because if we're going to point out how "well... technically Holland didn't get player A, player A wanted to come". Then we should take a look at every GM and see how much credit they actually deserve. 

For instance, going by this principle then, the Minnesota GM (Fletcher) gets zero credit for landing Parise and Suter. Why? Because Parise WANTED to go to Minnesota and convinced Suter to go with him. 

This principal makes be think NHL GMs are overrated. I think players are the real GMs. 

Anyways this whole arbitrary argument that Ken Holland doesn't actually deserve credit for player A or B needs to be applied ALL across the league to every single GM. Once we've done that we can take a look at how good GMs actually are. 

Edited December 26, 2016 by kickazz

[kliq 3,755]

4 hours ago, Dominator2005 said:

Well if we want to be honest here:

1. Hasek traded himself to Detroit.

2. KH wanted Luc Robitaille.

3. Brett Hull was signed thanks to Yzerman, Shanahan et Chelios given the fact that they have put a pressure on KH and they even re-structured their contracts to give money to KH.

1) Rumblings stated that Trouba wanted to come here, I dont see him wearing a Wings jersey. My point is that a player can want to go to any team, but a GM is the one that needs to trade for him.

2) I don't understand your point. Hen Holland wanted Luc Robitaille so therefore it doesn't count?

3) Again, Holland is the one who signed Hull and traded for Chelios. As far as them restructuring their contracts, link? I was not aware of this. I googled it and nothing came up.

Edited December 26, 2016 by kliq

[bringbackfontez 36]

"Used Illitch's cash"
"Gave Scotty what he wanted"
"Inherited the '97 team"

So basically, what many people are saying, is that there was no possible way Ken Holland could've received any credit for any team success during his tenure. So how do other GM's do it? Spend their own money? Refuse to discuss and consult with their coaches on current And future strategy/roster moves? It's nothing more than a loaded argument to place exclusive blame on KH for the current situation. Maybe he was too focused on the streak. He probably should've started the rebuild sooner. But to exclude him from any credit at all for at least 2 of the 4 cups is kinda ridiculous. Not many NHL teams have won 20% of the Stanley Cup s in a 20 year span.


Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[chaps80 1,591]

5 hours ago, Dominator2005 said:

Well if we want to be honest here:

1. Hasek traded himself to Detroit.

2. KH wanted Luc Robitaille.

3. Brett Hull was signed thanks to Yzerman, Shanahan et Chelios given the fact that they have put a pressure on KH and they even re-structured their contracts to give money to KH.

Hasek traded himself to Detroit just like Hossa's agent called Holland and asked for a contract. Elite players are easy to get if they voluntarily call you and say they want in.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

1) Rumblings stated that Trouba wanted to come here, I dont see him wearing a Wings jersey. My point is that a player can want to go to any team, but a GM is the one that needs to trade for him.
2) I don't understand your point. Hen Holland wanted Luc Robitaille so therefore it doesn't count?
3) Again, Holland is the one who signed Hull and traded for Chelios. As far as them restructuring their contracts, link? I was not aware of this. I googled it and nothing came up.

It was widely reported at the time. Not being able to find that info this many years later doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk