Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 8 votes

What Has Gillis Really Done For This Franchise?


  • Please log in to reply
234 replies to this topic

#211 Brick Tamland

Brick Tamland

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,604 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 21 January 2013 - 05:24 PM

Bottom line is that MG hurt us at this past trade deadline...a rebuild move when we were in contention..he blew it and would be nice of him to fess up...not pass the buck..we coulda traded Hodgson in the off season. At the time I thought it smacked of the Neely fiasco and I still do.


wow, comparing Hodgson to Neely, we have officially boarded the mothership!
  • 2
I Love Lamp...

#212 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,827 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 21 January 2013 - 05:53 PM

I've been thinking about this lately and why people praise Gillis so much, but he hasn't really done much... the core of our team was handed to him. He's made more bad/odd decisions then good.
  • 0

m97o1w.jpg

Credit to Parise11


#213 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,934 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 07:37 PM

I like Gillis' one year contract.
Apparently,somebody is thinking.
  • 0

#214 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,216 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 21 January 2013 - 07:52 PM

Turned a mediocre team into an elite team

I like this game.. What has Sather done for the rangers?
  • 0

#215 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,889 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:04 PM

Turned a mediocre team into an elite team

I like this game.. What has Sather done for the rangers?


What has Feaster done for the Flames?
  • 0

#216 The Kassassin Train

The Kassassin Train

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,108 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 05

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:09 PM

0-1-1 and CDC panics, when we win 3 in a row everyone will realize this was just a memory.

As for Kassian the kid can do no right. SO many of you are still on Hodgson's jock strap that it reeks.

He played exactly how he needed to last night and trying to get the crowd going and that was called "dumb".

Edited by The Kassassin Train, 21 January 2013 - 08:10 PM.

  • 1

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....

#217 VanNuck

VanNuck

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,180 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:09 PM

Gillis getting the executive of the year last season was the biggest joke I have ever seen.

Lets recap Gillis's major contributions so far.

Good

-Trading for Ehrhoff.
-Signing of Hamhuis.
-Trading for Higgins and Lapierre
-Re-Signing of Burrows at a discount.
-Signing of Tanev

Negative

-Re-Signing of Luongo to longterm contract after his first playoff meltdown against Chicago
-Trading Of Michael Grabner (and hence commitment to Mason Raymond) and a first round Pick(Howden) for Ballard and his bad contract
-Trading for David Booth and his bad contract
-Trading Cody Hodgson/Sulzer for Zack Kassian/Grags.
-Signing of Marco Sturm
-Not attempting to re-sign Willie Mitchell who you almost certainly would have re-signed here at a discount if the Canucks showed any interest in him.
-not one of his draft picks is playing in the NHL besides Cody Hodgson.
-signing of Mats Sundin
-trading a 2nd round pick for Steve Bernier
-trading a 3rd round pick for Andrew Alberts

Now Just the Facts

Lets see the part of this years Final Team Gillis inherited

Forwards.

D,Sedin, H.Sedin, R.Kesler,A.Burrows, M.Raymond,J.Hansen.

Dmen

Bieksa, Edler,Salo

Goalies

Luongo and Schneider

We have our top 6 regular season scorers on this list (Sedins,Kesler,Burrows,Edler and Bieksa) as well as our two very good goalies.

These players accounted for 148 of our 249 Goals this season and 7 of our 8 Playoff Goals.



Lets see the part of this years team Gillis actually created

Forwards

Booth,Pahlsson,Lapierre,Higgins,Malholtra,Weise,Kassian,Ebbett,Volpatti and Bitz

Dmen

Gragnani,Rome,Alberts,Ballard,Hamhuis and Tanev.

Goalies

None

These players combined for a total of 1 Goal in the playoffs and 76 of our 249 Goals in the Regular Season.


Well you've certainly built up a good point my friend. But I would go further and talk about the relationships between the franchise, the players, and the fans and how it has gone downhill. I would also make mention of how this team is third most hated, not because of the wins, but because the team is showing a lack of character despite Gillis' promise to build character. (I've gone into greater detail in "MG should be on thin ice..." but long story short, this franchise needs change. I vote to have Gillis replaced with Linden. Until then, I will be cheering for someone else.
  • 0

#218 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,889 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:12 PM

What has Burke done for the Leafs? Oops..forgot.
  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#219 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,365 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:13 PM

0-1-1 and CDC panics, when we win 3 in a row.


Same show every year with this fan base. The Canuck fan base doesn't have much of a thinking process or much common sense. They simply see something negative and react negatively. Instead fans should shut up, not immediately cry that the season is over, realize this team goes through this process every single year and every single year they end up FINE. And by fine I mean in the top ten of the overall standings. This team is simply too good to miss the playoffs.
  • 0
Posted Image

#220 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,827 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:19 PM

Same show every year with this fan base. The Canuck fan base doesn't have much of a thinking process or much common sense. They simply see something negative and react negatively. Instead fans should shut up, not immediately cry that the season is over, realize this team goes through this process every single year and every single year they end up FINE. And by fine I mean in the top ten of the overall standings. This team is simply too good to miss the playoffs.


Too good to miss the playoffs but not good enough to win a cup.
  • 0

m97o1w.jpg

Credit to Parise11


#221 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,350 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:30 PM

Let's just update this post a little.

The Canucks big offesason move was the Garrison signing who really isn't must better than Salo. Even though secondary scoring was a glaring problem at the end of last season and Gillis knew Kesler would be out a while he did nothing to address that. Bringing in absolutely no free agent forwards yet.

He failed to execute any goalie trade and continues to just create an ongoing distraction there. Safe to say he had a poor offseason and the Canucks are in trouble now.

Will he be able to pull off a big trade to turn this team around? My money is on NO!


:picard: :picard: :picard: :picard:

gradin123 = King of ES before King of ES

I can tell you enjoy throwing circumstances out the window when you look bad on situations in hindsight. You completely forget about what our needs were, what our situation was, what our roster was like, and it is the biggest fail in your post.

First off, your wrong on most of your OP. The Hodgson trade is looking better every passing day, and he wanted out anyways, the Booth trade was a win, the Ballard/Grabner deal made sense at the time and we would have lost Grabner for nothing anyways, Signing Sundin was a solid move, and then your overreacting to little moves that aren't all that bad.

Now you come back and are on your high horse again, we pick up the 2nd best D-man avaliable, a HUGE addition. That's a
huge + for MG. Also re-signs Edler at a fanatastic rate and term for us, another + for MG.

Now you get mad about him not picking up a forward, but I ask you.. Who exactly was there to pick up? Peter Mueller? MG tried tooth and nail to get one (Doan) and almost did, after him there was nothing avaliable, there is a reason it was an extremely weak free agent pool.

Now your saying he is holding off, what you would rather give away an all-star calibre play for nothing?? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? I usually am fine that people have these opinion but man you people that think giving Luongo away for nothing would have been the better move are totally out to lunch.

So lets say we traded Luongo for Bozak and a 2nd before the lockout, how bad would that look now?

What you people fail to understand is, that If we had done that and given an all-star away for next to nothing Gillis would be criticized far and away more than he is right now. And I guarentee people like you and other's would be question MG and it would just be another thing added to your stupid list.

End of rant/reply
  • 1

zackass.png


#222 Wolfey

Wolfey

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 365 posts
  • Joined: 15-September 09

Posted 21 January 2013 - 08:48 PM

He didn't need any top line forwards or Dmen. Booth hasn't settled yet. Ballard was one of the better players in the playoffs. I could keep going but. He didn't trade all the players that you like. Not making a trade is just a big as making one.
  • 1
Posted Image

#223 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:01 PM

Gillis getting the executive of the year last season was the biggest joke I have ever seen.

Lets recap Gillis's major contributions so far.

Good

-Trading for Ehrhoff.
-Signing of Hamhuis.
-Trading for Higgins and Lapierre
-Re-Signing of Burrows at a discount.
-Signing of Tanev


Trading for Ehrhoff wasn't bad. It's too bad he got a big head and thought he was better than he actually is. Were you aware that in his two years here he barely out-pointed Edler? He had over 30 more games played in that time, and more opportunity in offensive situations, and he barely got a few points ahead of Edler.

Signing Hamhuis isn't a "good" depending on who you talk to around here. King would suggest that since Hamhuis wanted to come here regardless, that this shouldn't count as something in Gillis' favor. I would disagree in that Gillis helped to create the culture of this team which was a very significant factor in Hamhuis signing here. That "team culture" is also what brought Garrison here, and why a lot of the guys who you aren't giving Gillis any credit for have chosen to re-sign here. Also of note is that he signed these guys to hometown discount contracts that are very friendly to the team's cap.

Definitely good on Higgins and Lapierre.

Re-signing Burrows at a discount, re-signing Bieksa at a discount, re-signing Edler at a huge discount, re-signing the Sedins at a huge discount, and re-signing Lapierre, Higgns and Hansen to really great contracts because they wanted to play here on a Mike Gillis team, not a Dave Nonis team or a Brian Burke team.

Under the Gillis term the Canucks have had very high finishes which has made drafting good prospects somewhat difficult. You note that he is responsible for Tanev, but you should also include Lack (even if he hasn't seen any NHL time as yet).


Negative

-Re-Signing of Luongo to longterm contract after his first playoff meltdown against Chicago
-Trading Of Michael Grabner (and hence commitment to Mason Raymond) and a first round Pick(Howden) for Ballard and his bad contract
-Trading for David Booth and his bad contract
-Trading Cody Hodgson/Sulzer for Zack Kassian/Grags.
-Signing of Marco Sturm
-Not attempting to re-sign Willie Mitchell who you almost certainly would have re-signed here at a discount if the Canucks showed any interest in him.
-not one of his draft picks is playing in the NHL besides Cody Hodgson.
-signing of Mats Sundin
-trading a 2nd round pick for Steve Bernier
-trading a 3rd round pick for Andrew Alberts


The Luongo contract kept a great goalie in this town at a very friendly cap hit. Fell free to disagree, but at that time it was a great deal and it is still a great deal.

Grabner was under-performing and was unlikely to make the team. As he was waiver eligible he would either have to be kept here in the pressbox or likely lost when the team tried to send him to the AHL. You really believe that anyone would have kept Grabner and moved Raymond? This is a clear case of 20/20 hindsight, and even with Grabner's one good season, I'd still take Raymond. I do regret the loss of the 1st round pick, but that was the price for a top-4 d-man at that time.

Ballard was geared up to be in the Canucks' top-4 and the team was in need of blueliners. Lots of 20/20 hindsight from a lot of people when this is discussed. Hamhuis was not yet signed, and even if he said he wanted to come here, that was no guarantee that he would sign here (eg. Schultz). Bieksa was on shaky ground from injuries and less than stellar play, and could well have been moved. Salo was a solid d-man but was breakable as always. Mitchell had played barely half a season and was possibly going to retire.

Has Ballard played as well as hoped? Heck no. He has had injury issues and also has, until recently, had a revolving door of partners. I am hoping for good things from him this year, if only because it will improve the return the team gets for him when he is likely traded.

Booth is a good player and his contract isn't that bad. I would like to have seen more result for the money, and I think we will see it this year. Gillis traded two contracts and an equal amount of cap hit, so Booth was pretty much a saw off in that regard. He has had injury issues which has reduced his effectiveness.

I regret losing Sulzer. I think he's a solid d-man, but not particulary flashy or gifted with huge offensive talent. he would have been a great 7th or 8th d-man here. Gragnani was acquired for a look-see. The Canucks wanted to know if they could do anything with his offensive game while improving his defensive game. It was an experiment that didn't work out. It cost the team Sulzer, who was likely going to go UFA, so where's the loss?

I was good then with the Kassian trade. I am good now with the Kassian trade. I will likely continue to be good with the Kassian trade, unless he does something to make it a bad deal.

I agree about Sturm. He was good, once upon a time. I was surprised that he was signed, and signed at the cap hit he got.

Mitchell was offered a contract, and he refused it. He was offered a one year deal for as much as $2 million. This was a sensible thing for Gillis to do rather than try to sign Mitchell to a multi-year deal at considerably more. Mitchell chose to go for more money and term with LA, who were far more in need of Mitchell than were the Canucks (Hamhuis, Bieksa, Salo, Edler, Ehrhoff, Ballard, Tanev). Good for Mitchell winning a Cup with them.

And since Hodgson was the highest 1st round pick, and also the first 1st round pick or Gillis, what would you expect? I might not have drafted Schroeder (he was on the BPA list), but there hasn't been a huge amount of success from the guys who drafted after him. Jensen wasn't needed to be at the NHL level at this point, although with the injury issues on the team it would have been nice to have him around, in 20/20 hindsight of course.

Sundin was a great signing and he did more in his half season here to create a winning atmosphere than Messier did in three seasons. The contract was "a bit" high, and I'm not sure that I would have offered it to Sundin, but then he may well not have agreed to come here.

It was a 2nd AND a 3rd for Bernier. Not the best deal made by Gillis by a long shot. Once again, 202/20 hindsight.

Alberts for a 3rd was a great pick-up for a depth d-man.


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

#224 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:42 PM

Now Just the Facts

Lets see the part of this years Final Team Gillis inherited

Forwards.

D,Sedin, H.Sedin, R.Kesler,A.Burrows, M.Raymond,J.Hansen.

Dmen

Bieksa, Edler,Salo

Goalies

Luongo and Schneider



Let's see what Gillis managed to re-sign here, each at a good (to great) cap hit:

D,Sedin, H.Sedin, A.Burrows, C. Higgins, J.Hansen, M. Lapierre, Bieksa, Edler, (Salo), Luongo and Schneider.

Let's also look at UFA's who signed here at a really great cap hit:

Garrison, Hamhuis


Lets see the part of this years team Gillis actually created

Forwards

Booth,Pahlsson,Lapierre,Higgins,Malholtra,Weise,Kassian,Ebbett,Volpatti and Bitz

Dmen

Gragnani,Rome,Alberts,Ballard,Hamhuis and Tanev.

Goalies

None

These players combined for a total of 1 Goal in the playoffs and 76 of our 249 Goals in the Regular Season.


So you are targeting guys who have had a number of injuries (Booth, Ballard, Malhotra, Bitz, Volpatti), are defensive specialists (Malhotra, Pahlsson, Hamhuis, Tanev), are rookies (Kassian, Tanev, Weise, Volpatti), or are here mostly to provide depth to support the starters (Pahlsson, Lapierre, Higgins, Malhotra, Weise, Kassian, Ebbett, Volpatti, Bitz, Gragnani, Rome, Alberts).

And why do you leave Garrison off of the list?

Your point is that Gillis hasn't done anything to improve the team, right? The counters to that are the previously mentioned re-signing of those guys who you credit to other GM's, the creation of a team culture that makes them want to re-sign here, at a great cap hit, and encourages other UFA's to sign here, also at a great cap hit. For those who would insert Schultz at this point, I'm afraid to tell you that Justin doesn't love you and he went to Edmonton because it was better for him. Deal with the rejection.

The other counter I would put to you is, what would you have done to make the team "better"? What UFA's would you sign, and at what cap hit? Let's add them in and see who gets bumped off the list.

What trades would you have made (or wouldn't have made), and which Canuck assets would you have moved? Do you think you're going to get something really good without moving somebody off of the list of inherited players? You wouldn't have traded for Ballard? Okay, Ballard isn't here. Your defense is: Alberts, Bieksa (who had played 55 games in the previous year), Edler, Ehrhoff, Rome, Salo (68 games in the previous season). Hamhuis and Mitchell were UFA's, GO.


regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#225 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:47 PM

Forgot another negative: Pavel Demitra. (RIP).


20g 33a in 69 games in his first season here. The only negative was injury issues which held him out of a lot of games.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#226 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:50 PM

Samuelsson actually has more points than kesler and booth combined so far in the playoffs.

He was good for us. Experienced and played with some fire.


Samuelsson played with some fire when the other team didn't play with any fire. He had one good playoff series, and disappeared in any other series where the going got physical.

regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#227 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:51 PM

"not" fixed.


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

#228 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:53 PM

Grabner was so fun to watch too. Think of what they could have got for Grabs had they waited until he scored 30 and then traded him.


Yeah, he'd skate down the ice, and get knocked off the puck, and since he was so far out of position the other team would skate back down the ice on a 3 on 2 and score. Good times.

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

#229 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:03 PM

Honestly, that sounds more like a description befitting MayRay.

Garbs>MayRay, Grabner +1st, that trade will never look good.

Cheers

Edited by scottiecanuck, 21 January 2013 - 10:04 PM.

  • 0

#230 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,812 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:41 PM

Honestly, that sounds more like a description befitting MayRay.

Garbs>MayRay, Grabner +1st, that trade will never look good.

Cheers


And yet, it was also so very true of Grabner.

I was not a fan of the Ballard trade. Not because of a 20/20 hindsight analysis of the trade. Not because I don't like Ballard. Not because I think the team didn't need Gillis to make a decision on acquiring another d-man.

I didn't like that he had to move a 1st round pick to get Ballard, but that was the price for top-4 d-men at that time. Throwing in Grabner and Bernier was a cap dump (Bernier) and a throw in that probably saved the Canucks having to add another pick or prospect. If they would have settled for a 2nd and a 3rd (or two 2nd rounders) and Bernier and Grabner I'd have been much happier.

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

#231 TotesMagotes

TotesMagotes

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,276 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 07

Posted 21 January 2013 - 10:44 PM

Hahaha, a lot of those negatives are positives. You're just an obvious Mike Gillis hater.
  • 1
Posted Image

#232 CodyHodgson's #1fan

CodyHodgson's #1fan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 553 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 11

Posted 25 January 2013 - 06:41 AM

He got us 2 President's Trophies, what else?


"he" got us to presidents trophies, did he really?
like the OP says, he had a lot of major key players already in his lineup. he should thank the previous GM'S for doing most of his job for him, as for the canucks future when these guys retire... im seriously worried because then its REALLY gillis' time.

just IMO, i completely agree with the OP.
  • 0
Always will love and support Cody Hodgson, great player, great potential great character, and I don't care about those stupid rumours about the trade. And we lost him, what a dissapointment. Love you COHO, forever a canuck in my heart!

One day Luongo will raise Lord Stanley's cup.
And show all those haters that he is the amazing goalie that he is.
No matter what jersey he wears, I will always be cheering for Luongo.

Forever Believe.

#233 DooBie604

DooBie604

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 09

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:15 AM

It's threads like these that make it so obvious that people hate with unrealistic expectations. So whenever the team wins it's because he was handed the team, even though it was him that re-signed most the players. But if he didn't re-sign them then it's also his fault because he let them walk. So unless he blows up the whole team and gets rid of every good player on the team and signs his own good players and then wins a Stanley Cup, only then is he a good GM? It's basically a no win situation with some of you and your ridiculous expectations.

I don't agree with all his decisions but to sit behind a computer and use hindsight to argue your points is such a douche thing to do.
  • 0

#234 suolucidir

suolucidir

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,221 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 05

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:34 AM

It's the same thing whenever they criticize anything. Team succeeds - credit to past GMs. Team falls short, MG's fault. Team wins, skaters played awesome. Team loses - Luongo's fault.

These days I'm never sure if guys like the OP are trolls or honestly this stupid.

The "Negatives"

-Re-Signing of Luongo to longterm contract after his first playoff meltdown against Chicago - This was a good move and it's still a good contract. Even with the newly added "luongo rule" it's a good contract. You have a 5.3 mil cap hit for goaltending you'd easily pay 6m+ a season for. If he retires a year early you're on the hook for one season at 6m. Well worth it for 8 years at a reduced cap.
-Trading Of Michael Grabner (and hence commitment to Mason Raymond) and a first round Pick(Howden) for Ballard and his bad contract. Grabner wasn't working out in Vancouver. That 1st rounder might be nice to have back. Negative, barely, but not for the loss of Grabs.
-Trading for David Booth and his bad contract Great move. Traded pending UFA and spare parts for a top 6 forward with a top 6 forward contract. Good move.
-Trading Cody Hodgson/Sulzer for Zack Kassian/Grags. Cody wanted out and Gillis acquired something we definitely needed in return. This was written a long time ago so I'll just chalk this point up to impatience. Great move, so far.
-Signing of Marco Sturm Zero risk, flipped him for a top6 forward. Great move.
-Not attempting to re-sign Willie Mitchell who you almost certainly would have re-signed here at a discount if the Canucks showed any interest in him. This one stings. Willie had sat out since lat January and hadn't played an NHL game. Willie wanted term, which MG was (rightfully) reluctant to give a player who had just suffered a serious concussion. I miss Willie, a lot, but at least he has his name on the cup now.
-not one of his draft picks is playing in the NHL besides Cody Hodgson. Hodgson was his first pick... who was supposed to be ahead of him in terms of development? Draft evaluation takes a long time.
-signing of Mats Sundin. Brilliant move. I'm not even going to waste my time explaining this one to any haters.
-trading a 2nd round pick for Steve Bernier. God damnit, Bernier.
  • 0
PSN: CloakOfSkill

Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists somewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.

It bugs me when people pull out the gold medal for an example... Luongo only had to outplay Brodeur.


#235 LimitedEdition

LimitedEdition

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 610 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 06

Posted 25 January 2013 - 10:48 AM

Interesting breakdown. Good job.
  • 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.