Jump to content

Homer: Bad GM or Worst GM Ever? Discuss:


pilldoc

Recommended Posts

@Polaris922

 

I agree that Holmgren sucked badly at cap management and was a drunken sailor when it came to free agents but the Mike Richards trade I lay blame on Ed Snider. There is no doubt that Holmgren was following Snider's marching orders when it came to the Richards/Carter trades. Snider maybe a lot of things but having his players being involved in the community is one thing he demands and Richards not doing that plus the partying led to him being shipped out of town. Hextall has his work cut out for him to ice a competitive team for next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well he did do that, among a pile of other things. He also acquired Mason, who outplayed the traded Vezina winner last year. So THAT cancels out that.

 

  Mmmm...sure about that?  Mason: 2.50 GAA/.917 SV%.  Bob: 2.38 GAA/.923 SV%.  Right now if you had to pick one - you'd take Mason? Me thinks not.

 

Giroux was a good pick. He went around where he was supposed to go, but there were plenty of other players around there too. And Homer broke the mold with that pick ...making it ok for the Flyers to take small skilled players. 

 

Like I said - agree he was a good pick.  I also agree he broke the "mold" but it was "mold" the Flyers themselves created.  I can give him credit because he may have manged to convince ES that a small, skilled player should be picked.

 

Picking Datsyuk where he went was pure luck. If anyone thought he was going to turn into half the player he is, they wouldn't wait 6 rounds to do it. Detroit had 2-2 round picks that year that were total busts, a 3rd, a 4th, a 5th and a 6th before the Datsyuk pick, bust, bust, bust, bust! They thought Adam Deleeuw was a better 6th rounder...you know, Adam Deleeuw?

 

I don't. But I know no other team even had Datsyuk on their boards or had scouted him. The Wings had.

 

Edit:  Didn't see Rad bust your chops on the "outplayed" comment either.  But it bears repeating. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brelic

 

I really do like just about everything Hexy has had to say since taking over (albeit it hasn't been that long). I really thought that was going to be Homer's track when Richards/Carter got traded, strip it down and build it back up from inside, but he couldn't lay off with the itchy trigger finger.

 

I sincerely hope Hexy believes and sticks to the tone he's been setting, if so it will the first time we've had a GM build a team since Keith Allen was king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@flyercanuck

I don't argue trading them gave you a brighter future down the line. I argue that NOT trading them MAY have given you a shot at the Cup that season. Imagine if the Pens had traded away their offense after losing to Detroit in '08?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't. But I know no other team even had Datsyuk on their boards or had scouted him. The Wings had.

 

1997 is ages ago especially with regard to taking European scouting in general and Russian scouting in particular.

 

The Red Wings guy himself only saw Datsyuk by accident and was almost coincidentally one of only two scouts who could have seen him, but for a bad storm cancelling flights.

 

The Blues had a guy who was supposed to be on that flight.

 

Every team has a much more robust European/Russian scouting program, although with the Zherdev/Radulov/Yakupov seemingly outweighing the positives that guys like Datsuyk brought one might say they've gone too far in the other direction.

 

The Wings had a pre-existing commitment to Soviet era players when they brought over the core of the Russian Five. That also made them an attractive destination for Russian players early on.

 

And in the end it's all well and good to be saying "why haven't they drafted a Datsyuk type", but over the past 10 years with 30 teams drafting 300 players in the sixth round, how many have panned out?

 

And then I see "Roman Cechmanek - 6th Round - 2000" :D same year as Lundqvist in the next round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1997 is ages ago especially with regard to taking European scouting in general and Russian scouting in particular.

 

The Red Wings guy himself only saw Datsyuk by accident and was almost coincidentally one of only two scouts who could have seen him, but for a bad storm cancelling flights.

 

The Blues had a guy who was supposed to be on that flight.

 

Every team has a much more robust European/Russian scouting program, although with the Zherdev/Radulov/Yakupov seemingly outweighing the positives that guys like Datsuyk brought one might say they've gone too far in the other direction.

 

The Wings had a pre-existing commitment to Soviet era players when they brought over the core of the Russian Five. That also made them an attractive destination for Russian players early on.

 

And in the end it's all well and good to be saying "why haven't they drafted a Datsyuk type", but over the past 10 years with 30 teams drafting 300 players in the sixth round, how many have panned out?

 

And then I see "Roman Cechmanek - 6th Round - 2000" :D same year as Lundqvist in the next round.

 

Relax.  Just using hyperbole to make a point.... ;) ....which is that drafting a future Hall of Famer in the 6th round makes the case for a "good" GM a lot better than taking a 1st round talent...in the 1st round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


which is that drafting a future Hall of Famer in the 6th round makes the case for a "good" GM a lot better than taking a 1st round talent...in the 1st round.

 

Oh, I gotcha :D

 

I am confused here? I thought Bobby Clarke drafted Giroux?

 

But it was really Holmgren pulling the strings which he was apparently really really good at until he was actually general manager at which point his strings were pulled hither and yon.

 

Or so one might be led to believe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in the end it's all well and good to be saying "why haven't they drafted a Datsyuk type", but over the past 10 years with 30 teams drafting 300 players in the sixth round, how many have panned out?

 

 

I just looked at 6th rounders in a 10 year period (2000-2010). THN did a similar study looking at different rounds and different factors last week but they went to 2013. IMO, that's an unfair time period due to the different development periods required for different players. A more comprehensive outlook should give you a 3-5 year buffer for development. Even then it's not perfect.

 

Anyway, here's what I found.

 

Of the 334 players drafted in that 10 year period, 95 of them (28%) played in the NHL. Their number of games played ranges from 1 (Mitch Callahan) to 699 (Marek Zidlicky). The maximum number of games in that period is 834, so Zidlicky played in 84% of the possible games since he was drafted.

 

The average number of games played for those who played at least 1 game is 137, but it's not appropriate in this case. The median (exactly half of the players were above this value, and exactly half were below it, which is the appropriate measure to use with this data) is 56. Remember - that median value is only for the players who actually made it to the NHL (28%)! The other 72% didn't even get a sniff of the big leagues. If I included all 6th rounders drafted in that period, the median would be 0.

 

The team with the highest success rate (draft picks who played at least 1 game in the NHL) over that period are the Flames (56%), and the worst team was the Coyotes (0%).

 

post-23-0-41841800-1404326006_thumb.png

 

But that's less helpful than looking at the total number of games played by their 6th round draft picks.. because, honestly, who cares if 80% of your picks play 20 games each? The real value is if you are getting value and mileage out of these guys.

 

post-23-0-88816300-1404326019_thumb.png

 

Keep in mind that if I had stretched it back 2 more years to 1998, Detroit would be near the top by adding Datsyuk's 800+ games to their total. Ottawa would also get a boost from Chris Neil's 800+ games, Montreal with Markov, and Buffalo with Kotalik. So of course this chart can change dramatically depending on the time period you include.

 

That also tells you that Detroit struck gold with Datsyuk, but nothing since (in the 6th round, anyway).

 

So, who are all these 6th round Flyers draft picks that give them the highest total number of games played over that period?

 

Seidenberg, 615

Cechmanek, 212

Rinaldo, 165

Maroon, 77

Eric Wellwood, 31

Kalinski, 22

Mormina, 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@flyercanuck

I don't argue trading them gave you a brighter future down the line. I argue that NOT trading them MAY have given you a shot at the Cup that season. Imagine if the Pens had traded away their offense after losing to Detroit in '08?

 

 I don't think the split in the dressing room was going to go well throughout another season. And back then Fleury was also a better goalie than what the Flyers had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I don't think the split in the dressing room was going to go well throughout another season. And back then Fleury was also a better goalie than what the Flyers had.

 

But I'm not a Flyers fan and even I wonder what might have been if they'd invested in a good goaltender for another season to give it a shot.  That's what I never figured out.  And apparently nobody knows the WHY of it other than to speculate.  Holmgren has never really said WHY he made those trades other than to prepare for a future.  If MY team were on the doorstep of another Cup after all those years, you bet your arse I'm giving it another go.  And that is part of what I think makes Holmgren a crappy GM.  He pulled the trigger on the trades without knowing if they could make it happen.  He took away an opportunity.  If another season had come and they'd fell short of the Cup final, then maybe I don't ask this question.  But nobody will ever know.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922

 

Jumping in like I always do.....I get what you're saying, and I certainly would like to know why Homer nuked the team. But despite the quasi-miracle 2010 run, I don't think they were really on the doorstep of winning a Cup, not with the garbage we were throwing out there to play nets.

 

Maybe I'm too close to be objective or too jaded by 40 (39) years wandering the desert, but I just don't think we were that close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922

 

 Nobody ever knows the "what if" after a trade. And i'm certainly not arguing Holmgren was a good gm...I've had it with him for years. All I'm saying is there's worse (Milbury, Snow, whoevers in Toronto at the time etc )

 

As for bringing in the goalie, I think we Flyer fans agree on that idea for about 25 years now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I'm not a Flyers fan and even I wonder what might have been if they'd invested in a good goaltender for another season to give it a shot.  That's what I never figured out.  And apparently nobody knows the WHY of it other than to speculate.  Holmgren has never really said WHY he made those trades other than to prepare for a future.  If MY team were on the doorstep of another Cup after all those years, you bet your arse I'm giving it another go.  And that is part of what I think makes Holmgren a crappy GM.  He pulled the trigger on the trades without knowing if they could make it happen.  He took away an opportunity.  If another season had come and they'd fell short of the Cup final, then maybe I don't ask this question.  But nobody will ever know.  

 

The rumor was the trades were brought about by drug-related behaviors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@sarsippius

 

Apparently you were because you lost in 6 games in the Finals to a juggernaut Chicago team.  That's pretty much as close as you get without a game 7 loss.  So add a goaltender and try again the next season.  

 

@flyercanuck

 

I know man... and in an odd sort of way, you have my condolences.  Sorta...  well... some of you guys here do, the rest don't.   LOL  

 

@doom88

 

Odd though that it hasn't been an issue anywhere else?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I'm not a Flyers fan and even I wonder what might have been if they'd invested in a good goaltender for another season to give it a shot.  That's what I never figured out.  And apparently nobody knows the WHY of it other than to speculate.  Holmgren has never really said WHY he made those trades other than to prepare for a future.  If MY team were on the doorstep of another Cup after all those years, you bet your arse I'm giving it another go.  And that is part of what I think makes Holmgren a crappy GM.  He pulled the trigger on the trades without knowing if they could make it happen.  He took away an opportunity.  If another season had come and they'd fell short of the Cup final, then maybe I don't ask this question.  But nobody will ever know.  

 

We were also just a shootout loss in the last game of the regular season away from missing the playoffs entirely.

 

Pronger's injury pretty much rendered the whole thing moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@sarsippius

 

Apparently you were because you lost in 6 games in the Finals to a juggernaut Chicago team.  That's pretty much as close as you get without a game 7 loss.  So add a goaltender and try again the next season.  

 

Well yeah the Game 7 loss was 27 years ago we haven't been as close since.....as far adding the goaltender, that's probably part of the reason too for Richards/Carter getting shipped out, no cap room, and we see how that turned out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If another season had come and they'd fell short of the Cup final, then maybe I don't ask this question.

 

there was context, though, that i think you would have had to be watching every game for the last half of that season and the playoffs to get.  the team went flat at the end of february, backed into the playoffs, squeaked by a bad buffalo team in the 1st round, and then had no response at all to boston in the 2nd.  richards' play was particularly...uninspired during that stretch.  he was unfocused on the ice, combative off of it (this was when the war with panaccio really blew up, panaccio calling richards out for floating and offering lifestyle related explanations for it..which wasn't cool, but also maybe wasn't wrong), and generally a pretty crap "leader".  pronger was in the room and in almost-open conflict with richards.  there really was a general "this isn't working" air to it all.  the threads on philly.com started focusing on "did the flyers give richards the 'C' too early, looks like he can't handle it" and shouts of pulling the C from him.  things just got to the point of feeling...untenable.  like the team's collapse in the last quarter of the season looked and felt like it might be a permanent souring that would only be changed by some major shake up.  it was also the year giroux really arrived, so holmgren figured a passing of the torch was in order.  

 

i'll be honest, i am one of those that thought what we saw over those last three months was a real turn in the team that wasn't likely to work itself out.  there was something very wrong with the chemistry involved, and while I was not thrilled when richards was traded, i figured it was probably one of the less extreme solutions to the problem available.  i don't think the flyers were in any shape to make a serious run for anything with a roster structured as it was, so i was ok when holmgren restructured it.  i think the flyers are closer now than they would have been without that bit of dynamite, it was going to get worse before better.  i think there were several seasons of ottawa-style rot in store without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Have you seen some of the signings out there? It's almost a good thing that Hexy is handcuffed.

 

It's the length that would be a problem, iMO. Moulson or Cammalleri for 5 years? No thanks. 

 

Stralman for 5 years? No thanks.

 

Vanek for $6.5M? No thanks.

 

And there's a bunch of mediocre players getting north of $4M for many years. Again, no thanks.

 

Get rid of Vinny, get rid of Grossmann. Re-sign Emery because we're out of options.

 

Call it a day.

Given his play, I think you might regret not moving on this one now. I know The Sharks do

Link to comment
Share on other sites


In a world where Darcy Regier and Mike Milbury have been GMs, Homer isn't quite there

 

Now you're just being mean.  He did draft Ryan Miller, after all.  That makes him sit at the right hand of God, doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...