Ed Willes' Tweets on Gillis/Weber

[NucksBruins]

Haha, yes, why panic indeed?

The kings made huge, controversial moves this yr trading top prospects for Richards and Carter and their huge contracts! Signed an injury prone simon gagne! Then changed coaches mid season.

Hardly no panic. Full credit to them tho because their bold moves turned into a Cup.

Boston is a fascinating comparison especially in relation to our obsession with Weber.

Boston sowed the seeds for their Cup by signing UFA Chara to a huge contract in 2006 for 5 yrs and $37.5 million.

They then re-upped him in 2010 for seven yrs and $45.5 million which will take him to the age of 40! A bargain if you ask me.

So yes I think we need to make a bold move to win a Cup. Making the huge offer to Weber would've qualified.

[NuxFan09]

Until they won that cup in 2011, there were many who felt Chara was overpaid. It is easy to look back now and say he was a brilliant signing, but outside of the 2011 run (which was 90% Tim Thomas), it hasn't worked out that well for Boston. They haven't been a top contender regularly and have had a lot of problems in the playoffs as well. They were really undisciplined and disorganized against the Caps this year.

Elite goaltending got Boston and Los Angeles their Cups. That's just the trend from the last two years. Maybe next year a team with an iffy starter (Pittsburgh, Chicago) wins it. There is no perfect formula to winning the Cup.

Richards and Carter had little to do with the Kings win. Quick posted a .946 save percentage and a 1.41 goals against average. Gagne only played in 4 playoff games and had zero points in total. The bold move was sticking with a goalie who had played well in the regular season and failed to get out of round one the previous two years.

[canucksnihilist]

Yep. Exactly. Why not go completely balls out? The future is meaningless. Look at all that the Sedin's have given this city. Did we not learn anything from 2002-03? Howcome Paul Holmgren is seemingly the only NHL GM who's main goal is winning a Stanley Cup, rather than job preservation?

Gillis & Gilman will regret this. A lot of you fans will find a way to justify it, of course, because you're somehow less of a fan if you criticize any component of this organization. But, my goodness, talk about a LOST OPPORTUNITY.

[elvis15]

Good post. I agree entirely. A strong #1 defenseman is also important. I would argue that every team that has won the Cup since the lockout has had that crucial ingredient, save for the 2006 Hurricanes.

2012 Los Angeles Kings: Drew Doughty

2011 Boston Bruins: Zdeno Chara

2010 Chicago Blackhawks: Duncan Kieth

2009 Pittsburgh Penguins: Sergei Gonchar (Yes, he was a stud #1 defenseman at the time, although probably the weakest on this list)

2008 Detroit Red Wings: Nicklas Lidstrom

2007 Anaheim Ducks: Scott Niedermayer and Chris Pronger

The Canucks may not have a guy on the same level as any of the guys listed above but I believe Alex Edler will take another step forward this season and will be good enough to be that crucial piece for the Canucks.

[winacup]

I've never hated that argument, but never really liked it either. Here's why:

Every position is important. Some teams do it with different mixes but a top D-man is no guarantee - or at least it hasn't been for the teams with the top 3 defencemen in the league at any given point.

Here's a point about moving for a #1 D-man. Even if you can sign them as a free agent, like Chara and the Bruins, it doesn't even guarantee a chance at the cup in the next couple of years.

Chara was drafted by NYI but played with Ottawa on some pretty good teams through the early-mid 2000's, even getting to within one win of the finals. It wasn't until the year that Chara signed as a free agent with Boston that Ottawa did make it to the finals, but lost to Anaheim. Certainly the Bruins didn't reap immediate benefits from having signed Chara. It wasn't until his fifth season with the Bruins that they had playoff success.

Even on good teams, he wasn't a guarantee. The same goes with Pittsburgh and Gonchar, who was drafted by Washington, in that it took 5 years for them to win. Niedermayer and Pronger had success early on in Anaheim after developing elsewhere but that was two top D-men on one team. Doughty and Keith developed with the teams they helped to a cup but again took a few years to have success. Lidstrom did the same and had success in his 6th year in the league (and the year after, and in 2002, and in 2008).

Unless you think Hamhuis could be Niedermayer and Weber Pronger, there isn't a recent instance of moving for a #1 D that did get instant results.

Would it be nice? Sure, but moving for Weber isn't going to guarantee us a shot at the cup in the next 3 years, and some people think we have a window that only lasts that long.

[Tortorella's Rant]

Weber is absolutey better offensively, and I can say that without a doubt his numbers would be significantly higher than Edler's if he played on the Canucks. How can I be so sure? Because Edler plays on a team with the f***ing Sedins and Kesler!! Weber plays on a team that barely spends over the cap floor on its players, including forwards. As a result, he has only ever had the opportunity to feed glorified KHLers with shots from the point. He isn't able to join the rush nearly as much as guys like Edler and Bieksa are able to do so because he has had to constantly babysit the Preds' defensively liable forward lines on nearly every play by staying posted at the blue line. I'm not trying to crap on Edler, because I really like him, and I want to see him and every other player on the Canucks succeed at getting a Cup--which is more than I can say for Gillis right now, based on his inaction and ineptitude. But in now way is he comparable to Weber.

[OrrFour]

Until they won that cup in 2011, there were many who felt Chara was overpaid. It is easy to look back now and say he was a brilliant signing, but outside of the 2011 run (which was 90% Tim Thomas), it hasn't worked out that well for Boston. They haven't been a top contender regularly and have had a lot of problems in the playoffs as well. They were really undisciplined and disorganized against the Caps this year.

Elite goaltending got Boston and Los Angeles their Cups. That's just the trend from the last two years. Maybe next year a team with an iffy starter (Pittsburgh, Chicago) wins it. There is no perfect formula to winning the Cup.

Richards and Carter had little to do with the Kings win. Quick posted a .946 save percentage and a 1.41 goals against average. Gagne only played in 4 playoff games and had zero points in total. The bold move was sticking with a goalie who had played well in the regular season and failed to get out of round one the previous two years.

[winacup]

if gillis doesn't make a bold move that gets us a cup this year aquillini will have his head

[King of the ES]

Looking at a top piece, do u think the Canucks are lacking a weber (arguably the best d-man in the league), or a sniper like Stamkos (arguably the best goal scorer in the league). If u could have one f them, wouldn't u take stamkos???

[King of the ES]

Here's a point about moving for a #1 D-man. Even if you can sign them as a free agent, like Chara and the Bruins, it doesn't even guarantee a chance at the cup in the next couple of years.

[King of the ES]

Until Weber actually proves that he's better offensively, which he has not, nobody can say he's better offensively with evidence supporting it.

[Snake Doctor]

Do you really want to be stuck with a 100 million dollar contract. I say no.

[elvis15]

I'm just going to share some opinions (with some facts mixed in I'm sure) from people around the league that write about this stuff professionally, since my word (and the facts I supply with it) apparently don't carry much weight:

Offseason Progress Report: mid-summer power rankings

2. Vancouver Canucks -- "The Presidents' Trophy winning team managed to snag one of the top defenders in free agency (Jason Garrison) and even managed to get him on a bit of a discount when compared to the rest of the market. Garrison is more than just a booming slap shot from the point, he's also a quality all-around defender. Don't expect him to score 16 goals again like he did this past season, but that shouldn't subtract too much from his overall value." -- Northwest Division Progress Report

The Canucks Are… Better. How can they not be after adding a quality top-four defenseman to a roster that just finished the regular season with the best record in the league?

...

4. Philadelphia Flyers (assuming they end up with Shea Weber*) -- The Flyers looked like they had taken a bit of a step back this offseason, but if they end up getting Shea Weber away from the Nashville Predators that would obviously change things quite a bit.

[canucksnihilist]

For this team, Weber's probably a better fit than Stamkos, but you've made an irrelevant point, anyway, as Stamkos has signed long-term in TB, and there's really never been any sort of question regarding his future with that franchise. Weber's tenure in Nashville has been on shaky ground for years. How many rumors have you heard of Stamkos being put on the block? Right, none. Not gonna happen. One is/was realistic, one is/wasn't.

[King of the ES]

I don't know what exactly you're trying to say, Elvis. Citing some other sportswriters' opinion on "Mid-Summer Power Rankings" will certainly not be changing mine.

And I really couldn't care less about "optics", either. Philadelphia was perfectly within their right to offer that contract, as was Columbus, if they so desired. The Stanley Cup isn't handed out to the team who has the most harmonious relations with the 29 others'. Like the real world, the NHL is dog-eat-dog. It's not Philadelphia's fault that other team's are losing money. It's not Philadelphia's obligation to generate fan interest and enthusiasm in Phoenix.

[King of the ES]

contraire: I think you have missed it.

it's about assessing the team's needs. that was the point. a defenseman isn't the top need.

[L'Orange]

Maybe you missed understanding the part that if Weber was holding out for Gillis to send a contract, it probably never would've happened, and he could've got struck by lightning the next day and have his career ended.

Philly put up the contract, of course he's going to sign. GREAT city, a GM who doesn't tolerate mediocrity, a fantastic young core, etc. What's not to love?

[elvis15]

I don't know what exactly you're trying to say, Elvis. Citing some other sportswriters' opinion on "Mid-Summer Power Rankings" will certainly not be changing mine.

And I really couldn't care less about "optics", either. Philadelphia was perfectly within their right to offer that contract, as was Columbus, if they so desired. The Stanley Cup isn't handed out to the team who has the most harmonious relations with the 29 others'. Like the real world, the NHL is dog-eat-dog. It's not Philadelphia's fault that other team's are losing money. It's not Philadelphia's obligation to generate fan interest and enthusiasm in Phoenix.

[NuxFan09]

I've never hated that argument, but never really liked it either. Here's why:

Every position is important. Some teams do it with different mixes but a top D-man is no guarantee - or at least it hasn't been for the teams with the top 3 defencemen in the league at any given point.

Here's a point about moving for a #1 D-man. Even if you can sign them as a free agent, like Chara and the Bruins, it doesn't even guarantee a chance at the cup in the next couple of years.

Chara was drafted by NYI but played with Ottawa on some pretty good teams through the early-mid 2000's, even getting to within one win of the finals. It wasn't until the year that Chara signed as a free agent with Boston that Ottawa did make it to the finals, but lost to Anaheim. Certainly the Bruins didn't reap immediate benefits from having signed Chara. It wasn't until his fifth season with the Bruins that they had playoff success.

Even on good teams, he wasn't a guarantee. The same goes with Pittsburgh and Gonchar, who was drafted by Washington, in that it took 5 years for them to win. Niedermayer and Pronger had success early on in Anaheim after developing elsewhere but that was two top D-men on one team. Doughty and Keith developed with the teams they helped to a cup but again took a few years to have success. Lidstrom did the same and had success in his 6th year in the league (and the year after, and in 2002, and in 2008).

Unless you think Hamhuis could be Niedermayer and Weber Pronger, there isn't a recent instance of moving for a #1 D that did get instant results.

Would it be nice? Sure, but moving for Weber isn't going to guarantee us a shot at the cup in the next 3 years, and some people think we have a window that only lasts that long.

[King of the ES]

Well then, let's simplify. I'm going to summarize the main points you've made in this thread and you can correct me if they're wrong.

1. Gillis' attempts to get Weber were nothing short of a failure. In fact, he did very little (upgrade from your initial opinion of nothing at all) to try and secure Weber's services.