Holmgren made some very nice moves in his first few years as GM:
Sending Forsberg to Nashville and eventually turning that into Hartnell and Timonen
Signing Briere as a free agent
Acquiring Marty Biron to finally give the Flyers some stability in net
Swapping Zhitnik for Coburn
And, though some disagree, the Pronger deal
His downfall was his reaction to Pronger's injury, signing Bryz and his tendency to overpay in free agency and give out NTC/NMC's like they were boxes of candy. - BiggE
In my opinion, his reaction to Pronger's injury wasn't his downfall. The moves to bring in Grossmann and Streit were good moves, and didn't hurt the team. Every team overpays for top players in free agency for the most part. That is not unique to Holmgren or the Flyers. Have you compared the number of NTC/NMC given out by Holmgren when he was GM, to other GM's on other teams to get a comparison? I think if that was done that would shed some light on whether Holmgren truly gave out movement clauses like they were a box of candy.
The biggest, and really only issue that I see from the Holmgren era was the failure to draft and develop defenseman. That is still affecting the team today, and is a major failure.
In my opinion, his reaction to Pronger's injury wasn't his downfall. The moves to bring in Grossmann and Streit were good moves, and didn't hurt the team. Every team overpays for top players in free agency for the most part. That is not unique to Holmgren or the Flyers. Have you compared the number of NTC/NMC given out by Holmgren when he was GM, to other GM's on other teams to get a comparison? I think if that was done that would shed some light on whether Holmgren truly gave out movement clauses like they were a box of candy. - MJL
My initial reaction was that I hated the trade, essentially 4 1sts and a big contract coming back. After realizing we sent back 4+ mil (Lupul) and true #1 dmen don't grow on trees I warmed up to the idea. - flyerscup2011
It was arguably as much or more than what Edmonton and Anaheim gave up. If they would have given that up for Weber, it would have been a lot but at least he was 26. For a 34 yo defenseman who played a physically punishing style there was a very low probability he'd play to his late 30's. That should have warranted a smaller package.
It was arguably as much or more than what Edmonton and Anaheim gave up. If they would have given that up for Weber, it would have been a lot but at least he was 26. For a 34 yo defenseman who played a physically punishing style there was a very low probability he'd play to his late 30's. That should have warranted a smaller package. - TheGreat28
Regardless of the package or how it ended, he was probably the best defenseman I''ve ever seen for the team.
In fact, there's no probably about it. Even at 34, he was still an elite defenseman.
In my opinion, his reaction to Pronger's injury wasn't his downfall. The moves to bring in Grossmann and Streit were good moves, and didn't hurt the team. Every team overpays for top players in free agency for the most part. That is not unique to Holmgren or the Flyers. Have you compared the number of NTC/NMC given out by Holmgren when he was GM, to other GM's on other teams to get a comparison? I think if that was done that would shed some light on whether Holmgren truly gave out movement clauses like they were a box of candy.
The biggest, and really only issue that I see from the Holmgren era was the failure to draft and develop defenseman. That is still affecting the team today, and is a major failure. - MJL
Agree with your last two points, especially the dman point. That was my line of thinking even back when they acquired Pronger and again when they offered a Kings ransom for Weber.
It was arguably as much or more than what Edmonton and Anaheim gave up. If they would have given that up for Weber, it would have been a lot but at least he was 26. For a 34 yo defenseman who played a physically punishing style there was a very low probability he'd play to his late 30's. That should have warranted a smaller package. - TheGreat28
Yeah and no. Pronger really didn't play a big hit type of physical style. His was more the stick to the chops when he knew the refs weren't looking type. Pronger's greatest attribute, IMO, was his hockey sense. I have no doubt that if he hadn't took a puck to the eye that much like Lidstrom, he could have been a very effective player right up to age 40.
Yeah and nb. Pronger really didn't play a big hit type of physical style. His was more the stick to the chops when he knew the refs weren't looking type. Pronger's greatest attribute, IMO, was his hockey sense. I have no doubt that if he hadn't took a puck to the eye that much like Lidstrom, he could have been a very effective player right up to age 40. - BiggE
Agreed here. He could drop the hammer when he needed to, but he wasn't a Schenn/Gudas type who went running around looking to nail people. He was just so strong and positionally sound that he could knock a player off the puck without a huge hit.
The rumor I heard was that the trade being discussed was more modest than what eventually happened. St Louis stepped into the mix and forced homer to outbid them, which he did. Not sure the accuracy of this but it's what I heard. - BOSS_TWEED
I never heard that. But it sort of echoes something I said before about Holmgren and Clarke. They would fixate on something or someone and then they would have to have that player at all cost. As soon as the bidding got that high they should have walked.
I think Hextall so far has demonstrated more savvy in setting his price and not outbidding himself.
Yeah and no. Pronger really didn't play a big hit type of physical style. His was more the stick to the chops when he knew the refs weren't looking type. Pronger's greatest attribute, IMO, was his hockey sense. I have no doubt that if he hadn't took a puck to the eye that much like Lidstrom, he could have been a very effective player right up to age 40. - BiggE
He only played 50 games the year before with knee issues. Everyone forgets that with the eye injury. And he missed a lot of time in previous seasons with back and knee problems. There was also a big risk that either injury could abruptly end his career.
Agree with your last two points, especially the dman point. That was my line of thinking even back when they acquired Pronger and again when they offered a Kings ransom for Weber. - TheGreat28
It's true, but part of the reason they didn't draft and develop defenseman is because they traded three 2nds, three 3rds and a 4th in the deals the brought them Grossmann, Kubina, Streit & MacDonald.
There is cause and effect. They traded a lot picks away and didn't have as much of an opportunity to draft and develop defensemen as they would have if they retained the picks. They actively decided to spend those picks to acquire vets rather than draft & develop.
Agree with this as well. He made some very good moves, and some questionable moves. He was also influenced by others in the organization on some of his moves.
Overall I think he was a better than average GM. He just couldn't take the team to the proverbial next level. - TheGreat28
I think he was very similar to his mentor, Clarkie, in many respects. He was bold and tried to win. There just has to be a balance with that and an ability to recognize when it's time to go all in and when to fold when you have a bad hand
He only played 50 games the year before with knee issues. Everyone forgets that with the eye injury. And he missed a lot of time in previous seasons with back and knee problems. There was also a big risk that either injury could abruptly end his career. - TheGreat28
True, but up til the eye injury, when he returned from other injuries, he was still a dominant defenseman who played 25+ minutes and anchored the team.
Aside from Bryzgalov and Kubina, I liked almost every one of his moves up until the 2012 offseason. - jmatchett383
I agree, it was stated earlier, not by you, that Holmgren should have started the retool that hexy has started a year or two earlier. Holmgren started the retool by trading Richards and Carter in the summer of 2011. The Flyers had just gone to the Cup finals the season before, in 2010. Should Holmgren have started the rebuild two years sooner, that would have stopped the team from going to the finals, and a rebuild immediately after going to the Finals, isn't very likely.
I think he was very similar to his mentor, Clarkie, in many respects. He was bold and tried to win. There just has to be a balance with that and an ability to recognize when it's time to go all in and when to fold when you have a bad hand - Jsaquella
It's true, but part of the reason they didn't draft and develop defenseman is because they traded three 2nds, three 3rds and a 4th in the deals the brought them Grossmann, Kubina, Streit & MacDonald.
There is cause and effect. They traded a lot picks away and didn't have as much of an opportunity to draft and develop defensemen as they would have if they retained the picks. They actively decided to spend those picks to acquire vets rather than draft & develop. - Jsaquella
True but they also had a run of dud 2nd round D picks from mid-1990s to 2000s: Kenny, Beckett, Forbes, Ratchuk, Bodrov, Marshall.
