Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Interesting Brian Burke Videos from his time as the GM of Canucks


This topic has been archived.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

#31 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 25 July 2012 - 08:17 PM

I think you misunderstand the tone of my second point you quoted. I think that Gillis didn't want to ever sign Luongo to that monster deal, behind closed doors I think Luongo was/is a real prima donna but puts on the face of team player out to the media. I don't know if that was reflected in the team's lethargic play at times (multiple times), it almost seems that Schneider through and through was always more of a team guy, and Luongo saw that and became threatened by it.


It's possible, but I find that hard to believe. Gillis had been a huge Luongo fan since his arrival - "best goalie in the world" was shoved down our throats with regularity. I think making sure that Luongo extended here was actually one of Gillis' first goals.

From what I saw of Luongo, he was a major diva when we first acquired him, but he did loosen up pretty significantly, especially once he signed the contract (after getting lit-up in Chi-town). Became far more of a team guy with the contract, and I think he's consistently been getting better in that respect. Bad time to trade him.

#32 Super_Canuck

Super_Canuck

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,366 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 09

Posted 25 July 2012 - 08:54 PM

I always liked him. Love him or hate him, he's a man of honour and ethics and does what he says. I remember a week before he got fired I saw him and said "Mr. Burke, I liked the job you've done, I hope you sign an extension here" and he said "I hope so too"

Also looking at the video of the 2002 Wings series, it brings back some terrible memories of what use to some terrible goal-tending year. Cloutier and Irbe lol...man how quickly we've forgotten and how quick people are to bash Lu, the best goalie we've ever had

#33 Forsy

Forsy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,111 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 10

Posted 25 July 2012 - 09:29 PM

...

but as these realizations have set in, i've also realized that's it's not so much professionalism and character as it is robotic players and organizational small man syndrome. while their bid to appear as a big market team has succeeded to an extent in the media and entirely with canucks fans, i get the impression that the bluster hasn't really paid off within the league's inner circle of front office types, agents, players, and veteran hockey analysts. this attitude has lead to a league-wide perception of arrogance, overratedness, and dirty play, always keeping in mind that when there's that much smoke there's a pretty good chance you'll find at least a little fire. the other problem is that the napoleon complex has spread to the fanbase. no longer do canucks fans view themselves as the lovable underdogs, the small market team that can compete with the big boys. instead, they view their team as an indestructible powerhouse, mocking any albertan, ontarian or quebecer they luck into crossing paths with, boasting how even their ahl players could field a better team than the lowly flames or leafs.

...


FALSE. The bolded text assumption is a media-driven perception wherein the Vancouver Canucks is a dirty, diving team is seen as "league wide". Because of the bias against this team borne out of that assumption, I can already see the useless, unnecessary back and forth argumentation of your points that will get us nowhere. The reason your whole argument is mired in wrong conclusions and overall incorrectness (but contains agreeable facts and correct analysis) is because of this assumption clouding what can be seen of the vancouver canucks. Your specific examples showcase weakpoints of the gillis regime, but no regime is free of these weaknesses, and the regime overall is healthy, and arguably healthier when compared to previous regimes.

This false assumption is the "smoke" that indicates a fire, but the smoke is 'virtual' and manufactured by the media in order to sell papers (of which our provincial media is only too traitorous and retarded to prevent it from festering and growing). None of these issues: arrogance , diving , whining , dirty, over-rated applies specifically to a single team in the entire league, let alone the Canucks. Name any team, and not only could you provide good examples of how each of these terms could apply to them, you would be able to find many teams and players who could point it to any rival. These are manufactured stories to help paint a team as a bad guy, and it sells because enough there are enough ignorant people are willing to believe it and become passionate about hockey through their hatred. The media is manipulating them to get them reading their stories of non-existent protagonists and antagonists.

Edited by Forsy, 25 July 2012 - 09:35 PM.


#34 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,833 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 25 July 2012 - 09:37 PM

FALSE. The bolded text assumption is exactly why this Vancouver Canucks is a dirty, diving team is seen as "league wide". I can already see the useless, unnecessary back and forth argumentation of your points that will get us nowhere because of the bias against this team borne out of that assumption. This is also the reason why your whole argument, which contains agreeable facts and correct analysis is mired in wrong conclusions and overall incorrectness (in other words, your specific examples showcase weakpoints of the gillis regime, but no regime is free of these weaknesses, and the regime overall is healthy, and much healthier when compared to previous regimes).

This false assumption is the "smoke" that indicates a fire, but even the smoke is 'virtual' and manufactured by the media in order to sell papers (of which our provincial media is only too traitorous and retarded to prevent it from festering and growing). None of these issues: arrogance, diving, whining, dirty, over-rated applies specific to any single team in the entire league, let alone the Canucks. Name any team, and not only could you provide good examples of how each of these terms could apply to them, you would be able to find many teams who could pinpoint it to any of their rivals at any time. These are manufactured stories help paint a team as a bad guy, and it sells because enough ignorant people are willing to believe it and become passionate about hockey through their hatred. The media is manipulating them to get them reading their stories of non-existent protagonists and antagonists.


perception i said.

and the point of my post wasn't to dissect the successes and failures of gillis's regime and compare them to those of management teams around the league, although i did derail myself and went off about that tangentially. my main goal was to discuss the team's culture under gillis and my own changes in how i view the team now as opposed to when gillis first took over, and even as recently as the stanley cup run.

#35 disisdayear

disisdayear

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 528 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 25 July 2012 - 11:23 PM

Thanks to OP for taking us down memory lane...Burke is and was indeed a beauty.

His candor and honesty is missed...Burkie sure doesn't talk like a lawyer, which is opposite to MG's lawyer-talk that we've all become accustomed to. Funny, how two guys who have seemingly similar backgrounds (i.e., ex-hockey players, academics with professional academic credentials, family men, etc.) can be so outwardly different. Other than Burkie being more expressive (combative is probably a better descriptor...my favourite Burkeism is when he said he'd drive Trent Klatt to the airport), I think think their basic philosophy to building a team is more similar than many of us think (probably explains why they are at a stalemate on the Luongo deal).

One thing that has not been discussed about Burkie is the graciousness, compassion and class that he showed in dealing with his son's death. For a man who outwardly demonstrates a lot "truculence", he was unwavering in his expression of love and support for his son. His support for "You can play, if you can play" campaign in honour of his son, I believe, will have a more profound impact on his reputation than anything he's done in hockey.

That sort of social responsibility is a common thread that binds Burkie, Gillis, and other professionals (i.e., I think everyone can agree that what Gillis and the organization has done to honour Rypien and his life struggles is commendable).

Notwithstanding timing and circumstances, I believe that both Burke and Gillis will go down as making significant contributions to the success and failure of the Canucks...though neither have led us to the holy grail of hockey, I think we can all agree that the quality of hockey that we have been able to witness under their watch has been equally entertaining.

#36 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,856 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 25 July 2012 - 11:49 PM

Brian Burke is a very good GM. It's just that some things are obvious. He is extremely arrogant, and often lets his mouth get the best of him. I respect the work he's done in Vancouver. But to be honest if you ask me, MIke Gillis as a GM >>>> Brian Burke. I wasn't impressed with him saying, "I'm not a fan of the Acquillini's" on top of tampering with the Vancouver Canucks.

Players Nikolaj Ehlers have been compared too by the fan base of the Vancouver Canucks.

 

1 Pavel Bure

2 Markus Naslund

3 Nathan Mackkinon

4 Jonathan Drouin.

5 Jonathan Tavares

 

http://bleacherrepor...d-top-prospects

combine results.  Ehlers 5'11 162 lbs of solid rock.  


#37 Forsy

Forsy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,111 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 10

Posted 26 July 2012 - 01:33 AM

perception i said.

and the point of my post wasn't to dissect the successes and failures of gillis's regime and compare them to those of management teams around the league, although i did derail myself and went off about that tangentially. my main goal was to discuss the team's culture under gillis and my own changes in how i view the team now as opposed to when gillis first took over, and even as recently as the stanley cup run.


My point was that if one assumes/validates that the perceptions do not pertain to reality, then the conclusion must be that your points of view on the state and culture of the team will pertain to almost every team in the league. In addition, it is likely that your point of view is simply biased against the canucks, either by choice, or by ignorance of reality and following the media-driven perceptions of the team.

You mentioned two major things:

1) Results
Mediocre or poor results for Gillis as GM in the following:
Drafting
Prospect Development
Playoff Success
Trades/Acquisitions
-As many remember, the prospect cupboard was fairly bare during the Burke era (minus the sedins), as we pursued free agents for the cup. Who would argue that the prospect depth is WEAKER than the burke or nonis eras?
The Canucks team in the gillis era has arguably some of the best canucks teams ever fielded, won the president's trophy twice, in a row, broken multiple team records, and we have consistently lead or been near the top in GA, GF, PP%, PK%, Wins, Pts, etc, in the past 2 years. Even assuming the Gillis era isn't the best team of all Canucks history, how can one possibly state that the Gillis era teams are weak when compared to either the canucks history (ie. the burke era), or to recent nhl history?
It's ludicrous that anyone would think that the team has "stayed the same" or "decayed" skill and/or results-wise since the burke or nonis era!

2) Honor
Respectability, Character, Honor is lost, (vs. big money spent), and Canuck fans becoming overconfident/boorish over weaker canadian team rivals due to example set by management.
-How does #2 get proved by your argument? When has Gillis dropped respectability, character and honor for the sake of securing more money, winning at all costs or any other reasons? What small man organizational syndrome is there? Robotic players are suddenly dishonorable - did we not have endless threads on how the team is not or can't fight back against rough or dirty play?
Did Gillis tell or encourage the fans to be dicks? Do the fans behaviour and general overconfidence mean that the team is at fault? This is again, the issue of being brainwashed by media into the perception of the team as evil or honor-less, but it does not pertain to reality.

*My Conclusion: Both arguments have flawed assumptions, and I argue both are the result of the bias set out by the media. #2 is directly caused by the media, and #1 is a general ignorance of canucks history, or recent NHL league history.

#38 cannucklehead4life

cannucklehead4life

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 09

Posted 26 July 2012 - 04:25 AM

When Brian Burke lived in Vancouver as the GM he was actually my neighbor for a few years. He's a really nice guy. We never talked hockey ever cause i didn't want to be that guy. But I did have a few good conversations about dogs(he had two awesome mastiff's) Vancouver that kind of stuff. He really loved this city. I myself thought that he was a great gm. My only real problem with him was that he couldn't pick a good goalie to save his life. All the guys he tried here. The same thing is happening in Toronto. The only place he had one was in Anaheim and Bryan Murray drafted him
Posted Image

#39 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 26 July 2012 - 09:04 AM

FALSE. The bolded text assumption is a media-driven perception wherein the Vancouver Canucks is a dirty, diving team is seen as "league wide". Because of the bias against this team borne out of that assumption, I can already see the useless, unnecessary back and forth argumentation of your points that will get us nowhere. The reason your whole argument is mired in wrong conclusions and overall incorrectness (but contains agreeable facts and correct analysis) is because of this assumption clouding what can be seen of the vancouver canucks. Your specific examples showcase weakpoints of the gillis regime, but no regime is free of these weaknesses, and the regime overall is healthy, and arguably healthier when compared to previous regimes.


No, it's not a media-driven perception, it's reality.

Over the past 5 years, I've lived in 4 different NHL markets across Canada and the U.S. I'm currently in Chicago. There are two commonalities amongst fans OUTSIDE OF VANCOUVER that I've noticed:

1) A hatred towards Sidney Crosby (for whining)
2) A hatred towards the Vancouver Canucks (for basically the same reason)

Trust me, it's real. The perception exists because it's reality. It's not a media creation. We are NOT well-liked.

#40 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 26 July 2012 - 09:13 AM

Who would argue that the prospect depth is WEAKER than the burke or nonis eras?


I would. Dave Nonis' drafting record was pretty good. Who do you think got us Schneider, Edler, Raymond, Grabner, and Hansen? I won't directly include Kesler, Bieksa, or the Sedin's, because Nonis wasn't "GM" at that time, even though he was essentially Burke's heir apparent and surely played a strong part in their selections.

Gillis is now in year 4, and he's had 1 draft pick crack the lineup, and that might not even change this year (Schroeder's a big question mark, IMO). Yann Sauve on an emergency callup doesn't count. That's pretty poor.

The Canucks team in the gillis era has arguably some of the best canucks teams ever fielded, won the president's trophy twice, in a row, broken multiple team records, and we have consistently lead or been near the top in GA, GF, PP%, PK%, Wins, Pts, etc, in the past 2 years. Even assuming the Gillis era isn't the best team of all Canucks history, how can one possibly state that the Gillis era teams are weak when compared to either the canucks history (ie. the burke era), or to recent nhl history?


It's hard to really call this the "Gillis Era", because he's really added so little to this team. IMO, this team is still basically an extension of Dave Nonis' work. Gillis has added ONE guy to the top-six, ONE guy to the bottom-four (two, if Garrison's any good). That's not exactly "putting his stamp on this team", is it?

#41 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,362 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 26 July 2012 - 10:17 AM

Interesting
Posted Image


#42 Monteeun

Monteeun

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,741 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 03

Posted 26 July 2012 - 11:50 AM

I would. Dave Nonis' drafting record was pretty good. Who do you think got us Schneider, Edler, Raymond, Grabner, and Hansen? I won't directly include Kesler, Bieksa, or the Sedin's, because Nonis wasn't "GM" at that time, even though he was essentially Burke's heir apparent and surely played a strong part in their selections.

Gillis is now in year 4, and he's had 1 draft pick crack the lineup, and that might not even change this year (Schroeder's a big question mark, IMO). Yann Sauve on an emergency callup doesn't count. That's pretty poor.



It's hard to really call this the "Gillis Era", because he's really added so little to this team. IMO, this team is still basically an extension of Dave Nonis' work. Gillis has added ONE guy to the top-six, ONE guy to the bottom-four (two, if Garrison's any good). That's not exactly "putting his stamp on this team", is it?


In Gillis defence, some of his propsects might take a while to get into the lineup. Personally, it might be years later before we can officially say whether Gillis was good or not specifically the draft picks.

Still, this is quite an interesting discussion.

Edited by Monteeun, 26 July 2012 - 11:53 AM.

Benning will be fired next year. Hope he enjoys screwing around for a few months. I just cant believe this. Another injured BC player. We just got rid of garrison. Seems like the canucks and linden just wanted any BC born player. Doesn't matter if hes good or not. We don't need another Linden to get us to game 7 of the Stanley cup and lose. We need someone to win us a cup.

 

5 million a year for Vrbata? 6 million for Miller? Kesler for Bonino and 24th instead of 10th pick or one of their top prospects? Garrison for scraps?

ive already lost faith in JB. Ive never EVER had this bad of a feeling about management.

 


#43 The Kassassin Train

The Kassassin Train

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,138 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 05

Posted 26 July 2012 - 12:20 PM

A little different than the Eeyore character who's running this franchise now, isn't he?

Great post, thanks for sharing.


Takes an Eeyore to see an Eeyore.

The key difference is that Sopel can fill in for Seabrook and Campbell just fine. Bieksa, he is garbage so in that sense he is like the worst defenseman in the league.


When Cody (Hodgson) gets older, he might be better than Datsyuk.


Let's not push this guy (Kassian). He's still immature, and if he fails on the 2nd line it's because he isn't ready. Some guys really need years to develop, it's how well and how fast players adapt to the game. In my opinion, I'd rather have Horvat getting 2nd line minutes. He will start off on the 3rd line next season but I see him making the transition, being a great compliment to whoever plays his wings.

At this point, I don't see Kassian fitting in to any role other than a 3rd. If players like Kassian start getting 2nd line minutes then we just stay inconsistent as a team.


The idiocy on CDC....

#44 Forsy

Forsy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,111 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 10

Posted 26 July 2012 - 01:42 PM

I would. Dave Nonis' drafting record was pretty good. Who do you think got us Schneider, Edler, Raymond, Grabner, and Hansen? I won't directly include Kesler, Bieksa, or the Sedin's, because Nonis wasn't "GM" at that time, even though he was essentially Burke's heir apparent and surely played a strong part in their selections.

Gillis is now in year 4, and he's had 1 draft pick crack the lineup, and that might not even change this year (Schroeder's a big question mark, IMO). Yann Sauve on an emergency callup doesn't count. That's pretty poor.



It's hard to really call this the "Gillis Era", because he's really added so little to this team. IMO, this team is still basically an extension of Dave Nonis' work. Gillis has added ONE guy to the top-six, ONE guy to the bottom-four (two, if Garrison's any good). That's not exactly "putting his stamp on this team", is it?

You mention one of the weak parts of the entire regime, the part that cannot even be verified till years later, and then conclude from that the gillis era is worse or the same as the nonis era? This is still ridiculous.

Gillis is paid to win games and field the best team possible, not "put his stamp" by removing old core players who have proven themselves to be good and replacing them "just 'cause".

That media-driven perception is not a reality. Yes, obviously people hate crosby whining, and they hate the canucks for diving, but it is not that those are the only players whining and diving. It is simply that the media has put a microscope on those players, which puts out a perception that they are the only ones who do it, or that the canucks and crosby are the only ones who do it to that extent - but this is media driven, it is not reality! Most teams and players whine and dive all the time, it is not unique to crosby or the canucks!

#45 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,833 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 26 July 2012 - 02:50 PM

You mention one of the weak parts of the entire regime, the part that cannot even be verified till years later, and then conclude from that the gillis era is worse or the same as the nonis era? This is still ridiculous.

Gillis is paid to win games and field the best team possible, not "put his stamp" by removing old core players who have proven themselves to be good and replacing them "just 'cause".

That media-driven perception is not a reality. Yes, obviously people hate crosby whining, and they hate the canucks for diving, but it is not that those are the only players whining and diving. It is simply that the media has put a microscope on those players, which puts out a perception that they are the only ones who do it, or that the canucks and crosby are the only ones who do it to that extent - but this is media driven, it is not reality! Most teams and players whine and dive all the time, it is not unique to crosby or the canucks!


i think what you're struggling with is the definition of perception. whether or not every team in the league has divers and whiners on it is irrelevant when talking about the reality that there's a league-wide perception of the canucks as a dishonorable team.

#46 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,254 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 26 July 2012 - 04:23 PM

At the end of the day, I contend Burke was (rightfully) shipped out for his handling of the Bertuzzi / Moore incident.

When we returned after the lockout it was clear, to me anyway and presumably anybody who watched, that Bertuzzi, Naslund and coach Crawford were no longer playing for each other. The locker room was poisoned.

And Burke, as was his character, stood by all three as our team disintegrated. It cost TENS of millions of dollars over the next 2 to 4 years. He needed to move Crawford or Bertuzzi, a monumental fail. He was deservedly fired!

But yes, he single handily stood on a soap box and turned this franchise around when he started. By memory his first move was to sign Steve Kariya. The point wasn't that Steve became any good, but the platform was to make signings (we could afford) that made our farm team, training camp, third and fourth lines more athletic, talented, competitive... By the time he was done, he clearly made brought us out of an age where our franchise could fail, to sold out rinks and one of the most exciting teams (WCE days) we have ever seen. A justifiable firing, but also credit where credit is due as our best GM ever!

On to Gillis?

I am souring in my opinion, but will evaluate as objectively as I can.

Its not fair to say Gillis's success is on the coat tails of previous managements drafting and personnel. It's hogwash actually. Salo, Burrows, the Twins, etc., were all retained when they had UFA eligibility. And Gillis was credited with improved team culture, buy in and performance leading to their returning. At the SCF, only Kesler, Hansen, Raymond and Edler were players signed while restricted. Thats 4 players on the roster? Sorry, this was Gillis's team!

And where some say his early signings were a flop, I call them a draw at worst. Demitra was sort of ordinary, and we overpaid. But all (and we were at the time) small market teams have to overcompensate to attract talent to an average team. See Carolina signing Semin today, a near identical situation and similar (but better) playerand which will accomplish the same thing for them. And we had cap space and needed talent to compliment our young but athletic team. Without Demitra, we were a lottery team. With him, we were a play off team. I call that a success! Adding Sundin? I dont personally credit him for dragging the Keslers and Sedin's of the world into first world stardom as some do. And we certainly overpaid. But we lost to Chicago in 7 games, and could have won a cup. People don't recognize how close we were! And we would not have been without big Matt's, however we did not win and tossed a whole pile of money away. Meh, a fail but yeomans try. It did raise our expectations, enthusiasm and swagger! Tie them together, and I call it a draw on Gillis's early days but we did move forward.

It is fair to say that Gillis's strategies are enigmatic, where his press clippings suggest painstaking process driven decision making. He talked about money ball, and bold moves when hired. These conflict with each other, and have in real life. Gillis married the two trying to get a beastly play off body out of a prospect to salvage Hodgson. Bad calculation! Currently, having failed to recruit (or develop) physical depth players, Gillis is trying to do it again drafting mature aged prospects who theoretically will be ready to replace the Byron Bitz's of the world soon enough to save us? I dont buy it.

Signing Tanev / Lack is positive, but it should not sway us into believing all players can be found amongst the forgotten. Before June the reality was we had only drafted two players in our system who were over 200 lbs. And we were lacking physical players to bring up. The overage drafts are an attempt to jump a generation and recover for the fact we had not stocked any size of consequence. We are going to have to bite the bullet, and trade or sign for depth players with size as we did with Manny & Torres. Unfortunately Higgins is better than Torres, but that is just a tease. Higgins is a cheat, trying to get a medium size player to do a big bodied job! We needed to keep Torres, we loose waaaay to many physical match ups now. And Manny is unfortunate, but here Gillis is admirably (and I like this) showing Burke like loyalty. Hopefully he recovers! Hodgson/Bitz/Torres > Higgins/Kassian/Weise hands down. Too many money ball decisions which are not working without attending to fundamentals like size, speed and skill amongst veteran players. Since the SCF, to put it bluntly, Gillis has been too cute with his decisions!

His signature player moves are trading for Erhoff & signing Manny/Torres/Hamhuis which filled essentially every physical and talent need we could reasonably expect, plus re-signing Kesler, yes Lou (but one of the enigmatic under pressure moves), the Sedins and Burrows. They make him a pass as GM. He also bears the burden of making rash decisions and playing them off as smart use of money after blowing wads in others. My leash is growing shorter as he has made mostly mistakes since we were in the SCF.

We have upgraded Salo (Garrison), but screwed up with Hodgson (our best prospect since the Twins) not replaced Erhoff (even though K Connauton might be the guy down the track), not replaced Torres & not replaced Manny. With Lou and some cap room, we do have all potential to accomplish what we need. So Gillis is not a flop. These moves need to be accomplished by the trade deadline or I will move from questioning Gillis to calling for his scalp. I also believe we should be making moves that win!



you know, most canucks fans have long since turned on burke, in stark contrast to the outcry at the time of his firing. they were furious then at the mccaw regime (and stan mccammon in particular) for choosing not to renew the contract of the "best gm in hockey." this blow was softened when his protege took over, however, and the wound gradually closed and left a scar of bitterness at the lack of post season success burke achieved in his tenure in vancouver. fans also began shredding personnel decisions in hindsight as if they hadn't viewed them as the single greatest player acquisition(s) in league history a mere 2 or 3 years prior.

i've been guilty myself of badmouthing the guy and enjoying his failures with the leafs, but it's things like this (and many others) that make my respect for him as a human being, if not an nhl exec, grow more and more. sure the guy has a bit of blowhard in him (he is a lawyer, after all), and a touch of arrogance, but it's plainly obvious that he has a ton of character and is a really stand-up guy. we get on his case now for shooting his mouth off to the media, but do we really even disagree with the things he's saying, or do we just get indignant because he's saying them in public?

here's the kind of respect and loyalty this guy garners: remember dave nonis sobbing during the press conference where he was crowned gm, stating that "he hadn't expected to get the position that way," alluding to burke being forced down the plank?

this trickles down a lot into team culture. over the last year and a half, i've personally soured pretty significantly on the mike gillis regime. and this isn't just bitterness or disappointment with the on-ice success; it's the whole culture.

gillis rode in to town essentially unopposed upon the recommendations of tony gallagher (it's fun to point out, actually, that at this time gallagher and ed willes virtually swapped positions with the province, heel for face, in the way they covered the team -- it had previously been willes for the regime and gallagher the voice of dissension, but this flip started switching when the aquilinis gained sole ownership and the transition finished with the way nonis was fired and gillis was hired -- followed thereafter by willes writing gradually less and less about the canucks due, presumably, to either a lack of permitted access to the team or disgust) and a courtnall. he brought with him a lot of promises about becoming a "destination" market for players. he promised to vastly improve the team's drafting department and team facilities. he was going to build the team around character and work ethic.

he also brought his own culture with him. at first, it seemed like the emphasis was on professionalism and character, with things like community involvement taken into consideration. he also did everything in his power to stand on the big stage with the big market teams. in a lot of ways, he's succeeded. the media and fans consider vancouver a big market team now, where only 8 or so years prior the team was putting 14000 butts in the seats and was on the verge of being moved slightly down the pacific coast (oh yeah, burke is the guy who single-handedly turned that around, by the way). but what has gillis really accomplished? drafting is marginally better, at best, and vancouver still isn't a destination for big name free agents. the team had an incredible year in their anniversary season and have been consistently great, but they've still only been out of the second round once. there's also the fact that all of the canucks' success the last 4 years has been on the backs of acquisitions from the previous regime, from the scouting department, to the coaching staff, to the entire core of the team (sedins, kesler, burrows, hansen, raymond, salo, bieksa, edler, luongo, schneider). meanwhile, what have gillis's acquisitions done? bernier failed. demitra failed. sundin showed up and got paid and doesn't argue when the players and management talk about the great effect he had on the team. ballard eats cap space. the only prospect to make an impact on the lineup, gillis's prize prospect, the epitome of gillis's philosophy of character, turned eric lindros and was shipped out of town. his replacement, while too early to judge, looks like he has a lot of potential he won't meet. hamhuis is good. malhotra is unfortunate. samuelsson was shipped out, crippling the canucks' offensive versatility.

but as these realizations have set in, i've also realized that's it's not so much professionalism and character as it is robotic players and organizational small man syndrome. while their bid to appear as a big market team has succeeded to an extent in the media and entirely with canucks fans, i get the impression that the bluster hasn't really paid off within the league's inner circle of front office types, agents, players, and veteran hockey analysts. this attitude has lead to a league-wide perception of arrogance, overratedness, and dirty play, always keeping in mind that when there's that much smoke there's a pretty good chance you'll find at least a little fire. the other problem is that the napoleon complex has spread to the fanbase. no longer do canucks fans view themselves as the lovable underdogs, the small market team that can compete with the big boys. instead, they view their team as an indestructible powerhouse, mocking any albertan, ontarian or quebecer they luck into crossing paths with, boasting how even their ahl players could field a better team than the lowly flames or leafs.

gillis has no doubt done good things, too. the improvements to the facilities, the outside the box thinking and research, the financial investment in the scouting and player development departments, the expectation of professionalism from the entire organization, and some other things as well have all made a marked impact on the team. it has become a very well run business. hence why the aquilini family was happy to extend his contract.

what you end up with, in a nutshell, as the difference between the gillis regime and the burke/nonis regime is the trading of respectability, honour and character for a whole lot of money, both spent and gained. don't worry, though, it was a hockey trade.


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 26 July 2012 - 04:32 PM.


#47 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,833 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 26 July 2012 - 04:30 PM

At the end of the day, I contend Burke was (rightfully) shipped out for his handling of the Bertuzzi / Moore incident.

When we returned after the lockout it was clear, to me anyway and presumably anybody who watched, that Bertuzzi, Naslund and coach Crawford were no longer playing for each other. The locker room was poisoned.

And Burke, as was his character, stood by all three as our team disintegrated. It cost TENS of millions of dollars over the next 2 to 4 years. He was deservedly fired!


sorry, but i stopped reading here. burke was let go before the lockout.

#48 nucklehead2

nucklehead2

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 09

Posted 26 July 2012 - 05:22 PM

These are some of the best posts I've seen in a long time, shows some people were fans pre lockout era lol. Its hard too judge how Gillis is being rated but for me after the CoHo trade the luongo trade really really needs too pan out... Which to be honest is a long shot in my mind he's an amazing goalie

#49 Forsy

Forsy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,111 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 10

Posted 26 July 2012 - 06:24 PM

i think what you're struggling with is the definition of perception. whether or not every team in the league has divers and whiners on it is irrelevant when talking about the reality that there's a league-wide perception of the canucks as a dishonorable team.

And as long as no one has polled or held a vote with the league, that idea that the whole league perceives the canucks (or any other team/player) as dishonorable doesn't pertain to reality.
It cannot be established via interviews with rival teams and players who have specific reasons to hate the canucks.
And it cannot be established via media-driven stories that put a microscope towards certain players and teams and showcase it repeatedly over news and highlights. Since the media does not talk to the vast majority of the league players and determine a consensus ruling, they are most likely simply sensationalizing this trash because they lack the imagination to write anything else of substance.

#50 Rypien37

Rypien37

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,585 posts
  • Joined: 26-March 07

Posted 26 July 2012 - 07:18 PM

The guy always puts up a front like he is so tough and strict. I bet he is the BIGGEST softie...
Posted Image

R.I.P. Your heart and fearlessness will be remembered


#51 nux4lyfe

nux4lyfe

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,314 posts
  • Joined: 07-May 03

Posted 26 July 2012 - 07:23 PM

I really don't understand why people hate him so much, he actually did a lot good for the Nuckers.

13zpnd4.jpg

Thank You Twilight Sparkle for the dope sig!


#52 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,833 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 26 July 2012 - 08:44 PM

And as long as no one has polled or held a vote with the league, that idea that the whole league perceives the canucks (or any other team/player) as dishonorable doesn't pertain to reality.
It cannot be established via interviews with rival teams and players who have specific reasons to hate the canucks.
And it cannot be established via media-driven stories that put a microscope towards certain players and teams and showcase it repeatedly over news and highlights. Since the media does not talk to the vast majority of the league players and determine a consensus ruling, they are most likely simply sensationalizing this trash because they lack the imagination to write anything else of substance.


league-wide doesn't necessarily mean all-encompassing. let's go through it a bit.

chicago's players obviously really dislike the canucks, and ditto boston. you can write both off, almost, because of the rivalries, but not quite. when did chicago's players start hating the canucks? before they met in the playoffs. it was the game that burrows pulled duncan keith's hair.

mark recchi, a respected nhl veteran who everyone here would have commended as a good bc boy and a real class act, came out and said publicly that he's never hated any team as much as the canucks due to their arrogance. i honestly trust his judgment on the issue.

ryane clowe loathes the canucks, and especially kevin bieksa, because he considers him a phony that picks his spots, which is kind of true if you look at his fight card.

rj umberger hates ryan kesler because kesler shot his mouth off about rj being greedy when asking for rookie max.

2 canucks players were voted in the top 10 (or perhaps 5) of the most overrated in the league, by other players.

most of the league's gms seem unwilling to do business with mike gillis, forcing him to go back to his old well in florida time and time again.

when fans around the league think about the canucks, they think about ryan kesler and roberto luongo and it leaves a bad taste in their mouths, and frankly i don't much blame them.

#53 Forsy

Forsy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,111 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 10

Posted 26 July 2012 - 11:30 PM

league-wide doesn't necessarily mean all-encompassing. let's go through it a bit.

chicago's players obviously really dislike the canucks, and ditto boston. you can write both off, almost, because of the rivalries, but not quite. when did chicago's players start hating the canucks? before they met in the playoffs. it was the game that burrows pulled duncan keith's hair.

mark recchi, a respected nhl veteran who everyone here would have commended as a good bc boy and a real class act, came out and said publicly that he's never hated any team as much as the canucks due to their arrogance. i honestly trust his judgment on the issue.

ryane clowe loathes the canucks, and especially kevin bieksa, because he considers him a phony that picks his spots, which is kind of true if you look at his fight card.

rj umberger hates ryan kesler because kesler shot his mouth off about rj being greedy when asking for rookie max.

2 canucks players were voted in the top 10 (or perhaps 5) of the most overrated in the league, by other players.

most of the league's gms seem unwilling to do business with mike gillis, forcing him to go back to his old well in florida time and time again.

when fans around the league think about the canucks, they think about ryan kesler and roberto luongo and it leaves a bad taste in their mouths, and frankly i don't much blame them.

You mention 3 of our players being hated, and we can make it 4 if you add Lapierre. How much do you know about the other teams and players (other than avery)? Think that the canucks are the only guys with so much hatred on their players? You're playing right into the media circus, because the media is the only news we can get about these guys, and they love to showcase scandals that what will generate the most traffic on their sites (ie. whatever canuck and canadian team fans will look into).

Dr. Recchi, arrogance? In most cases, this is called confidence, or even overconfidence. And in either case, arrogance isn't suddenly dishonorable. The doctor sh1ts on the losing team when it's completely unnecessary and unprovoked after the finals, just like Adam Burish sh1tting on pronger. Now there's class.

Listening to teams that are mic'd up will show that dishonorable play happens on occasion by most, if not all teams. Media-based drivel, as always. Just like the "offensive system" vs. "defensive system" of coaching bs that they keep trying to pin on coaches.

#54 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,557 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 29 July 2012 - 06:30 AM

"There was no way Alex Auld was going to be on this team this year, unless he flew to France during the summer and bathed in the holy waters at Lourdes"


"If Trent can get 3 years at over a million from someone else, god bless him I'll drive him to the airport"


(On Shootouts)
"There is no way, as long as I am in charge of the Vancouver Canucks, there's no way we are gunna vote for that. To me it would be the same thing if the National Football league decided there games by guys throwing footballs through a tire.



Ahhh.. Good old Brian Burke, all that Detriot stuff was great too. He's always good for a laugh.

zackass.png


#55 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 29 July 2012 - 12:52 PM

he did good things for us , i dont know if he will do the same for toronto tho
Posted Image

#56 thema

thema

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,292 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 12

Posted 29 July 2012 - 12:59 PM

A little different than the Eeyore character who's running this franchise now, isn't he?



Ya think? I was amused that Gillis stole the "level playing field" whine from Burkie.

#57 aqua59

aqua59

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,136 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 08

Posted 29 July 2012 - 01:11 PM

Some of you bone heads still don't get it. I said some not all. The NHL is a business, a cut throat business that demands results from top to bottom.

The regime that handled Burke's firing was bush. Look what the did with the Grizzlies. we didn't like them but they were there with deep pockets.

Burke is gone. He's won a Cup and know is basking in the spot light he so loves.

The guy was a very good GM while here and I think for all intensive purposes still a very savvy GM.

That said his undoing has been his own ego and nothing else. Quite simply my opinion hold him to be a jerk but a great GM.

Like MG or not he still has the GM's job at present and is reshaping the team slowly into a better product than provided by Burke. That has something to be said for ownership too.

Forget the past, Burke is long gone. I'm glad too!




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.