Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Dazzle

Members
  • Posts

    11,843
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Dazzle last won the day on August 2 2021

Dazzle had the most liked content!

About Dazzle

  • Birthday 11/25/1987

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Victoria
  • Interests
    Hockey

Recent Profile Visitors

44,992 profile views

Dazzle's Achievements

Canucks Franchise Player

Canucks Franchise Player (12/14)

11.8k

Reputation

Single Status Update

See all updates by Dazzle

  1. @Petey_BOI Your thread is a glimpse of how bad our fanbase is.

    1. Show previous comments  22 more
    2. Dazzle

      Dazzle

      @Alain VigneaultHorvat, Kassian, Schroeder, Shinkaruk, Subban, Cassels, Gaunce?

       

      Which of these players actually amounted to anything in hindsight? If the value you trade is less than what you have when playing them, then you have a problem. Horvat is the ONLY one on this list. Hardly a recipe for success for a GM to build off that. In short, Gillis didn't do a good job with selecting these players, minus Horvat. (Kassian came actually from a trade). Do you seriously think that any of those players, many of whom did not play many NHL games, would've netted you some good assets?

       

      It doesn't matter what those prospects were "thought" to be. Hockey is very much a results oriented business. Without results, you have nothing to write home about. None of those players, aside from Horvat and Kassian made it to the NHL (so far). Therefore, Gillis has had a mixed record, even when it came to his Stanley Cup playoff teams.

       

      You missed the part where I said "lottery protected" - we had a choice to protect it in case we tanked hard. In hindsight, it was the right decision to give it up this year. (The draft pick was much lower than Podkolzin at 10). Miller wasn't going to come cheap, and Tampa Bay had other options of trading worse players. Miller also didn't have an NTC like Schmidt did, which severely reduced the value of a player. What is the proof that Miller would've come cheap? I see nothing to justify your position.

       

      The rest of what you said has already been discussed at length. Everyone can see that we lost a starting goalie, defensemen and a top-six forward which we traded for at the deadline. We can see the losses. But people were screaming at Benning at day 4. Irrational much? Benning is not yet done. Furthermore, if Benning's team doesn't succeed this coming season, we should expect questions to come back to him. If he succeeds, will Benning get credit? I suspect no, not from a certain portion of the fanbase.

       

      I don't care if you think I'm a Benning Bro or not. What I can see is that your reasoning to justify Benning's termination is insufficient, particularly when you understate Gillis' mishandling of draft picks. It's funny. When Benning trades draft picks, people scream at him. When Gillis did it, was he immune? Absolutely not. He got plenty of flack, but a lot people were blinded by the playoff team window.

    3. AV.

      AV.

      Why are you twisting my point?  You said that Benning had nothing to lean on but he did, hence why I listed those players.  Yeah, in hindsight, many on that list didn't amount to anything but at the time of Benning's hiring, they had value as prospects.  If we knew that all of our prospects we had wouldn't amount to anything and we fired Benning tomorrow, would you argue that the new guy had nothing to lean on?  Of course you wouldn't.  FYI, this is the same GM that when he was an AGM, he felt it was appropriate to trade a 21 year old Tyler Seguin for Eriksson and pennies.  

       

      Re: Miller:  You missed the part where I said "protected or not".  Like I said, if you bet something expensive on a game of blackjack and you win, it doesn't make you a genius; it makes you lucky enough to beat the odds.

       

      Finally, Gillis' "mishandling" of draft picks was few and very far between.  You're overstating it to protect your Benning, imo.

       

      Bernier was calculated-risk move that turned out to be bad.  Statistically, he was pretty productive in San Jose and was only 23.  Did Gillis ever make that type of move again?  No.  Almost like as if he learned right away (as a rookie GM with no front office experience) that signing experienced wingers would serve to be better and keeping his assets for other moves would be wiser.

       

      I'm not really sure where you're getting the notion that Ballard was a cap-dump seeing as he was durable in his 4 year career (at the time), largely thought to be stuck behind bad teams in Phoenix and Florida, and was regularly hitting around 30 pts, while hitting a ton and shot-blocking like a fiend.  It turned out to be a bad move and truthfully, one that I wasn't really happy we made (I really liked Grabner at that time) but as Bieksa/Salo/Mitchell were injury-prone and Rome/O'Brien were limited with what they could do, it was understandable.  Did Gillis ever trade a 1st again?  No.

       

      Every other move involving picks being traded were for Alberts (meh, we got 3 ish seasons out of him), Higgins (great), Lapierre (good), Pahlsson (yuck), Roy (ultra yuck).  Although, the latter two weren't so bad value wise as rentals, they just didn't help the team get out of the first round.

       

      So, a bad move to start off his GM career with picks and two moves toward the end that didn't work out while chasing a cup.

       

      He's lightyears ahead of Benning.

    4. AV.

      AV.

      To better clarify my point.  Gillis traded a 2nd and 3rd to get a guy who was maybe that decade's Jake Virtanen.

       

      Jim Benning moved a 2nd and a 3rd for Linden Vey (only 18 games of NHL experience at that time) and Andrey Pedan (who?).

    5. Show next comments  12 more
×
×
  • Create New...