Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

Anyone else feel bad for Gillis?


  • Please log in to reply
329 replies to this topic

#241 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:52 PM

You're stating your incorrect opinion as fact again. We would have been better off in keeping Grabner, that should have happened. It didn't, we lost. You can say "i would have made teh same mistake Gillis made", thats a fair statement and then give your reasons. You can't say we weren't better off in keeping Grabner, that is clearly wrong, where your lack of objectivity comes in.


So you saying that had Grabner not been traded Gillis would have gifted him a spot on this team despite showing up in poor shape yet again? I'm saying he wouldn't have. Just as Tallon wouldn't. I don't see that as a mistake.
  • 2
Posted Image

#242 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:56 PM

In the end it comes down to this for me:
Would we have been better off keeping Grabner? No. Short of gifting him a roster spot, he would have been lost to waivers. Gifting a prospect a spot who can't be bothered to show up in shape and ready to play isn't the message I'd want to send to the rest of the team. In the end something is always better than nothing. Which is what we would have had if we hadn't traded him.


Yeah, I'd sure rather have David Booth, with his $4.25M contract and IQ of 58.

And yeah, you referenced that the team was the highest scoring in the league, thanks in large part to the luck of the divisional draw. What happened to those goals in the playoffs? Dried up pretty quickly, didn't they? Was it 8 goals in the SCF, over 7 games? Think a guy like Grabner may have helped?

There are a few categories of depth where you REALLY cannot have too much of, and speed and scoring ability are two of them. Grabner has both. Kassian, who you referenced as being "versatile", has neither. He's big, and that's about it. That's the type of depth that won't help you win hockey games.
  • 1

#243 sdnucksfan

sdnucksfan

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 460 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 11

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:59 PM

yeah he had to deal with your ass(cody hodgson)

doubt he pays too much attention if any at all to the complainers here on cdc
  • 0

#244 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:59 PM

So you saying that had Grabner not been traded Gillis would have gifted him a spot on this team despite showing up in poor shape yet again? I'm saying he wouldn't have. Just as Tallon wouldn't. I don't see that as a mistake.


It's not really a gift if he PROVED HIMSELF WORTHY the prior year, now, is it?

Don't try and tell us that he wasn't a star over those 20 games. The RPM line was making serious noise.
  • 0

#245 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 04 August 2012 - 08:15 PM

Yeah, I'd sure rather have David Booth, with his $4.25M contract and IQ of 58.

And yeah, you referenced that the team was the highest scoring in the league, thanks in large part to the luck of the divisional draw. What happened to those goals in the playoffs? Dried up pretty quickly, didn't they? Was it 8 goals in the SCF, over 7 games? Think a guy like Grabner may have helped?

There are a few categories of depth where you REALLY cannot have too much of, and speed and scoring ability are two of them. Grabner has both. Kassian, who you referenced as being "versatile", has neither. He's big, and that's about it. That's the type of depth that won't help you win hockey games.


Booth beats a guy that started the season on the top line, worked his way down to the third line, and finished the season -18.


Who can say if he would have helped in the finals? Grabner may have done nothing more than join the lengthy list of walking wounded. Or he may have simply disappeared against the big bad Bruins. We'll never know. But for it to happen he had to be handed an unearned roster spot. Which contenders don't tend to do.


It's not really a gift if he PROVED HIMSELF WORTHY the prior year, now, is it?

Don't try and tell us that he wasn't a star over those 20 games. The RPM line was making serious noise.


What he had previously proven was an inability to show up to camp in shape, questionable defensive ability, and a tendency to disappear when play got too physical. I wouldn't say those things give him a free pass onto the roster. Particularly when our top six all had a career year. And I have to say I rather liked our third line up until Malhotra's freak eye injury.

Wait a minute....2 goals in 19 games qualifies a guy as a star? I recall the "star" getting benched a few times because of his poor defensive play in that time. He did get a hatty against a non-playoff team with an inexperienced backup in goal though. Superstar!

We have vastly different definitions of what constitutes a star player.

Everybody knew Grabner had both speed and some offensive skills. He had four years to straighten out his shortcomings and failed to do so. The biggest of which in my book is offseason conditioning with defensive responsibility a very close second. It really calls into question his work ethic showing up to camp year after year in poor shape. Which is why he shouldn't have been gifted a roster spot.

You may as well give up. You won't change my mind that moving Grabner wasn't the best option under the circumstances. He was a moveable asset that didn't fit. Nothing more.
  • 2
Posted Image

#246 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,089 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:23 PM

Raymond over Grabner at the time was the logical choice and if I have to explain why..... Plus, the team we currently have now is better than what Grabner would bring if he was here in place of someone else. I cannot back it up but Grabner also was reported on 1040 to have sat out/benched himself at times in the playoffs for Spokane because of the physicality in some of the games. On top of that, this is true, Grabner was also criticized for his lack of physical play. And that trend holds true to today because he's soft as baby sh1t. He's even less physical in terms of hits than the Sedins are, if you can imagine that.

OMFG, are we actually debating whether getting rid of Grabner was a bad decision or not? It sure as hell didn't hurt us so lets just leave it at that. At the end of the day he's just another marginal player with mediocre goal scoring ability, some solid pickpocketing skills and literally as soft as they come. (None of which he is actually better than Raymond at when Raymond is on his game as we've seen before)
  • 2
Posted Image

#247 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,042 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:25 PM

seriously still talking grabner....i mean coho talk is bad enough
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#248 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,343 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 05 August 2012 - 12:48 AM

Why are you guys still trying to debate with them? Give it a rest and let it go, you aren't going to change their minds or even get them to the point where they're even open to other opinions on the subject.

This is how I felt looking at the comments still going on in this thread:
Posted Image
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#249 tiredatwork

tiredatwork

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 814 posts
  • Joined: 15-May 09

Posted 05 August 2012 - 01:16 AM

So you saying that had Grabner not been traded Gillis would have gifted him a spot on this team despite showing up in poor shape yet again? I'm saying he wouldn't have. Just as Tallon wouldn't. I don't see that as a mistake.


Why do you not acknowledge the fact that Grabner said he was trying to hard in camp, trying to do too much? If you were objective you would acknowledge it.
  • 1

#250 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 05 August 2012 - 07:12 AM

Grabner played 20 games in the NHL and was let go,traded,most importantly,the franchise never,ever figured out he was capable of being a 30 goal scorer IMMEDIATELY.

Neely was given three years here and played third line fiddle before they gave up on him.

Grabner was given 20 NHL games as a Canuck,scored more than half a point per game,mostly on the third line and finished +2.

He has NHL stats of scoring better than every third game pace now after three NHL seasons.That is a 27 goal scorer.

If any of you closet GM's and blow hards think that scoring at that pace in the NHL is being 'soft','mediocre' , 'in poor shape' -on and on with a Gillis decision that gave up on a star player as fast as possible then you are friggin dumb as a sack of hammers.

The 'Detroit Model,developing our talent,being patient',la de da-horse manure.

Gillis blew it,his advice was poor or he just made a bad decision.

Live with it,big boys.

This team desperately covets goal scorers but they are given away ASAP and the spin comes from on high and is repeated ad nauseum for years like it was gospel.

Gillis brings in head injured players and gives up on young stars.Super policy.

Great theatre if you like living in some delusionally based Gillis worshpping world.
  • 0

#251 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 05 August 2012 - 07:20 AM

You may as well give up. You won't change my mind that moving Grabner wasn't the best option under the circumstances. He was a moveable asset that didn't fit. Nothing more.


So can Gillis not claim victory, than, in the Ehrhoff acquisition from SJ? At the time, he was a moveable asset that didn't fit on their team.

Are the Sharks better off by having traded Ehrhoff, too?
  • 0

#252 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 05 August 2012 - 07:28 AM

OMFG, are we actually debating whether getting rid of Grabner was a bad decision or not? It sure as hell didn't hurt us so lets just leave it at that. At the end of the day he's just another marginal player with mediocre goal scoring ability, some solid pickpocketing skills and literally as soft as they come. (None of which he is actually better than Raymond at when Raymond is on his game as we've seen before)


Yeah, because how could we ever move on with a Calder candidate that was the fastest skater in the entire NHL on a big stage at the All-Star weekend?

"Mediocre goal scoring ability" is pretty funny. 34 on one of the NHLs biggest dog teams in his rookie season is not impressive to you? Even in his allegedly "terrible" sophomore season, he had 20. Not too shabby for a 24 year-old in his 2nd season. He's got 59 goals over 174 GP, which, by my calculations, renders him the following GPG number:

-Grabner: .339

Now, let's compare that number to the rest of our top-6's career numbers:

-Grabner: .339
-D. Sedin: .325
-Booth: .282
-Kesler: .273
-Burrows: .266

So if he's "mediocre", what are the rest of the guys on our team?
  • 2

#253 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 05 August 2012 - 08:11 AM

So can Gillis not claim victory, than, in the Ehrhoff acquisition from SJ? At the time, he was a moveable asset that didn't fit on their team.

Are the Sharks better off by having traded Ehrhoff, too?


In a sense yes. Ehrhoff wasn't an excess need in SJ. They were in cap trouble and he was a salary dump. They needed to move a contract more so than the player without taking salary back. I'm surprised MG's was the best offer they received.
  • 2
Posted Image

#254 tiredatwork

tiredatwork

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 814 posts
  • Joined: 15-May 09

Posted 05 August 2012 - 08:11 AM

Grabner played 20 games in the NHL and was let go,traded,most importantly,the franchise never,ever figured out he was capable of being a 30 goal scorer IMMEDIATELY.

Neely was given three years here and played third line fiddle before they gave up on him.

Grabner was given 20 NHL games as a Canuck,scored more than half a point per game,mostly on the third line and finished +2.

He has NHL stats of scoring better than every third game pace now after three NHL seasons.That is a 27 goal scorer.

If any of you closet GM's and blow hards think that scoring at that pace in the NHL is being 'soft','mediocre' , 'in poor shape' -on and on with a Gillis decision that gave up on a star player as fast as possible then you are friggin dumb as a sack of hammers.

The 'Detroit Model,developing our talent,being patient',la de da-horse manure.

Gillis blew it,his advice was poor or he just made a bad decision.

Live with it,big boys.

This team desperately covets goal scorers but they are given away ASAP and the spin comes from on high and is repeated ad nauseum for years like it was gospel.

Gillis brings in head injured players and gives up on young stars.Super policy.

Great theatre if you like living in some delusionally based Gillis worshpping world.


But nobody cares, they only want to diminish his accomplishments and justify the bad trade. Our leading goal scorer in the minors for 4 years turns out to be a 30+ goal man in the nhl. How could Gillis predict this? Really. Our farm system sucks, that's just espn.com or hockeyfutures hating on us, we really are much higher than that. We disagree and we are the ones that aren't objective? Being objective means coming up with excuses for bad decisions. period. It's has an eerie cult type feeling, no thinking for yourself, wait for MG to make a decision, than back it up no matter the results.
  • 2

#255 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,360 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 05 August 2012 - 08:17 AM

sad
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#256 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 05 August 2012 - 08:30 AM

Yes,you are,Employee.

A sad Gillis excuse pumping machine that is run down every time you trot out your rah-rah Gillis nonesense.

Your schtick is up.
  • 1

#257 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 05 August 2012 - 08:43 AM

In a sense yes. Ehrhoff wasn't an excess need in SJ. They were in cap trouble and he was a salary dump. They needed to move a contract more so than the player without taking salary back. I'm surprised MG's was the best offer they received.


Well, heck, Luongo isn't an excess need in Vancouver. So why not just move him for someone else's failed 1st round pick, using this logic?
  • 0

#258 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:00 AM

Great theatre if you like living in some delusionally based Gillis worshpping world.


Great theatre indeed. You completely ignore all Grabners shortcomings. How much does scoring a goal help if you're giving up two? To say his defensive game is suspect is being kind. He hits less than a Sedin and unlike the Sedins he tends to shy away from the physical play. The topper to me is he just doesn't seem to have it in him to show up to camp in shape. The kid could well be star in this league if he just had the drive.

For two years there was a top six spot for the taking here and Grabner couldn't be bothered to show up in shape. A golden opportunity in Florida for a spot....and he doesn't show up in shape. You don't see a trend there? This guy had the choice between a decent salary in the minors or a lottery win in the NHL and couldn't be bothered to show up ready to compete. That doesn't raise any red flags for you? It has nothing to do with "Gillis worshipping", it has everything to do with Grabners shortcomings.

You have to trade something to get something. Grabner made himself expendable.
  • 2
Posted Image

#259 tiredatwork

tiredatwork

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 814 posts
  • Joined: 15-May 09

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:00 AM

Yes,you are,Employee.

A sad Gillis excuse pumping machine that is run down every time you trot out your rah-rah Gillis nonesense.

Your schtick is up.


MG's employee of the month does make me laugh. doesn't come up with a single thought of his own but doesn't realize it.
  • 1

#260 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:02 AM

Well, heck, Luongo isn't an excess need in Vancouver. So why not just move him for someone else's failed 1st round pick, using this logic?


Lou is expendable as there is a better option. Grabner was expendable because there was a better option. Ehrhoff was a cap dump. Bernier was a cap dump. Get the difference?
  • 1
Posted Image

#261 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:06 AM

Yeah,I do,

Luo's best days are behind him and has had a lengthy NHL career.

After that there is nothing that you said that made any sense in regards to Grabner.

I got it.Get it yet?

Edited by nuck nit, 05 August 2012 - 09:07 AM.

  • 0

#262 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,360 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:10 AM

Yes,you are,Employee.

A sad Gillis excuse pumping machine that is run down every time you trot out your rah-rah Gillis nonesense.

Your schtick is up.


Still waiting for somebody to show me where I said Gillis has done no wrong and every move he makes is great. I asked KofES but so far nothing.

Funny somebody talking schtick who keeps repeating the same thing over and over again...well not funny...that ones sad too. :D
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#263 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,360 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:11 AM

MG's employee of the month does make me laugh. doesn't come up with a single thought of his own but doesn't realize it.

And yet you guys sound exactly the same...:D Laughs indeed.

It ok though guys...I understand it I really do...
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#264 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,501 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:17 AM

I know you get it,Employee.

You run down others without making any contribution.
  • 0

#265 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:33 AM

Still waiting for somebody to show me where I said Gillis has done no wrong and every move he makes is great. I asked KofES but so far nothing.


Of course you never said it, because you're not that absolute (like nobody is).

To make it easier, though, let's hear a move of Gillis' that you feel was WRONG. And don't include the Hodgson tongue-lashing that we all acknowledge was ridiculous. I'm talking a personnel move, which was an error.
  • 0

#266 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,343 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 05 August 2012 - 09:41 AM

Lou is expendable as there is a better option. Grabner was expendable because there was a better option. Ehrhoff was a cap dump. Bernier was a cap dump. Get the difference?

And yet you guys sound exactly the same... :D Laughs indeed.

It ok though guys...I understand it I really do...

They will neither "get the difference" nor do they "understand" as you both do and I've spent enough time trying to show them there's at least two sides to the coin. Their dimes have heads on both sides though, one with Grabner and one with Weber.

They'll ignore your salient points and continue to try and attack anything they feel is a weakness based on their logic. Anything they can't refute gets edited out of the quote and you're back in the same circular argument, like you have been for days now.

I repeat:

Why are you guys still trying to debate with them? Give it a rest and let it go, you aren't going to change their minds or even get them to the point where they're even open to other opinions on the subject.

This is how I felt looking at the comments still going on in this thread:
Posted Image


Edited by elvis15, 05 August 2012 - 09:56 AM.

  • 1

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#267 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,360 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 05 August 2012 - 10:29 AM

Of course you never said it, because you're not that absolute (like nobody is).

To make it easier, though, let's hear a move of Gillis' that you feel was WRONG. And don't include the Hodgson tongue-lashing that we all acknowledge was ridiculous. I'm talking a personnel move, which was an error.


Are we including hindsight deals like you guys do or real ones that we can actually question?

Well you can but I honestly won't include those.

I certainly thought it was a mistake not signing Brendan Morrison. Morrison was overrated and his stats in Calgary were inflated because of his line mates but I still hated that Gillis didn't sign Morrison...especially given who he did sign. IMO in terms of missed opportunities that is by far his biggest mistake.

I'd also say there were some signings I thought were poor as well. Plenty that weren't good but didn't hurt the team. The ones I think that were actually detrimental were Hordichuk and Schneider. Those two signings from day 1 I didn't like. There was potential with Hordichuk but the reality was and is that he is a low talent ass clown. Lots of useless signings like Lukowich but they didn't have any negative effect.

I absolutely hated the Shannon trade. I also think he could have gotten more for Ehrhoffs rights than a 4th but that's just nitpicky. Also I thought Ellington had potential and given everything Pahlson did for us it would have been worth it to find out where that potential would have led to. Also there is no way I would have included the first round pick in the Ballard trade. Second at most.

Gillis is not a perfect GM by any standard. He has however done more good than bad for this organization; and is an arse tonne better than the guy before him. (That's coming from a guy who disagreed with the Nonis firing) If you three can't see that that's just fine. I am not a Gillis cheerleader...I am however in my opinion more objective and clearly less emotional than the 3 of you. I mean KofES how objective do you think you are? You have more or less already made up your mind about Garrison without even seeing him play. You've made up your mind so much so that you jump on anyone that says anything positive about Garrison. How objective do you think that is? Are we just going to play the opinion card on this one?


Out of curiosity...and this question is for everyone not just the three stooges what move since the lock out do you think hurt this team the most? I know there's going to be a lot of "Ballard Trades" and "Hodgson Trade" and in retrospect the Ballard trade is valid...Hodgson trade is yet to be seen. IMO though...the Cooke trade. Especially since Cooke has cleaned up his act and has shown that he's actually a good hockey play not just a horses ass on skates. Pettinger was bloody useless. That deal was almost as bad as the Rucinsky/ Sanderson trade.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 05 August 2012 - 11:04 AM.

  • 2
Posted Image
Posted Image

#268 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,360 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 05 August 2012 - 10:34 AM

They will neither "get the difference" nor do they "understand" as you both do and I've spent enough time trying to show them there's at least two sides to the coin. Their dimes have heads on both sides though, one with Grabner and one with Weber.

They'll ignore your salient points and continue to try and attack anything they feel is a weakness based on their logic. Anything they can't refute gets edited out of the quote and you're back in the same circular argument, like you have been for days now.

I repeat:


Look there's plenty of thing I find entertaining that I get nothing out of in terms of intelligence. This happens to be one of them. I know it's on a message board but when you read their posts don't they come off as kind of angry and condescending...that's hilarious to me.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#269 AK_19

AK_19

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,429 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 08

Posted 05 August 2012 - 11:48 AM

Are we including hindsight deals like you guys do or real ones that we can actually question?

Well you can but I honestly won't include those.

I certainly thought it was a mistake not signing Brendan Morrison. Morrison was overrated and his stats in Calgary were inflated because of his line mates but I still hated that Gillis didn't sign Morrison...especially given who he did sign. IMO in terms of missed opportunities that is by far his biggest mistake.

I'd also say there were some signings I thought were poor as well. Plenty that weren't good but didn't hurt the team. The ones I think that were actually detrimental were Hordichuk and Schneider. Those two signings from day 1 I didn't like. There was potential with Hordichuk but the reality was and is that he is a low talent ass clown. Lots of useless signings like Lukowich but they didn't have any negative effect.

I absolutely hated the Shannon trade
. I also think he could have gotten more for Ehrhoffs rights than a 4th but that's just nitpicky. Also I thought Ellington had potential and given everything Pahlson did for us it would have been worth it to find out where that potential would have led to. Also there is no way I would have included the first round pick in the Ballard trade. Second at most.

Gillis is not a perfect GM by any standard. He has however done more good than bad for this organization; and is an arse tonne better than the guy before him. (That's coming from a guy who disagreed with the Nonis firing) If you three can't see that that's just fine. I am not a Gillis cheerleader...I am however in my opinion more objective and clearly less emotional than the 3 of you. I mean KofES how objective do you think you are? You have more or less already made up your mind about Garrison without even seeing him play. You've made up your mind so much so that you jump on anyone that says anything positive about Garrison. How objective do you think that is? Are we just going to play the opinion card on this one?


Out of curiosity...and this question is for everyone not just the three stooges what move since the lock out do you think hurt this team the most? I know there's going to be a lot of "Ballard Trades" and "Hodgson Trade" and in retrospect the Ballard trade is valid...Hodgson trade is yet to be seen. IMO though...the Cooke trade. Especially since Cooke has cleaned up his act and has shown that he's actually a good hockey play not just a horses ass on skates. Pettinger was bloody useless. That deal was almost as bad as the Rucinsky/ Sanderson trade.


Definitely disagree on those:

1. Lukowich came in our trade with Ehrhoff, he was a cap dump and was never expected to be a part of this team outside of depth on our AHL team. He was part of the price we paid for Ehrhoff.

2. Shannon was terrible I have no idea what you're talking about. Grabner and Tambellini, both players of a similar mold, were better players the moment they played on our team and still couldn't stick around here. 07-08 was possibly the weakest forward group we've had in 10 years and he still got sent down to the minors. End of the day we lost a player who'd spend his days in the AHL for us for another player who'd spend his days in the AHL. Regardless, this is nitpicking as you said.

3. Ellington was garbage. The guy can't even make it to the AHL four years later and wasn't even the best defenseman on the Salmon Kings. If that guy was not a bust I'm not sure what is.

Agreed on all the other points though.

Better reasons to dislike Gillis are:

1. Marco Sturm signing: Nobody give me some hindsight bull**** this was bad from the get go. Don't make me pull out an old thread, the majority here were embracing themselves for the worst the moment they heard this happen.

2. Johnson signing: For a guy known for his faceoff prowess he was nothing amazing and went below 50% in at least one of his years here. Anyone paying close attention realized he wasn't good on the PK (despite being advertised as such) as his routine shotblocks were predictable and teams would just fake a shot, wait for him to go down, then start passing it around what essentially became a 5-3. Used to piss me off so much. Oh, and he was a blackhole offensively and injury prone.

3. Sulzer trade: The guy didn't get any opportunities here and the moment he's traded he gets over 20 minutes a game in Buffalo. That's an incredible jump. We got back a player we didn't even re-sign or play in the playoffs. A 7th rounder would've been better. But more importantly, Buffalo saw untapped potential in Sulzer that we, for some reason, didn't which worries me. The player I saw in Buffalo ( my 2nd favourite team) was a lot better than Ballard/Tanev/Alberts/ and Rome. Even if there weren't space on our D-group, if MG thought SUlzer had talent he would've showcased him on the line-up (not unlike Hodgson).
  • 0

#270 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 05 August 2012 - 12:39 PM

Out of curiosity...and this question is for everyone not just the three stooges what move since the lock out do you think hurt this team the most? I know there's going to be a lot of "Ballard Trades" and "Hodgson Trade" and in retrospect the Ballard trade is valid...Hodgson trade is yet to be seen. IMO though...the Cooke trade. Especially since Cooke has cleaned up his act and has shown that he's actually a good hockey play not just a horses ass on skates. Pettinger was bloody useless. That deal was almost as bad as the Rucinsky/ Sanderson trade.


I think the biggest mistake was the trade that didn't happen. Coming out of the lockout I said Jovo should be moved as he was going into his final contract year and we were aleady in cap trouble with our existing contracts. I suggested moving Jovo for a goalie plus. Instead Nonis re-signed Clouts who was immediately injured and gone for the season. Jovo walked at the end of the season as we didn't have the cap space to re-sign him. People at the time said I was crazy. But we squandered a season where we actually had two equally good scoring lines because we couldn't keep the puck out the net. What followed was bad trades for rental players to try plug the holes on defense. Which didn't pay off at all as we missed the playoffs. Nonis made big mistakes from the get go.
  • 0
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.