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

adniel_g

Members
  • Posts

    384
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by adniel_g

  1. Exactly...

    While I have stated many saying we didn't get the two points etc don't get it...you do...

    Torts did this for a number of reasons

    1. Response and team toughness. They did not respond when Lou got run and needed to send LA and the rest of the league a message, that crap will no longer go unanswered

    2. Team building. Players will play bigger when they know someone has their back. Have you ever seen the twins throwing as many hits? yes we don't need them doing it but its a mindset, I am not scared, and I will not be intimidated, and I will intimidate

    3. As you suggested, this was ALL about changing the mindset of this team from reactionary and patient to instigator and impatient, take the ice, take the areas and put fear into others that if they go there they will get hit. Even Bieksa said, the Kings players were asking on the ice 'whats with you guys tonight' - ie why are you playing us so hard, we're not used to this and we don't like it...

    4. Drill into this team that toughness is not about size. Its about team mentality, its about team toughness, its a mindset and sometimes it takes an extreme like last night to tell you, you are tougher than you think.

    5. Sports is about emotion, intensity, intimidation. Torts means that when he talks about 'stiffness'. Stiffness isn't just playing hard on the boards, and blocking shots, its about teams hating to play against you because they know, I touch the puck someone is hunting me, i go to the net, i am getting hit. AV was a master tacticion who took emotion out of the game(don't take bad penalties because of a bad hit etc). Torts has said the opposite, hit em back...he gets it, he gets that emotion allows you to find a way to raise your game, you feed off the anger and intensity...he wanted the boys to see that, to use it, to allow it out...and boy did we see it come out...and what happened, the boys played bigger, i ask all those complaining about 2 points...what, what has been our problem in the last 2 years in the playoffs? Size sure, but how about making up for it by PLAYING BIGGER....that's what last night was about

    As I said right after the game Torts is a coaching genius...he just drilled into these players, well showed them to how to drill it into themselves, that they indeed can be an annoyingly tough team to play against.

    Never give a starving man a fish, give him a fishing rod and teach him to fish for himself...that's what Torts just did. The boys will not play like this every game but they know now, they are tough enough to respond, he shocked the AV complacency from them and I can tell you this.

    Any team that meets these boys in the playoffs, win or lose, will not get an easy round this year...and last night just set the tone

    Ahh BS, you want to send the league a message, you do what Thornton did. All this did was lose us 2 points, and flex guns we don't have. I am sure rats like Nolan would be happy to exchange themselves for 7 minute power-plays after this. If anything this shows the league that we can indeed be rattled and will encourage it further in future games. Our problems continue, we cannot score, and we are an inconsistent team that forgets its identity all the time. This game was good for Canuck fans and the players who clearly wanted to take their minds off of hockey for the game.

    Bottom line Kings are 4-0 vs the Canucks and came out with no major injuries. They will forget about us faster than last night's lay.

  2. No we should not re-sign borderline fringe 3rd line players, we have too many of those.

    It doesn't matter that we cannot replace him easily, he is probably our mvp, does everything, we have tonnes of overpaid players in comparison, just get him out of here. If we trade him now, while his value is still high, we might be able to snag a player of David Booth's calibre off some unexpecting GM. Heck if we are really lucky, they might even auto accept and MG will not have to worry about having to hide from the media etc until the trade goes through.

    Lets DO this!

    Who's with me?

  3. Well Kessel is leading his team while Seguin just got traded b/c of party/drinking problems. Who cares how many points he puts up, if he is already so uncommitted, he will most likely fade in the yeas to come. Character prevails in the NHL. Toews is comparable to Seguin in terms of age, draft ranking etc. At Seguin's age, Captain Serious was willing his team to victory. Seguin will always be in the shadows, a gun for hire no loyalties kind of player.

  4. His hands are tied, We don't have any significant pieces or cap space to make any major moves, I'd wait til' closer to the deadline when teams start falling off (hopefully not us) to make any major moves, even then I'd be surprised if he does anything drastic. The way I see it is that Gillis is going to stand pat and probably even wait til' next season when the Horvat/Shink regime begins..because let's face it, other teams don't want our garbage as much as we don't want their garbage, Edler, Booth so far = garbage.

    We are going to be better off as sellers at the deadline. We don't have a ghost of a chance at the cup this year. We just need too much to be contenders... a second line, a fourth line, a #1 dman.

  5. this... inanimate carbon rod is now our new GM

    what's its first 3 big moves?

    Carbonrod.png

    This team is decaying much faster than any radioactive carbon rod, but the rod will likely be all gone before Gillis makes a move. I vote for the rod!

    Realistically your choice atm is SMITHERS (Gillis) or THE ROD.

    Mr. Burns (Francesco Aquilini) made the right call!

  6. It's easy to throw Gillis under the bus now for the Booth trade, but at the time he made the trade everyone around here was talking about how we robbed Florida 'again'..no one thought things would be working out they way they are, and, in hindsight from what I understand, Gillis consulted with Kesler about acquiring Booth, guess that was a mistake.

    Well everyone does not form the consensus, the players results do. And no I am not trying to hold it against him at all. I think the Booth trade and all his other actions, i.e. Hodgson had reasons to be done and we will never know, but no matter what their result he at least tried.

    The past couple of years have been a total mess. He was forced into the Schneider trade and hasn't taken any significant action outside of it.

    I am holding his inaction against him. Every trade has risk and is a gamble, cannot fully blame any GM for that. But not wanting to make a move when it's clear this team needs a move?

  7. As well written the op's post is, I have to also say that the op tends to lean a little towards a bias. Every team is going to have slumps and to expect consistency in a team from year to year is unreasonable.

    Lou Lamoriello is a good example of this. New Jersey has seen it's fair share of ups and downs over his tenure as GM there. Some years the team does great while other years the team has not, yet he has won Stanley Cups. By the op's logic, Lamoriello is an okay GM at best since he is not consistently making the team better.

    One thing the op fails to mention is it's not the fans who hire and fire the GM's, it's the owners. Ultimately, the owners have the power to make their decision. The fans may help the owners with their decisions (ie. attendence, etc), but in a hockey-crazed market like Vancouver, where there will be tickets sold anyway, it won't matter as much.

    Gillis himself is not necessarily doing bad. The details of every trade that happens is behind closed doors. We will never truely know what happened in the Hodgson trade, or the Schneider trade. We won't really know what could have been. We can speculate and shake our fists at GMMG all we want, but in the end we are mere window shoppers blinded by diamonds that we want that we may or may not be able to afford.

    Well ok-good gm at best. Can't say he has done a terrible lot for NJ. They ride Brodeur every year. Not the toughest thing to tighten up defensively and have success. AV did it when he started here and we had a terrible crop of players and it had great results.

  8. I think Gillis, so far, falls in the good, but not great, GM category.

    Honest question that I've asked before to the 'Fire Gillis!' crowd, who would you choose to replace him?

    I think we've already got one of the leading candidates in Gilman, but then you have to expect that the 'process' wouldn't change to any great degree. My other two picks would be Botterill in Pittsburgh and Fenton in Nashville.

    Just because there is no immediate replacement, it doesn't make the current job holder competent.

    Quite clearly this team is regressing with core players aging. We either go for it with the vets (which we have already chosen to do by keeping Lu over Schneids) or mini/major rebuild and get some value from our place in the rankings and our aging core players...those are the sensible options.

    Instead we are doing NOTHING. Any GM is capable of more than that.

  9. I dont think any of us can properly understand the enormous strain of being in charge of a $400mil dollar franchise in a city where that team is all or nothing. Fans and media scrutinizing every move you make. All the captain hindsight's telling you they knew it all along.

    We can compare Gillis to the other GMs but lets not fool ourselves into pretending we know what we are talking about when it comes to trades , players and contracts.

    I highly doubt any of us could do better than MG.

    I think herein lies the problem. It's not about us doing better, I never said I could be a better GM, same goes with critiquing players. All we can do is compare them to others in their profession, what it comes down to is results. Ever since our cup run we have taken bigger and bigger steps back every year. Shouldn't be a surprise either, all we have done is lose players of that winning roster year after year, without completely replacing them.

    I don't understand the complexities of being a player as well, but the bottom line is David Booth until a few games ago (after being benched, ridiculed, sent to Utica) was playing quite horribly. Even without being a professional talent scout/GM, I can see that his 4M cap hit could be better spent elsewhere. Its that simple. Any complications/reasons why this cannot be solved/has happened are just excuses and also a consequence of the actions of this very same GM.

    • Upvote 2
  10. Over the years, the management of sports clubs has evolved in favor of efficiency, consistency, and professionalism. In today's NHL, GM's are scrutinized and criticized for every single move they make, don't make, or were close to making. There is no slack in any area of the game. Managing tight budget constraints, drafting future players, professional media representation, and overall entertainment value/competitive level of the team are some of the key responsibilities expected of every NHL GM.

    At this level, the only thing separating a good GM from a bad or terrible one is his ability to increase/manage the competitive level of the team. Media representation, budget issues, and even drafting are in large part delegated to public relations staff, scouts, capologists, rest of front office, and/or the club owners directly (i.e. instructions come from up top).

    So to err at this level (assuming budget management, drafting, and PR are taken care of), a GM would have to employ bad risk management either in a trade or signing. Put simply, the only remaining responsibility of a GM is to sign effective players to good contracts (either through FA or retaining current players) or to trade for them. Therefore, a lot of the time, they are criticized for agreeing to a lop-sided trade or offering a bad contract.

    What would make an ok GM? one that maintains his team and makes small additions to offset team losses.

    A bad GM? one that makes uninformed trades, giving up value in the process.

    A terrible GM? Wouldn't you say the worst GM from an owner's standpoint is one that does nothing at all? Failing to do their only job? Failing to adapt to the constant change of the NHL?

    Trying to fit MG under these very rigid and arbitrary criterion, would it not be fair to say that at best he is an ok GM, and if you looked closer, especially at this past year, you'd lean more in favor of bad to terrible?

    My 2 Cents, we all have our opinions, flame away!

  11. Don't trade our prospects for a guy like Kane, they could be really good one day, one of them could even be the next Evander Kane!!

    Meanwhile, the teams struggles continue.

    Why not horvat and a 1st?

    What the hell are we trying to do with drafting players? No one has made it big since Kesler, traded Hodgson. Might as well speed it up and trade some prospects for a young forward that can help us now. Gaunce, Jensen, Horvat, Shinkaruk good group, but are 2-3 years away from making an impact in the NHL. Could play a few games, but wont put up too much. Can this team last another 2-3 years? NO

    Either a semi rebuild is needed here (2-3 yr window) or a trade for right now. In keeping Luongo over Schneider, imo MG already decided it was now or never, even if he did not have a choice.

    Just wasting value of the Sedins and Kesler atm.

    Unless of course the point is just to fill the stands for the regular season, in which case this would be the best way to go actually...hmmm well isn't that something, there was a plan all along......

  12. Fools...stop with the nonsense. If they would take Horvat and a 1st for Kane, I'd do it. Wait where have I heard this before...oh yeah Hodgson for Kassian...

    Wth? Kesler + Really? What is the point of trading one of our workhorses for a 1 dimensional player. A PF that fights? How many times have we to try and fail at that.

    If we get him, it better be for 1 prospect and 1 pick, o/w no thx.

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...