Ding-Dong

Very informative and well done post. Not only did you tackle it from a hockey perspective, but also froma business perspective which is what I think is really lacking in regards to this discussion. But sadly, this post will do nothing to change his mind. There's just simply too much logic in it

This is your problem. All assumptions. I'm a young person based off of my comments? Please son. Give me a break.

Hahaha Please, don't flatter yourself. I come on here to have debates and you happened to be involved in one of them. Are you that desperate for human attention that you look at this as if I'm coming on to you?

Hahaha Ahhhhh yes. Deductive reasoning. Let me ask you a question. How far has deductive reasoning got you in regards to the NHL and it's operations? Are you a GM yet? Making points based off of deductive reasoning and passing them off as fact is actually extremely weak on your part. I don't know what you do for a living but let me tell you, deductive reasoning starts to fall apart pretty quick in the real world. Lawyers don't make their living off of deductive reasoning. Journalists don't make their living off of deductive reasoning. Statisticians don't make their living off of deductive reasoning. GMs don't make their living off of deductive reasoning. Do you know why? Because they can't prove it. It's all hearsay until you're able to prove it.

Again, you're trying to divert it to a topic in your favour. Did I ever state any of what you said in a single one of my posts? No. You just know that by diverting it to something that makes Gillis look bad, you may be able to get a few people to sympathize with you. Instead stay on topic and prove to me how he could have gotten more for Schneider.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean for it to come across as that I was doubting the Ehrhoff cap dump situation. I cannot and will not deny that. The stuff in bold still goes and was my main point.

Here's a post I had written in the past when someone else tried to make this point: Here are some trades for PROVEN (Goalies that had actually played a full season as the starter) goalies in the NHL. All of these goalies here had very successful careers up until the point to where they were traded. Take Luongo for example. When we got Luongo he was in the prime of his career. We traded a fragile Todd Bertuzzi, a backup goaltender in Alex Auld and Bryan Allen in return for Luongo and Krajicek. Patrick Roy and Mike Keane for Jocelyn Thibault, Martin Rucinsky and Andrei Kovalenko Dominek Hasek for Vyacheslav Kozlov, a first round pick and future considerations Dwayne Roloson when he took the oilers to the Stanley Cup Finals was traded for a 1st rounder and a 3rd rounder. When he took the Lightning to the ECF, he was traded for Ty Wishart Giguere was traded for Vesa Toskala (He played backup behind Hiller) and Jason Blake Tomas Vokoun was traded for a 1st (9th overall), and 2 2nds Halak was traded for Lars Eller and Ian Schultz So in your eyes, a goalie that had yet to play the starter position for a full season in the NHL was going to get more than these goaltenders. Trading Cory Schneider was never going to get us a 'Ransom'. Could we have gotten a little bit more for him? Maybe, I won't deny that. A top 6 winger though? No. Saying that is the same as admitting he was worth more than the goalies listed above when he hadn't even played a full season in the NHL. If you read that last sentence and believe he was worth more than those goalies than you really, really need to take off the homer glasses

The problem with this point (but mainly what's bolded) is it's all hearsay. You state these things as if they're fact but the truth is you have no idea. You talk as if you were in the room when these trades happened but the reality is you saw it on TV like the rest of us. You can't give a reason as to why no other GM was willing to offer up more for Ehrhoff other than 'Who knows' and then claim that it was the best trade the Sharks were offered. I don't and I never claimed to know, but I do know the trade happened and regardless of the circumstances Gillis was on our end of making that trade happen. You can try and grasp at straws and theorize as to why the trade happened, theorize that we could have gotten more for Schneider (Past goalie transactions would disagree with you a bit here) and theorize that Gillis negotiationg tactics are not what got us Ehrhoff. That's the problem though. All theories. You haven't proved anything other than the fact you like to throw theories out there without actually providiing any facts but pass them off as such.

Very good points. I completely agree with the fact that we have to start trading away some of our core for younger, blue chip prospects. I like to think this is what his plan was when he mentioned the whole 'retool' and going off of some of his recent transactions it's certainly starting to feel that way. This summer is going to be a true indication as to the direction this team is headed. Let's hope it goes our way.

Those don't count. Only the bad trades he's made and the Luongo situation do.

You've backed it with opinion. Every time you're presented with actual facts you try to divert the discussion to something that may lean in your favour. When that gets disproved, you again try and divert it to something else. I've mentioned in many posts as to why I believe Gillis should remain here with actual facts, but I'll try my best to sum it up. I'm never against getting better. If we're able to get a GM that we know can do better than Gillis, I'm all for it. Can you guarantee me that getting an assistant GM of another team or an ex-Canuck is going to improve this team better than a Gillis that has been in this organization for 5 years now? No, you can't. You also can't give me someone out there that is currently available with a better track record either. So what does that mean? We've got the best man available right now, and despite some of his history, he's been the best GM that this organization has ever had. Until you're able to find someone that you can not only PROVE is better but also AVAILABLE, then I am extremely comfortable with this GM. If we could get Lombardi, Chiarelli or Holland, I'd do it in a freaking heartbeat. But don't pretend like their sh*t don't stink either.

Hahaha Yes, that's right. You contradict your very own point in this thread yet I'm the myopic one.

Ahhhhh I get it now. So it's ok when trades don't work out, just as long as it's one of the GMs you listed above or any other GM in the league. It's just not applicable to Mike Gillis because that would discredit your point instead of strengthen it. I'm sorry man, you should have just said that from the beginning.

Did you really want me to go back and pull up your exact quote? It's only a couple pages back and I even bolded exactly what I was responding too. Is it really that hard for you to admit that you may have been incorrect in saying that those GMs got 'FULL VALUE' in all of their trades? Or did you just want to again deny ever saying that in the first place?