Archived

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

Peaches

Anyone else feel bad for Gillis?

330 posts in this topic

And everyone tells me to stop using regards :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really want to line yourself with buddy who's trying to argue that we needed a dman as Bieksa was thought to be traded? huh? i guess being a gm must be hard if ownership is trading players behind your back. you are seriously in agreement with this guy?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to around 1:00 mark, but it's mentioned a few times throughtoout the segment.

regards,

G.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ho Ho Ho and Ha Ha.

Just like Christmas.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hahahhah, that is classic. Interview is about how expendable Bieksa is as we have added so much depth on D.

You argue how we had to make the trade as we were so thin on the blue line and then show me an interview where it talks about who we move as we are stacked on D. You never disappoint!

awesome man.

Do you ever even think hmmmm, when you say something like "bieksa was thought to be traded". You do realize that the gm makes the trade, right? Who did MG think traded Bieksa? Think man.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What part of "Hamhuis wasn't signed when Mike Gillis acquired Ballard" is so hard to understand? There were no guarantees that Hamhuis was going to choose Vancouver, "at the time", and two teams were so confident in their chances to sign him that they were willing to, and actually did, trade mid-round draft picks for his rights.

If Gillis hadn't traded for Ballard and Hamhuis decided to sign elsewhere, then what? Sorry, but no Malhotra (huge part of winning the #1 seed which helped us bust out to three 2-0 series leads in the playoffs) and a defence in shambles; therefore, no Cup run in 2011. Furthermore, Hamhuis probably accepted $500,000 less than he would have had we not been so cap strapped at the time since $4.2m extra cap space =

"Excuse me but you can afford to pay me $5m instead of $4.5m especially since the Islanders are offering $6m, Pittsburgh is offering $5.5m. and the Flyers are offering $5m..."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The luongo deal was a great signing because it gave the Canucks elite goal tending for a long time. The thing is now Shneids has emerged and we all know what has transpired. I still think the deal is a good one and Luongo has 4-5 years of solid play infront of him.

Now, as far as Gills being a great GM, only time will tell. I'm at a point where I'm on the fence as far as whether or not I like him. At first I thought he was genius but not so much lately. Moneyball tactics seem to be a good thing with a lower salary cap, but you can't expect players to keep taking less when they see others hitting homeruns in free agency.

The Ehrhoff pick-up was great, not re-signing him wasn't. I'm not sure if Buffalo got to Hoff before free agency started or not, but I was not happy with not having him back.

The way he handled the whole Cody Hodgson situation was classless and he should've just kept his mouth shut in the end, it made the situation even harder to swallow. Grabner and a First for Ballard? Is this Gillis's fault or is it his fault only for listening to his scouting staff's opinion of Ballard? Another question is does Gillis know what a compentent scouting staff is and if he know's if he has one or not? I've thought about that from time to time!

What it comes down to for me right now is not the return the Canucks get for Luongo, but how it's all handled in the end. Im sure the Canucks will do well in the trade, but I really really hope it's done before the season starts. I don't want to see a circus like the Pavel Bure situation again and hope Gillis isn't holding out for a total fleecing of Florida or nothing deal. As you all can see I have my doubt's but am hoping he know's what he's really doing. <_<

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i sure do feel sorry for him, those millions of dollars he collects every year must really make his life difficult! :picard:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You actually have good points in many posts but have come unglued on this topic. You really want to line yourself with buddy who's trying to argue that we needed a dman as Bieksa was thought to be traded? huh? i guess being a gm must be hard if ownership is trading players behind your back. you are seriously in agreement with this guy?

And yes, when he starts rambling i don't read. Can you really blame me? at least you guys have each other.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More straw grasping on your part, with liberal attempts at muddying the waters, and an unhealthy dose of hysterics.

The interview was dated post July 1. It illustrates that Bieksa was being talked about as trade bait, something about which you seem to be in denial. At no time have I ever suggested that the team was considering trading Bieksa, as you are suggesting by your, "You do realize that the gm makes the trade, right?" comment.

I think it's sad that this is the only kind of defense you can mount to defend your position on the Ballard trade.

regards,

G.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Canucks gave up on Grabner 20 games into his NHL career.

Everybody with half a hockey brain should be questioning that move-and will question that move - for the next fifty years.

It has all the makings of Neely Part 2.

Let's hope Quinton Howden does not turn into an NHL gem or it is just a laugher all around.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More straw grasping on your part, with liberal attempts at muddying the waters, and an unhealthy dose of hysterics.

The interview was dated post July 1. It illustrates that Bieksa was being talked about as trade bait, something about which you seem to be in denial. At no time have I ever suggested that the team was considering trading Bieksa, as you are suggesting by your, "You do realize that the gm makes the trade, right?" comment.

I think it's sad that this is the only kind of defense you can mount to defend your position on the Ballard trade.

regards,

G.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, I say lots, you continue to have an issue with understanding and accepting.

1.) In my post, I said your previous post (to the one included here) was grasping at straws as far as trying to find an adequate argument to support your position. Further, I stated that you are "muddying the waters", which is an attempt on your part to deflect my arguments, against which you appear not to have any adequate response. I then go on to say that you are looking like you're getting a bit hysterical on this subject. (That last bit was perhaps a bit unkind. I apologize.)

That was just the first line.

2.) I then pointed out that the interview contains comments about Bieksa who, at that time was being considered as "trade bait", something of which you seemed to be completely unaware. I then commented that I had never suggested that the team was going to trade Bieksa,

3.) I finished by stating, "I think it's sad that this is the only kind of defense you can mount to defend your position on the Ballard trade."

Your response to the above is to return to an idea which I have never written, but is rather something you have generated and has somehow become, at least in your mind, an idea of mine.

Where did I write anything about how Bieksa was going traded by the team without Gillis being being involved? I did write:

"Other guys got injured, which meant that Bieksa wasn't traded, as pretty much everyone on here were assuming was going to happen, and he played pretty well." which is found in post #141.

"Bieksa looked like he was going to be traded (but he wasn't)", found in post #173.

It is clear to me that these comments refer to opinions expressed by posters on these forums. and have nothing to do with Gillis, nor do they suggest that the team was going to trade Bieksa behind Gillis' back..

Do I see the gap in logic? No. What I do see is a lack of understanding on your part, You are jumping to conclusions which are not there. You are also trying to put words in my mouth. If that is the only way you feel you have a chance to win a debate on this subject then good luck trying.

I suggest you go back and read all of the the posts which you have suggested you do not fully read. Once you've done that I'm sure things will be clearer.

It's okay, take your time. I'll still be here.

regards,

G.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

once again you say nothing here.

Please explain, if Gillis is the GM, the guy who makes the trades, how could he havr thought Bieksa was traded?

Do you see the gap in logic?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever thought that maybe you're so anti Gillis and that's clouded your ability to use reason and logic so much that you're actually now just anti-Canuck?

To any outsider looking in that sure seems the case. Same would go for guys like KofES and maybe even Nucknit. I know the next line from any of you is that you just love the Canucks so much you won't turn a blind eye blah blah blah but that doesn't make sense if every move Gillis makes is considered bad by you guys.

Just something to think about...I'm sure you won't care and it won't sink in. Keep on keeping on...

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's probably good advice. I should probably just accept we missed our chance, root for our guys and hope for the best. Watching our gm piss away our chances at a cup sucked, but nothing can be done now. Endless posts about why we made bad trades aint gonna help.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell me more about wanting to spend 3.750M for two years with a modified NMC on a 37 year old who is injury prone.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.