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

Dazzle

Members
  • Posts

    11,843
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Dazzle

  1. Every coach has limitations. The players themselves have to do the rest. RT feels like Green - a losing record coach. If Boudreau, a winning coach overall, can't make that team into the playoffs, the team has to go.
  2. Forsling was traded much early on and it ended up being a horrible trade for Vancouver, to say the least. Benning's worst trade by far. At least OEL and Garland are usable. Clendenning was utter trash.
  3. I don't think Anaheim is going to do too bad next year. They have a bunch of excellent prospects because they know how to draft, probably one of the best crops. Anaheim is going to dominate for the next few years because of it. This coach has a ton of experience with developing players, with what it seems like, so I think this will be a GOOD fit.
  4. There is a difference. Ray is an established commentator and Cammi, well, she's the assistant GM. There has to be a significant amount of trust. The other gal you're mentioning was just a bad hire from the very beginning. The red flags were right there and they hired her anyway.
  5. Garland has scored quite a few goals in front of the net (usually deflections). He's spinning away from defenders using his size and speed and he's difficult to knock down. I'm just not sure we are seeing the same player.
  6. Wow, I don't know what to say about this. I thoroughly disagree. How can one be a perimeter player and be a hard nosed antagonistic style? That sounds contradictory.
  7. For what it's worth, he played amazing against Canada in the WJC. He had something like 40 or 50 stops and kept Canada to just 2 goals. Amazing performance, despite their loss. Now, we see why he's a brilliant prospect pick.
  8. I don't think so. I agree that he talks to Green about coaching and hockey stuff, but we were at least competitive in those games with Tocchet. With Green, we had so many bench minors (too many men) and a lack of genuine accountability. Tocchet has shown in his small sample that he holds every player accountable. Green gave free passes to certain people.
  9. He is worse than Willie D. The amount of talent that Willie D had pales considerably compared to the teams that Green had. Remember, Willie D did not have a Pettersson or a Boeser type of player. It should be noted that he had more wins than Green did, percentage wise. That is NOT good. Moreover, Willie D has had more success at the lower levels. Green? Yeah, it was Benning's fault for keeping him way too long.
  10. Pretty much. Too bad none of his teams, minus the bubble one, would've made it to the playoffs. Lol.
  11. Green has no record of winning lol. All his AHL and NHL tenures have been losing records. Of course they all want to win, but bad coaching = bad developing.
  12. If you left it to Green, he'd leave our prospects to rot. Juolevi, Gadjovich (ouch, he would've been useful), Kole Lind. People say our drafting sucks - they don't. When you have an unproven coach (Green has no winning seasons, regardless if it's AHL or otherwise), that is crap.
  13. I really think Beauvillier was a good pickup. His play surprised me. I don't want to trade any one of these three because I like them each for separate reasons.
  14. I was responding to this new situation of him being in the KHL. I stand by this. He has no value now.
  15. There is nothing Nazi about Putin's government. For shame that a certain self-identified Jewish poster was condoning this.
  16. Yeah, some of management's trades and acquisitions have been good, but they also have made some pretty questionable moves. Kratvsov was a worthwhile gamble I guess, but he really didn't do much while he was here, so maybe he knew that he wasn't cut out for the NHL.
  17. Grabner was not BPA. He was a reach from somewhere in the 2nd round, but was a great pick, in hindsight. Few players did what he did, while on the Canucks and on the other teams. He just didn't much for Vancouver.
  18. We weren't okay without him. Our PK immediately sucked without him. Sure he wasn't the only reason for why that was the case, but he was an integral reason.
  19. It's a bad trade in hindsight. There was way too much hype in the drafting pedigree. Also, quite a few Ranger fans feel their prospect development is crappy, which includes Kratvsov.
  20. Canuck fans - never change - the obsession with Benning is unreal.
  21. It was a terrible waste of a draft pick - period, and it looked worse that the same GM who traded for him decided to buy him out. This demonstrates an example of poor pro scouting, even though Gillis was also the one who helped find players like Tanev. Florida may not have benefited much from the trade in hindsight, but it still was a poor use of a draft pick. Speaking of which, Gillis never found anyone (!) in the first round, aside from high draft picks like Hodgson and Horvat. We couldn't even grow our own depth players, except maybe Hutton. Gillis spent a lot of our treasure chest and never was able to draft with the picks that he did have. He's a GM who had some great years with playoff teams, but he's definitely not a GM you'd want to rebuild a team around. Some people say that Gillis had a plan to rebuild, but was thwarted or interfered by Aqua. Yet how do we explain why he couldn't draft depth players using 1st, 2nd, or 3rd round picks in any given year? That wasn't on Aqua. That's on Gillis and his team. Gillis did have a few mid to late round 1st round picks, Gaunce and Jensen being one of them. I actually liked Jensen, but again, he didn't amount to anything. He also had some 2nd rounders. Somehow though, we didn't get anyone else except Connauton (who was traded away before he played) Let's remember the great playoff years under Gillis, but let's also not forget the reality of it. He really wasn't good towards the tail end of his tenure here.
  22. You gotta admit, trading Grabner and a 1st was a terrible trade, regardless of what happened. People often talk about how Gillis made moves, which he did, but rarely do they comment about the bad trades. He also bought out Ballard, the same player that he traded for. There's no question that Gillis brought in great players during free agency, but there were some absolutely awful trades and drafting under his watch. Look no further than the fact that he only drafted three usable players throughout his tenure - Hodgson, Hutton, and Horvat. Gillis did good things, such as pushing out playoff teams. The Canucks were 1 game away from the Cup under his watch. Yet his legacy was his drafting and lack of development. Over 5 years of drafting and not a single player remained, except Horvat.
×
×
  • Create New...