McShogun99
Registered User
Never missed the playoffs during his 5 years with a conference finals and cup final appearance. We're one of the most successful teams during that span.The bar was so low I'm not sure that's a ringing endorsement.
Never missed the playoffs during his 5 years with a conference finals and cup final appearance. We're one of the most successful teams during that span.The bar was so low I'm not sure that's a ringing endorsement.
How much of that has to do with the guy wearing #97?Never missed the playoffs during his 5 years with a conference finals and cup final appearance. We're one of the most successful teams during that span.
Chiarelli had 97 and 29 and only made the playoffs once in 4 years.How much of that has to do with the guy wearing #97?
Yeah he was a terrible GM, I don't think anyone would say otherwise. But without 97 this team is lost in the desert, period.Chiarelli had 97 and 29 and only made the playoffs once in 4 years.
Surprised at this. Holloway was producing here, and in the AHL, and was establishing. Plus that the goals he did score here tended to be hands goals. Some brilliant ones and even making deft puck plays on net with speed. The kid was finding it. I was banging that drum last season and in playoffs and wanting team to give him bigger roles. McLeod was always value. PK, zone exits/entries, speed. Was a responsible transition player.At the time of the offer sheet, I thought the best decision was to let both players go. Both of them hadn't proven anything and I didn't think that they, especially Holloway, would break out in this manner. I remember that Ryan McLeod was in a very similar situation a few years ago and he took a one-year contract around $800,000 to $900,000. Why couldn't Holloway do the same? Holloway hadn't proven more than McLeod in his time here. Then, we offered McLeod a contract for similar to what Holloway signed for in St. Louis and he did shit all, making me think that Holloway would follow a similar path to McLeod, Yamamoto, Puljujarvi, and many others than we overpaid for a small sample size.
Now, it's looking like we made a horrible decision. Was Holloway mismanaged and hence unhappy here? Is this yet another case of not knowing what we have in a player? Or was it another case of a player flourishing once he leaves this organization? I have no idea what to think anymore.
At the time of Game 7 concluding to opening of free agency there was an exclusive window to negotiate and gauge the health of the known trade request relationship with Broberg and to pro-actively assert the future of two home grown blue chip prospects coming off proving points in deep playoff competition. Contingency plan should alway include keeping options open by calling prospective trade partners. Especially as both were involved in active trade discussions mere months before that. You even have a qualified list of where to start (cough cough St. Louis Blues).At the time of the offer sheet, I thought the best decision was to let both players go. Both of them hadn't proven anything and I didn't think that they, especially Holloway, would break out in this manner. I remember that Ryan McLeod was in a very similar situation a few years ago and he took a one-year contract around $800,000 to $900,000. Why couldn't Holloway do the same? Holloway hadn't proven more than McLeod in his time here. Then, we offered McLeod a contract for similar to what Holloway signed for in St. Louis and he did shit all, making me think that Holloway would follow a similar path to McLeod, Yamamoto, Puljujarvi, and many others than we overpaid for a small sample size.
Now, it's looking like we made a horrible decision. Was Holloway mismanaged and hence unhappy here? Is this yet another case of not knowing what we have in a player? Or was it another case of a player flourishing once he leaves this organization? I have no idea what to think anymore.
Holloway showed flashes, especially in the playoffs. But again, that was a small sample size. I'm not defending management, because obviously they didn't do their due diligence with this player and were oblivious enough to the market conditions to get caught with their pants around their ankles, but what were they supposed to offer a player that had never put up sustained production here? Time and time again we overpaid for small sample sizes and it wasted useful cap. Mcleod. Yamamoto. Puljujarvi. Kassian. Do we repeat that same mistake with Holloway and tie up unnecessary cap in a cup window? The one time that we decide not to overpay a player it bites us in the ass. That's what's so frustrating.Surprised at this. Holloway was producing here, and in the AHL, and was establishing. Plus that the goals he did score here tended to be hands goals. Some brilliant ones and even making deft puck plays on net with speed. The kid was finding it. I was banging that drum last season and in playoffs and wanting team to give him bigger roles. McLeod was always value. PK, zone exits/entries, speed. Was a responsible transition player.
Holloway is dissimilar to McLeod. Holloway is a bull, agressive to pucks and flying in at D. He's a cannonball and hard to contain. Has potential as a Power forward. McLeod opposite and finding open ice not through physicality but superior skating and edge work.
I prefer Drai playing with strong or physical players. I loved seeing Holloway with him the short instances he had. Holloway of course has hands unlike Pods who has been hard to watch after org gave up Holloway.
Yes, but everyone between Sather and Holland were various levels of epic failures.Never missed the playoffs during his 5 years with a conference finals and cup final appearance. We're one of the most successful teams during that span.
Do you forget how young Holloway was, how little a segment he'd played here in the NHL, and how much Holloway was showing his hand in Bakersfield. He's had a reasonable ascension, taking account of minutes played, than even Ryan Smyth did. Smyth didn't find his game until around 50-60NHL games played wherein he was getting huge minutes on a bad club. College kids can take longer too but the worth is often worth it as they tend to be better honed.Holloway showed flashes, especially in the playoffs. But again, that was a small sample size. I'm not defending management, because obviously they didn't do their due diligence with this player and were oblivious enough to the market conditions to get caught with their pants around their ankles, but what were they supposed to offer a player that had never put up sustained production here? Time and time again we overpaid for small sample sizes and it wasted useful cap. Mcleod. Yamamoto. Puljujarvi. Kassian. Do we repeat that same mistake with Holloway and tie up unnecessary cap in a cup window? The one time that we decide not to overpay a player it bites us in the ass. That's what's so frustrating.
Draisaitl and McDavid. .00001% of teams in the history of the NHL have 2 players like that in their prime at the same time. Did the 80's Oilers brag about one finals appearance with Gretzky & Messier? 90's Avalanche with Sakic & Forsberg? Pens with Crosby & Malkin? These are the comparables. Not this "oh gee we stopped missing the playoffs" mentality. It's just not that big of an accomplishment man.Never missed the playoffs during his 5 years with a conference finals and cup final appearance. We're one of the most successful teams during that span.
Ekholm, Kane, Hyman, Foegele, Holloway and Broberg...that's pretty goodDraisaitl and McDavid. .00001% of teams in the history of the NHL have 2 players like that in their prime at the same time. Did the 80's Oilers brag about one finals appearance with Gretzky & Messier? 90's Avalanche with Sakic & Forsberg? Pens with Crosby & Malkin? These are the comparables. Not this "oh gee we stopped missing the playoffs" mentality. It's just not that big of an accomplishment man.
Holland was born on second base and people like you keep trying to give him credit for hitting a double. He added 2 needle-moving players in 5 years, and blew up the toilet with most everything else.
I guess he gets zero credit for building the most successful team in the modern era or did 25 years of success in Detroit just fall in his lap? Crosby and Malkin only made the finals 4 times in what will probably be a 20 year career. Ovechkin only once in the same time frame. Having some of the best players in the game guarantees nothing unless you build a solid team around them and that didn’t happen with us until Holland was hired.Draisaitl and McDavid. .00001% of teams in the history of the NHL have 2 players like that in their prime at the same time. Did the 80's Oilers brag about one finals appearance with Gretzky & Messier? 90's Avalanche with Sakic & Forsberg? Pens with Crosby & Malkin? These are the comparables. Not this "oh gee we stopped missing the playoffs" mentality. It's just not that big of an accomplishment man.
Holland was born on second base and people like you keep trying to give him credit for hitting a double. He added 2 needle-moving players in 5 years, and blew up the toilet with most everything else.
I mean yeah it's not like he didn't do good things but the Nurse/Campbell contracts have probably sewered our hopes of ever winning a Cup. In addition to abysmal drafting and asset management...Ekholm, Kane, Hyman, Foegele, Holloway and Broberg...that's pretty good
took a team that finished 25th in the league in 2018-19 to a perennial playoff team that won the 2nd most playoff rounds the past 3 seasons...the results speak for themselves
and if it were all 97 and 29, then the results would be the same this year
he made his share of blunders, but he was light years better than anything before or since