Top 5 best GMs currently

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Zito, Hughes, Sweeney, Nill, Davidson

 

[Jeune Poulet]

Zito, Sweeney, Holland, Brisebois, Cheveldayoff.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/columbus-blue-jackets/latest-news/were-players-who-spoke-out-against-patrik-laine-and-elvis-merz%C4%BCikins-traded-to-protect-them

A good rule of thumb I learned a long time ago is that anytime you see a headline that ends in a question mark, the answer to that question is “No”

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

1. Kevin Cheveldayoff
2. Jim Nill
3. Bill Zito
4. Joe Sakic
5. Kent Hughes

Before anybody calls me a homer, Cheveldayoff knows how to draft and when they need to be signed to big contracts he manages to get them on a good and balanced deal... IN WINNIPEG!!! He also wins trades, some may argue but he does so... well. May lack a cup, but when he you think about it he's done such an incredible job.

Mind you, they follow ownership orders as opposed to their own unless told otherwise.

McCrimmon is good too, but being in Vegas has put his GM career on steriods. But his resume in Brandon says otherwise.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

1. Kevin Cheveldayoff
2. Jim Nill
3. Bill Zito
4. Joe Sakic
5. Kent Hughes

Before anybody calls me a homer, Cheveldayoff knows how to draft and when they need to be signed to big contracts he manages to get them on a good and balanced deal... IN WINNIPEG!!! He also wins trades, some may argue but he does so... well. May lack a cup, but when he you think about it he's done such an incredible job.

Mind you, they follow ownership orders as opposed to their own unless told otherwise.

McCrimmon is good too, but being in Vegas has put his GM career on steriods. But his resume in Brandon says otherwise.

I don't see how you can rank Cheveldayoff number 1 though without any sort of team success. They've never made it to the final let alone win a cup, or the presidents trophy, etc. Just drafting well and signing people to good contracts doesn't make you the best. You need some sort of team success to actually prove what you're doing is really good.

 

[Brodeur]

Maybe just in general, we have an overly romanticized picture that being a GM is only making trades, signing players, and drafting prospects. It's not unusual to see a GM not be at the draft table when a team is making a mid-late round pick. So it amuses me when a GM gets sole credit for a pick when in actuality they'll typically defer to the scouting staff since the GM simply hasn't had time to view that many prospects. As I understand it, most teams employ a specialized capologist / contract negotiator so that's not something the GM does by himself.

Dean Lombardi did a podcast last year and Andy Strickland asked him if he had any interest in being a GM again. Lombardi didn't seem interested partly due to the travel involved. Lombardi also noted that he was happy enough to be an advisor for the Flyers on the hockey ops and that a GM also has to be involved in the business side of the club. Lombardi didn't want to sit through marketing meetings.

I remember reading an anecdote where some writer was interviewing the Washington Wizards GM and they were interrupted when his secretary showed up with some paperwork that needed his signature. The writer asked what the papers were for and the GM said it was something like authorization to pay for sports bras for the WNBA team.

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

Maybe just in general, we have an overly romanticized picture that being a GM is only making trades, signing players, and drafting prospects. It's not unusual to see a GM not be at the draft table when a team is making a mid-late round pick. So it amuses me when a GM gets sole credit for a pick when in actuality they'll typically defer to the scouting staff since the GM simply hasn't had time to view that many prospects. As I understand it, most teams employ a specialized capologist / contract negotiator so that's not something the GM does by himself.

Dean Lombardi did a podcast last year and Andy Strickland asked him if he had any interest in being a GM again. Lombardi didn't seem interested partly due to the travel involved. Lombardi also noted that he was happy enough to be an advisor for the Flyers on the hockey ops and that a GM also has to be involved in the business side of the club. Lombardi didn't want to sit through marketing meetings.

I remember reading an anecdote where some writer was interviewing the Washington Wizards GM and they were interrupted when his secretary showed up with some paperwork that needed his signature. The writer asked what the papers were for and the GM said it was something like authorization to pay for sports bras for the WNBA team.

The Blues just posted a video of their pre-draft discussion and their activity at the draft table. It's clear Armstrong defers to his team of scouts and serves as more of a facilitator to try and lead things in the right direction. You can tell he puts a ton of faith in his team.

 

[Brodeur]

The Blues just posted a video of their pre-draft discussion and their activity at the draft table. It's clear Armstrong defers to his team of scouts and serves as more of a facilitator to try and lead things in the right direction. You can tell he puts a ton of faith in his team.

Most GMs will try to stay out their scouts' way, although there are cases where a GM pulls rank. Probably the most recent example was Bobby Clarke throwing Ron Hextall under the bus for the Flyers taking Nolan Patrick when the scouts wanted Miro Heiskanen (Clarke misremembered it as Makar). But it makes more sense for a GM to be involved with a high pick since his job security would be more tied to it than say a garden variety 3rd round pick.

Dean Lombardi had a couple hiccups early in his Kings tenure. He inherited a team with a bunch of young forwards but without much on defense. Lombardi was hired right before the 2006 Draft, so he really hadn't had any exposure to the prospects that year. He let the incumbent scouts (who would be fired a few months later) take Trevor Lewis and Jonathan Bernier in the first round. But allegedly he put his foot down when the scouts wanted to draft a forward in the second round and he made them take a D. So they took a D prospect named Joe Ryan instead of their original choice of Milan Lucic. And then there was the Thomas Hickey reach the next year where Lombardi more or less said they had to take a puck moving D.

 

[BelovedIsles]

These damn ads have me phantom replying.

 

[PAZ]

Zito, Nill, McCrimmon, D. Armstrong, Brisebois

HM: Allvin, MacFarland, Sweeney

I give a lot of props to GMs that won a cup or get the team close. I do like a lot of moves that rebuilding GMs have done like Grier and Hughes, but until they get over the hump they're only doing one phase. Chayka made a bunch of smart moves and signings, but it never amounted to anything.

Cheveldayoff is good overall but was too passive and didn't make the most of the team's window.

 

[Laus723]

These damn ads have me phantom replying.

It’s $12 a year to remove the damn ads. I don’t get people who don’t become sponsors.

 

[I am not exposed]

He is easily in my bottom 5

Why? Can you give legitimate reasons why Zito is a bottom 5 GM?

 

[WhataKnight]

I can’t just shit out a top-5.

But I know some will be hideously underrated.

MTL, WPG, SJ & ANA haven’t had their “glow up” moments quite yet, but they have the ingredients.

Zito, McCrimmon and Allvin stand out to me, though.

 

[FlappyGiraffe]

McPhee/McCrimmon have put on a clinic ever since Vegas joined the league

 

[HabzSauce]

He hasn't proven to have done any of those things the team can't get out of the basement. Pretty rich though to chirp about talent and culture to a team that is in the playoffs every season

What do you mean he hasn't proven to do any of those things? Building a good culture, managing the cap well, and acquiring talent - you say he's done none of this? I call BS.

Just because team still in basement doesn't mean Habs aren't building a culture. All I've heard from players that's play/played in MTL since Hughes took over have said nothing but positive things to say. Night and day difference from the bergevin days. The players look like they're having fun, you can literally see it. Hughes also hired Marty St Louis which has been a huge part of all this - I mean how can you say they ain't building a good culture when you have a guy like him mentoring a bunch of youngins? The whole team loves him and habs saw improvements from just about everyone besides maybe Anderson. Habs got a good vibe going on right now and it all starts at the top with Hughes.

And no talent i call BS again. What about Kirby Dach? Newhook? Laine? Matheson? Is that not a prime example of acquiring talent? Those were all trades by the way so you cant play the drafting is easy card.

And no cap management either? Hughes stepped into a dumpster fire and was able to turn it right around. Caufield, Slaf, Guhle - all good deals or at least all good bets. Kept all three under 8M. Then the newhook, Dach and montembault signings. Nothing crazy, all fair/good deals. Habs have a very healthy cap right now and will be even better next off-season once more deadweight is lifted. I assume you have not a clue what's going on in MTL but go take a look and see for yourself. Hughes has also been weaponizing his cap for three years - twice with Monahan and now with laine. That's called cap management is not?

 

[Xirik]

What do you mean he hasn't proven to do any of those things? Building a good culture, managing the cap well, and acquiring talent - you say he's done none of this? I call BS.

Just because team still in basement doesn't mean Habs aren't building a culture. All I've heard from players that's play/played in MTL since Hughes took over have said nothing but positive things to say. Night and day difference from the bergevin days. The players look like they're having fun, you can literally see it. Hughes also hired Marty St Louis which has been a huge part of all this - I mean how can you say they ain't building a good culture when you have a guy like him mentoring a bunch of youngins? The whole team loves him and habs saw improvements from just about everyone besides maybe Anderson. Habs got a good vibe going on right now and it all starts at the top with Hughes.

And no talent i call BS again. What about Kirby Dach? Newhook? Laine? Matheson? Is that not a prime example of acquiring talent? Those were all trades by the way so you cant play the drafting is easy card.

And no cap management either? Hughes stepped into a dumpster fire and was able to turn it right around. Caufield, Slaf, Guhle - all good deals or at least all good bets. Kept all three under 8M. Then the newhook, Dach and montembault signings. Nothing crazy, all fair/good deals. Habs have a very healthy cap right now and will be even better next off-season once more deadweight is lifted. I assume you have not a clue what's going on in MTL but go take a look and see for yourself. Hughes has also been weaponizing his cap for three years - twice with Monahan and now with laine. That's called cap management is not?

Culture doesn't mean #%@ until your team is #%%@ slapped disappointment after believing you were on the upswing. When the crowd starts booing because they expected better and podcats and talkshows talk about "perhaps we should restart the tank again".

all the Hab's have now are "good vibes".

Please don't respond with "That Hab's are different".

signed by
Every team and fanbase that has or has been in rebuild in the past 10+ years.

 

[HabzSauce]

Culture doesn't mean #%@ until your team is #%%@ slapped disappointment after believing you were on the upswing. When the crowd starts booing because they expected better and podcats and talkshows talk about "perhaps we should restart the tank again".

all the Hab's have now are "good vibes".

Please don't respond with "That Hab's are different".

signed by
Every team and fanbase that has or has been in rebuild in the past 10+ years.

Habs are different srry

 

[Rockomax]

Allvin has basically just found ex Pens staff and players to sign which feels more like JR pulling strings. I don't put him in that group at all yet.

Zito, Nill, Armstrong (Blues), the last two are a toss up between 3-5 others I think. Hughes would be one but that pick of a pos that shouldn't have a career stops me from ever picking him as a top 5.

Referring to Logan Mailloux? If so, that was Bergevin; not Hughes.

 

[RandV]

He's done a fantastic job of turning a bleak future into one of the best looking up and coming teams in a very short time. His "team building" has been fantastic so far. Of course now (soon) we need to see results. I find too many here focus entirely on "this GM won a Cup recently" even if they didn't build the team. Maybe I'm weighting the "built the team" aspect a little heavily, but as I said, I'm biased. And again, we'll need to see results, but I think he's done an incredible job of fixing the cap, finding talent at all positions, and rebuilding the culture thus far.

A good encapsulation of the all too common faulty HF thinking. "Bleak future" -> high draft picks -> bright future is kind of the natural order of things. San Jose's old core aged out so of course they're going to be terrible and start accumulating top picks.

It's perfectly fine for a teams fans to be happy with the job a rebuilding GM and just because they're a bad team at that point doesn't mean it's a bad GM, but in a thread talking about top 5 GM's in the league you go with the winners. Tanking and getting lots of picks is the easy part of the job, the league intentionally sets it up that way. Actually building a consistent winner is the hard part and a GM should have to take that step to get any serious consideration at being one of the best.

 

[Dead Coyote]

Anyone who has GMDA in their top 5 should have GMBA in there instead. Has clearly shown that he's a major reason for the blues success and has done an excellent job with Arizona/Utah.

 

[TK 421]

Anyone who has GMDA in their top 5 should have GMBA in there instead. Has clearly shown that he's a major reason for the blues success and has done an excellent job with Arizona/Utah.

Um no, sorry but he would need to do quite a bit to match Doug Armstrong. Attributing the Blues success to Bill Armstrong would be WAY off mark.

 

[CanadienShark]

A good encapsulation of the all too common faulty HF thinking. "Bleak future" -> high draft picks -> bright future is kind of the natural order of things. San Jose's old core aged out so of course they're going to be terrible and start accumulating top picks.

It's perfectly fine for a teams fans to be happy with the job a rebuilding GM and just because they're a bad team at that point doesn't mean it's a bad GM, but in a thread talking about top 5 GM's in the league you go with the winners. Tanking and getting lots of picks is the easy part of the job, the league intentionally sets it up that way. Actually building a consistent winner is the hard part and a GM should have to take that step to get any serious consideration at being one of the best.

On the flip side, GMs often inherit great teams without doing much of anything to build them, then they get lauded as amazing GMs because the already great team won a Cup.

 

[Xirik]

On the flip side, GMs often inherit great teams without doing much of anything to build them, then they get lauded as amazing GMs because the already great team won a Cup.

Sometimes true.

Though on HF people think Stan Bowman sucks because he inherited a winning team. so I think people recognize it.

 

[CanadienShark]

Sometimes true.

Though on HF people think Stan Bowman sucks because he inherited a winning team. so I think people recognize it.

I remember talk about Bowman being so incredible years ago despite that.

 

[Xirik]

I remember talk about Bowman being so incredible years ago despite that.

I guess that's just how it goes, People who are loved at the time end up reviled in the history books.