Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

"Bold Moves" - Is Gillis actually capable of making them?


DeNiro

Recommended Posts

The more important question is "Bone Headed Moves?"

The ones that make you say WTF Gillis, you fool.

Ballard trade - just awful, terrible contract, mediocre player, no size, meh skill. Threw away Howden, Grabner is better than Raymond.

Sundin Signing - He dodged a major bullet here, although Sundin wasnt deplorable, he debatebly helped Kesler

develop. But 20m....

Bye bye Sedins, hello Basement of the league.

Re-signing AV - This one can be expanded on endlessly, but in simple terms.....This guy hasnt worked well in

the playoffs, and his favourites game is really a joke, its time for a fresh face, someone with leadership qualities.

Someone who can adjust on the fly, not just sit there and chew gum when things are going south. Yet AV was re-signed. Sigh.

None of this list is from hindsight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Optimistic fans would argue that he doesn't need to make the bold moves, esp. if he trusts his core as is.

As good as it would be to revamp it somewhat and win it all, it's reasonable to stick with the core that went to the Cup FINAL and is the two-time reigning President's Trophy Champions. Of course, he's not afraid to patch up holes as well, but at minimal cost b/c he doesn't have many top quality assets to work with in the first place that would allow for quick fixes without tearing a hole in the team's future. I don't blame him if he doesn't make an "earthshaking" move that's high risk, high reward when he can retain the asset and move it later on, possibly for greater effectiveness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

You mean the guy who made the bold move of trading Federov for Beachamin, signing Niedermeyer to a 4 year 27 million dollar contract, trading some spare parts for Pronger, and firing Babcock and hiring Carlyle?

Seems like that worked out pretty good for him.

Gillis has the opporunity to make moves like that with Weber or Suter. Time will tell if he can make those bold moves or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe this summer could be MG defining moment as Canuck GM. Contrary to what MG said, the window of opportunity for the Canucks to make a legitimate run is slowly closing on the team. It is the old story of dammed if you do it or dammed if you don't do it. Maybe the best move is none but only time will tell if that will be the correct move. Either way I believe this will make or break MG as the Canucks GM. The Vancouver fans are hungry for a championship and will slowly lose patience in the next year or two especially seeing what teams that haven’t won it the cup or never have won it in a while like Chicago, Boston and LA have done in the last few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Traded Hodgson, wouldn't accept no from Sundin, signed Luongo to 12 year 64 million dollar contract and made him captain, offer sheeted David Backes, traded many draft choices including the first rounder in 2010.

I would say that these were all bold moves. Bad moves? Sure. Dumb moves? You bet! But bold moves they were. Yes indeedy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a window open for Van to win now rather than later. You don't need to and don't want to make a bold move just for the sake of one unless it is a clear step to winning the cup. Gillis as for the most part given us some good upgrades without really changing the team and possibly taking a step in the wrong direction. There are a number of issues that this team needs to address that doesn't necessarily require bold moves at this stage. You try to fix something too much and you end up breaking it more.

As for Gilis you can't really judge him until this current window is closed. If the window closes and we don't have a cup then it is really hard to give him the two thumbs since he inherited a lot of the current core players.

Gillis's mandate is clear - win the cup with this team. He knows that and will be judged by that goal. We are in the 9th inning and he is closer. He's got the most difficult role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you're really getting the OP's point. Bold meaning a move that can put them over the top, not tinkering. None of the guys you mentioned could put the nucks over the top.

Booth from the outset was a bet on a guy regaining 30 goal form, yet to be seen. Not to mention now AV's in his head.

Sundin-while helpful in the room, wasn't a guy to make a real difference at his age. Definitely had an impact on the team (Sedins and Kes) but still not a game breaker at his age anymore.

Hamhuis - yes great move and an important piece.

Luongo's contract has become an albatross, he has mismanaged the youth on the team (didn't he state when he came here that he wanted to follow the build from within strategy like Det)...well other than Tanev who has his group drafted and brought into the linup? No one I think...

He hasn't been as great as everyone says, he's let a good ship keep going but missed a window...lets hope he's courageous enough to make a move before that window closes that gets them over the top, or at least doesn't f'up the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Traded Hodgson, wouldn't accept no from Sundin, signed Luongo to 12 year 64 million dollar contract and made him captain, offer sheeted David Backes, traded many draft choices including the first rounder in 2010.

I would say that these were all bold moves. Bad moves? Sure. Dumb moves? You bet! But bold moves they were. Yes indeedy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Unfortunately most of Gillis's biggest moves havnt worked out that well. (Sundin, Bernier, Demitra, Ballard) but on the other hand this team still has Nonis's and Burke's hands all over it becuase he hasnt made many changes. I think now is great time for Gillis to shake up the team, obviously Luongo will me a key move in his legacy here, but another player I think he should consider moving might be Edler considering he has one year left on his deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a window open for Van to win now rather than later. You don't need to and don't want to make a bold move just for the sake of one unless it is a clear step to winning the cup. Gillis as for the most part given us some good upgrades without really changing the team and possibly taking a step in the wrong direction. There are a number of issues that this team needs to address that doesn't necessarily require bold moves at this stage. You try to fix something too much and you end up breaking it more.

As for Gilis you can't really judge him until this current window is closed. If the window closes and we don't have a cup then it is really hard to give him the two thumbs since he inherited a lot of the current core players.

Gillis's mandate is clear - win the cup with this team. He knows that and will be judged by that goal. We are in the 9th inning and he is closer. He's got the most difficult role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree - losing Hamhuis prevented the Canucks from 'going over the top' - he was exactly what the Canucks needed to solidify their blueline - with him they were up 2-0 and poised for a big shutdown of Boston. Without him, the series turned. Bold or not, Hamhuis acquisition put the Canucks over the top - they were the best team in the NHL until the hit on Lucic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MG has made very few bold moves, by the criteria most people classify bold as. However, he hasn't really needed to make any drastic changes; if a team is running away with the conference (last year's Canucks), there's no need to sell the farm for Weber or Parise. Minor changes (Higgins and Lapierre) are needed, at best. If a team is in the running for a second straight President's Trophy off a SCF visit (this year's Canucks), there's no need for a huge shakeup. I mean, sure there might be a few upgrades to be made, but it's not worth it to overpay.

LA acquired Carter at the deadline because their current roster wasn't getting the job done. LA fired Murray and hired Sutter because they weren't getting results. If LA was safely in a playoff position (at the time), I guarantee you Murray would still be coaching them, and I wager the Carter trade would never have happened.

Also, the Canucks don't have anything they're willing to give up, unlike other teams who made big moves. Most people would flip if we traded Schneider for a second pairing (at best) defenceman. Some people don't want to deal any assets except Ballard, Raymond and a 1st, yet they expect MG to pull bold moves out of his butt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...