Dave Bolland

[CarltonTheBear]

I dont think anybody's saying that. In fact, I think alot of people tend to think GMs are inherently incompetent.

It was pretty much in each of your last 3 posts. If Nonis/Shanny think it's a good idea to bring back Bolland then it's a good idea.

 

[Kin]

Sure. If you're only counting the bad deals GMs make in their careers.

I don't think you need to think that someone is always wrong to think they no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt in spite of available evidence. Just wrong enough.

 

[Redleaf]

I dont think anybody's saying that. In fact, I think alot of people tend to think GMs are inherently incompetent.

It was pretty much in each of your last 3 posts. If Nonis/Shanny think it's a good idea to bring back Bolland then it's a good idea.

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

 

[Redleaf]

Sure. If you're only counting the bad deals GMs make in their careers.

I don't think you need to think that someone is always wrong to think they no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt in spite of available evidence. Just wrong enough.

I'll need a butterfly net to catch that one. 

 

[Kin]

I'll need a butterfly net to catch that one. 

I'm sure you'll get around to it after you work out the intricacies of quoting a person.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

I don't think as a fan you should agree or disagree with any decision a GM makes just because of what their name is. Even Lou Lamorello and Ken Holland make mistakes. If JFJ was still running the show somehow and he wanted to bring back Bolland in the exact same circumstances would you be against the decision? If Nonis went out and brought back Mark Fraser for $3mil a year would you just shrug and say he must know what he's doing?

 

[Redleaf]

I'll need a butterfly net to catch that one. 

I'm sure you'll get around to it after you work out the intricacies of quoting a person.

Really?  :

 

[Redleaf]

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

I don't think as a fan you should agree or disagree with any decision a GM makes just because of what their name is. Even Lou Lamorello and Ken Holland make mistakes. If JFJ was still running the show somehow and he wanted to bring back Bolland in the exact same circumstances would you be against the decision? If Nonis went out and brought back Mark Fraser for $3mil a year would you just shrug and say he must know what he's doing?

Now that I've got a minute, let me try this again...

I don't just agree and go along with every decision Nonis has made as GM. Obviously, he's made mistakes. I've disagreed with many of his moves. I didn't like his decision not to upgrade the defense last summer for instance.

Regardless of what other fans may believe, I think taking a chance on Bolland is a smart GM move. Shanahan appears to have come to the same conclusion as Nonis. That's two pretty bright hockey guys thinking, like myself, that its a good idea to keep Bolland around.  That's all I was saying.

 

[mr grieves]

I dont think anybody's saying that. In fact, I think alot of people tend to think GMs are inherently incompetent.

It was pretty much in each of your last 3 posts. If Nonis/Shanny think it's a good idea to bring back Bolland then it's a good idea.

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

Ooooooh. It's just the guy who signed the worst UFA contract in recent memory and extended a coach whose team gave up the most shots against in the modern NHL that you think is a "smart hockey man."

What do you suppose the GMs of actual playoff teams are?

 

[Redleaf]

I dont think anybody's saying that. In fact, I think alot of people tend to think GMs are inherently incompetent.

It was pretty much in each of your last 3 posts. If Nonis/Shanny think it's a good idea to bring back Bolland then it's a good idea.

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

What do you suppose the GMs of actual playoff teams are?

Idiots.

The guy hasn't been without mistakes. I don't think too many GMs are. But what I like about Nonis is that he hasn't sold the farm for reclamation projects and 'wanna be Leafs before they retire' guys like so many Leaf GMs did before him. He's been patient, kept most of his draft picks, and has put together,(along with Burke), the most talented squad of youngsters the Leafs have had in 'as long as anyone can remember'. I respect the fact that he hasn't sold out, and believe he's done a real good job all around.

 

[AvroArrow]

No Bolland... The risk isn't worth it.

 

[mr grieves]

The guy hasn't been without mistakes. I don't think too many GMs are. But what I like about Nonis is that he hasn't sold the farm for reclamation projects and 'wanna be Leafs before they retire' guys like so many Leaf GMs did before him. He's been patient, kept most of his draft picks, and has put together,(along with Burke), the most talented squad of youngsters the Leafs have had in 'as long as anyone can remember'. I respect the fact that he hasn't sold out, and believe he's done a real good job all around.

Sure, but that seems to me a pretty low scratch for the GM of a young, rebuilding team to meet. And where he's made his mistakes, it seems to me, is precisely with cutting bait or over-committing to complementary players like Bolland. I don't know what the Clarkson signing was if not mismanaging assets (not picks or youth, but compliance buyouts and cap space) for a "wanna be a Leaf before he retires."

 

[Kin]

Sure, but that seems to me a pretty low scratch for the GM of a young, rebuilding team to meet. And where he's made his mistakes, it seems to me, is precisely with cutting bait or over-committing to complementary players like Bolland. I don't know what the Clarkson signing was if not mismanaging assets (not picks or youth, but compliance buyouts and cap space) for a "wanna be a Leaf before he retires."

I agree. If the Leafs are ever going to get serious about competing they're going to have to hold themselves to the standard of the best teams in the league, not take solace in being marginally more competent then the various collection of dopes who've run the team in the recent past.

 

[moon111]

I'm confused here.  Isn't the goal to get the 1st overall draft pick?

 

[skrackle]

I dont think anybody's saying that. In fact, I think alot of people tend to think GMs are inherently incompetent.

It was pretty much in each of your last 3 posts. If Nonis/Shanny think it's a good idea to bring back Bolland then it's a good idea.

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

Ooooooh. It's just the guy who signed the worst UFA contract in recent memory and extended a coach whose team gave up the most shots against in the modern NHL that you think is a "smart hockey man."

What do you suppose the GMs of actual playoff teams are?

Yep. Not to mention wasting two compliance buyouts. It would be nice to have at least one of those left.

Nonis has done very little so far to give any indication that he's capable of transforming the Leafs into a contender. The Leafs aren't good enough to make the playoffs, and they are not bad enough to draft top end talent. Isn't that where JFJ had them?

 

[ZBBM]

Nonis has done very little so far to give any indication that he's capable of transforming the Leafs into a contender. The Leafs aren't good enough to make the playoffs, and they are not bad enough to draft top end talent. Isn't that where JFJ had them?

Bang on.

We spent a lot of the season blasting away at Carlyle because his stupidity was on display day in and day out.  But Nonis is just as big a failure, and the fact that he was able to convince Shanahan to double down on RC doesn't lead me to think our new leader has any more on the ball.

Nobody can claim JFJ was a success.  But despite all the hype, Burke/Nonis haven't achieved anything better. 

 

[Bonsixx]

Nonis has done very little so far to give any indication that he's capable of transforming the Leafs into a contender. The Leafs aren't good enough to make the playoffs, and they are not bad enough to draft top end talent. Isn't that where JFJ had them?

Bang on.

We spent a lot of the season blasting away at Carlyle because his stupidity was on display day in and day out.  But Nonis is just as big a failure, and the fact that he was able to convince Shanahan to double down on RC doesn't lead me to think our new leader has any more on the ball.

Nobody can claim JFJ was a success.  But despite all the hype, Burke/Nonis haven't achieved anything better.

I remain hopeful that the very talented and young group of Kessel, Bernier, JVR, Rielly can be built around.

 

[Leaflifer]

Nonis has done very little so far to give any indication that he's capable of transforming the Leafs into a contender. The Leafs aren't good enough to make the playoffs, and they are not bad enough to draft top end talent. Isn't that where JFJ had them?

Bang on.

We spent a lot of the season blasting away at Carlyle because his stupidity was on display day in and day out.  But Nonis is just as big a failure, and the fact that he was able to convince Shanahan to double down on RC doesn't lead me to think our new leader has any more on the ball.

Nobody can claim JFJ was a success.  But despite all the hype, Burke/Nonis haven't achieved anything better.

I remain hopeful that the very talented and young group of Kessel, Bernier, JVR, Rielly can be built around.

I do too. Whether that will happen, who knows, but the potential is in those players.

I'm not going to judge Shannahan yet, but I know what I'd like to see, and so far I'm not thrilled about keeping Carlyle. On the flip side, RC hasn't coached a game yet since Shannys been here.

My hopes are a few vets/leaders to help turn the rich kids into a NHL hockey team from an on ice perspective.

 

[Redleaf]

I dont think anybody's saying that. In fact, I think alot of people tend to think GMs are inherently incompetent.

It was pretty much in each of your last 3 posts. If Nonis/Shanny think it's a good idea to bring back Bolland then it's a good idea.

Because I, personally, think they are both smart hockey men. How do you conclude from that that I believe all GMs in the league are infallible? Is agreeing with a GMs decision not a strong enough argument now?

Ooooooh. It's just the guy who signed the worst UFA contract in recent memory and extended a coach whose team gave up the most shots against in the modern NHL that you think is a "smart hockey man."

What do you suppose the GMs of actual playoff teams are?

Yep. Not to mention wasting two compliance buyouts. It would be nice to have at least one of those left.

Nonis has done very little so far to give any indication that he's capable of transforming the Leafs into a contender. The Leafs aren't good enough to make the playoffs, and they are not bad enough to draft top end talent. Isn't that where JFJ had them?

I'm a little confused. You don't think Nonis has done a good job because the Leafs aren't one of the worst teams in the league?

 

[Redleaf]

The guy hasn't been without mistakes. I don't think too many GMs are. But what I like about Nonis is that he hasn't sold the farm for reclamation projects and 'wanna be Leafs before they retire' guys like so many Leaf GMs did before him. He's been patient, kept most of his draft picks, and has put together,(along with Burke), the most talented squad of youngsters the Leafs have had in 'as long as anyone can remember'. I respect the fact that he hasn't sold out, and believe he's done a real good job all around.

Sure, but that seems to me a pretty low scratch for the GM of a young, rebuilding team to meet. And where he's made his mistakes, it seems to me, is precisely with cutting bait or over-committing to complementary players like Bolland. I don't know what the Clarkson signing was if not mismanaging assets (not picks or youth, but compliance buyouts and cap space) for a "wanna be a Leaf before he retires."

To each their own, but I think some people are putting entirely too much weight on the Clarkson contract when sizing up how well Nonis has done.

How much is it really a reflection of Nonis abilities as a GM to judge talent when a player like Clarkson suddenly and surprisingly has by far the worst season of his career? Are we really saying Nonis should have anticipated this happening and because he didn't he's now a bad GM? Had Clarkson performed as well as he has virtually every other season he's played in the NHL, there wouldn't be nearly as many critics of Nonis decision to sign him. Let's not forget, Clarkson had more than a few suitors willing to offer him that very same contract and more.