White Noise Canucks Talk

[JE14]

Frustrated that he was traded at all. Or at least frustrated in the manner he was traded. The return was not great because Gillis' management kept him around until his trade value evaporated.

It's just the final punctuation on a series of frack ups by Gillis. It looks bad because he put us in a situation where we had to look bad. This extends beyond just Luongo. Makes the Schneider trade look that much worse.

He needs to go.

Markstrom+Matthias>>>Scrivens+2nd

[King Heffy]

Are people upset over the return for Luongo or the fact that he was even traded at all?

I don't know what people can possibly expect in return for him, and more importantly his contract. I thought the deal was alright, and if Markstrom pans our we'll be laughing.

The eating of salary, and the fact that Gillis traded Schneider first. It's disgusting that even Tampa Bay and the Islanders were willing to buy out their bad contracts, but we couldn't buy out Lu and will be suffering the effects of his contract for years to come.

[KFBR392]

Frustrated that he was traded at all. Or at least frustrated in the manner he was traded. The return was not great because Gillis' management kept him around until his trade value evaporated.

It's just the final punctuation on a series of frack ups by Gillis. It looks bad because he put us in a situation where we had to look bad. This extends beyond just Luongo. Makes the Schneider trade look that much worse.

He needs to go.

See the only thing I can relate to is the timing. He should have been gone long ago, but in all fairness, none of us really know what went down at the time. Asking prices from both sides, and the demands of Luongo and his agent may have played much bigger roles than we know. Hindsight is 20/20.

Schneider for a 9th/Horvat sounds bad, but for some reason Schneider for Valerie Nichushkin sounds better. It's hard to pin that on MG. Time will tell whether that was a fair deal.

I'm not trying to defend MG, because I too think he's done some questionable things... But I think the flack he's taking here is a bit over the top. Luongo wanted out, and maybe we can blame management for that - who knows, but at the end of the day he wants to be in Florida. He did what he could here, he's not getting better, and he's not going to be a difference maker here anymore. Getting rid of his contract is a blessing, regardless of the return - which I actually thought was fair all things considered.

I'm more concerned with what MG does from here. Freeing up that cap space could help us huge, and shows he's willing to rebuild.

At this point, after watching this team perform... I'd rather take my chances on Lack and some new blood offense, compared to Luongo and the same old guys playing in front of him.

[g_bassi13]

Markstrom+Matthias>>>Scrivens+2nd

It's not about getting Scrivens and a 2nd, lol. I wouldn't have been happy with that either.

We had a championship calibre team. We had some young pieces, we had some ageing pieces. The kind of team you could play around and tweak with to good effect. But the decay this team has seen was not something gradual. Piece by piece, notch by notch, the team has free fell into this position. They had no business being this low, this fast.

Forget Luongo was even traded for Markstrom, and look at the big picture. Look at the assets we had. Look at where we are now. Did we maximize our returns, or were we continuously trading from positions of weakness?

We got some sweet pick ups like Ehrhoff for nothing. Higgins and Lapierre were great Deadline additions. We got Lack and Tanev for free. He got Hamhuis as a FA. Some positives there, sure.

But on the other hand, he extended Lu to his attrocious contract. He let go of Ehrhoff, which began the demise of our #1 Power Play. He traded away Hodgson for an unequal prospect. You talk about trading away draft picks for useless deadline acquisitions, Gillis did that with Derek Roy. He Allowed the Luongo, Schnieder fiasco to fester by refusing to move either. He then traded away the younger one, when he decided it would be best to hang on to the untradable one, and from that position of weakness, did not maximize his returns at all (Not at all). He then decides that after trading away his younger star goalie, that guy with the unmovable contract had to be moved as well, and traded it for some mediocre contracts, while making it so that his contract still hobbles us in multiple ways moving forward.

That's just to name some things.

That's not to even mention his poor-ish drafting record, and earlier career incidents like the Sundin $10 million a year multiple year contract offer that would have lost us the Sedins, or the Bernier/Backes RFA disaster.

In the end we got a few good years out of a team that was largely headed by players that Gillis inherited. Props to him for managing to hold on to some of them. But wrong choices have been continuously made on the whole, and now we're here.

I won't be bothering to watch this team until Gillis is gone. He pulls the team in all these different directions, reacting instead of planning, and often not reacting when he really should be doing something. He should have been really trying to do is build the team in that Red Wings Image that he was talking about way back when. How do you think he managed in that regard? Lol.

The sky is not falling, and I have not permanently given up on the team, but the horrible management just really needs to go. They have proven time and again that they don't know what they're doing. I know when it comes to a team, any player, any coach, or any manager that's on the brink of leaving, or is performing poorly, they get a degree of sympathy. I do this all the time. But with the defence Gillis has been receiving, it's going too far.

[Intoewsables]

Frustrated that he was traded at all. Or at least frustrated in the manner he was traded. The return was not great because Gillis' management kept him around until his trade value evaporated.

It's just the final punctuation on a series of frack ups by Gillis. It looks bad because he put us in a situation where we had to look bad. This extends beyond just Luongo. Makes the Schneider trade look that much worse.

He needs to go.

If they hadn't traded Luongo this season, the only other feasible option would have been to CBO him in the offseason. A compliance buyout would have been the preferable choice IMO, but if Aquilini felt the same way, this would've been done last offseason (and we'd still have Schneider). The cap recapture rule penalty would have been devastating had we decided to hold on to Luongo for the entirety of his career. At least the Panthers will be picking up a portion of the penalty this way, and they're the ones stuck with the declining 35 year old goaltender.

Before the cap recapture penalty was brought in, there wasn't much reason to move Luongo. Not sure how the management team can be faulted for hanging on to him for too long, unless you expected them to foresee the rule changes.

I will say though, this whole goalie controversy debacle was handled really poorly by everyone in the Canucks organization. For a team that prided themselves on being player friendly and a desirable location for UFAs, this is pretty shameful. As far as the actual trades go, I don't think the returns were all that bad, but surely this could have been handled much differently.

Which other moves have you disliked?

[g_bassi13]

If they hadn't traded Luongo this season, the only other feasible option would have been to CBO him in the offseason. A compliance buyout would have been the preferable choice IMO, but if Aquilini felt the same way, this would've been done last offseason (and we'd still have Schneider). The cap recapture rule penalty would have been devastating had we decided to hold on to Luongo for the entirety of his career. At least the Panthers will be picking up a portion of the penalty this way, and they're the ones stuck with the declining 35 year old goaltender.

Before the cap recapture penalty was brought in, there wasn't much reason to move Luongo. Not sure how the management team can be faulted for hanging on to him for too long, unless you expected them to foresee the rule changes.

I will say though, this whole goalie controversy debacle was handled really poorly by everyone in the Canucks organization. For a team that prided themselves on being player friendly and a desirable location for UFAs, this is pretty shameful. As far as the actual trades go, I don't think the returns were all that bad, but surely this could have been handled much differently.

Which other moves have you disliked?

Could/Should they have moved Luongo before the cap recapture policy came into place? I dunno, but I wouldn't be blaming them as much of they had dealt with the controversy that existed before then, whether it was Luongo or Schnieder that they were going forward with. If they traded Schnieder then, I would've treated the cap recapture thing like an unfortunate happenstance. But holding onto all his cards like he did into the lockout? I don't forgive him then.

I mean, if we had a happy Luongo, who happened to be subject to the cap recapture policy, I wouldn't care so much, because he was meant to be our goalie for life anyways.

But the team and the management kept drawing it out. They waited almost a year after Schneider was designated the starter, and Luongo wanted out, before they eventually decided to just move Schneider anyways.

The team has handled that situation with a lot of disrespect, and are directly responsible for losing two quality goal-tenders for close to nothing of what they should have been worth.

When Schnieder was traded, I'm sure most thought "Well that was a crapty return, but at least this is all over, and we have a starting goalie." And then this bull happened.

As for answering your latter question, just look to the post above. It doesn't even include things like the Ballard trade. More the fundamental mistakes that should not have been occurring. Loads of fans justified each of them, like this one.

Poor treatment of players, leading to a forced hand at moving assets, leading to assets being returned at poor value. In the big picture, they created an product on what turned out to be an unsustainable model, that expired far before the labelled Best Before date.

They management is not responsible for everything that brought the Canucks to where they are at the moment, but at the same time, they are the ones who have to absorb the blame. You can critique the inner workings of any given transaction made, but looking at what has happened overall, how can someone say the management has not harshly failed this team?

[King Heffy]

Could/Should they have moved Luongo before the cap recapture policy came into place? I dunno, but I wouldn't be blaming them as much of they had dealt with the controversy that existed before then, whether it was Luongo or Schnieder that they were going forward with. If they traded Schnieder then, I would've treated the cap recapture thing like an unfortunate happenstance. But holding onto all his cards like he did into the lockout? I don't forgive him then.

I mean, if we had a happy Luongo, who happened to be subject to the cap recapture policy, I wouldn't care so much, because he was meant to be our goalie for life anyways.

But the team and the management kept drawing it out. They waited almost a year after Schneider was designated the starter, and Luongo wanted out, before they eventually decided to just move Schneider anyways.

The team has handled that situation with a lot of disrespect, and are directly responsible for losing two quality goal-tenders for close to nothing of what they should have been worth.

When Schnieder was traded, I'm sure most thought "Well that was a crapty return, but at least this is all over, and we have a starting goalie." And then this bull happened.

As for answering your latter question, just look to the post above. It doesn't even include things like the Ballard trade. More the fundamental mistakes that should not have been occurring. Loads of fans justified each of them, like this one.

Poor treatment of players, leading to a forced hand at moving assets, leading to assets being returned at poor value. In the big picture, they created an product on what turned out to be an unsustainable model, that expired far before the labelled Best Before date.

They management is not responsible for everything that brought the Canucks to where they are at the moment, but at the same time, they are the ones who have to absorb the blame. You can critique the inner workings of any given transaction made, but looking at what has happened overall, how can someone say the management has not harshly failed this team?

Yeah. To top it all off, we get a guy who's one of the biggest divers in the game. So much for trying to clean up our image.

[Guest Gumballthechewy]

Yeah. To top it all off, we get a guy who's one of the biggest divers in the game. So much for trying to clean up our image.

If you're worried about divers then you should be looking at a few players already here...

[King Heffy]

If you're worried about divers then you should be looking at a few players already here...

I thought Gillis wanted to fix our image. Bringing in yet another diver doesn't exactly strike me as congruent with that goal.

[avelanch]

markstrom's diving incidents were 4 years ago. i haven't heard about it since then. heffy, you're upset over the wrong thing here.

[aGENT]

Frustrated that he was traded at all. Or at least frustrated in the manner he was traded. The return was not great because Gillis' management kept him around until his trade value evaporated.

It's just the final punctuation on a series of frack ups by Gillis. It looks bad because he put us in a situation where we had to look bad. This extends beyond just Luongo. Makes the Schneider trade look that much worse.

He needs to go.

We got more value out of the Lu trade than we would have any time in the last two years...not sure how that's deemed "evaporated"...?

Both the Lu and the Schneider returns were more than fair. Goalies simply don't get you huge returns. All the ranting in the world (or Eastern media telling you otherwise) will not change that.

I find it endlessly amusing that the posters accusing Gillis of simply being reactionary are actually the ones doing so. So many people on here have WAY too much difficulty separating their emotions from logic.

[Guest Gumballthechewy]

Both the Lu and the Schneider returns were more than fair.

The Lu trade was pretty much the best we could get from him, however we could have gotten a lot more for Schneider.

[g_bassi13]

We got more value out of the Lu trade than we would have any time in the last two years...not sure how that's deemed "evaporated"...?

Both the Lu and the Schneider returns were more than fair. Goalies simply don't get you huge returns. All the ranting in the world (or Eastern media telling you otherwise) will not change that.

I find it endlessly amusing that the posters accusing Gillis of simply being reactionary are actually the ones doing so. So many people on here have WAY too much difficulty separating their emotions from logic.

I'm just looking at the team, and the current situation they've been put into. But thanks for questioning my basic mental faculties. You seem to get a joy out of talking down to people all the time.

Call it whatever the hell you want, but I'm not going to be watching this team until someone else is in charge of running it. Are you really saying it's simply reactionary to observe what Gillis has done to this team?

[aGENT]

The Lu trade was pretty much the best we could get from him, however we could have gotten a lot more for Schneider.

Based on what other than sheer fantasy?

[aGENT]

I'm just looking at the team, and the current situation they've been put into. But thanks for questioning my basic mental faculties. You seem to get a joy out of talking down to people all the time.

Call it whatever the hell you want, but I'm not going to be watching this team until someone else is in charge of running it. Are you really saying it's simply reactionary to observe what Gillis has done to this team?

The cap/new CBA (and to a lesser degree Booth being injured/unable to be bought out) is the largest reason this year was always going to be at best "ok" and at worst the disaster we see now. It just happened to go "at worst". Blame the universe or whichever deity you pray to.

The team's in nowhere near as bad of a position as the fanatical portion of CDC seems to think it is. We have a solid veteran group that will be bolstered by a strong youth movement, plenty of cap room heading in to the summer and some redundant pieces that can be moved in the summer to expedite the youth movement.

Keeping largely the status quo for the forward group also largely ensures we'll likely continue to do poorly this year and draft fairly high.

What's the panic?

[avelanch]

goalies just don't fetch much anymore.

i expect kes to be dealt at the draft/during the offseason

[Guest Gumballthechewy]

I'm just looking at the team, and the current situation they've been put into. But thanks for questioning my basic mental faculties. You seem to get a joy out of talking down to people all the time.

Call it whatever the hell you want, but I'm not going to be watching this team until someone else is in charge of running it. Are you really saying it's simply reactionary to observe what Gillis has done to this team?

Jesus man, calm down, it's only a game!

I was once like you, I went through this same situation in the Linden era and between inept management and Linden getting traded I was pretty frustrated but then I realised that this is hockey, favourites get traded, inept mangenment run teams into the ground, but things will get better.

I used to be a die hard Canucks fan but after Linden left I started to focus more on hockey as a whole, started to follow other teams. I still love the Canucks and they will always be my number one team but I'm a hockey fan first and a Canucks fan second. I love hockey way to much to give up on it just because the team makes some moves I don't agree with.

Based on what other than sheer fantasy?

Based on what Edmonton allegedly offered for him.

[73 Percent]

"im a hockey fan fist and a canucks fan second"

words right out of my mouth gumball

[aGENT]

Jesus man, calm down, it's only a game!

I was once like you, I went through this same situation in the Linden era and between inept management and Linden getting traded I was pretty frustrated but then I realised that this is hockey, favourites get traded, inept mangenment run teams into the ground, but things will get better.

I used to be a die hard Canucks fan but after Linden left I started to focus more on hockey as a whole, started to follow other teams. I still love the Canucks and they will always be my number one team but I'm a hockey fan first and a Canucks fan second. I love hockey way to much to give up on it just because the team makes some moves I don't agree with.

Based on what Edmonton allegedly offered.

Better yet, learn to separate your emotional attachment of the game/team from the actual intellectual observation of the organization/management. Use your impressive man-skills of compartmentalization

And Gum....Allegedly It's all rumours and I heard it rumoured that's what Gillis' demands were, not what was actually offered. So again, not based in reality. Gillis took the best offer he got for a largely unproven goalie with other teams knowing we HAD to get rid of a goalie AND clear cap due to the CBA. In that light a 9 pick in one of the deepest drafts in years was more than fair. Especially considering goalies are worth practically nothing in trades.

[Twilight Sparkle]

i'm happy kes didn't get traded. just put that to bed and move on. could be one of the reasons why this team's playing like **** with all the injuries, who's staying and who's going, it's a lot of drama that's hard for the players to not pay attention to, especially what's been going on with lu and now he's finally gone. with a season like this, seeing people blaming torts and the 'system' it's just being at the wrong place at the wrong time