Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Gillis on 1040


This topic has been archived.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

#61 wizeman

wizeman

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 223 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 12

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:56 AM

Pfft, this 'love for Coho' was never there until he was gone. Constantly i heard nothing but assessments on how bad he was, how he was never going to be all that great, how slow he was, how soft, etc. from the fans in the stands, where i was like, 'give it time?'


I never sat in the stands to hear folks bashing Hodgson but from the people online and in the media for every one who said he was slow or high maintenance, 4 others were worshiping the ground he walked on. I had never seen anything like it before. The guy had never even played a game for our team at that point. And when he did, he wasnt anything special but all I heard was more excuses . I for one am glad he is gone.

And you are right. He is going to ask for 5mil , and the Sabres are going to give it to him . Then we are going to start to hear the laughter when the $5mil Cody is now expected to created offense without all star wingers. He is going to be expect his team to win. Hes going to expect his body to last 82 games plus playoffs without injury.

The laughter is coming. Just wait.

#62 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,944 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:04 AM

Oshie scores; Booth doesn't do jack.


Oshie - 63 goals, 262 games = .24 gpg
Booth - 104 goals, 377 games = .28 gpg.

Anyhow, I'm not the biggest Booth fan, but give the guy the credit he is due.
He has the best underlying numbers on the Canucks by a significant margin.
His corsi is +19.63 (3rd on the club, 4th last year) - this year he was getting only 45.9% offensive zone starts and producing 54.2% finishes - and he was doing that playing without Kesler on makeshift lines.
Booth is far too maligned on these boards - I understand he's not the most popular guy - not a lot of people here relate to his off-ice lifestyle - but he's a better hockey player than is recognized here. He's a guy who goes hard to the net (something folks here are always complaining about a lack of on this club), he's a very strong skater, plays a physical game, and he plays a solid two way game.
With all due respect to Oshie - he has 7 goals in 30 games this year - his corsi is barely above water at +1.25 (his relative corsi is -3.4), his ozone starts are slightly higher than his finishes - he's a -5.... in other words his underlying numbers are not very impressive and don't really indicate that he's a better player than Booth.
He's also a 4.2 million cap hit, so in terms of bang for the buck, these guys are a wash.

#63 canuckbeliever

canuckbeliever

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 07

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:08 AM

I am going to make a general point instead of responding to every single criticism of my narrative. I find it really funny how people who criticize Gillis are seen as bandwagoners or typical CDC.

From my experience and that of friends the typical CDC poster is one who shows blind faith in the team without questioning the moves of management. In my opinion that is typical CDC. It is the same guys who love each player when hes on the team and right when he is out they hate the guy and criticize him on how he sucked.


It is the same people who loved Nonis when he was GM but decided to bash him by calling him "Nonutz" when he left. My point in mentioning the Oshie comment was that every team has injuries and the Canucks injuries were not that much worse than STL. Especially considering what TJ Oshie brings to the game and the level of impact he can have.

This market has a lot of spin and that stems from the media down. I think it is important to be an educated Canucks fan who looks at the good and bad while being able to seperate both. Gillis has a history of making blanket statements where all he does is justify and spin. An example of that happend to occur on TEAM 1040 yesterday when he was talking about injuries.

#64 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,944 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:27 AM

I am going to make a general point instead of responding to every single criticism of my narrative. I find it really funny how people who criticize Gillis are seen as bandwagoners or typical CDC.

From my experience and that of friends the typical CDC poster is one who shows blind faith in the team without questioning the moves of management. In my opinion that is typical CDC. It is the same guys who love each player when hes on the team and right when he is out they hate the guy and criticize him on how he sucked.


It is the same people who loved Nonis when he was GM but decided to bash him by calling him "Nonutz" when he left. My point in mentioning the Oshie comment was that every team has injuries and the Canucks injuries were not that much worse than STL. Especially considering what TJ Oshie brings to the game and the level of impact he can have.

This market has a lot of spin and that stems from the media down. I think it is important to be an educated Canucks fan who looks at the good and bad while being able to seperate both. Gillis has a history of making blanket statements where all he does is justify and spin. An example of that happend to occur on TEAM 1040 yesterday when he was talking about injuries.


It sounds like two variations of essentially the same thing.

critical of managment = bandwagoner = reductive imo.
supportive of management = blind faith = reductive imo.
There really is no "typical" CDC poster - I find some irony in that you appear to be essentially refuting "blanket statements" with mere counterpoint blanket statements.
Both are oversimplified generalizations that are reductionist.

#65 canuckbeliever

canuckbeliever

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,933 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 07

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:32 AM

It sounds like two variations of essentially the same thing.

critical of managment = bandwagoner = reductive imo.
supportive of management = blind faith = reductive imo.
There really is no "typical" CDC poster - I find some irony in that you appear to be essentially refuting "blanket statements" with mere counterpoint blanket statements.
Both are oversimplified generalizations that are reductionist.



I have no problem with individuals being supportive of management. I like majority of management as well In my opinion Aquilini is one of the best owners in the NHL and genuinely cares about his fan base. For all the criticism I have towards Gillis he has made some good moves.


My major problem is individuals who are supportive of management without facts which is majority of individuals. I know I didnt make that clear in my last post.

Yeah the post was a bit of a blanket statement but generally my takes tend to include facts which is why I didn't feel the need to include facts here and frankly its 11:30 in the morning and exam season so feel to lazy to do research right now.

Edited by canuckbeliever, 20 April 2013 - 11:33 AM.


#66 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,944 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 20 April 2013 - 11:45 AM

I have no problem with individuals being supportive of management. I like majority of management as well In my opinion Aquilini is one of the best owners in the NHL and genuinely cares about his fan base. For all the criticism I have towards Gillis he has made some good moves.


My major problem is individuals who are supportive of management without facts which is majority of individuals. I know I didnt make that clear in my last post.

Yeah the post was a bit of a blanket statement but generally my takes tend to include facts which is why I didn't feel the need to include facts here and frankly its 11:30 in the morning and exam season so feel to lazy to do research right now.


fair enough.
My personal take is that everyone makes mistakes - some are entirely unforseeable. There are risks in every single move - every move has the potential to go wrong - even those that appear like a slam dunk at the time.
I've liked Canucks management since the end of the Keenan era. Keenan made a few decent moves, but one thing I could never tolerate about his approach was his public devaluation of some of his own assets. He would doghouse particular players and dump them after openly running their value down. It had not only a divisive effect, but was simply a bad business approach.
However, since then, I've been really happy overall with management.
I like Brian Burke - I loved the faith and confidence he showed in his guys - I loved the way he would defend them and take the heat for his decisions. He never landed us a great goaltender, but he made game efforts that were generally judged too harshly imo.
I like Nonis as well. I think he and Burke did a lot of things that set the organization up for success - they obviously acquired a strong base.
The two of them have done a decent job in Toronto. I'll never agree with attempting to build a team around players like Phaneuf and Kessel, but otherwise they're over-criticized - perhaps understandably so - pro sport is result oriented.

Gillis as far as I am concerned has taken what he had to work with and done an excellent job imo.
His most criticized decsions imo are blown way out of proportion, and tend to take things out of context.

#67 rkyway

rkyway

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 11

Posted 20 April 2013 - 04:11 PM

"If you look around the league and history there is a miniscule # of players that achieve what they are going to achieve for rest of their time. It is going to take time to get consistency and with 99.7% of youngins it takes time"
- what a farce. So why then do you trade a guy having a great year for someone you hope several years down the line Might have a good year? Give me a break.

#68 Red Light Racicot

Red Light Racicot

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,705 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 10

Posted 20 April 2013 - 06:10 PM

I think the real problem is how overhyped and overloved Cody Hodgson was.

He developed a fanatical fanbase . It was so bad that you could never even mention any flaw in his character. At several points many were calling him the next Canuck camptain. Many insisted he could play as well at times as Stamkos and the wold junior tourney proved he was better than Tavares.

Yes. This kind of fanaticism. They insisted that he was a great 'two way' player which made many of us doubt our own sanity. Were we really talking about the same Hodgson we see with the Moose or Canucks 3rd line?

Anyways. When he was traded, the whole CDC board exploded and had to literally shut down. I have no idea if thats normal or not because I wasnt a member yet. I have been told about it and to me its the same reaction you would expect when Queen Elizabeth dies.

So , Zack Kassian has the most unfortunate luck in the world to now be thrust into this Cody Hodgson world. A world of fans hanging at the end of a rope wishing they were dead. Pissed off and looking for a target to blame for their beloved boy being snatched away from them.

Its Gillis. Its AV. its Ryan Kesler refusing to bend over and be his winger. Its anyone and everyone. The medical staff.

Well, now its the poor guy who we got in trade for him . He who has nothing to do with Hodgson . He now has to be blamed and mocked for his whole career to make up for the loss of their beloved Hodgson.

As for Kassian? Hes a 22 year old with bigger upside and a longer learning curve. Once he learns to keep his intensity level up and use the gifts he was given, hes going to be an outstanding hockey player.


It IS Gillis' fault. All of this Kassian/Hodgson business you see now is a result of a decision he made.

He is the one who overestimated Kassian's ability, claiming he would contribute during last year's playoffs.

Hes the one who buckled under pressure and made a poorly timed and thought out decision.

The fan reaction is pretty standard, youre going to get a ton of flak in any hockey market for the kind of move Gillis made.

#69 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,306 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 20 April 2013 - 07:07 PM

"If you look around the league and history there is a miniscule # of players that achieve what they are going to achieve for rest of their time. It is going to take time to get consistency and with 99.7% of youngins it takes time"
- what a farce. So why then do you trade a guy having a great year for someone you hope several years down the line Might have a good year? Give me a break.

Who exactly are you so disturbed we traded? The guy who wanted out and had both his agent and father pushing Gillis for more minutes? The one who was having a decent year after he was deployed in the best possible situations so his success would be maximized? There's your answer as to why he was moved.

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

If this team lets go of Sang he will burn this team next year.

 


#70 gurn

gurn

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,669 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 11

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:39 PM

It is not about losing Cody it is about getting back a player that was billed as immediate help for last years play-offs. That player turned out to be Kassian who will be ready to help in a significant way in 1-2 more years if he develops as hoped.




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.