Bodee Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Gillis kept the team as strong as he could based within the confines of the salary cap; something you seem to completely ignore in your analysis. The fact that the team achieved a second president's trophy dismisses your claim that it was that much weaker. The 10/11 was one of the best teams in the last 10 years statistically, and should have cruised to a cup win. The team last year was not as good but didn't need to be to at least make it to the WCF, if not at least past the first round. It was a complete failure by the coaching staff, and anyone that thinks otherwise is looking in the wrong places to find blame. I did not miss any point, far from it. You seem to be ignoring the track record of a coach that clearly came up short with the teams he was given. You keep equating regular season with the playoffs. You imply the statistics proved we had a SC winning team, well the Boston game implied we didn't and it was near as damn it re-confirmed against LA. You keep making excuses for Gillis's inability to strengthen the Finals team. You know there is a skill in upgrading. It doesn't mean you keep everyone you have and suddenly bring in someone else. You deal. Of course we all know "dealing" is Gillis's achilles heel. He can't get himself to the other side of the table. And that won't change. I'm MAKING A POINT that he came up short with the PLAYERS he was given when he should have had better. The point is we were lucky to have a coach who even reached the playoffs this year after the injuries and the shambles made of getting what we needed. Of course he not only didn't get what the Canucks needed ..........he downgraded and forced AV to play duds (Sestito, Pinizzotto, Joslin, Ebbett) rehabs (Barker) and youngsters who were not ready. (Schroeder, Sweatt, Jensen, Kassian, Corrado.) What a fiasco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitecarnage Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 so, apart from the coaching change, is Gillis staying for another year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck2288 Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 I watched the news conference yesterday as saw a Brain Burke wannabee. Gillis talks down to the media in a manner that just smells of arrogance (or is that his sweat?) short flippant answers, no taking of respsonsibility for the state of the team's current roster. The thing is there is a HUGE difference between Burke and Gillis....Burke has a proven track record. My point is that you have to EARN the right to carry a level of arrogance. Gillis has EARNED nothing. Gillis needed to come accross as humble and share some responsibility and instead of acting like as a coward does....blame someone else. All he could talk about how he fought to keep AV five years ago and now he could not justify keeping him....what he failed to mention is the terrible drafting, terrible trades and lack of improvement in the team's roster over those same 5 years. Lets face it, its not looking good...the current roster is weak and the cupboard is pretty bare. Nobody in the league want to deal with Gillis because he is a bottom feeder former player agent and frankly nothing more than a snake oil salesman that convinced the Aquilinis he know hockey better that Nonis. Make no mistake, AV had to go, but now Gillis has to go and a good thing is there is nobody left for Gillis to blame and its only a matter of time until he is shown the door for his lack of ability. I am a lifelong fan of the Canucks and it kills me to see the situation they are in right now. I just want a leader that I can support and Mike Gillis is no leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiangunner Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Its either Tippett or Eakins. If they want a proven commodity its Tippett if they want someone with a different philosophy and approach it's Eakins. Gillis better get this decision out of the way so he can start making the "BOLD" moves when it comes to roster asap. He should start with figuring out return for Edler..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 This is the truth that some people keep looking past. If you have Sedin, Kesler, and Roy down the middle you should have no problem scoring goals. But this season you could see the desperation coming from AV. He had no way left to motivate the team other than juggling the lines. And in the end it only ended up being counter productive because there was no chemistry on offense. AV did everything he could with this core. But after so many years of coming up short, the team needs something new to believe in. A new a coach and some youth in the lineup will hopefully accomplish that. Except Henrik doesn't shoot/can't score, Roy is a passer who doesn't score much, Kesler has been a bandaid and our wingers suck. What on earth makes you think those three guys should make us score a bunch of goals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Gillis could trade for him. The NYR traded for Michel Bergeron back in '87. regards, G. Or like the time we traded coach randy carlyle to the ducks for a 2nd round pick? Pretty sure that was removed from the CBA. No compensation for staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Why does anyone wants an offensive minded coach, when we dont have offensive players beside the Sedins. Kesler is not a guy for an offensive minded/puck possession coach like Babcock. He just bullies his way to the next and has a great wrister. If we try to play like Detroit with Lapierre, Hansen, Higgins, Booth, Kassian we will get crush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolwut? Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 No that's not how it works...........so don't damn well insult our intelligence. It works the same way other GM's work........YOU TRAD WHAT YOU HAVE TO GET BETTER. That is all about JUDGEMENT and BARGAINING ABILITY. These players are not your sons or your best friends. They are players belonging to the Club. You don't throw NTC's at them to guarantee they will be at the Christmas Party for the next 5 years, you keep the situation as fluid and flexible as you can so that when you need to upgrade you have the pieces to do it. Gillis backed himself into a corner till he was only able to sign rehabs and duds for this team. He performed as an Agent and NOT as a GM. He has neither the mindset or the experience to get us out of this clusterf-ck he has created and ironically got rid of the only guy who was keeping us in the game despite Gillis continued brain farts and loss of focus. I'm not about to say gillis is infalible and hasn't done a perfect job.. I think we can all agree he hasn't.. What GM could? I agree with Mikes assertion that the landscape is always changing, whether people wish to view this as an excuse or not.. Its undeniably true. That being said, your posting regarding making trades reads as if there were always trades available for MG to make.. Yes, the fact that he handed out NTCs to numerous players handcuffs him, no doubt.. But the fact remains that there is no guarantee there would be trades available to begin with.. Or that the prices wouldn't be too steep. Everyone seems to expect MG to win every trade.. Well that's just not possible.. Some will turn out, others may not. I still fail to see what any of the above has to do with a power play that crashed and burned over the past few seasons after being one of the best in the league (can't blame that all on ehrhoff and saloon leaving), and a team with as much skill as the Canucks playing 20 minutes a game for well over a year now. You can claim the lack of a supporting cast all you like, but that to me just reeks of giving our players a free pass. They played not to lose, they played soft uninspried hockey, and mailed it in o n many a night leaving their goaltenders hanging out to dry. Again, blame Gillis for personnel issues, but I blame the coaching staff for countless nights where the team, whatever makeup of players it may have been, was not ready to come out hard and instead coasted through the motions. Coaching coaching coaching coaching coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue & Green Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Tippet is at the top of my list. He has a lot of experience coaching in the NHL western conference already and has done well with what he had. This alone should gain respect from the players. It's not the time to experiment or gamble with a coach with little or no NHL experience especially with our aging core group of players. Tippet may be defensively minded but that doesn't sound bad to me right now. The Canucks often looked lost in their own end this year with too many giveaways and few good breakouts, they weren't the puck possession team of past years. They spent a lot of energy and time chasing around in their own end. It's pretty hard to be a run and gun team without the puck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JensenFan2011 Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 how about Mike Johnston? He should get a fairly good look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 I'm not about to say gillis is infalible and hasn't done a perfect job.. I think we can all agree he hasn't.. What GM could? I agree with Mikes assertion that the landscape is always changing, whether people wish to view this as an excuse or not.. Its undeniably true. That being said, your posting regarding making trades reads as if there were always trades available for MG to make.. Yes, the fact that he handed out NTCs to numerous players handcuffs him, no doubt.. But the fact remains that there is no guarantee there would be trades available to begin with.. Or that the prices wouldn't be too steep. Everyone seems to expect MG to win every trade.. Well that's just not possible.. Some will turn out, others may not. I still fail to see what any of the above has to do with a power play that crashed and burned over the past few seasons after being one of the best in the league (can't blame that all on ehrhoff and saloon leaving), and a team with as much skill as the Canucks playing 20 minutes a game for well over a year now. You can claim the lack of a supporting cast all you like, but that to me just reeks of giving our players a free pass. They played not to lose, they played soft uninspried hockey, and mailed it in o n many a night leaving their goaltenders hanging out to dry. Again, blame Gillis for personnel issues, but I blame the coaching staff for countless nights where the team, whatever makeup of players it may have been, was not ready to come out hard and instead coasted through the motions. Coaching coaching coaching coaching coaching. I haven't seen a NTC prevent a player movement yet other than when the player was universally not wanted. It all relates back to the dollars involved. ie Gomez. How does Gillis play hardball on NTC's when other GM's hand them out as a matter of course. It is a fine line that team managements have to thread. Half the NHL have losing seasons. Van's management was in the top 10 and still couldn't cut it with expectations. The classic was Gillis's comment that he would hire his new coach from the assembled sports writers. He should perhaps extend his search to the CDC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Not a big fan of owners meddling in hockey operations decisions, but in this case I agree with them Tippet would be a great choice as coach. That being said, is he even available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Tippet is the type of coach who might make Edler into that Norris player everyone thought he could be. I could see Kesler and Burrows starring under Tippet but the Twins might be a ? mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 does anyone really think a new coach is going to solve our teams problems? these are grown men.. the style of play wasnt an issue.. neither was the game plan... you need players that care enough to lay it all on the line when it counts and you cant coach that..not to a veteran core like the canucks have. we have seen the best we will ever see out of sedins, burrows, kesler ,bieksa ,hamhuis,higgins and edler a new coach isnt going to change their style of play.... the only thing AV did wrong as a caoch was made it too comfortable for this core group, never held them accountable for bad play.. these core group of guys i mentioned could have bad games and bad weeks and never miss a shift when a young guy in the lineup would get stapled to the bench after one give away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 @EyeOnHockey: Alain Vigneault's response to Mike Gillis still being the Canucks GM http://t.co/JJRJ3Bv9UN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blömqvist Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 Why does anyone wants an offensive minded coach, when we dont have offensive players beside the Sedins. Kesler is not a guy for an offensive minded/puck possession coach like Babcock. He just bullies his way to the next and has a great wrister. If we try to play like Detroit with Lapierre, Hansen, Higgins, Booth, Kassian we will get crush. Exactly! That was the downfall with AV. AV at his core is a defensive minded coach. MG came along and gave him some offensive players in Ehrhoff, Samuelsson, Sundin, Schneider, and Demitra (RIP) and basically forced AV to play an offensive game. AV did well to adjust, but when those players left and were replaced by 3rd/4th liners with little offensive skill our team proved to be crappy because AV was still forced to play an offensive style of game via management. It's like putting the engine of a Toyota Corolla in an F1 car and expecting it to win the race. With that in mind, even if we did get the greatest offensive coach available right now it would be useless since the majority of our team is that of the engine of a Toyota Corolla. As you said, we can't play offense with "Lapierre, Hansen, Higgins, Booth, Kassian." Our roster should be suited for a Tippet-style defensive game. We have a great goaltender, a solid defence, and a whole lot of nothing up front except for the Sedins, Burrows, and Kesler. Unless management wants to change the makeup of this team, it's looking like we're heading back into the dark ages -- which I don't mind if we get 16 wins in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 And who is moving to the bottom pair, Hamhuis or Edler? That depends Baggins. Both Hamhuis and Edler were playing absolutely horrific hockey at the beginning of the season while Ballard and Tanev was our best tandem. Their ice-times were adjusted (by one minute of ice-time) but Edler and Hamhuis were still given too much ice-time that negatively impacted the outcomes of games. Both dmen personally lost us games when it wasn't necessary to ice them. Hamhuis eventually found his stride when paired with Garry but Edler never found his. If Ballard isn't bought out, I would be very interested to see how a fresh pair of eyes handles the above situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 What's wrong with Grapes? He an aging fart who has lost his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 does anyone really think a new coach is going to solve our teams problems? these are grown men.. the style of play wasnt an issue.. neither was the game plan... you need players that care enough to lay it all on the line when it counts and you cant coach that..not to a veteran core like the canucks have. we have seen the best we will ever see out of sedins, burrows, kesler ,bieksa ,hamhuis,higgins and edler a new coach isnt going to change their style of play.... the only thing AV did wrong as a caoch was made it too comfortable for this core group, never held them accountable for bad play.. these core group of guys i mentioned could have bad games and bad weeks and never miss a shift when a young guy in the lineup would get stapled to the bench after one give away. so your suggestion is to trade the entire team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitecarnage Posted May 23, 2013 Share Posted May 23, 2013 double post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.