Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 35 votes

Michael Gillis is grossly overrated


  • Please log in to reply
236 replies to this topic

#31 Goal:thecup

Goal:thecup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Joined: 03-September 07

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:16 AM

Sundin signing put the team on the map; free agents were interested in playing here and the twins and Kes got valuable leadership.
Luongo and the Sedins signing was protection of player assets; we would have received nothing if they had signed elsewhere.
Gillis does not waste assets; he develops and maintains them.
Ahh, what the heck; this was just a troll anyway.
  • 0

#32 rain

rain

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 446 posts
  • Joined: 28-December 07

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:18 AM

Last year Gillis was GM of the year in the NHL. I guess they just didn't know the truth. <_<
  • 1

#33 BRAVEMAN91

BRAVEMAN91

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 03

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:19 AM

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.





Tell us this in the next 10 years.. Schneider is the model of what a good eventual successor should be to Luongo. If Gillis has not developed that guy by the time Lu's contract expires then we have a problem.

Gillis is trying to copy a succesful model in Detroit and add his touch to it. While still keeping his head in the present with Stanley Cup aspirations, He should keep improving his scouting dept, keeping the team on pace with the Edmontons of the world who will try to knock the older Canucks off they're perch.

Edited by BRAVEMAN91, 05 February 2012 - 10:30 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

Follow Me on Twitter: @braveman91
Checkout my Canuck videos on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/braveman91

#34 Wilbur

Wilbur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:22 AM

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.

You're forgetting the context of that time. The Canucks DESPERATELY needed defensemen. Bieksa was coming off an awful year and nobody knew how (or even if) Mitchell would come back from his injuries. The Canucks needed reliable defensemen that had a history of staying healthy. Mitchell only met half that criteria, the 1.5 M offer reflected that. The Canucks could not afford to take any chances with the players they got for the back end (which makes the Booth situation a little different, as they could take that chance up front).

As for the state of the defense now? That just goes to show you the market for defense. Teams don't give up healthy top 4 defensemen for nothing.
  • 1

#35 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,384 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:26 AM




(Still waiting for your reply......)
  • 1

Posted Image


#36 YEGCanuck

YEGCanuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 09

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:27 AM

Sounds a little like you are suggesting Burke is a better GM, good luck with that. I think the greatest contribution Gillis has made was to develop a solid, positive environment for the team to suceed. Not just the on-ice product, but throughout the organization. Other clubs are now attempting to follow the lead Vancouver has created as a winning formula. Players come and go over time, a strong foundation as an organization is a key to consistent performance.
  • 0

#37 fall0ff

fall0ff

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 403 posts
  • Joined: 10-October 10

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:28 AM

I'm more shocked with this idiot getting "plus 3" for opening this thread. I think this guy is overrated.
  • 0

#38 Lemieux

Lemieux

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 781 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 04

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:31 AM

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.
  • 0
This signature is not blank.

#39 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:32 AM

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.


I bet you are right about Willie staying for $6M over 2 years but, MG wouldn't take that risk.

Signing Ballard was meant to be DEFENSIVE help. It's easy, in hindsight, to criticize the signing. When he was inked, I was ecstatic. I thought that he and Hammer would have put us over the top. It hasn't panned out that way although KB4 is starting to play better recently.

Also, Lu's signing at a cap hit of $5.3 is a steal for a top 5 goalie. The term is steep, but there are clauses in the contract for both parties to opt out before full term. Salary only matters to the player, the owner and fans who like to bitch and moan (myself included!).

:towel: :canucks:
  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#40 nuck luck

nuck luck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:37 AM

Hamhuis?


or Max... or Higgy.  I guess we shouldn't look at players that he re-signed...or for that matter, lets not even consider  how he changed the whole image of the team?  There was a time that Vancouver was not known to be a choice destination for players...  All of his minor adjustments, excluding player moves, might not mean a lot on a individual basis, but when you combine them all together, it makes a formidable difference.  One that means nothing to you and me...but it has meant the difference for players that benefit from them.What about the Canucks record BEFORE and AFTER his arrival?I wouldn't consider acquiring Ballard a bad thing... don't forget that he was a coveted player in the offseason and EVERY GM wanted him.  I give him credit to be able to sign him before the other GM's...only proves he's got some skills as GM.  I think that he hasn't been used the proper way...right side, pp, partners, lines, etc......  I don't fault MG for this.How can you consider Booth a failure???  That is what makes your points ridiculous!  Do you not remember how this all came about?  Granted that Sturm was a failure...but at least he was able to recognize this and didn't hesitate to move him.  We lost an often injured Sammy that has been on a steady decline that was becoming a FA, I love Sammy and hated to see him go, but I have to say that Booth is a pretty good rebound.  Not only this...but Reinprecht is lighting it up on the Wolves and the only reason we haven't seen him on the Nucks is because of the cap, come playoffs, we will see how lopsided this trade really was when we can play Reinprecht.  We are a better team with JUST Booth in the lineup than we were without him.  MG just acquired a top 6 PF and still kept the rest of the team intact....how is this a fail?Oh... and we got a 3rd round.

Edited by nuck luck, 05 February 2012 - 10:40 AM.

  • 0

#41 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,018 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:44 AM

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.


And do any of these 3 make over the $1.5M Willie was offered? .. you are talking in circles to no real point other than you have a soft spot for Willie .. Willie has a soft spot too .. its between his ears ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#42 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,750 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:46 AM

Bring Back the Minus's!!!!
  • 2

#43 werallcanucks

werallcanucks

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:48 AM

ya your right...he hasnt done anything spectacular...hes only built one of the most balanced teams in the NHL, drafted some great talent (hodgson, Connauton, Tanev, Schrieder,) to give us a great future, and our team is a Stanley Cup contender. What more do you want out of a GM... Sure hes made some head scratching moves. But who hasnt. The Sundin signing may not have been as affective on the score board, but he helped and guided the twins into the players they are today. And thats coming directly from the twins. We can bitch all we want about the Luongo contract. but i see a great goalie in net thats gonna give us a solid chance to win every night thats only costing the team 5.3 million every year. The way good goalies are being paid right now...i say thats a hell of a deal. I also believe it was MG that signed Burrows to a 2 mil 4 year deal. WHAT WAS HE THINKING. Im just gonna end this here because i dont feel like going on and on and on, because i could
  • 1

#44 bd71

bd71

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 726 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:54 AM

Gilis is like all GMs. Gets too much credit for when things are going well and when things are going wrong he will get too much blame. He's made some great moves and some bad moves. He inherited a great core and has done a pretty good job building around them.

I think giving credit for picks like Hodgson is a little much though. Who else was he going to take? The reality of picking low is that you don't really have much choice. A guy gets slotted in and you take him. Is the guy who drafted Crosby a genius?
  • 1

#45 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,940 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:56 AM

Kyle Beach.
  • 1
Posted Image

#46 nuck luck

nuck luck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:58 AM

or Max... or Higgy. I guess we shouldn't look at players that he re-signed...or for that matter, lets not even consider how he changed the whole image of the team? There was a time that Vancouver was not known to be a choice destination for players...

All of his minor adjustments, excluding player moves, might not mean a lot on a individual basis, but when you combine them all together, it makes a formidable difference. One that means nothing to you and me...but it has meant the difference for players that benefit from them.

What about the Canucks record BEFORE and AFTER his arrival?

I wouldn't consider acquiring Ballard a bad thing... don't forget that he was a coveted player in the offseason and EVERY GM wanted him. I give him credit to be able to sign him before the other GM's...only proves he's got some skills as GM. I think that he hasn't been used the proper way...right side, pp, partners, lines, etc...... I don't fault MG for this.

How can you consider Booth a failure??? That is what makes your points ridiculous! Do you not remember how this all came about? Granted that Sturm was a failure...but at least he was able to recognize this and didn't hesitate to move him. We lost an often injured Sammy that has been on a steady decline that was becoming a FA, I love Sammy and hated to see him go, but I have to say that Booth is a pretty good rebound. Not only this...but Reinprecht is lighting it up on the Wolves and the only reason we haven't seen him on the Nucks is because of the cap, come playoffs, we will see how lopsided this trade really was when we can play Reinprecht. We are a better team with JUST Booth in the lineup than we were without him. MG just acquired a top 6 PF and still kept the rest of the team intact....how is this a fail?

Oh... and we got a 3rd round.



sorry...I know there's no paragraphs, I had them initially...and I tried to edit them in?
  • 0

#47 Jay86

Jay86

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 12

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:03 AM

I think that MG deserves more credit that he has received for not doing too much with the team when he took over. Remember this was before the sedins had their crazy breakout years. Many GM's would have come into an organization and wanted to shake things up a little bit. He took a slow and steady approach, evaluated his players, improved the facilities and staff surrounding the team.

I think that he has done a damn fine job so far, and i think he is targeting this year, and the next two, two really gol for it.
If the canucks dont have a cup in the next two years folling this season......we wont....for another 40.
  • 0

#48 Cody9

Cody9

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 924 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 08

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:05 AM

WOW! Did you think about what you wrote before you wrote it? Highly doubt that. I read some of the comments but not all. What about our #9, our future CAPTAIN. CODY! CODY! CODY! And who drafted him? God Bless Mike Gillis for CODY.

Who signed BURR, at a steal for 4 years at $2 million per year? THANK U MG.

Lou has become unbelievably humble, sticking up for the guys even when they don't really deserve to be stuck up for, non commenting about Thomas, and playing much better. REMEMBER that groin pull in that day game in Pitsburgh - that is what has changed his game. NOT being over used in Florida. Get over it and check your RATING list before you call someone over rated. We will win a CUP with MG at the helm and he will be he for a very long time.
  • 0

#49 Wilbur

Wilbur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:05 AM

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.

Yes, up until that Malkin hit, Mitchell was as reliable as it gets. But going into that summer even Willie Mitchell didn't know if he was able to play. Even after he signed with LA he wasn't 100% certain. Yes, you can always bury players in the minors but it doesn't look good on teams that do that. You can't just sign and trade draft picks for every potential defensemen out there then bury any players in the minors that don't make the cut after the dust settles. Legitmate, everyday NHL defensemen wouldn't put up with that and then not sign here if that was the case. You can do that with Alberts, Romes, and Sulzers of the world because that's there roll (6-8 NHL dmen). The problem with the Canucks is they have 1 or 2 too many Alberts/Rome/Suzler on the team and could use at least 1 more legitimate 4-6 NHL defensemen (and perhaps an upgrade to Ballard but I'm not going to get greedy). Yes, Mitchell falls in that category now, but at the time the Canucks had to make the decision and his health was just too big of a question mark. In sports, hindsight is always 20/20
  • 0

#50 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,769 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:08 AM

If I remember correctly, Mitchell was not yet healthy at the time Gillis acquired Ballard - and Gillis wasn't comfortable waiting (concussions are unpredictable). Gillis was in a tough position - and Ballard looked like a seriously good fit at the time.

Ironically, Mario Lemieux is one of the most over-rated players of all time.

It is always easy to look back 5 years later and assess moves. Who could have predicted that Sundin would be such a disappointment - the guy always showed up in Toronto.

Yes, Burke has assembled a good core - but you need more than a core, and things change quickly in the NHL - Gillis has made lots of excellent moves to more than make up for a few questionable ones, and has done a great job of retaining the core... the proof is in the results. Forgetting half the players on the team and complaining about Luongo's contract is not the greatest argument. Luongo's contract is far from immovable - if he were available, a number of teams would line up with offers, especially given his bargain cap-hit.
  • 1

#51 skadoosh

skadoosh

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Joined: 08-November 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:11 AM

Some people just love to whine. Eventually they grow up and realize that whining makes them look foolish.
  • 1

#52 The Kassassin Train

The Kassassin Train

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,110 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 05

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:18 AM

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.


Uhhh sacrificing the future? Yeps you're right that's why we have Hodgson, Schroeder, Rodin, Connauton all developing to be great players in the coming years. What about Sauve?

That right there is a complete line. Are you high?

If the Canucks LOSE faith in Luongo they can buy him out, the Aquallinis have shown that they are willing to spend to keep players in the minors. Gillis hasn't done anything? Booth has 18 points in 26 games here. We got him for nothing. I'm willing to bet that Booth will outproduce Raymond for the next 5 years.

You disgrace the name Lemieux. When you have some validity to your post or substance then post again.
  • 2

The key difference is that Sopel can fill in for Seabrook and Campbell just fine. Bieksa, he is garbage so in that sense he is like the worst defenseman in the league.


When Cody (Hodgson) gets older, he might be better than Datsyuk.


Let's not push this guy (Kassian). He's still immature, and if he fails on the 2nd line it's because he isn't ready. Some guys really need years to develop, it's how well and how fast players adapt to the game. In my opinion, I'd rather have Horvat getting 2nd line minutes. He will start off on the 3rd line next season but I see him making the transition, being a great compliment to whoever plays his wings.

At this point, I don't see Kassian fitting in to any role other than a 3rd. If players like Kassian start getting 2nd line minutes then we just stay inconsistent as a team.


The idiocy on CDC....

#53 Forsy

Forsy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,107 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 10

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:23 AM

Favored, Imperfect General Manager = Grossly Overrated.

Therefore, they should fire Mike Gillis and Ken Holland.

I choose to fire the OP instead.
  • 0

#54 y0shi

y0shi

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: 01-May 09

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:26 AM

Today is the one year anniversary of Scott Gomez' last goal.

http://www.nhl.com/i...s.htm?id=432312

http://didgomezscore.com/

http://www.celebrations-gomez.com/en/

So what were you saying about Ballard? :P
  • 2

CDCGML Posted Image - Tampa Bay Lightning


#55 TheCammer

TheCammer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,634 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 08

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:31 AM

I think someone was at the front of the line when they handed out the stupid pills.

We have resigned players at below market value, re-stocked a horrifically depleted farm system and become one of the league's elite teams. The team culture has changed. We expect to win rather than hope to compete. All of this has occurred under Gillis and Vigneault's watch, the development of Kesler, Burrows, the Sedins' rise to Super stardom. What more do you want?

Has every move worked out? No, but we continue to compete at the top level. Your argument seems to be mostly focused on Willie Mitchell. I liked Mitchell as well but he was grossly overrated by much of this fan base.
  • 2
Posted Image

#56 mort55

mort55

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 07

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:34 AM

The biggest change that has happened under the Gillis regime is going to be the success of players in our system. Gillis has been able to assemble a team that is solid from top to bottom. This means that there are no free-be line spots and determination to make this team and the drive to want to play every night is creating better players. Look at Cody Hodgson, this guy is going to be a star but I think it's because he didn't get it handed to him. If the team was lacking skill Cody probably would have come a long been great at times but sort of shied off at times when he realized he was a lock to play on the team (not that he's that kind of guy, just that's a natural thing to happen). I think we are going to see a lot of our prospects follow the same route Cody has, as long as this team stays solid.
  • 1

#57 Tony Romo

Tony Romo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,861 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:39 AM

You do better...
  • 1
Posted Image Posted Image


Thanks to Raoul Duke for the Russell Wilson sig.

#58 GodzillaDeuce

GodzillaDeuce

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 08

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:41 AM

Doggin' Gillis?!? Yer' nuts, bro

Edited by GodzillaDeuce, 05 February 2012 - 11:45 AM.

  • 0

well I'm sorry that gd is soo perfect


#59 Tvinz

Tvinz

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 11

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:41 AM

Luo's cap hit isnt bad at all, and as for the contract length.. who cares? Its front loaded, and in the last years only pays 1mil.. When that happens, Its not like they're forced to keep him in the line-up.. and do you really think this organization can't afford to pay 1mil/year for 3-4years in retirement? crap, We have a 2mil contract sitting in the AHL. For that matter, in the last years of his contract, when Luo's in his Tim Thomas aged years, lots of teams that cant make their Cap are going to drool over a prize like Luongo. That only costs 1mil / year.

Also, Did you not understand WHY they made the contract so long? It let Nucks keep a goalie like Luongo, without destroying their cap.

Tell you this much, Rather Luo then Khabibulin.. and guess who gets paid more?

That said, You should clearly apply for his job,. because obviously you're more experienced and could better.
  • 1
Posted Image

#60 DreamHerO

DreamHerO

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,800 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 10

Posted 05 February 2012 - 11:43 AM

Sundin made Kesler and the Sedins what they are today.
  • 1
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.