ice orca Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 All fine and dandy until we are still ousted by LA in the first round and Hodgson's value takes a dip and he is no longer worth a Kassian trade. MG traded Hodgson when his value is at a peak. If you don't pull the trigger when the player you covet is available you may lose out. I'm glad he traded for Kassian and Hodgson wouldn't of made any difference. Our problem against LA wasn't our third line, it was our top 2 lines. Do you really think Hodgson would of dominated Stoll's line to make up the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 That MG's year has been a dissapointment is an understatement! He made sooo many moves in getting us to game 7! This year all his moves individually were not bad. On face value Booth is good value vs Sammy who's contract was expriring. In real value, signing Samuelsson was one of those under the radar moves which brought both skill and necessary elements. Booth brought necessary elements, but took away more. And ask yourself, when we had Danny, Burrows, Raymond, Higgins (a world class line up of left wingers), why would we trade for another LW in Booth??? The problem was we made no complimentary moves to replace the play making, 220 lb size, shot, puck control skills, veteran savy which we lost for Booth and his athleticism. Lets face it, what we will probably get 3 years from now from Kassian is exactly what we needed now. But we had Pahlsson in Manny already and loosing Hodgson also cost us our guy who could put goals on other guys sticks when Hank was not on the ice. 2knd subtraction with no gain. And where Kass was supposed to be a physical, willing to throw em down, fast and capable of filling in on a top line when match ups dictated, he was not. And we took Bitz out of the line up to make room for him, who we waited all year for, plus Bitz did look ready! Why the fark did we need another left D in Gragnani, another small non physical left D, when we had Ballard, Hamhuis, Edler, and even could have called up current AHL all star PP captain Connautton? Wow, I'm getting depressed realizing how MG completely bought the wrong guys, regardless of what positive value they might have in the future. What happened to the knack for bringing in the right guy, Manny, Torres, Erhoff, Hamhuis... Torres for example is not great, but his 215 lb tank body, that can fly, matched with Manny at 220 lbs created a line that could run over massive front lines for other teams. An out of form Manny, with (a better player than Torres) Higgins was not our solution. They no longer held a physical advantage. What happened to that instinct? Why are we accumulating assets in the wrong positions, who will be ready at the wrong time??? I used to think Gillis was a genius, Drafted Hodgson Resigned sedins Got Erhoff for nothing Signed Hamhuis, Malhotra, Tanev, lack, Higgins, lappy But then he signed Sturm, WTF Then traded Hodgson Ballard trade looks terrible now, mostly cuz we just don't use the guy Now he is close to having buggered our goaltending... Has he gone off his rocker, I think this summer we will find out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uber_pwnzor Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Before someone corrects me, I meant coat tails in the opening post Summer of George? Believe it or not George isn't at home so please leave a message after the beep Believe it or not George isn't at home, where could I be??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeywoot Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Nothing happened cause we couldn't land a goalie in the time we had, Burke and DN built a great team back in the WCE days but goaltending killed us and that shot. Burke and DN drafted guys like Sedins, Kesler, Edler, Bieksa, Schneider, Hansen, Raymond, Ohlund, Bourdon, Grabner, Umberger and they were consider bad at drafting what exactly has Gillis done with our farm? it's one of the worse in the league and a ton of questions about who will take over in the future and our star prospect was a diva who wanted out cause the coach ripped on about his injured back... not that I'm hating on Gillis as I do like him but your completely bind if you can't see what Gillis had given to him and those guys laid out this core so much so that Gillis never touched it and left it alone from the core to coaching staff to scouting. Do you get it now?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 And the idea of a window would be more applicable if the Canucks do something very stupid (as many are proposing around here) and trade 4 or 5 young premier assets to get a bloated asset like Nash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Canuck Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 In hindsight the Canucks gave the Kings their stiffest challenge. We lacked secondary scoring last season and our faceoff % was a mere shadow of the season previous. With the emergence of stellar goalies all over the place traffic in front of the net is what is needed especially once playoff hockey starts. The Canucks are just too small when the going get tough. Refs just don't call the game the same way during the playoffs and our little guys don't stand a chance. Kassian was a good move but he really is 2-3 years away from being the player he has potential to be, I honestly think Jensen is closer. Schroeder needs to be moved. He is just too small for us and not good enough to make up for his lack of size. Gillis screwed up at the previous seasons deadline, he really should have picked up Arnott for our cup run, I think he's too old now to make the impact we need. So... I think we should try and get Staal, the Pens have to lock up Sidney & Malkin and Staal will be difficult to fit into the system. Trade Lou for some decent picks and use the cap space created and trade for Staal. I'd also make a pitch for Matt Carle, I think he's the type of stay at home d man we need, cause we just can't afford dream guys like Suter of Weber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANUCKLELION Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 In hindsight the Canucks gave the Kings their stiffest challenge. We lacked secondary scoring last season and our faceoff % was a mere shadow of the season previous. With the emergence of stellar goalies all over the place traffic in front of the net is what is needed especially once playoff hockey starts. The Canucks are just too small when the going get tough. Refs just don't call the game the same way during the playoffs and our little guys don't stand a chance. Kassian was a good move but he really is 2-3 years away from being the player he has potential to be, I honestly think Jensen is closer. Schroeder needs to be moved. He is just too small for us and not good enough to make up for his lack of size. Gillis screwed up at the previous seasons deadline, he really should have picked up Arnott for our cup run, I think he's too old now to make the impact we need. So... I think we should try and get Staal, the Pens have to lock up Sidney & Malkin and Staal will be difficult to fit into the system. Trade Lou for some decent picks and use the cap space created and trade for Staal. I'd also make a pitch for Matt Carle, I think he's the type of stay at home d man we need, cause we just can't afford dream guys like Suter of Weber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 All fine and dandy until we are still ousted by LA in the first round and Hodgson's value takes a dip and he is no longer worth a Kassian trade. MG traded Hodgson when his value is at a peak. If you don't pull the trigger when the player you covet is available you may lose out. I'm glad he traded for Kassian and Hodgson wouldn't of made any difference. Our problem against LA wasn't our third line, it was our top 2 lines. Do you really think Hodgson would of dominated Stoll's line to make up the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raph Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I think we should try and get Staal, the Pens have to lock up Sidney & Malkin and Staal will be difficult to fit into the system. Trade Lou for some decent picks and use the cap space created and trade for Staal. I'd also make a pitch for Matt Carle, I think he's the type of stay at home d man we need, cause we just can't afford dream guys like Suter of Weber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brahma Bull Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Can you imagine what kind of players we'd get back if we traded Hodgson and Schneider together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradinToSmyl Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 All fine and dandy until we are still ousted by LA in the first round and Hodgson's value takes a dip and he is no longer worth a Kassian trade. MG traded Hodgson when his value is at a peak. If you don't pull the trigger when the player you covet is available you may lose out. I'm glad he traded for Kassian and Hodgson wouldn't of made any difference. Our problem against LA wasn't our third line, it was our top 2 lines. Do you really think Hodgson would of dominated Stoll's line to make up the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 It entirely depends on what the criteria is for a "bold move" Since trading players on and for the second line don't count then only LU or Sedins/Kesler do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Tamland Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 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...
GradinToSmyl Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Did you forget about a guy named Carey Price? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradinToSmyl Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Dave Nonis matched the offer sheet that Paul Holmgren sent Ryan Kesler's way, at a time when sentiment was hovering around 50/50 as to whether he should or shouldn't. Dave Nonis didn't succumb to the pressure by the fanbase and the media to trade Kesler & Edler for Brad Richards in '08, which probably ended up costing him his job (since the Canucks went on to tank and miss the playoffs). Dave Nonis brought Alain Vigneault to the Canucks. Dave Nonis brought Alex Burrows to the Canucks. Dave Nonis drafted Cory Schneider, Alex Edler, Jannik Hansen, Mason Raymond, Michael Grabner. Nonis has stones that Gillis has yet to display. The '08 trade deadline cost him his job, but it was the right thing to do for the franchise. And you call Luongo Nonis' "coup de grace"; OK, fine, but what exactly is Mike Gillis' "coup de grace"? Christian Ehrhoff for a couple of years? Please. If you don't think that Dave Nonis laid the foundation for this team, as it exists right now, you're delusional. The one thing that I will give Mike Gillis a lot of credit for, actually, was re-signing the twins back in '09, when it was 50/50 as to whether or not they were "franchise players to move forward with". That's probably been Gillis "coup de grace", so far, which pales in comparison to Nonis' acquisition of Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vansicle Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 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...
King of the ES Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 So to be clear, you are applauding non trades and players the scouting staff and mgmt team drafted years ago? I guess we'll need to give Gillis another 6 years and see where his picks and trades end up. That means Kassian get till 2017 till you can assess. As it sits, the Nonis/Burke era did nothing on the ice when it mattered. Technically I guess we should give Quinn some credit for the current team, he drafted Linden who then Keenan traded to get the parts needed for the Sedins and Luongo. And when Lu is traded, Quinn will still be getting credit for that player. == I do not care what Gillis' coup is or isn't, i just simply said that giving Nonis credit for the core isn't true, it's just cherry picking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 That guy is just a clown who thinks he;'s a hockey guru but actually knows nothing, ignore him. He thinks Gradin was better than Naslund lol enouogh said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 NHL Managment don't have time to babysit players, especially when they haven't played a full season in the NHL. Gillis said himself that he spent more time on Cody's issues in the last 3 years then the rest of the team combined. Too many issues: -Wants more ice time in his rookie year, which shows lack of respect for Kesler, Burrows, Sedins etc who worked their way to those minutes. -Screwed up back -Slow stride -Needs a life coach to boost his ego -Meddling Father -Crazy Agent stating that Hodgson will be better than Stamkos Why not trade away those issues and start fresh with Kassian. Big, powerful, all around talent with big time potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABurrows14 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 These weren't just "non-trades"; Dave Nonis stuck his neck on the line when he matched the offer sheet given to Ryan Kesler, which many people thought he was crazy for, as Kesler had really shown very, very little, at that point. He also chose to do what he felt was best for the team, and not what was best for his job security, when he chose to not acquire Brad Richards in 2008 at a heavy cost, while he was under heavy pressure to do so. And what's this about the scouting staff and other members of management drafting players? You're now not willing to give Nonis any credit for acquiring all of those players under his watch? That's a reach. Does Mike Gillis not get any credit for Nick Jensen, then (assuming he one day becomes a productive NHLer)? Nonis/Burke's fingerprints are still all over this roster. Our most prominent players were not acquired by Mike Gillis. Mike Gillis, really, has done little more than shuffle around with the bottom-six forwards and the middle-pairing defense. The only concrete top-sixer that was acquired by Mike Gillis is David Booth, and that looks to have been a pretty costly mistake, much like his Keith Ballard acquisition, another huge setback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.