Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Cup Loss making Gillis do things he shouldnt


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
97 replies to this topic

#91 DefCon1

DefCon1

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,478 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 08

Posted 24 June 2012 - 03:44 PM

There was a similar topic to this on HF boards, and I though id bring it here.

Basically since losing to Boston in the cup Finals the Canucks have been drafting big and tough guys time after time this year and last years draft. Its stupid. We were one of the best teams and still are for now, because we had so much skill and that got us to the Cup Final. Gillis is so bent on changing the make-up of the team, and it's really unnecessary. There are so many players that the Canucks could've gotten in this years draft and last but he was so concerned that he must draft someone is atleast 6'2 200. It's stupid


YEah, am really starting to question Gillis when it comes to drafting. We need to draft skilled players now more than ever. After the Sedins leave, we might as well be a last place team. Who has the potential to replace the Sedins?? It seems the team will be filled with 6'2 grinders in the future like the Flames.

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Posted Image

QUOTE (Rye and Kesler @ Jun 29 2009, 10:24 PM) Where is Celebrities? I am tryin to find it on Club vibes but i can't find it. Is it relatively new? Sounds good though we will have to check it out.

I think Germany is the exception because they should know how to use their own balls.

QUOTE (pacecar @ Aug 2 2009, 11:53 AM) Sheep are ok but horses, ewww.


Posted Image


#92 Ray_Cathode

Ray_Cathode

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,813 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 07

Posted 24 June 2012 - 05:41 PM

There was a similar topic to this on HF boards, and I though id bring it here.

Basically since losing to Boston in the cup Finals the Canucks have been drafting big and tough guys time after time this year and last years draft. Its stupid. We were one of the best teams and still are for now, because we had so much skill and that got us to the Cup Final. Gillis is so bent on changing the make-up of the team, and it's really unnecessary. There are so many players that the Canucks could've gotten in this years draft and last but he was so concerned that he must draft someone is atleast 6'2 200. It's stupid


Which is why Schroeder is doing so well with the Canucks. MG must be thinking that all those injured players that caused us to lose against Boston - Daniel, Ehrhoff, Edler, Kesler, Raymond, Hamhuis, etc, etc, was because our skilled guys had too many big helpers to do the heavy lifting against Boston. Our skill, of course, also prevailed over a big, ohysical LA team, and three years ago against that puny Chicago team.

Sure wouldn't want MG to learn from history.

#93 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:05 PM

There was a similar topic to this on HF boards, and I though id bring it here.

Basically since losing to Boston in the cup Finals the Canucks have been drafting big and tough guys time after time this year and last years draft. Its stupid. We were one of the best teams and still are for now, because we had so much skill and that got us to the Cup Final. Gillis is so bent on changing the make-up of the team, and it's really unnecessary. There are so many players that the Canucks could've gotten in this years draft and last but he was so concerned that he must draft someone is atleast 6'2 200. It's stupid


You complain about obtaining muscle, others would complain about sticking with skill.

Honestly, the ONLY THING we need is a real #1 d-man, and a new coach. That is it. Plain and simple.

Package Luongo plus more for a number one D, or a prospect that will be a number 1 in a year or two.

...and fire AV. SERIOUSLY.
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#94 GradinToSmyl

GradinToSmyl

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 982 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 12

Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:10 PM

YEah, am really starting to question Gillis when it comes to drafting. We need to draft skilled players now more than ever. After the Sedins leave, we might as well be a last place team. Who has the potential to replace the Sedins?? It seems the team will be filled with 6'2 grinders in the future like the Flames.


Hi there! It's me, common sense. I know, I know, not as common as you might think. I was wondering which players you thought have been available to us that would have been Sedin replacements. I'll even give you the benefit of scouring draft sheets since the beginning of Gillis' time here. That's right, you get to use hindsight to make all of your picks. Draft for the Canucks last 4 years.
After a few days here, I am surprised half of you got the anti-bot question correct to register for this site.

#95 lmm

lmm

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:46 PM

Nonis made some sloppy picks, Grabner, Rahimi, Ellington, White...
He also traded a lot of picks while sitting in 9th place working the theory "If you just get in... you never know"
LA winning the cup is the first time ever a seed that low has won, so get ready to hear a lot more of that theory. bla.

The problem with Gillis is the same as Nonis and Burke before him, that ALL of the picks take too long to mature.
As as someone said in another thread, by the time the WCE was done the Sedins were ready...
that is not the solution it is the problem, if the Sedins were 1st line players 5 years after their draft the Canucks have the WCE and Sedins in 2004. But no the Sedins took 9 years to dominate and the WCE was long gone. Compare that to Anahiem, Pittsburg, Chicago or LA.
I cannot remember if it was Wienrich, Sean Brown, Wienrich's buddy ( the one that looked like Bertuzzi, can never rememberhis name) or the goalie from Buffalo, one of those guys cost us the pick that could have been Lucic.
If it happened once it would not be a big deal, but it is a pattern through several regiems.

#96 skyfall

skyfall

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 940 posts
  • Joined: 16-November 09

Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:48 PM

Which is why Schroeder is doing so well with the Canucks. MG must be thinking that all those injured players that caused us to lose against Boston - Daniel, Ehrhoff, Edler, Kesler, Raymond, Hamhuis, etc, etc, was because our skilled guys had too many big helpers to do the heavy lifting against Boston. Our skill, of course, also prevailed over a big, ohysical LA team, and three years ago against that puny Chicago team.

Sure wouldn't want MG to learn from history.


Skill should've killed off Chicago in the first round in 4 games, nashville in 4 or 5 and well I couldn't ask for better against the sharks. Skill and brains should've done well against Boston after saving energy similar to how LA saved energy gettin to the finals in minimal games.

Instead the oddest thing happened: the Canucks used work ethic and skill to be regular season champions. Then in the playoffs they decide to use physical play as one of their main strategies.

I don't know how much physical play actually contributed to the Canucks success. They almost lost to Chicago while playing physical and basically handin Chicago two games instead of killing them. The physical games allowed them to win games by one or two goals while chicago used brains, skill and energy into attacking to blowout the Canucks.

Against Boston I dunno where this physical thing came from. I thought the Canucks had a huge speed advantage early on. It looked like Boston was screwed in the first two games. Physical play was a risky strategy and it ended up costing the team not only for the cup run but next season with carryover injuries. Situational hitting makes sense like when a puny guy like Marchand gets a hit to get the puck then uses speed to burn the D and get easy goals.

In the last 5 years I haven't seen the Canucks get many easy goals while other teams can easily find it against us. If there's anything to learn it's that hitting for the sake of hitting is a risky strategy, focusing on gettin easy goals could lead to success without injury or much expended effort and better coaching could help the skill players be effective while saving energy and tougher players use more skill and bring a competitive advantage.

What ppl fail to take out of chicago's, Boston's and LA's cup runs was that they picked their spots on d and offense due to coaching, scouting and adjustments and they hit for a purpose rather than just hit for the sake of hitting.

#97 2009cupchamps

2009cupchamps

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 791 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 09

Posted 24 June 2012 - 07:41 PM

Ok people do not get it, first 2 rounds you take the best player available. after that you draft by organizational needs, size is one of those needs. Not every player is going to be projected for top 6, especially when your drafting as late as we are. So if you want to find a gem in the late ronunds they have to have size, cause if they had raw talent they would have been picked by then. I like thier direction the Canucks are going in. What we need is to trade for some high picks from other teams since we pick late always.

#98 awalk

awalk

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,170 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 24 June 2012 - 08:06 PM

You get vanilla, you want chocolate. You get chocolate, you want vanilla. Annnnd so on and so forth.




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.