elvis15 Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Chicago Draft picks 2nd round or later with 40+ NHL games: ... I think you and I have different definitions of excelled. I'd say they just got lucky with a couple of late picks like we did in 04 and 05. Corrado (5th round 2011) certainly looks like a hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 He's also included guys like Burish and Wisniewski, who weren't drafted in the last decade (2002) and Anderson who was drafted in 1999 and 2001 - and excluded Bieksa (2001) - as well as the Canucks undrafted free agent signings - Burrows, Tanev, Lack (and the late rounder Corrado)... He's claiming you are cherry picking, but his lists are slanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your New Coach Mr. Tippett Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Basically zero in house competition. AV playing favourites and not have the entire team accountable. Only whipping his whipping boys. No push from players coming up through the system to drive the vets. Everyone and their dog has a NTC, NMC. Guys like Higgins who have bounced from team to team because they only play when their career is on the line, rewarded with 4 years. Similar with Hansen. Bad reads by Gillis. Gotta keep those fringe players hungry. The ones without talent who only contribute by busting their arse. No Dmen that can clear the space in front of the net effectively. All small, and relatively soft. No balance. A fourth line comprised mostly of players who aren't NHL calibre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ji_unit Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 “Five years ago we came in here and reset this organization." Please..... keeping the incumbent coach and letting an aging captain walk is not "resetting the organization". Keenan reset the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Don't forget he missed Mike Brown! I made sure to include him in my list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 "Five years ago we came in here and reset this organization." Please..... keeping the incumbent coach and letting an aging captain walk is not "resetting the organization". Keenan reset the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ey40 Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Maybe Gillis can foresee himself being fired, so that's why he said the team needs a reset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 You know when you're a bottom feeder a second round pick can't exactly be called a "late round" pick. Btw, I didn't look through all of them but Chris Porter never played a game for Chicago and has a whopping 127 NHL games since being drafted in 2003. That's what you consider excelling at late drafting? Try to be a little realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 He's also included guys like Burish and Wisniewski, who weren't drafted in the last decade (2002) and Anderson who was drafted in 1999 and 2001 - and excluded Bieksa (2001) - as well as the Canucks undrafted free agent signings - Burrows, Tanev, Lack (and the late rounder Corrado)... He's claiming you are cherry picking, but his lists are slanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Why would I include tanev etc in a discussion aboyt a drafting record of a team? And actually I did mention bieksa if you learn to read.You have no argument against the validity of the comparable drafting records so why even bother respnding with a nitpick like this anyway? The only thing slanted us how crapty the canucks have been at drafting for the past decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Any time I am looking for "chicken little" and canna find him, why I just come to CDC .. he is EVERYWHERE .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 If Gillis listened to CDC, this team would be in a bigger hole than they already are. How many people recall that the consensus around here was to draft Team Canada star Quinton Howden? I do. Well, as stands he has a big goose egg in 18 NHL games now. Obviously the pick was traded along with Grabner for Ballard. Had Gillis listened to CDC, people would be calling Howden a bust and have ultimately blamed Gillis for making the decision that THEY wanted. Whether Grabner would have played as well here as he has on the Island is debatable. If we look at back in history of the threads on CDC, there was no real consensus about Torres and Ehrhoff being let go. CDC'ers were pleased that Gillis passed on Torres and obviously Ehrhoff since they were asking for too much money. The other half believed that it was a mistake. CDC was mostly satisfied with Higgins as a potential replacement over Torres. CDC'ers were glad at the time that the following season had rolled around and Ehrhoff was looking like crap in Buffalo and were convinced Gillis made the right call. CDC was happy that we brought in Garrison as a potential replacement for Ehrhoff. It's nonsensical that people will criticize Gillis for signing Luongo to such a huge contract, yet they would have approved of a massive, unmovable contract for Ehrhoff, if he was truly content on signing only such a deal like the Sabres offered. Now that the Canucks are out for the second time in the first round and both series without either of those players, people are quick to blame Gillis again for the decisions that they approved of. The point of this is to show that CDCers don't know any better than Gillis. Not even close. Most of their opinions are based on media projections and NHL.com statistics, which is understandable. But CDC is quick to blame Gillis for when things don't work out the way it was intended, even though a hefty portion of the people wanted precisely those things. People around here need to stop busting his chops because if CDC ran the team, it would have been run into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BedBeats™2.0 Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Maybe reset CDC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sosunnyhere Posted May 15, 2013 Author Share Posted May 15, 2013 lol. Ballard for Komisarek made me laugh. You have 0 credibility after saying that. awesome first impression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey Fever Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Reset what!..... Core of this team is Nonis and Burke era. A change in GM means last one was not doing a good job evaluating and acquiring talent. So why is the core still made up of guys from the previous GM's ......does reset mean we are going to attempt new experiments that we started five years ago. HMMMM who will be the Ballard, Booth, and Lappierre of the next five years? Gillis said everything we expected during press conference,and brought in the "reset" moniker which will be the leading cover of every new "Fail" he attempts. My choices for the new Ballard is Komisarek..... for the new Booth is Scottie Upshall..... for the new Max Lappierre is Jordan Tootoo. I see a lot getting worse before better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Very witty - "if you learn to read" - that's novel. Who the Hawks drafted in 1999, 2002, etc is utterly irrelevant, as is the Canucks drafting in the years before 2008. This is a thread purporting to hold this Canucks administration accountable - why you'd waste our time with lists including players drafted 11 and even 14 years ago (Anderson was first drafted in 1999) is a mystery. The current prospect pool is nowhere near as scarce as most complainers on this site maintain - the drafting record in this short period is for the most part far too early to assess, but between the draft and the undrafted free agents added, there are players with reasonable NHL potential at every position. Jensen Blomstrand Gaunce Schroeder Kassian Grenier Tommernes Corrado Tanev Lack Cannata Truth is - no one really knows how good the vast majority of young players will turn out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 If Gillis listened to CDC, this team would be in a bigger hole than they already are. How many people recall that the consensus around here was to draft Team Canada star Quinton Howden? I do. Well, as stands he has a big goose egg in 18 NHL games now. Obviously the pick was traded along with Grabner for Ballard. Had Gillis listened to CDC, people would be calling Howden a bust and have ultimately blamed Gillis for making the decision that THEY wanted. Whether Grabner would have played as well here as he has on the Island is debatable. If we look at back in history of the threads on CDC, there was no real consensus about Torres and Ehrhoff being let go. CDC'ers were pleased that Gillis passed on Torres and obviously Ehrhoff since they were asking for too much money. The other half believed that it was a mistake. CDC was mostly satisfied with Higgins as a potential replacement over Torres. CDC'ers were glad at the time that the following season had rolled around and Ehrhoff was looking like crap in Buffalo and were convinced Gillis made the right call. CDC was happy that we brought in Garrison as a potential replacement for Ehrhoff. It's nonsensical that people will criticize Gillis for signing Luongo to such a huge contract, yet they would have approved of a massive, unmovable contract for Ehrhoff, if he was truly content on signing only such a deal like the Sabres offered. Now that the Canucks are out for the second time in the first round and both series without either of those players, people are quick to blame Gillis again for the decisions that they approved of. The point of this is to show that CDCers don't know any better than Gillis. Not even close. Most of their opinions are based on media projections and NHL.com statistics, which is understandable. But CDC is quick to blame Gillis for when things don't work out the way it was intended, even though a hefty portion of the people wanted precisely those things. People around here need to stop busting his chops because if CDC ran the team, it would have been run into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Actually I used 10 or so years of drafts because the point I was making was that saying that building like the hawks meant tanking for a decade was false. They did poorly but they drafted very effectively over that time and produced a lot of quality nhl players. Unfortunately the canucks are not likely to be able to draft that well if historybis any indicator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Building like the Hawks isn't really a very good analogy - and regardless the Hawks aren't built around late round picks - their core is made up of a 3rd overall pick in Toews, a 14th overall in Seabrook, a 1st overall in Kane - you don't get those kind of picks without tanking for years. Keith was a 2nd round pick.... Hossa and Sharp were not drafted by the Hawks, neither was Leddy, who was a 16th overall of the Wild. The Canucks are drafting fine - they've been a contender - they don't have handfuls of roster spots to fill, they've only really needed a player or two to emerge each year, and they've certainly managed that despite spending a number of picks to pick up roster players in the midst of contending for a Cup. The better analogy would be trying to sustain as Detroit has - and it's too early to judge whether the current administration's groundwork will succeed in keeping this team competitive. For people to pretend that they know otherwise is just that - pretentious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice of the Voiceless Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Let's not compare canucks and blackhawks drafts,they sucked for years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.