Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* - - - - 9 votes

MG should be on thin ice...


  • Please log in to reply
212 replies to this topic

#151 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,007 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:43 AM

Tweeted what? Cody is asking to leave Vancouver?
Give it up ,Baggins.


See for yourself......


http://blogs.theprov...s-before-trade/

Near the end of a long day on twitter for Ritch Winter, Cody Hodgson’s agent, a Vancouver Canucks fan, @scurrie90, sent him this tweet:
“Cody’s Dad made him go through 3 agents til they finally found one that antagonized MG (Mike Gillis) enough that Cody (was) moved.”
Winter (@hockeyagentdad) responded with this:
“Third time luck they say.”
It was the glib low point in a day Winter didn’t do his client any favours. The agent who openly mocks the media for rampant speculation, ironically fueled even more with his revelations about the events that led up to the blockbuster Hodgson trade to Buffalo.
First with a bullet was Winter revealing Hodgson met with Vigneault Saturday about his role with the team. Winter called it a “great meeting.”
Maybe. What it’s not, is common. Mentioning a meeting with the coach about his role two days before he was traded only feeds the wooly mammoth in the room. And that is did Hodgson ask for a trade? Did his camp push the Canucks into their decision to deal Hodgson for Zack Kassian on deadline day?
Winter said only Vigneault and Hodgson know what was said in the meeting. It certainly doesn’t help the optics.
It’s ironic Winter reveals the meeting in the same tweet he says, “I just find speculation fascinating.”
He must.
For most of Wednesday, he was the source of it.
Continuing to stoke the fire, Winter added:
“Now we did ask for more ice time.”
In the meeting two days before the trade deadline? That meeting was about asking for an increased role? Oh, right, that’s pure speculation.
Winter clarified it later with this:
“I discussed icetime on several occassions over 2 years. Never demanded it ever.”
Sometimes, it’s better to say nothing. Let a story die, instead of pumping oxygen into the fire. Hodgson’s ice time was a rager which was finally dying down. By confirming it was an issue, Winter dumps his gasoline on it at the worst possible time. It will make things more difficult for Hodgson Saturday, when he’ll again be asked all about his request for ice time.
When pushed on the topic, Winter says:
“He never made such a request. Why would you assume that.”
Because you mentioned it.
He followed that with:
“how I love the unfounded speculation.”
Good luck making sense of that sequence.
Of course, Winter didn’t stop there. Unwilling to disengage, he added this:
“Cody loved Vancouver, the vanc (sic) fans and the city. Team had different goals than Cody. The trade supports that. But it was a surprise.”
It was vague and open to questioning. How were the goals different? Long term goals, or short term?
Winter has continually stressed Hodgson did not ask for a trade. Maybe he should have left it at that.
“Media (is) trying to fill blogs, airtime, etc. With speculation in 24/7 sports media world 2 c what sticks,” he tweeted.
Oh, the ironing.
The 24/7 sports world will be just fine without Hodgson speculation.
“Speculation just a product of those who r having trouble reading Eng. Its pretty clear,” Winter says.
It seems there are different definitions of clarity. And English.



Or how about this gem......


http://blogs.theprov...-request-story/
The run of the Cody Hodgson circus in Vancouver appears to be finally coming to a close.
His agent Ritch Winter took down the big top late Thursday, finally deleting a series of contradictory tweets which only fuelled speculation that Hodgson wanted out of Vancouver and asked for a trade.
Winter admitted Hodgson wanted more ice time, something he said was an issue for two years, and revealed a meeting Hodgson had with head coach Alain Vigneault. He did get the date wrong. The meeting was last Friday, not Saturday.
At maybe its strangest moment, Winter tweeted out his cellphone number and when someone asked him via Twitter why he would do that, he said it didn’t happen.
A couple hours later dozens of tweets, going back two weeks, were deleted. Everything on Hodgson was gone.
Then Friday the Buffalo Sabres arrived in Vancouver and said Hodgson would not be available. But they changed that late in the afternoon, giving the Vancouver media less than 20 minutes to get to a presser with the rookie. It wasn’t enough notice for most of the media, including The Province and TEAM 1040.
Sportsnet and Vancouver Sun’s Elliott Pap was on hand, however, and gave Hodgson a good grilling. I’m loath to link to anything at the Vancouver Sun, but this is hilarious and worth a read.
Essentially, Hodgson doesn’t answer any of the questions and refuses to specifically address whether he asked for a trade.
Maybe it could lead to more speculation, but Vancouver is just about run bone dry on Hodgson speculation at this point.
He starts every answer with “Like I said,” which wasn’t dissimilar to Todd Bertuzzi when he answered every question with “It is what it is” after returning from his suspension in 2005.
The best exchange, mostly for the great question, was this:


Pap: Given the history of your back issues two seasons ago, and the supposed bad blood over that, did any type of conversation take place between your side and the Canucks in which you were told, if you wanted a trade, you would have to play well in a Canucks uniform to establish your trade value?



Hodgson: “Like I said, I don’t look back at everything that’s happened. I’m happy for my time here. I’m really grateful that they drafted me and gave me an opportunity to play. They helped develop me and become the player I am today so I have nothing but good things to say about the organization and what they’ve done for me.”



Hmmmm, Winter wipes out tweets and Hodgson evades questions.....it's a head scratcher.....
  • 0
Posted Image

#152 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,732 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:07 AM

Wow, you really don't get what MG gave up on...COHO will be a top 20 player in the NHL pointwise for the next 10 years for a player who will be given far more opportunity then COHO was ever given and has way less talent.






regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#153 hockeywoot

hockeywoot

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 08:00 AM

This thread is laughable.

Some people need to temper expectations.
Name one GM who has a flawless record.

You can't. Believe it or not, as humans, as people, we mistakes.
Yes, NHL GMs too...

Managers are either above average, average, or below average.
Look at the other top managers in the league.
Are they significantly better than MG?

MG ain't perfect, but he's pretty damned good.
His good moves far outweigh the bad.

For those sucking at the Burke-Nonis teat.... give it a rest.
As if Gillis should have gotten rid of perfectly good core players simply to appease a few nutty fans LMAO.

Gillis took an "okay" team with some good players, and turned them into a perennial contender.
It's no accident.

Ultimately its the players who have to perform.
Management can only do so much.
  • 0

#154 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,418 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 08:36 AM

See for yourself......


http://blogs.theprov...s-before-trade/

Near the end of a long day on twitter for Ritch Winter, Cody Hodgson’s agent, a Vancouver Canucks fan, @scurrie90, sent him this tweet:
“Cody’s Dad made him go through 3 agents til they finally found one that antagonized MG (Mike Gillis) enough that Cody (was) moved.”
Winter (@hockeyagentdad) responded with this:
“Third time luck they say.”
It was the glib low point in a day Winter didn’t do his client any favours. The agent who openly mocks the media for rampant speculation, ironically fueled even more with his revelations about the events that led up to the blockbuster Hodgson trade to Buffalo.
First with a bullet was Winter revealing Hodgson met with Vigneault Saturday about his role with the team. Winter called it a “great meeting.”
Maybe. What it’s not, is common. Mentioning a meeting with the coach about his role two days before he was traded only feeds the wooly mammoth in the room. And that is did Hodgson ask for a trade? Did his camp push the Canucks into their decision to deal Hodgson for Zack Kassian on deadline day?
Winter said only Vigneault and Hodgson know what was said in the meeting. It certainly doesn’t help the optics.
It’s ironic Winter reveals the meeting in the same tweet he says, “I just find speculation fascinating.”
He must.
For most of Wednesday, he was the source of it.
Continuing to stoke the fire, Winter added:
“Now we did ask for more ice time.”
In the meeting two days before the trade deadline? That meeting was about asking for an increased role? Oh, right, that’s pure speculation.
Winter clarified it later with this:
“I discussed icetime on several occassions over 2 years. Never demanded it ever.”
Sometimes, it’s better to say nothing. Let a story die, instead of pumping oxygen into the fire. Hodgson’s ice time was a rager which was finally dying down. By confirming it was an issue, Winter dumps his gasoline on it at the worst possible time. It will make things more difficult for Hodgson Saturday, when he’ll again be asked all about his request for ice time.
When pushed on the topic, Winter says:
“He never made such a request. Why would you assume that.”
Because you mentioned it.
He followed that with:
“how I love the unfounded speculation.”
Good luck making sense of that sequence.
Of course, Winter didn’t stop there. Unwilling to disengage, he added this:
“Cody loved Vancouver, the vanc (sic) fans and the city. Team had different goals than Cody. The trade supports that. But it was a surprise.”
It was vague and open to questioning. How were the goals different? Long term goals, or short term?
Winter has continually stressed Hodgson did not ask for a trade. Maybe he should have left it at that.
“Media (is) trying to fill blogs, airtime, etc. With speculation in 24/7 sports media world 2 c what sticks,” he tweeted.
Oh, the ironing.
The 24/7 sports world will be just fine without Hodgson speculation.
“Speculation just a product of those who r having trouble reading Eng. Its pretty clear,” Winter says.
It seems there are different definitions of clarity. And English.



Or how about this gem......


http://blogs.theprov...-request-story/
The run of the Cody Hodgson circus in Vancouver appears to be finally coming to a close.
His agent Ritch Winter took down the big top late Thursday, finally deleting a series of contradictory tweets which only fuelled speculation that Hodgson wanted out of Vancouver and asked for a trade.
Winter admitted Hodgson wanted more ice time, something he said was an issue for two years, and revealed a meeting Hodgson had with head coach Alain Vigneault. He did get the date wrong. The meeting was last Friday, not Saturday.
At maybe its strangest moment, Winter tweeted out his cellphone number and when someone asked him via Twitter why he would do that, he said it didn’t happen.
A couple hours later dozens of tweets, going back two weeks, were deleted. Everything on Hodgson was gone.
Then Friday the Buffalo Sabres arrived in Vancouver and said Hodgson would not be available. But they changed that late in the afternoon, giving the Vancouver media less than 20 minutes to get to a presser with the rookie. It wasn’t enough notice for most of the media, including The Province and TEAM 1040.
Sportsnet and Vancouver Sun’s Elliott Pap was on hand, however, and gave Hodgson a good grilling. I’m loath to link to anything at the Vancouver Sun, but this is hilarious and worth a read.
Essentially, Hodgson doesn’t answer any of the questions and refuses to specifically address whether he asked for a trade.
Maybe it could lead to more speculation, but Vancouver is just about run bone dry on Hodgson speculation at this point.
He starts every answer with “Like I said,” which wasn’t dissimilar to Todd Bertuzzi when he answered every question with “It is what it is” after returning from his suspension in 2005.
The best exchange, mostly for the great question, was this:


Pap: Given the history of your back issues two seasons ago, and the supposed bad blood over that, did any type of conversation take place between your side and the Canucks in which you were told, if you wanted a trade, you would have to play well in a Canucks uniform to establish your trade value?



Hodgson: “Like I said, I don’t look back at everything that’s happened. I’m happy for my time here. I’m really grateful that they drafted me and gave me an opportunity to play. They helped develop me and become the player I am today so I have nothing but good things to say about the organization and what they’ve done for me.”



Hmmmm, Winter wipes out tweets and Hodgson evades questions.....it's a head scratcher.....


Looking at the completely irrational and nonsensical style that Winter writes in I can only come to one conclusion. Nucknit is Ritch Winter.
  • 4
Posted Image
Posted Image

#155 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,848 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:12 AM

Higgins, Lappiere, Hamhuis, all great pick-up's. Garrison is probably going to be good for the canucks as well. Not to mention that most of the players who Burke and Nonis are responsible for were re-signed at cap freindly deals.

The real problem I see facing the Canucks is the scouting department. I'm sure they hit a home run with corrado, but not much else is happening with the canucks drafting. I say this excluding the obvious first rounders the canucks have selected. I would much prefer a drafting system in which they take the best possible player available instead of trying to hit home runs on projects. Detroit uses the best player available model, and it seems to work great for them.

Next is the trade's. Gillis gets feed back from the scouting department on players around the league when trades are being discussed with other teams. If the advice he gets from his scouting department is sub-par, then you end up with players who under achieve such as Ballard. I like Ballard, but the return for should of been much better for what the Canucks gave up. I feel the same for the kassian deal as well. Hodgsen has top 20 scoring ability and was drafted 10th overall, perhaps a larger package for Hodgsen should have come back.

Either way, I think Gillis needs to take a serious look at the scouting department if this franchise is to succeed in the future!


I don't know - the scouting department seemed to be A-OK when it came to Ehrhoff, Samuelsson, Hamhuis, Higgins, Lapierre...

I think the problem with Ballard was that he never had to recover from a serious injury before. Not only did he have a summer of rehab after we acquired him, but he has been injured multiple times since. He's been unable to find any rhythm, and may just be one of those players who is never the same after getting hurt.

As for the young guys, has it been that bad? For 2008, Hodgson panned out (obviously with a disclaimer), and Sauve looks to be a future bottom-pairing defenseman. Not bad for a draft where the GM just took over, and had no 3rd or 4th round picks. Rai had small flashes of potential, but injuries derailed him.

2009 hasn't produced an NHL game yet, but that is probably more to do with the strength of our team than the quality of those drafted. Schroeder may not pan out, but it's far from certain at this point. And he was most certainly the BPA at the time. Rodin is in the same boat. Connauton holds a lot of promise, as does Joe Cannata. Andersson, Price, and Anthony are longshots, but still in the picture.

In 2010, we had no pick until the 4th round, #115. So I wouldn't expect much there. McNally and Friesen hold promise though.

2011, too early to tell for sure, but Jensen looks solid as hell, and Corrado seems to be a surefire homerun. If anybody else pans out it will be gravy.

2012 is also far too early to tell, but Guance sure looks excellent. Mallet was picked more for what he could bring us quickly (physical depth player). No 3rd or 4th round pick.

I'd say the drafting has been pretty good. What really would have been nice for now would be if we had anything to show for 2006 and 2007, because these players would likely be just coming into their own. But other than Grabner (who we likely would have lost on waivers, had we not traded him), we got absolutely zilch.

That has really affected our ability to supplement the roster with young guys. Fortunately, Gillis has been fantastic at finding veterans to fill those spots admirably, for less than market value. A good chunk of the credit for that should go to the scouting staff as well.
  • 0
Posted Image

#156 I Got A Boy

I Got A Boy

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Joined: 04-January 13

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:14 AM

This thread is laughable.

Some people need to temper expectations.
Name one GM who has a flawless record.

You can't. Believe it or not, as humans, as people, we mistakes.
Yes, NHL GMs too...

Managers are either above average, average, or below average.
Look at the other top managers in the league.
Are they significantly better than MG?

MG ain't perfect, but he's pretty damned good.
His good moves far outweigh the bad.

For those sucking at the Burke-Nonis teat.... give it a rest.
As if Gillis should have gotten rid of perfectly good core players simply to appease a few nutty fans LMAO.

Gillis took an "okay" team with some good players, and turned them into a perennial contender.
It's no accident.

Ultimately its the players who have to perform.
Management can only do so much.


he got motivation to post dis thread cuz burke got fired
  • 0

#157 frazzY

frazzY

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,390 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:30 AM

Lol negative people will grasp at straws. Sure majority of our core is from the Burke/Nonis era. but look how long those 2 combined were here for? Lots of GM's like to blow the team up, Gillis saw that we were close, just needed some tweaks, that in itself is great insight and a great managerial decision. The character players he's added have worked out amazing and he has given up little to nothing to acquire.

You can't argue with the on-ice product, we contend every year, are at the top of the league for the last 2, what more do you want? I know this town is hurting for a stanley cup but its not easy to win that trophy. 29 other GMs in the league want what we and Gillis want.

And the argument that "he didn't have to try hard to get Hamhuis, Garrison, etc. Cause they wanted to play here, bla bla" is LAUGHABLE! That means that Ken Holland is a crap GM cause everyone wanted to play in Detroit the last 20 years....

Give Gillis some credit, by far our best GM since Quinn, statistically he is better actually. These last few years have been the brightest in this franchise. But some of you clearly wish MG blew the team up when he came here cause you just cant help but compare him to Nonis and Burke....

SMH
  • 0

#158 TimberWolf

TimberWolf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,359 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 04

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:38 AM

Did everyone forget Gillis' most spectacular signing in his 1st year as GM ... Sundin ??!! ... I mean #13 is in the HOF, right :lol: ??Originally offered him $20 mill for 2 years, Gillis' arse was saved when Sundin only chose to play 1 year ... I mean 1/2 year. Had Sundin taken Gillis up on his original offer, I'm pretty sure Gillis would be back to representing players again instead of GM of Canucks.


That's the list I asked for, then? One acquisition that may be questionable? A guy that got 8 points in 8 playoff games for us? This is the reason to hang Gillis high?
  • 0

I was saying Lu-Urns...

star-wars-hockey-goal.gif?w=284

#159 KING ALBERTS

KING ALBERTS

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,260 posts
  • Joined: 01-May 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 10:26 AM

gillis put the peices together to turn this team from a p layoff team to a stanley cup finals team.

if anyone should be on thin ice its vigneault
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

i fel off the banwagon and hit my hed on a rok


#160 stawns

stawns

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,895 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 03

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:22 AM

gillis put the peices together to turn this team from a p layoff team to a stanley cup finals team.

if anyone should be on thin ice its vigneault


do tell..........seems to me that 90% of the core memebrs, the ones who carry the team on their back were here when he got here
  • 1

#161 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:27 AM

Gillis Pros:

Cap Management, Player friendly

Gillis Cons:

Lack of GM experience leads to poor asset management. So what if CoHo asked for a trade. MY answer would have been "No. You are Canucks property, now spank spank and straight to the minors with you."

It is starting to look like he has squandered our future potential (prospects and draft picks) on plugs and projects. Some have worked out but he never managed to keep them around! (Ehrhoff,Torres,Mitchell etc) I often wonder what MG's garage looks like. I envision a bunch of rusted out broken down projects destined for the scrap pile.

I also wonder if MG's hard line Player Agent days are a detriment to his career as a GM. Is it possible it is that much harder for him to make a trade because some other GMs just don't want to deal with him?

MG is starting to show a clear tendency towards washed up players or players (From Sundin-Barker and everyone in between)who everyone else have given up on. I guess it's ok if they work out but really, is that a sustainable way to build a contender. You are really just playing the odds at that point and hoping for the best.

The current team really is a Burke/Nonis creation, despite what the super homers here are trying to spin.Even the coach, who, if memory serves, was on the thinnest of ice before MG came along.

I would be extremely interested to hear Mikael Samuelson expand on reasons why he "Will not miss the canucks management" Would also like to hear some candid responses from other players regarding GMMG.
  • 2

#162 Monty

Monty

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,692 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:33 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COSeM2EVkDc


                                         regards,
                                               G.


Watching TNG for the first time on Netflix (never watched it before). Saw this episode a couple days ago. Put a smile on my face that you posted this.
  • 1

Can you imagine drowning AT a KK Rev concert?

  


i'm pretty sure that's how zombies are born.


#163 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,732 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:51 AM

do tell..........seems to me that 90% of the core memebrs, the ones who carry the team on their back were here when he got here


And the point is that they are still here, and at a very good cap hit, rather than walking as UFA's.

regards,
G.
  • 2
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#164 bongo4420

bongo4420

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 442 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 04

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:54 AM

Gillis is vastly overrated by the homer Vancouver media and fans. If it wasn't for the player's he inherited we would be battling for last every year. The Canuck's have no depth because of MG's constant failures and it's only getting worse.
  • 1

#165 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:58 AM

And the point is that they are still here, and at a very good cap hit, rather than walking as UFA's.

regards,
G.


Luongo is a good cap hit, not sure if it'll be so good in 2020 though lol

Sundin 10mil cap hit? Gillis's first move and he dodge a bullet on that one. Maybe it has made him gunshy to sign any more big names or maybe big names just don't want to sign here, not sure which way the door swings on that one.

Speking of letting important players walk as UFAs, Mitchell, Torres, Ehrhoff (who else am I missing?) say hi!


My real concern with MG is that he traded away too many good prospects and draft picks for basically nothing.

Edited by scottiecanuck, 18 January 2013 - 12:00 PM.

  • 1

#166 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,078 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:11 PM

My real concern with MG is that he traded away too many good prospects and draft picks for basically nothing.


Hodgson and Howden are all you really have here, and call Ballard and Kassian nothing if you will, but you're embellishing. Some of those mid round picks he moved resulted in Higgins and Lapierre.

Edited by oldnews, 18 January 2013 - 12:12 PM.

  • 1

#167 Brambojoe

Brambojoe

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 257 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:45 PM

He was handed arguably the two most complete players in the NHL the paSt five years ... and certainly the most complete players in the history of Vancouver. (Sedins)

And the best or second best only to lundqvist goalie in the league the past 5 years.


Interesting, who negotiated and signed these players current contracts with Vancouver. Can you remind me?
  • 0

#168 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,927 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:46 PM

Just wondering, with Burke out of the picture, does Gillis become the most antagonizing GM in the NHL now? (according to the media?)
  • 0
Posted Image

#169 bongo4420

bongo4420

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 442 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 04

Posted 18 January 2013 - 01:13 PM

Interesting, who negotiated and signed these players current contracts with Vancouver. Can you remind me?


Every Gillis homer points to the fact he re-signed some players, big deal. Any GM the Canucks could have hired, or retained, would have signed the Sedin's. A GM is defined by the players he acquires You have a serious problem if your GM's crowning achievement is re-signing players that were already here
  • 0

#170 stawns

stawns

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,895 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 03

Posted 18 January 2013 - 01:18 PM

And the point is that they are still here, and at a very good cap hit, rather than walking as UFA's.

regards,
G.


I agree that his moves to re-sign players have been good, but that post was a response that he added the key members to make the team a contender.........he's made a 1-2 good moves, a cpl of ok moves and a few blah moves. His record is not as spectacular as the myth of MG indicates.

Still, I have no problem with the job he has done in Van, but if he fumbles the goaltender situation it could cost him his job
  • 0

#171 Brambojoe

Brambojoe

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 257 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 02:05 PM

Every Gillis homer points to the fact he re-signed some players, big deal. Any GM the Canucks could have hired, or retained, would have signed the Sedin's. A GM is defined by the players he acquires You have a serious problem if your GM's crowning achievement is re-signing players that were already here


Because players never change teams when they become free agents?
  • 1

#172 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,007 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 18 January 2013 - 02:12 PM

Every Gillis homer points to the fact he re-signed some players, big deal. Any GM the Canucks could have hired, or retained, would have signed the Sedin's. A GM is defined by the players he acquires You have a serious problem if your GM's crowning achievement is re-signing players that were already here


Once a GM chooses to re-sign a player that player is his. He chose to sign him. He could have just as easily let the Sedins walk and pursued other UFA's, He didn't, and there were many on this board that wanted him to. Quite a few here thought he overpaid the Sedins.
  • 1
Posted Image

#173 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,732 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 02:15 PM

Gillis Cons:
Lack of GM experience leads to poor asset management. So what if CoHo asked for a trade. MY answer would have been "No. You are Canucks property, now spank spank and straight to the minors with you."


Is this good asset management? Once upon a time, back in the original six years, Hodgson might have been a 2nd to 3rd round pick. If he ticked off management he would indeed have been buried in the minors for so long that the only way he would be at an NHL game is if he bought a ticket.

With expansion and the watering down of talent, teams can't really afford to bury a guy unless it's for money/contract reasons or that they just can't get rid of him via a trade. With Hodgson, if the team no longer wanted him then a trade was the best option. Anything else would be a waste of a resource.

I think Gillis is a good judge talent and is very good at asset management. He might not look at a situation quite from the same angle as another GM, but he does know what makes a player good and what he doesn't want or need. Further, any significant decision (such as 1st round picks) is discussed in a group of Gillis and his various assistants and scouts. He doesn't just throw a dart at a board and hope for the best.


It is starting to look like he has squandered our future potential (prospects and draft picks) on plugs and projects. Some have worked out but he never managed to keep them around! (Ehrhoff,Torres,Mitchell etc) I often wonder what MG's garage looks like. I envision a bunch of rusted out broken down projects destined for the scrap pile.


Uhm, what picks has he squandered? 2010 was the only year where the Canucks had traded off a 1st (as part of the Ballard deal). The 2nd and 3rd round picks from that year were also moved. Total Canuck picks which were traded while Gillis has been here (regardless of who traded them): 1st - 1, 2nd - 2, 3rd - 3, 4th - 3, 5th - 0, 6th - 0, 7th - 0. Picks acquired: 1st - 0, 2nd - 2, 3rd - 1, 4th - 1, 5th - 0, 6th - 1, 7th - 0. And there was the whole thing of the Canucks' 3rd which was traded away and then re-acquired, plus there may well be a pick or two coming in from the Luongo deal.

Prospects of note moved: Hodgson, who got the Canucks Kassian; Grabner (who was likely going to be lost to waivers) who was traded for Ballard; White, who was traded for Ehrhoff. I'm thinking there's still a lot of future to be had.


I also wonder if MG's hard line Player Agent days are a detriment to his career as a GM. Is it possible it is that much harder for him to make a trade because some other GMs just don't want to deal with him?


I don't see that being the case at all. Burke was talking deal, and he was the guy who supposedly had the most reason to dislike Gillis. If other GM's were former players, why would that poison their attitudes towards Gillis? If a GM does something to screw another GM, then there will be problems down the road and payback in some form. Gillis has not acted unprofessionally to any other GM in any way, as far as I know.


MG is starting to show a clear tendency towards washed up players or players (From Sundin-Barker and everyone in between)who everyone else have given up on. I guess it's ok if they work out but really, is that a sustainable way to build a contender. You are really just playing the odds at that point and hoping for the best.


Yes, Gillis going to build a contender from guys who are castoffs from other teams and cannot get a job anywhere else. I'm tempted to insert a trawler pic here...

All GM's do this. Go look at the UFA's signings and guys who are getting PTO's.

The current team really is a Burke/Nonis creation, despite what the super homers here are trying to spin.Even the coach, who, if memory serves, was on the thinnest of ice before MG came along.


Yup, and Gillis contacted Burke/Nonis on a regular basis as to how to run the Canucks. True story.


I would be extremely interested to hear Mikael Samuelson expand on reasons why he "Will not miss the canucks management" Would also like to hear some candid responses from other players regarding GMMG.


Yes, because Samuelsson is the guy who really was the heart and soul of the Canucks during his time here.....


regards,
G.
  • 1
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#174 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:00 PM

Yes, that would be good management. What kind of GM lets an unproven rookie(or his dad) walk all over him and dictate the terms of play? What kind of message does that send to the rest of the players? CoHo should have been put in his place and treated like the spoiled kid he was acting like. He is no Lindros (not even a Brett). He should have been told to "Do as your dam well told or you can go to the minors. If you don't like those 2 options, sit out and see what it does to your career." End of story.

The team is a Burke/Nonis creation. The impact players MG has brought in, have mostly moved on at their first opportunity. The rest he has brought in have been bottom of the barrel, 29 team reject, plugs.

Regardless of Samuelson's role on the team (maybe it was more than he is given credit for, along with Ehrhoff and Torres), there was something about management that rubbed him wrong enough to be vocal about it. I would like to know where the smoke is coming from as Samuelson probably isn't the only one, just the only vocal one.

Is everyone that analyzes the nux without pink sunglasses on an automatic trawler? Perhaps, to some.

Sincerely,

S.

Edited by scottiecanuck, 18 January 2013 - 03:23 PM.

  • 1

#175 Dildo Faggins

Dildo Faggins

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 03:15 PM

Gillis royally effed up with the Luongo contract and now he is effing up the possibility of trading him. Two roster players plus a pick for 33 year old Luongo "play-off choke artist" and his monster contract? Get serious. He is asking for way too much and no one is going to take a deal like that. We had a great opportunity to trade him to Toronto and finally get rid of this burden, and he screws it up by making outrageous demands. I'm still super pi ssed about losing Hodgson too, the best Canucks prospect in years for an unproven work in progress Kassian who is no where near Hodgsons talent level. And then there was Grabner, another offensively gifted prospect with huge potential, traded for Ballard, an expensive d man who has spent more time in the dog house than play. Not happy with these parts of Gillis' trade record.
  • 1

#176 FireGillis

FireGillis

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,271 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:59 PM

Gillis is on thin us if we fail again and he doesn't fire AV. AV has screwed another young prospect in schroeder, just like cody. Schroeder is our future, not freaking ebbert. God damn if AV fails again, Gillis should show AV and himself the door! Sick of AV screwing young prospects!
  • 0

Proud member of 2015 tank nation! :towel:


#177 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,038 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 05:52 PM

CDC genuinely amazes me sometimes.


Nothing surprises me anymore.
  • 0

RIP LB RR PD


#178 Zoolander

Zoolander

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,189 posts
  • Joined: 29-February 12

Posted 18 January 2013 - 06:00 PM

Well Grabner was a -18 last year and only had 32 pts, in 78games.......He doesn't play defence and the only reason his +/- was good 2 seasons ago was because he played on the 1st PP Unit with Tavares and Moulson

I don't want forwards who don't back-check on this team....so losing him wasn't a huge deal. Booth will be better this year IMO, both him and Kesler were injured last year and he still was on pace for 20+ goals if it wasn't for that knee-on-knee hit.

I'm not even going to discuss the Kassian trade, because they are different players and both aren't very proven in the NHL.


Gillis is the best GM we've ever had, and will make the right choice when it comes to Luongo
  • 0
My 2014 Draft wishlist: 1st rd: Draisaitl, Virtanen, Scherbak. 2nd rd: Brendan Lemieux, Thatcher Demko (Goalie)
Posted Image
Future Canucks top 6:
Shinkaruk-Draisaitl-Scherbak
Virtanen-Horvat-Jensen

#179 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,416 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:32 PM

Well Grabner was a -18 last year and only had 32 pts, in 78games.......He doesn't play defence and the only reason his +/- was good 2 seasons ago was because he played on the 1st PP Unit with Tavares and Moulson

I don't want forwards who don't back-check on this team....so losing him wasn't a huge deal. Booth will be better this year IMO, both him and Kesler were injured last year and he still was on pace for 20+ goals if it wasn't for that knee-on-knee hit.

I'm not even going to discuss the Kassian trade, because they are different players and both aren't very proven in the NHL.


Gillis is the best GM we've ever had, and will make the right choice when it comes to Luongo


uhh no Grabner was not the 1st PP unit and PP goals do not count against +/-
  • 0

#180 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,732 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:45 PM

Luongo is a good cap hit, not sure if it'll be so good in 2020 though lol


It will be good for someone, if he is still playing. Luongo as a guy to help a team get to the cap floor would be a great asset. If not, it's a million and change for a year or two against the Canucks' cap. With good planning to take this eventuality into consideration, there shouldn't be a problem, but you know all of this, Scottie, ergo:

Posted Image



Sundin 10mil cap hit? Gillis's first move and he dodge a bullet on that one. Maybe it has made him gunshy to sign any more big names or maybe big names just don't want to sign here, not sure which way the door swings on that one.


The deal was for a guy who had 12 consecutive seasons of 70+ points with the Leafs. In that span, he scored 40+ goals twice, 30+ goals eight times, and 25+ goals twice. He played half a season with the Canucks, scoring 9g 19a.

Had he played two full seasons here, and barring injury (like he got in the playoffs) I believe the Canucks would have been a much better team than they are currently.

But you know all this, Scottie.


Speking of letting important players walk as UFAs, Mitchell, Torres, Ehrhoff (who else am I missing?) say hi!


It's interesting that you complain about Gillis showing "a clear tendency towards washed up players or players (From Sundin-Barker and everyone in between)who everyone else have given up on."

Torres was a project. He was a "washed up player" and Gillis gave him a chance. It's also interesting that for eveyone who says that the Canucks are really missing a guy like Torres, there's easily as many who said "good riddance" when he left because of his bad penalties and spotty play.

Mitchell was very heavily concussed and was in a position where another hit the wrong way and not only would his career be over but it could result in a life-altering event. The Canucks did stick by him. He was offered a contract. It was not as high in dollar value or duration as he wanted, so he went to a team which needed him than the Canucks. Good on Mitchell for staying healthy and winning a Cup. Good on Gillis for not allowing sentiment to get the better of him and place the team in a bad situation.

Folks complain about Luongo's term, and yet Ehrhoff's 10 year deal is never mentioned. He'd be getting $8 million this year if there had been a full season.

Luongo is a good cap hit, not sure if it'll be so good in 2020 though lol


Ehrhoff has a good cap hit, not sure if it'll be so good in 2021 though.... lawl(?).

Ehrhoff was an okay offensive d-man. Did you know that Ehrhoff, in the two seasons he played here, barely out-pointed Edler? And that was with him playing over 30 games more than Edler and probably also getting more power play time. Ehrhoff was a defensive liability. You know this Scottie, or you should.

You forgot Salo. We all respect and admire Salo. This being said, it was a good business move on Gillis' part to not sign Salo to the type of deal he got from TB. Good luck to him while he is there. Maybe he'll play an entire season.


My real concern with MG is that he traded away too many good prospects and draft picks for basically nothing.


I refer you to this post:

Uhm, what picks has he squandered? 2010 was the only year where the Canucks had traded off a 1st (as part of the Ballard deal). The 2nd and 3rd round picks from that year were also moved. Total Canuck picks which were traded while Gillis has been here (regardless of who traded them): 1st - 1, 2nd - 2, 3rd - 3, 4th - 3, 5th - 0, 6th - 0, 7th - 0. Picks acquired: 1st - 0, 2nd - 2, 3rd - 1, 4th - 1, 5th - 0, 6th - 1, 7th - 0. And there was the whole thing of the Canucks' 3rd which was traded away and then re-acquired, plus there may well be a pick or two coming in from the Luongo deal.

Prospects of note moved: Hodgson, who got the Canucks Kassian; Grabner (who was likely going to be lost to waivers) who was traded for Ballard; White, who was traded for Ehrhoff. I'm thinking there's still a lot of future to be had.



regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.




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.