DeNiro Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 It's interesting that Gillis's position as GM was sold to the Aquilini's based on the promise of "bold moves", yet in his time here, he hasn't really made any bold moves. Unless you count the Sundin contract as bold, but that's been debated enough. My question is, are you okay with the fact that Gillis is likely never going to make any wild moves that make you go "wow"? You could argue that Detroit's GM has never really made many bold moves, and they're the most sucessful team in the NHL in the last 20 years. But there is more evidence that points to bold moves leading to teams winning cups. Just look at thr last 6 teams that have won: LA - traded for Richards, Carter, hired Darryl Sutter Boston - traded Kessel for what ended up being Seguin, traded for Horton and Seidenberg Chicago - Traded for Campbell, Signed Hossa long term Pittsburgh - Firing Therrien and replacing him with Bylsma, trading Whitney for Kunitz, and in the previous season acquiring Gill and Hossa which helped them big time in their first run. Detroit - Signing Brian Rafalski to 6 year, 36 million dollar contract, signing Hossa helped in their 2nd run Anaheim - Traded for Neidermeyer and Pronger, fired Babcock and hired Carlyle, signed a bunch of great role players. In your opinion, is Gillis being to patient and not going for it enough now? Or are you happy with the patient approach that will allow us to keep being competitive in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kassassin Train Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 He did trade one of our most prized Prospects that everyone was raving about at the time he was drafted for what many on these boards consider a plug. Signed Luongo to a 12 year contract...(most likely will be traded for a decent return at the least) Sundin offer like you mentioned... Signed a bunch of role players, but I believe that's up to AV to make that work and we all know how he has a pet chihuahua in Raymond who is somehow a top 6 forward... Sign and Trade was pretty bold as it might deter some free agents from signing here in Sturm? That's pretty bold no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cs2016 Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 And what about the Ballard trade? We lost Quinton Howden for a player that hasn't exactly worked here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanKeslord17 Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 The moves he has made are pretty much obvious ones that tubrned out bad. Like, everybody would have traded Sammy and Sturm for Booth, but that didn't work so well, maybe next year it will. He re-signs guys that should be back next year. Hopefully he actually makes good moves this summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 The Hodgson trade made a lot of people say 'wow.' The Booth trade at the time made a lot of people say 'wow.' The Sundin offer was definitely a 'wow.' Hamhuis coming here instead of Philly and Pittsburgh might qualify as a 'wow.' Short answer is yes, by the looks of it. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 He did trade one of our most prized Prospects that everyone was raving about at the time he was drafted for what many on these boards consider a plug. That's pretty bold no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zigmund.Palffy Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 He did trade one of our most prized Prospects that everyone was raving about at the time he was drafted for what many on these boards consider a plug. Signed Luongo to a 12 year contract...(most likely will be traded for a decent return at the least) Sundin offer like you mentioned... That's pretty bold no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I wouldn't call the Hodgson move bold at the time. I know people will though. It was more stupid than anything. Could they honestly not work out a solution until seasons end and then he and the Canucks could part ways? Here, you've got a contender and neither side could bite the bullet for another two months? Taking your third line center on pace for 40 points on a Cup contender and replacing him with an AHL player isn't bold -- that's dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 The Sundin signing was very bold. I think some of his other trades would be considered bold if he didn't completely fleece the other team. For instance, he was bold in acquiring Christian Ehrhoff but he only had to give Daniel Rahimi and Patrick White so the trade itself wasn't really bold or gutsy. The Booth acquisition would generally be considered a bold move as Booth is a 31 goal scorer and a power forward but again, he only had to give up Samuelsson and Sturm to get him so you wouldn't treat it as a "bold move" per se. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kassassin Train Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 That was out of neccesity though. Hodgson and his camp wanted out. If he was happy here, he wouldn't have been traded. And as far as Kassian being considered a plug, people who say that know nothing about him. I wouldn't consider a rookie for rookie trade really that bold. I'm talking about landing the big name free agent at all costs, or packaging half of the farm for that legit gamebreaker. That type of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 I'm not talking about just any signing, trade, or re-signing, I'm talking about the BIG move. The one that says that we're going for it all this year no matter what? Every move he's made so far has been pretty safe. Think on the same lines as trading for Pronger, Richards, Horton, or signing Hossa. He hasn't made a move on that level yet. The blockbuster type deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Yeah, im still waiting for him to make an acquisition that really puts his stamp on the team. Dan Hamhuis was gonna sign here no matter who the GM was, the Sundin offer was a bold move but it was also stupid had Sundin accepted the 2 years. Trading our 1st and Grabner at the Draft for Ballard whose been a complete bust count as a bold move but all his 'bold' moves so far hasnt done us anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Påhlsson Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Ballard and Hodgson trades were definitely bold. I think once most of the Burke/Nonis core is gone then we'll see Mike Gillis' team emerge. Gillis needs to be careful aswell because if one of his bold moves knocks the Canucks out of the top 8 then we have a problem. So I think he has been bold but not EA NHL bold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradinToSmyl Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 And what about the Ballard trade? We lost Quinton Howden for a player that hasn't exactly worked here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Påhlsson Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I'm not talking about just any signing, trade, or re-signing, I'm talking about the BIG move. The one that says that we're going for it all this year no matter what? Every move he's made so far has been pretty safe. Think on the same lines as trading for Pronger, Richards, Horton, or signing Hossa. He hasn't made a move on that level yet. The blockbuster type deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kassassin Train Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I wouldn't call the Hodgson move bold at the time. I know people will though. It was more stupid than anything. Could they honestly not work out a solution until seasons end and then he and the Canucks could part ways? Here, you've got a contender and neither side could bite the bullet for another two months? Taking your third line center on pace for 40 points on a Cup contender and replacing him with an AHL player isn't bold -- that's dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradinToSmyl Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Yeah, im still waiting for him to make an acquisition that really puts his stamp on the team. Dan Hamhuis was gonna sign here no matter who the GM was, the Sundin offer was a bold move but it was also stupid had Sundin accepted the 2 years. Trading our 1st and Grabner at the Draft for Ballard whose been a complete bust count as a bold move but all his 'bold' moves so far hasnt done us anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 I do agree with this though. But I'll be patient since the Canucks prospect pool is being rebuilt so the Canucks don't have the assets the Kings, Flyers etc... had to acquire those players. For example to get Richards last season Canucks would have likely had to give up Jensen/Hodgson. Roster Player and 2nd. That's way too many assets for a team that is still stocking up their prospect pool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Påhlsson Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Well that's the type of bold move I'm talking about. Would you rather have Kassian or trade Hodgson, Raymond, and a 2nd for Richards? It shouldn't matter that our prospect pool is shallow right now if we're going all out for the cup. We're likely going to need a few years of tanking in the future anyways to get on the same level as LA and Philly in terms of prospects. Plus if our scouts can keep getting us guys like Jensen, a couple drafts will get us some more good young players anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komodo1970 Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Trading Schneider instead of Luongo would be bold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.