• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

45 Neutral

About Lemieux

  • Rank
    K-Wing Star

Contact Methods

  • ICQ 0
  1. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    Now we can add the atrocious Hodgson deal to the mix. What Kassian is, he should not be worth a potential Calder candidate. Absolute larceny to the max!!!
  2. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    Going to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals is a euphemism for "you are the last loser standing." Not winning is not winning. At least we had a two-goal effort from Linden. Last time I checked, they got shutout. The first thing that they need to do is to get Henrik Sedin to shoot the puck more. He has the ability to do that, but he disappears. He can't get his game going without the PP. People blame the Bruins, but I think the Canucks should blame themselves. Simply put, the offense was anemic. I am not saying Gillis is bad, but he's not as good as he's been marketed.
  3. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    Your reply stands out, in this sea of useless replies, so I will give you my reply. Quote: By your own admission all of these great players were brought in before Gillis. Yet I dont recall the Canucks getting to the finals with these same players before Gillis, do you? In fact they couldnt get past the 2nd round. This can be easily explained. They were boys a few years ago. Now they are men. Just look at how Kesler and the Sedins have changed. And don't get me talking about the previous "core" players like Cloutier, the one-man wrecking crew. Quote: You can easily sit there it your high chair and knock Gillis for Ballards contract, but the fact is Gillis did not make that contract. Ballard and his contract were acquired in a trade. On top of that who could know that Ballard would under perform to the level he has? The task of the GM is to assess the risk. He's paid millions to do it. Acquiring the player is the GM's job. You can't blame the scouts or any other people. Afterall, the scouts are the people that you hire. Besides, the one who can make the decision is the GM. He gave up a first rounder PLUS Grabner, who was a 14th-overall first rounder from the previous regime PLUS Bernier, who was a first rounder himself. Three first rounders can get you a player like Phil Kessel (not that I am a fan of his play, but he is definitely a better player than Ballard) My point is that Nonis wasn't given another shot, and all the credits have gone to Michael Gillis. When the Canucks falter in the near future, they will blame this guy. The problem with this team over the years (I have watched the Canucks for over 20 years) is that it hasn't brought in proven winners in their prime, like a Scott Niedermayer or a Forsberg. They had had Mark Messier and Sundin, good players on the decline, and good talents without the winning credentials like Bure. They simply have no game changers. A Joe Sakic, Yzerman, Scott Stevens is a game changer. Bringing in Corey Perry won't help. What they need is a Zetterberg type, a warrior that can go all out and play a team game. So far, Gillis has not shown that he is capable of doing that.
  4. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    you're [sic] analysis here in the first line doesn't mean a lot either.
  5. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    You're [sic] English isn't as good as you think, so you can stop pretending now. Getting bad contracts from a bad team is the same as signing the contracts in the first place. Columbus did not sign Carter to that ludicrous deal. Now they are stuck with it. Don't they have to be responsible? Same for Gillis. No one in the world had been sticking a gun to his head and say "trade for Ballard". Of course Luongo can waive his NTC. Have you ever heard of an NTC where the player cannot waive his NTC? If the player couldn't, who would be able to???!!! The fact is, by giving him the NTC, Luongo dictates what he wants to do. And you give him that contract after a stellar regular season, but miserable playoff performances. Should have waited till he reached free agency. He would've taken a hometown-discount like the Sedins. If he walked, it would've been fine cause the Canucks still had a solid second option in Schneider. Nowadays, you don't win with the goalie, you win with a system. Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh are good examples. The so-called big-money goalies, Bryzgalov, Vokoun, Lundqvist, Luongo... what have they really won?
  6. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    Mitchell averaged 72 games in the 3 years before the concussion year, so I don't see how he wasn't reliable. That's a pretty good number for a defensive d who plays a physical game. One concussion and you treat him like sh*t? That's not a good move. The Canucks made an average of $2-3mil cash per playoff home game. Sources say that they made 40-50mil in playoff receipts alone last year. If they were concerned about the cap, they would've been able to bury his contract in the AHL. It would've been a good insurance policy.
  7. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    Well, Chris Tanev, Aaron Rome and Andrew Alberts were no better than Mitchell. They lost the finals on the backend. Gillis' failure to address DEFENSE was evident. And then he went out and added more soft forwards. I think your arguments do not add much to the discussion.
  8. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    David Booth had had TWO concussions and Gillis had him for much more than what he would have had to pay Mitchell. Your argument is dead on arrival.
  9. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    It was obvious that the Canucks needed DEFENSIVE help. If he had been offered 6mil for 2 years I am sure Mitchell would've stayed. It wasn't that big of a risk considering he was only 32 and the contract was for only two years. Instead, he went for an undersized Ballard who was making more than 4+ for multiple years, never having played a playoff game. This to me, is a bad decision. Ballard was sitting in the box in the playoffs. Mitchell would've been at least a top four, along with Ehrhoff, Edler, Hamhuis (and when healthy, Salo). It was obvious though, that Salo couldn't keep the Bruins out of the dirty area.
  10. Michael Gillis is grossly overrated

    I concede that Hamhuis is a good signing, but he did it while offering a ridiculous $1.5M contract offer to Willie Mitchell, the horse. He unfortunately suffered a concussion while playing like a warrior, and they treated him like sh*t. Could've at least helped contain some of the bad Bruins in the playoffs. Now, that role belongs to Andrew Alberts, which is scary to say the least.
  11. This guy is grossly overrated. He has come up with bad contracts after bad contracts. Overpaying Ballard, Booth, Sundin (thank goodness he did not take the 2-year $20mil contract), Demitra (RIP), and Luongo. These are good players, but definitely not at the salary that they are making. Now they are really stuck with Luongo, an older goalie with more and more mileage. This guy was overused in Florida, and you just don't see him playing at the same level 2 or 3 years down the road. This situation has caused the whole Schneider thing. Schneider looks like a young solid number one that could carry the Canucks into the next decade. He has solid moves, unlike the Sieve Cloutier. He's a calming presence. Because of the no-trade clause to Luongo, Schneider has to be moved. People defend Gillis and say that he had got the Canucks into the finals. The main pieces, i.e. Kesler, Sedins, Edler, Bieksa, Salo, Burrows were all pieces from the past regimes. The only guy that Gillis could truly claim to be a valuable asset was ehrhoff. Gillis is really sacrifing the future of the team for immediate gains. It's really sad to see.
  12. Burrows? Do We Really Need Him?

    Burrows is a good player, but when his contract is up, Hansen is going to take his place. I'd be surprised if were to get 20 goals on another team without the Sedins.