Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Are we gun shy to pull the trigger on deals.

Rumour

  • Please log in to reply
134 replies to this topic

#61 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,713 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:26 PM

Gillis has a lot of difficulty making good trades. His biggest trades have crippled this team. He's the reason the current team is struggling and our future looks bleak with a lack of quality prospects.

He started off OK but has been going downhill since he traded away Grabner and a first for Ballard. He's transformed the highest scoring team in the league to what we have now

...and then he lets Volpatti go for nothing when we desperately need more grit.

Good GMs don't find it hard to consistently make trades that work out.


This, the fans think he's god because he signed most of our core, who was already here when he got here.... What has he done since our cup run?

I just watched a bunch of Sestito fights and he is a plug, fights smaller guys and loses almost every fight.
  • 0

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#62 Onions

Onions

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 449 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:29 PM

Oh for sure...its not like the seventies when I traded hockey cards....BUT when a team gains players that the Nux could have easily grabbed its hard to have faith in our GM...


who could we have "easily grabbed"?
and what is your definition of "easily"?
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#63 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:36 PM

who could we have "easily grabbed"?
and what is your definition of "easily"?


Jagr for one.

Also if I had been MG and heard Van Reimsdyk was available I would have made it happen. It is not that players are not available so much as Gillis can't prioritise his roster to get them.

Of course you have to give something good up but MG seems to think he can't part with anyone.

Edited by Bodee, 01 March 2013 - 12:39 PM.

  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#64 canucksnihilist

canucksnihilist

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,460 posts
  • Joined: 14-June 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:40 PM

no. he is not gun shy. you have to assume he will make a deal with one of the goalies. and he did make the Kassian trade which was unpopular: ergo he has made a trade that nobody liked at the time, and he will be making one that people might or might not like.


if he does care about the media and fan image when he makes moves, he needs to be fired. 1st and foremost should be quality of the trade, and the rest eventually takes care of itself
  • 0

#65 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:45 PM

no. he is not gun shy. you have to assume he will make a deal with one of the goalies. and he did make the Kassian trade which was unpopular: ergo he has made a trade that nobody liked at the time, and he will be making one that people might or might not like.


if he does care about the media and fan image when he makes moves, he needs to be fired. 1st and foremost should be quality of the trade, and the rest eventually takes care of itself


Look let's not kid ourselves here.

We parted with Hodgson AND Sulzer and Sulzer is playing better than half our D while Hodgson IS coping with the minutes AND the responsibility while Kass is up/down and in/out.

I like Zack and I think he will be good for us but let's not in any way think we won that deal...........not by a long shot.
  • 1
Kevin.jpg

#66 Kack Zassian

Kack Zassian

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 12

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:47 PM

Also if I had been MG and heard Van Reimsdyk was available I would have made it happen. It is not that players are not available so much as Gillis can't prioritise his roster to get them.

Of course you have to give something good up but MG seems to think he can't part with anyone.



So what would you have traded that would have been the equivalent to Schenn?

Philly needed d-men... you probably would have seen Bieksa going the other way.
  • 0

#67 Kack Zassian

Kack Zassian

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 12

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:49 PM

Oh for sure...its not like the seventies when I traded hockey cards....BUT when a team gains players that the Nux could have easily grabbed its hard to have faith in our GM...


Hindsight is 20/20 but just out of curiosity, what are some of these players we could have "easily grabbed"?
  • 0

#68 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,333 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:56 PM

Boy, if Burke offered Bozak and Kadri for Luongo, I can see why he'd be fired.

Or giving Grabovski superstar money.
  • 0

Subbancopy.jpg


#69 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,713 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:00 PM

So what would you have traded that would have been the equivalent to Schenn?

Philly needed d-men... you probably would have seen Bieksa going the other way.


I would have done that deal.
  • 1

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#70 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:02 PM

So what would you have traded that would have been the equivalent to Schenn?

Philly needed d-men... you probably would have seen Bieksa going the other way.


I would have decided how badly I needed van Reimsdyk and then offered a package. Edler, perhaps, Booth and Tanev? What's the point of even asking though because we are not sitting in the room. You have to find out what they would want and haggle to agreement.

The guy is a monster with 12 goals and 16 points already for the Leafs at 22 years old
  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#71 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,059 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:07 PM

Look let's not kid ourselves here.

Sulzer is playing better than half our D


Is that right?
The only regular on the Sabres roster who is facing a weaker quality of competition than Sulzer is John Scott.
Sulzer is getting 53.8 % offensive zone starts and has four points - his underlying numbers are actually not impressive and imo don't match up very well against any of the Canucks defensemen. I wouldn't consider him anywhere near the class of Ballard, who is pretty much universally considered the Canucks 6th man.
Even Alberts has better underlying numbers - a RelQoC of +1.751, a relative corsi of +2.01, and only 45.5% offensive zone starts.
- if Sulzer were here, imo he'd be where he was with us last year - not seeing any ice time whatsover, and buried deep down the depth chart.
The right thing to do was let him go somewhere he could play.
  • 0

#72 Kack Zassian

Kack Zassian

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 12

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:08 PM

I would have done that deal.


Look how bad our team is doing without Bieksa? CDC is constantly complaining about how we don't have enough RH d-men...

Would you have traded him for the guy who was a 40 point player? Also, JVR is shooting an unsustainable 16% atm

I would have decided how badly I needed van Reimsdyk and then offered a package. Edler, perhaps, Booth and Tanev? What's the point of even asking though because we are not sitting in the room. You have to find out what they would want and haggle to agreement.

The guy is a monster with 12 goals and 16 points already for the Leafs at 22 years old


You honestly would have traded Edler for JVR.... honestly? Philly wanted a young d-man with similar upside (something we don't have). So we would have likely had to move one of our big 3 (Bieksa, Hamhuis, Edler which is a no-go).

He is also shooting an unsustainable 16%, so the goals are an outlying number.
  • 0

#73 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,059 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:11 PM

After what Feaster just pulled, every GM in the NHL should be gun shy and may want to rethink any deal before jumping... unless of course they are dealing with Feaster, in which case, gitterdone!!
  • 1

#74 Teen Icarus

Teen Icarus

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 980 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 09

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:42 PM

I think making trades is harder than fans think


In hockey pools and other things, it often takes me several weeks to make a trade, and that's with friends and only my honour at stake. Imagine how much tougher it must be when you have a million people who might freak out if you make the wrong trade, and the other guy feels the same way.
  • 0
Spoiler

#75 VicNuckleHead09

VicNuckleHead09

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 361 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 09

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:48 PM

Lu for 1st
Kesler for 1st +
Booth,. higgins for 1st
Bieksa for 1st
Hamhuis for 1st +
Garrison for 1st

make them waive their ntc's

add that to canucks' 1st = 7 1st rd picks in deep draft. Window is now, this core aint getting any younger or better. If Gillis cant get them over the hump then its better to tank. Cup or Bust! As it stands right now this team won't go all the way; maybe 2nd rd or conf finals but that should be considered a big failure.

Would prefer not to tank, so Gillis it is up to you to make this team wayy better by deadline. If not then just build for the future and don't settle for 2nd rd or conf finals appearance!

Canucks dont go all the way and next year they are stuck with aging sedins, injury prone kesler, aging defensemen in bieksa and hamhuis while other teams' younger superstars will hit their prime.
Also stuck with overpaid players in booth, ballard, garrison.


Who the hell is going to play our games?? O>O That is just a dumb idea.
  • 0
Posted Image
"Louuuuuuuuuu!" - Last game Attended: Vancouver vs. Penguins
Email me

#76 CanuckleHorse

CanuckleHorse

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Joined: 18-February 13

Posted 01 March 2013 - 01:55 PM

Wow peeps awesome feed back love it. I say today the cap hold GMs back they dont want to let go their cheaper younger options and thats what the Nucks want.
  • 0

#77 WeatherWise

WeatherWise

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,869 posts
  • Joined: 20-September 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 02:09 PM

Gillis is no longer as bold as he once was. Though the Sundin deal may not have been the smartest move, it brought this team character and generated excitement. It was starting to pay off in the playoffs, as well. We haven't seen Gillis make such bold moves since then, however. It's as if his philosophy has changed.
  • 0
The greatest segue into a weather segment.

#78 nitwitt

nitwitt

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 246 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 12

Posted 01 March 2013 - 02:22 PM

I think making trades is harder than fans think

I think not, it just takes a set.
  • 0

#79 honey badger36

honey badger36

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,499 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 01 March 2013 - 02:38 PM

Bottom line the Aquellinis are Happy and the Canucks are making money. Selling the future for a cup run does not make sense when you can continue winning pres trophies and filling the arena selling merch and advert time. of course the fan in me wants a cup but the buisness man in me says stay the course were one of the richest teams in the league just by continuing to make the playoffs and being a great regular season team. Hey beats being a leafs fan.
  • 0

#80 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,500 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 01 March 2013 - 02:45 PM

Bottom line the Aquellinis are Happy and the Canucks are making money. Selling the future for a cup run does not make sense when you can continue winning pres trophies and filling the arena selling merch and advert time. of course the fan in me wants a cup but the buisness man in me says stay the course were one of the richest teams in the league just by continuing to make the playoffs and being a great regular season team. Hey beats being a leafs fan.


Well...in the past, at least. The Leafs sell out every game even when they lose for years. They are the richest franchise in the league and make tons of money So far this year, they are also much more entertaining and effective to watch. Their management has also managed to land some good talent JVR that has changed the landscape somewhat.

Being smug about our Nucks at the expense of the Leafs fans could be coming to an end. Hopefully not. :bigblush:
  • 0

#81 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,363 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 01 March 2013 - 02:56 PM

What a winning topic. A fabrication based on another fabrication.
  • 0

#82 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,275 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:00 PM

I think not, it just takes a set.

What like Feaster?
  • 0

#83 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,360 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:07 PM

Gillis is no longer as bold as he once was. Though the Sundin deal may not have been the smartest move, it brought this team character and generated excitement. It was starting to pay off in the playoffs, as well. We haven't seen Gillis make such bold moves since then, however. It's as if his philosophy has changed.


If you live MIke gillis's shoe for one week, you will soon know why, its so hard to make trades, let a lone a good trade. That being said, you probably get conned into trading Luongo away right away.
  • 0

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.  


#84 Red Light Racicot

Red Light Racicot

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,455 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 10

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:13 PM

I suspect he is gunshy, and that was an easy conclusion for me to arrive at. He claimed he thought Kassian would help the team during last year's playoffs, yet to date AV has shown little interest in giving him much of a role on the team. Some of his more recent transactions have also been questionable.

You gotta wonder about the information hes getting from the people hes hired to assess any potential trades, and whether MG still has the same amount of confidence in them.
  • 0

#85 lmm

lmm

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,507 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:18 PM

Look how bad our team is doing without Bieksa? CDC is constantly complaining about how we don't have enough RH d-men...

Would you have traded him for the guy who was a 40 point player? Also, JVR is shooting an unsustainable 16% atm



You honestly would have traded Edler for JVR.... honestly? Philly wanted a young d-man with similar upside (something we don't have). So we would have likely had to move one of our big 3 (Bieksa, Hamhuis, Edler which is a no-go).

He is also shooting an unsustainable 16%, so the goals are an outlying number.




So you trade Edler for JVR
sign Garrison and Salo

and what do you have?
A better D than we now have and JVR
  • 2

#86 nucks_rule1

nucks_rule1

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,773 posts
  • Joined: 19-May 07

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:22 PM

trades dont happen in a few hours. When the team is winning its tough to make these long term decisions. Where is this team out, who knows right now.
  • 0
Posted Image
my thread!


100th post on September 9th 2008
1000th post on june 24th 2010

THANK YOU MIKE GILLIS FOR GREATEST OFF SEASON EVER!

HANK= H(ART ROSS)

#87 lmm

lmm

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,507 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:23 PM

making trades is most difficult when you sign Luongo to that contract
Trading Booter was hard for Tallon because of his contract
trading Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo and Malholtra is hard because of their ntc contracts
If you look at what the Canucks paid for Booter, a similar return (underpayment) should be expected for Lou
  • 0

#88 Kack Zassian

Kack Zassian

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 12

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:43 PM

I think not, it just takes a set.


Your user name really reflects this post
  • 1

#89 Kack Zassian

Kack Zassian

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 12

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:47 PM

So you trade Edler for JVR
sign Garrison and Salo

and what do you have?
A better D than we now have and JVR


You must really hate Edler....

1) By your logic Luke Schenn value = Alex Edler value (let that sink in for a second)
2) Do you think JVR will continue shooting 16.9%, or is it likely to regress by at least 5%?
3) Also, do you have a contingency plan when Salo gets injured? Or do we just run with Cam Barker?
  • 0

#90 Sanford

Sanford

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,422 posts
  • Joined: 23-December 07

Posted 01 March 2013 - 04:05 PM

making trades is most difficult when you sign Luongo to that contract
Trading Booter was hard for Tallon because of his contract
trading Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo and Malholtra is hard because of their ntc contracts
If you look at what the Canucks paid for Booter, a similar return (underpayment) should be expected for Lou


OH PLEASE... everything is SO HARD TO DO! Then why the heck did we hire Mike Gillis in the first place? Our Core is still Run by Sedins, Burrows, Kesler, Raymond, Hansen, Luongo, Bieksa, Edler,... ALL NONIS PLAYERS. In fact he still kept Nonis' coach Alain Vigneault! Not even that he even went as far as critisizing our scouting team BUT STILL KEPT DELORME... His drafting record is far more mediocre than Nonis'.

I also remember Gillis telling that the Sedins might not be in his plan, complete arrogance and ignorance.

He has done nothing since our cup run... our team has gotten worst and worst.

Terrible Signings and Trades:

Bernier for a 2nd and 3rd round pick.
Marco Sturm, 2 million and only lasted for 5 bloody games.
Peter Shaefer...
Keith Ballard.. (4.1 for a number 6 defensemen, not to mention a first round pick and Michael Grabner)
Letting go of Mitchell
Signing 1 hit wonder Garrison to a 4.6 multi year contract..

The list goes on HE HAS DONE NOTHING for this team. Look at how terrible our prospect pool is... we don't even have anyone that can step up in the farm team. For some reason he has become some "god" gm because he was able to resign players THAT WERE HERE in the first place.

This is still Nonis' team.

Heck it's really laughable that Mike can't even trade Luongo when its' become CLEAR that we can't have 2 goalies like this. Just complete terrible asset management. Luongo is just going to get older and his value is just going to drop further and further.

Sorry had to get out, after hearing his arrogant voice today in his interview I've just had enough.

Terrible and one of the most overrated GM's in this league.

Edited by Sanford, 01 March 2013 - 04:07 PM.

  • 2
Posted Image





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Rumour

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.