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

#181 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:11 AM

Ahahaha!! You should have given me a minus - as a tribute to Mario = Floater = Cherry-picker!


Yah ok buddy, you have obviously never watched Mario play. He dominated from the get go. He made all of his teamates better (see Rob Brown) and drug the penguins kicking and screaming from last place in the league (when he was drafted) to back to back Stanley cup winners in the early 90s. At 1.88 ppg over an NHL carrer that was plagued with back injuries and cancer, he won the Art Ross 6 Times, the Conn Smythe Twice, the Hart 3 times and the Calder I guess they give these awards to Overrated floaters Huh?

You have zero hockey creditability after your assinine assesment of one of the greatest players to ever play the sport.
  • 2
Posted Image

#182 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,316 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:27 AM

Yes, I did grow up watching Mario play... if you remember that this thread is about Mike Gillis being over-rated, and keep my comment in context (did you notice the name of the OP? or the fact that he claims Ehrhoff was Gillis' only notable acquisition, kind of ironic as well considering your name is Hamhuis' Beard?) - you might have a sense of humour about it... your first comment was quite funny, this one you seem to be getting your left Bulin in a knot...

Edited by oldnews, 06 February 2012 - 11:38 AM.

  • 0

#183 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:45 AM

Yes, I did grow up watching Mario play... if you remember that this thread is about Mike Gillis being over-rated, and keep my comment in context, you might have a sense of humour about it...your first comment was funny, this one you seem to be getting your left Bulin in a knot...

Your comment has zero context to this thread, what did Mario have to with Gillis in the first place, you brought it up and now you tell me to stay on topic?

Not to mention the OP could have taken his name after Claude Lemieux or maybe he is really into politics and took his name after Pierre Lemieux or maybe he goes to UBC and loves his Economics Professor Thomas Lemieux, you don't know!

Well for the original topic the op is just wrong, how many GMs brought us to one win of the Stanley Cup. Not to mention the OP just focuses on the trades and signings rather than all the other stuff MG has implemented from scouting to player health regimes. I think MG has the respect and appreciation of the players and coaching staff. My only knock against GM MG would be that since he was an amazing player agent before he became GM, I think some other GMs really still hold a grudge over that and therefore are maybe more hesitant to trade with him.

Edited by Hamhuis' Beard, 06 February 2012 - 11:47 AM.

  • 3
Posted Image

#184 MikeyBoy44

MikeyBoy44

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,079 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 09

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:45 AM

You gotta give a little to get a little
Not every contract is going to be a steal


/thread
I'll bet even holland has contracts he wished he never did. Perfection is impossible.
  • 0
Posted Image

#185 VanCityScout

VanCityScout

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,684 posts
  • Joined: 06-March 08

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:49 AM

interesting
  • 0

#186 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,864 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:55 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.




regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#187 tocnhockey

tocnhockey

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,727 posts
  • Joined: 08-May 04

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:56 AM

Mike Gillis grossly overrated??

Mario Lemieux is one of the most overrated players of all time??

I swear a couple of you must drink then come on here and proceed to just humiliate yourself in public.


Posted Image
  • 3

"He'll play, you know he'll play. He'll play on crutches."

 

 linden_mclean1994.jpg

 

Kirk McLean and Trevor Linden -Game 6 1994 SC Finals


#188 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:00 PM

Mike Gillis grossly overrated??

Mario Lemieux is one of the most overrated players of all time??

I swear a couple of you must drink then come on here and proceed to just humiliate yourself in public.


Posted Image


QFT and Awesome Sig!!!
  • 2
Posted Image

#189 bongo4420

bongo4420

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 442 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 04

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:12 PM

OP is spot on. Modern day sports media are just lackeys for the home team so you never hear any real criticism of Gillis but there is lots to go around. Just because he studies their bowel movements it doesn't mean he's some super GM. It's been a revolving door of hacks around the core that he inherited. We would be Columbus if it wasn't for the previous regimes.
  • 0

#190 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,775 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:25 PM

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.

calm down, Schneids is a canuck and he is an RFA this offseason: which means Gillis could match and keep him.

Now the thing i wanted to comment on was Sundin. If anything could be said to be a bad idea luring Sundin here with that offer was maybe the closest to a 'mistake' from your whole list, but hear me out for a moment. He ended up coming for 5million, due to the pro rated contract, and he scored 28 points in half a season, Further, the Godfather of European Players *he was the first none north american to be drafted in the number one spot in 1989* is from Sweden, and his coming here may have played a heavy part in the Twins re-signing with us in the offseason. Perhaps it was a back room deal, we will never know. "We will re-sign if you bring Mats Sundin here and pay him 5million, Mats will then help us fund the ice complex in Ornskoldsvik, nudge nudge wink wink" I am just supposing, and have no source, but the thing is, we don't know how big an impact Mats had on the back to back trophy winning twins staying in Vancouver.

Also your troll thread about firing Luongo could have gone in any other luongo thread, lol.
  • 1

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#191 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:26 PM

OP is spot on. Modern day sports media are just lackeys for the home team so you never hear any real criticism of Gillis but there is lots to go around. Just because he studies their bowel movements it doesn't mean he's some super GM. It's been a revolving door of hacks around the core that he inherited. We would be Columbus if it wasn't for the previous regimes.

If we still had the previous regime, we would have depth guys like Bulis, Chouinard, Cowen, Isbister, et al instead of guys like Higgins, Lappy, Malhotra and Booth, I'm sorry these character guys Gillis got aren't even in the same Hack league as the Burke and Nonis' depth pylons.

While I do agree that Gillis inherited much of the core, he still had to sign them all to reasonable cap friendly contracts which he did very well.
  • 1
Posted Image

#192 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,316 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:29 PM

Hamhuis'Beard
I think you are protesting a bit much - other than that sarcastic comment, the rest of what I said was actually fairly reasonable.
No - Mario is not the most over-rated player of all time - that was a tongue-in-cheek comment that mirrors the claim that Gillis is "grossly over-rated". Yes, I assumed that Lemieux refers to the most notable Lemieux in hockey history, and given this is a hockey site, it didn't occur to me that the OP may have chosen that name because of a UBC professor - you got me there. I'm going to give you a plus one for that one.

Of course Mario was great, but he did have a little help dragging the Penguins out of last place - a few of the guys who played for the 1991 Penguins (their first Stanley Cup) - Ron Francis, Bryan Trottier, Joe Mullen, Mark Recchi, Kevin Stevens, Jaromir Jagr, Barry Pederson, Larry Murphy, Paul Coffey, Tom Barrasso... Pretty much a championship team with or without Lemieux.
  • 0

#193 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,316 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:32 PM

OP is spot on. Modern day sports media are just lackeys for the home team so you never hear any real criticism of Gillis but there is lots to go around. Just because he studies their bowel movements it doesn't mean he's some super GM. It's been a revolving door of hacks around the core that he inherited. We would be Columbus if it wasn't for the previous regimes.


A revolving door of hacks? If that is the case, the entire NHL is full of hacks...
  • 0

#194 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:45 PM

Everything Gillis does has a point.
Sundin was brought in at that high price to show that Vancouver was a prime destination for free agents.
I'd say it's worked in attracting people: Booth and Ballard are definite upgrades over Chouinard and Carney.


Wasn't Booth traded for Samuelson?
  • 0

#195 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,712 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:47 PM

Hamhuis'Beard
I think you are protesting a bit much - other than that sarcastic comment, the rest of what I said was actually fairly reasonable.
No - Mario is not the most over-rated player of all time - that was a tongue-in-cheek comment that mirrors the claim that Gillis is "grossly over-rated". Yes, I assumed that Lemieux refers to the most notable Lemieux in hockey history, and given this is a hockey site, it didn't occur to me that the OP may have chosen that name because of a UBC professor - you got me there. I'm going to give you a plus one for that one.

Of course Mario was great, but he did have a little help dragging the Penguins out of last place - a few of the guys who played for the 1991 Penguins (their first Stanley Cup) - Ron Francis, Bryan Trottier, Joe Mullen, Mark Recchi, Kevin Stevens, Jaromir Jagr, Barry Pederson, Larry Murphy, Paul Coffey, Tom Barrasso... Pretty much a championship team with or without Lemieux.

One player =/= a championship team! but Lemieux was a pretty great foundation to work with. If the pens never drafted Lemieux would they still have a team? I think the answer is no but that is just my opinion.

As for your Original post I actually agree with everything you said except that one line about Mario.
  • 0
Posted Image

#196 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:47 PM

Hamhuis'Beard
I think you are protesting a bit much - other than that sarcastic comment, the rest of what I said was actually fairly reasonable.
No - Mario is not the most over-rated player of all time - that was a tongue-in-cheek comment that mirrors the claim that Gillis is "grossly over-rated". Yes, I assumed that Lemieux refers to the most notable Lemieux in hockey history, and given this is a hockey site, it didn't occur to me that the OP may have chosen that name because of a UBC professor - you got me there. I'm going to give you a plus one for that one.

Of course Mario was great, but he did have a little help dragging the Penguins out of last place - a few of the guys who played for the 1991 Penguins (their first Stanley Cup) - Ron Francis, Bryan Trottier, Joe Mullen, Mark Recchi, Kevin Stevens, Jaromir Jagr, Barry Pederson, Larry Murphy, Paul Coffey, Tom Barrasso... Pretty much a championship team with or without Lemieux.


Name one player who's one a cup entirely by themselvs... And if it weren't for Lemieux the Penguins would have moves out of Pittsburgh...
  • 0

#197 MacdeesSnipinGs

MacdeesSnipinGs

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 272 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 12:57 PM

General manager's dont have a crystal ball to see how players turn out, they make calculated risks and gamble's that try to maximizie performance, while minimizing potential long term detriment to the team.

I think you should take a look around the league, and say Gillis is doing a bad job compared to other GM's
yes he has made some questionable signingings but it is easy to say that once the dust settles, how about the sedin's burrows, hansen, salo contracts and tell me he is doing a bad job!
  • 0

#198 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,968 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 06 February 2012 - 01:20 PM

Overrated? No.

MG has donea terrific job of creating a culture and climate that players want to play in and that increases the chances of the Nucks being in the top performers of the league for many years to come.

He sin't likely to make a block-buster move becasue 1) it is extremely difficult to do with so many buyers and so few sellers right now and 2) he feels the current group is pretty close to where he wants the team to be.

My concern with where he has the Nucks is that the team is s near the cap with its current roster and has so little room to move without giving up significant assets. That we are spending to the cap limit (almost) and still have some "holes" in the depth/balance of the team is a concern to me.

To be facing Nashville with $42.M in aquisition room and Detroit with $13m heading to the deadline is scary. These teams are able to pick up some serious talent without having to let go of much if any of their current roster. How will the Nucks stack up if these teams add significant talent to their D or top 6?!
  • 0

#199 shawn antoski

shawn antoski

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 753 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 01:33 PM

GILLIS IS A GOD
even god makes mistakes ...
you were born
  • 0

#200 canucklesmith

canucklesmith

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 01:33 PM

so many cry babys on this thread. Get over it. Gillis has had a lot to work with and has done an ok job. Hes definitely made some mistakes. who cares?
  • 0

#201 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,877 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 06 February 2012 - 01:35 PM

I don't agree with the OP's post. I think he needs to get his facts straight before he blabbers on like that.
  • 0
Posted Image


#202 one-x

one-x

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,258 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 02:40 PM

hmmm, has op forgotten what we traded for ehrhoff? and the hammy contract? I want to say kesler but I'm not sure if that was him or nonis. Also the cap hit of both the sedins is roughly the same as ovi.
  • 0

                                 tumblr_m8tr8mGRkW1rdrug2o1_400.jpg    tumblr_ncj1ajVA7j1tb6rtvo2_250.gif

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


#203 Ryan Strome

Ryan Strome

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,312 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 06 February 2012 - 02:45 PM

GILLIS IS A GOD
even god makes mistakes ...
you were born


This post is about as stupid as the op.Infact if I were him I would report this post. Some of you never learn.
  • 4



#204 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,234 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 03:20 PM

OP is spot on. Modern day sports media are just lackeys for the home team so you never hear any real criticism of Gillis but there is lots to go around. Just because he studies their bowel movements it doesn't mean he's some super GM. It's been a revolving door of hacks around the core that he inherited. We would be Columbus if it wasn't for the previous regimes.

tell me mate have you achieved anything worth talking about in your life .your statement about the media is ludicrous , i used to think the aussie media and public were the classic , we love you when you win but when you lose you will be crucified type of fan , but you guys in vancouver have taken that to another level .
  • 0

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#205 George_Costanza

George_Costanza

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 04

Posted 06 February 2012 - 03:39 PM

If the negative feature still existed something tells me you would certainly not have a positive rating...heck you may even challenge the Burrows thread by clutch.
  • 0
Posted Image

#206 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,126 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 06 February 2012 - 09:26 PM

Mario was one of the best to ever play the game.

He recorded the second best PPG in NHL history,THE BEST GPG in NHL history -with a bad back,no exercise regime,a fight with cancer and no McSorley covering his hooped back.No Kurri,no Coffey,no Messier.
This guy played hockey like nobody I have ever seen before or since.
Lemieux was pure brilliance and I wish I could go back in time and watch him play all over again.

Bobby Orr called him "the most talented player I've ever seen."

In 1992-93, Lemieux averaged a career best 2.67 points per game.
Highest goals-per-game average including playoffs, career (among players with 200-or-more goals):
Mario Lemieux, .749
Most goals, one home playoff game-5
Most goals, one period-4
Most shorthanded goals, one season: Mario Lemieux, 13, 1988–89

When we talk hockey gods Mario is in that category.A lawyer/player agent/newbie GM with one cup final is not.

Edited by nuck nit, 07 February 2012 - 04:11 AM.

  • 0

#207 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,257 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:38 PM

are you high? Luongo is an amazing goalie, and has many good years to come, he is only payed 5 million which is not that bad for a gold medalist. Sundin, yes he was overpaid, but he did ok in the playoffs and showed good leadership. Booth, he is a great player who is doing better now once he settled in with the team. Pavol Demitra....... how dare you. And yes, ballard is overpaid for a 3rd defenseman, but he is starting to do better


Are you high? Luongo makes 6.7 million, but it's a cap hit of only 5.3 million.


September 2, the Canucks announced that they had signed Luongo to a 12-year contract extension worth $64 million for a $5.33 million annual salary cap hit.[97] The front-loaded deal, which will expire by the time Luongo is 43 and includes a no-trade clause, sees him make $10 million in 2010–11, then approximately $6.7 million annually through to 2017–18, $3.3 million and $1.6 million the subsequent two seasons, before tailing off to $1 million for the final two years.[97] The contract contains two additional clauses to circumvent the no-trade clause that allow Luongo to facilitate a trade after the fifth year and for the Canucks to also facilitate a trade after the seventh year.[98]


  • 0

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#208 Lemieux

Lemieux

    Comets Star

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

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:52 PM

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.

Gillis has come in and done what needed to be done. He saw the issue with our blue line always being depleted because of injury so he went out and made sure it wouldnt be an issue. 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? Are you trying to say you did?

Gillis managed to bring in Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, Hamhuis, Malhotra, Lapierre, Booth and Ballard.
When the team needed defence he went and got the best free agents available. When they needed another center he got Malhotra (its no coincidence Kesler emergence as a star happened to come when the defensive specialist arrived). This city was clamoring for a big body to play next to Kesler, he went and got Booth for some spare parts.
He also resigned Kesler, Burrows (4 year, 8 million.contract), negotiated the deal with the Sedins (a steal a 6 mil per) and got Schnieder signed to his current contract.

This team couldnt cut it before Gillis came in.The core might have already been here but he kept it intact and at a very managable Cap hit. He also brought in the depth, and that is what got us to the finals.

GM's are not psychics. They make mistakes, all of them. But Gillis has made far more good moves than bad ones, and at least he has made moves to address the issues that this team has had. So yes he inherited some great talent, but what exactly did Nonis manage to do with it?


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.
  • 2
This signature is not blank.

#209 leftwinglockdown

leftwinglockdown

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 07

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:48 AM

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.


Your assessment that our core players were boys before Gillis got here and men now as the sole reason for why they have made such big strides is a joke. You cannot ignore the fact that they developed under Gillis and not Nonis. Sedins did not look like they were ever going to be more than 80pt players and Kesler did not look like he was going to be anything more than a 3rd line checking center. Their developments into star players in this league occurred under Gillis and the culture of winning he has instilled in the locker room.

Also, the fact that you value Bernier as a first rounder in your argument shows how ridiculous a claim you are making. While Bernier was a first rounder, he did not reach his potential when he was with the Sharks or the Canucks and he still has not reached his potential after being traded. Grabner couldn't even make this team out of training camp and had to be traded and then waived to finally get going. While Grabner did have a good first year with the Islanders, he has been completely invisible this year and is totally off his career high in goals that he achieved last year.

Edited by highvision, 07 February 2012 - 04:49 AM.

  • 0

#210 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,126 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 07 February 2012 - 05:28 AM

"You cannot ignore the fact that they developed under Gillis and not Nonis.

Sedins did not look like they were ever going to be more than 80pt players and Kesler did not look like he was going to be anything more than a 3rd line checking center.

Their developments into star players in this league occurred under Gillis....."highvision

The twins have been with the Canucks since 1999.

Hank recorded four consecutive 75-82 point years before Gillis arrived.

The Flyers offered Kes a contract in 2006.I guess Philadelphia should give Gillis the credit for developing Kes to that point in time,except Gillis was still years away from GM Place/Rogers Arena.After all,they knew Kes would never be more than a third liner without Gillis guiding him through puberty into a man.

Hank,Dan and Kes all became men in the last few years.

The Canucks organisation were developing Kes and the twins years before Gillis and the Acquilini's had their first conversation.

In the twins case,it was near a decade.Give us some more Gillis revisionism

Edited by nuck nit, 07 February 2012 - 05:32 AM.

  • 0




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.