One thing I want to point out about MG and Torts

[Ugli Fruit]

Look, we can all admit that the cup window closed after 2011. Most of us saw too much rosiness to admit it, but it's true. What Torts did was accelerate that slow, dreadful decline and save us a few more years of mediocrity.

How has he done this? I think that Tortorella brings a "play the right way" style of hockey, where you go hard to the net, grind along the boards, and protect the goalie with everything you got. It's probably what most people think of when they visualize hockey, not Pre-2011 Sedin Cycling for example.

Our core is fading, it's pretty obvious that the Sedins are not very versatile when it comes to playing style; this reflects Daniel's fragility after that Concussion. Kesler, when injury-free, will always be good at this type of hockey; it's what got him drafted in the first place. Higgins has been noticeable, as well as Santorelli, Kassian, even Booth, because they suit this playing style. But with our Sedins playing like dirt, and the power play failing as a result, we are night in and night out a team with no primary scoring available. Not from a slump, just not available.

AV then, might be a more ideal option for this core in terms of winning games, because he managed the Sedins better. But what about the future? He always sat the rookies and the doghouse had a special place for Hodgson. But what does Tortorella do? He plays who is playing well. I paraphrase Torts when he says, "I liked Jensen's overall play against Calgary", and so he played Jensen 16+ minutes! AV would never have done that, not even close. Torts quietly seems to have developed the likes of Zac Dalpe, Darren Archibald, Jannik Weber and Tanev to some degree (helped him develop a 2-way approach) as well. In a couple of years, this team will have a very strong backbone of bottom 6 veteran forwards who know how to play "the right way", or the physical, out-battle the opposition style game that cup winning teams have all utilized. Add in the fact that MG traded both goalies to get an elite center prospect (something we desperately needed especially after Hodgson's departure) and to get rid of Lu's bad contract (unfortnately), we would have a future top 3 forward set with real potential chemistry.

MG has, somehow, set a bright future for the Canucks, a future that I don't think AV would have been able to bring about as quckly or as effectively. Kudos to MG for bringing in the perfect interim coach for the next best hope of the Canuck generation!

I mean, they say the ones who grew up in adversity prove to be the strongest, don't they?

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

It really is a process.

Awesome post +1

[Shinkaruk_9]

Look, we can all admit that the cup window closed after 2011. Most of us saw too much rosiness to admit it, but it's true. What Torts did was accelerate that slow, dreadful decline and save us a few more years of mediocrity.

How has he done this? I think that Tortorella brings a "play the right way" style of hockey, where you go hard to the net, grind along the boards, and protect the goalie with everything you got. It's probably what most people think of when they visualize hockey, not Pre-2011 Sedin Cycling for example.

Our core is fading, it's pretty obvious that the Sedins are not very versatile when it comes to playing style; this reflects Daniel's fragility after that Concussion. Kesler, when injury-free, will always be good at this type of hockey; it's what got him drafted in the first place. Higgins has been noticeable, as well as Santorelli, Kassian, even Booth, because they suit this playing style. But with our Sedins playing like dirt, and the power play failing as a result, we are night in and night out a team with no primary scoring available. Not from a slump, just not available.

AV then, might be a more ideal option for this core in terms of winning games, because he managed the Sedins better. But what about the future? He always sat the rookies and the doghouse had a special place for Hodgson. But what does Tortorella do? He plays who is playing well. I paraphrase Torts when he says, "I liked Jensen's overall play against Calgary", and so he played Jensen 16+ minutes! AV would never have done that, not even close. Torts quietly seems to have developed the likes of Zac Dalpe, Darren Archibald, Jannik Weber and Tanev to some degree (helped him develop a 2-way approach) as well. In a couple of years, this team will have a very strong backbone of bottom 6 veteran forwards who know how to play "the right way", or the physical, out-battle the opposition style game that cup winning teams have all utilized. Add in the fact that MG traded both goalies to get an elite center prospect (something we desperately needed especially after Hodgson's departure) and to get rid of Lu's bad contract (unfortnately), we would have a future top 3 forward set with real potential chemistry.

MG has, somehow, set a bright future for the Canucks, a future that I don't think AV would have been able to bring about as quckly or as effectively. Kudos to MG for bringing in the perfect interim coach for the next best hope of the Canuck generation!

I mean, they say the ones who grew up in adversity prove to be the strongest, don't they?

I like the way you speak of this. I agree, there is some silver lining to this.

And there is no better time to start the rebuild than now. Generational talents like CMD and Cherchyun being available soon.

[î мцšт вяздк чфµ]

no matter what anyone says, to me it comes across as if gillis is "a deer in headlights" as a gm.

[VanCityCanuck14]

Why are we all supporting Gillis? He is awful. I am not saying Torts is the greatest, but the GM is the main reason we are not good.

As for Torts, I think he has a good system that does not mesh well with this team. In addition were not that good. Cold reality..

3 top 6 forwards and a bunch of 3rd (granite pretty good) liners. A few prospects at best... Luongo? In my mind Gillis is a bottom 5 GM. Least we don't have Snow

[Warhippy]

Why are we all supporting Gillis? He is awful. I am not saying Torts is the greatest, but the GM is the main reason we are not good.

As for Torts, I think he has a good system that does not mesh well with this team. In addition were not that good. Cold reality..

3 top 6 forwards and a bunch of 3rd (granite pretty good) liners. A few prospects at best... Luongo? In my mind Gillis is a bottom 5 GM. Least we don't have Snow

And once you actually check his history which Elvis so eloquently did for you, you'll realize he is FAR from terrible.

Gillis has done better in his tenure than all but 5 GMs in terms of success. Everything you can point out I can summarily discharge fact check and prove incorrect. But you will never see another persons point of view.

This Gillis hate is entirely misplaced on this forum. he may be getting stale but he is far from terrible.

Or, am I a goof for having a different point of view?

[Zuongo]

+1 good post OP

[Master Mind]

Look, we can all admit that the cup window closed after 2011. Most of us saw too much rosiness to admit it, but it's true. What Torts did was accelerate that slow, dreadful decline and save us a few more years of mediocrity.

We won another President's trophy in 2012, I'd say the window didn't close after 2011.

How has he done this? I think that Tortorella brings a "play the right way" style of hockey, where you go hard to the net, grind along the boards, and protect the goalie with everything you got. It's probably what most people think of when they visualize hockey, not Pre-2011 Sedin Cycling for example.

Our core is fading, it's pretty obvious that the Sedins are not very versatile when it comes to playing style; this reflects Daniel's fragility after that Concussion. Kesler, when injury-free, will always be good at this type of hockey; it's what got him drafted in the first place. Higgins has been noticeable, as well as Santorelli, Kassian, even Booth, because they suit this playing style. But with our Sedins playing like dirt, and the power play failing as a result, we are night in and night out a team with no primary scoring available. Not from a slump, just not available.

Sedin Cycling was much more effective than Torts' style.

AV then, might be a more ideal option for this core in terms of winning games, because he managed the Sedins better. But what about the future? He always sat the rookies and the doghouse had a special place for Hodgson. But what does Tortorella do? He plays who is playing well. I paraphrase Torts when he says, "I liked Jensen's overall play against Calgary", and so he played Jensen 16+ minutes! AV would never have done that, not even close. Torts quietly seems to have developed the likes of Zac Dalpe, Darren Archibald, Jannik Weber and Tanev to some degree (helped him develop a 2-way approach) as well. In a couple of years, this team will have a very strong backbone of bottom 6 veteran forwards who know how to play "the right way", or the physical, out-battle the opposition style game that cup winning teams have all utilized. Add in the fact that MG traded both goalies to get an elite center prospect (something we desperately needed especially after Hodgson's departure) and to get rid of Lu's bad contract (unfortnately), we would have a future top 3 forward set with real potential chemistry.

AV knew how to use his players better. And he helped the development of players like the Sedins, Kesler, Burrows, Edler, Bieksa, Hansen, etc. Yes he made some questionable decisions with a few players, but overall he was better than what most think.

MG has, somehow, set a bright future for the Canucks, a future that I don't think AV would have been able to bring about as quckly or as effectively. Kudos to MG for bringing in the perfect interim coach for the next best hope of the Canuck generation!

MG also let go of key components from what made our team so great in 2011. He's given us a brighter future with recent draft picks, but I think Torts is the wrong coach for this team.

I mean, they say the ones who grew up in adversity prove to be the strongest, don't they?

[Ugli Fruit]

The way you posted makes it impossible to properly argue your points, but here goes.

Just because we won a president's trophy in 2012 doesn't mean the window is wide open. The Canucks get wrecked in the first round after 2011, when it actually matters (see why below)

Yes, I even said Sedin cycling is effective, which is what AV would have done. However that window is closed, Torts' style far benefits the young players that will play in the next few years even though it hurts the Sedins' production. All part of the "process", if you will.

AV used the Sedins well by letting them do whatever they wanted and never putting them on the PK or defensive zones. That's never going to happen with 90% of the other players, so why advocate the laid-back, don't play any prospects style? AV developed those players over years (along with Sundin doing a good share for Kesler). Torts has turned Dalpe, Archibald and Weise (to some extent) some of the best 4th liners we've ever had, even better than some third liners we've had at some point, in half a season. I'm personally excited to see what he will do for the development of the likes of Gaunce, Jensen and Shinkaruk.

You could say MG let go of those pieces because he saw the rebuild coming. Spending over 1.5-2+M on bottom 6 players is for when you are making playoff and cup runs, not when rebuilding. What would Torres have done for us right now? Not much but eat away more cap than a third liner should.

[Master Mind]

The way you posted makes it impossible to properly argue your points, but here goes.

Just because we won a president's trophy in 2012 doesn't mean the window is wide open. The Canucks get wrecked in the first round after 2011, when it actually matters (see why below)

Yes, I even said Sedin cycling is effective, which is what AV would have done. However that window is closed, Torts' style far benefits the young players that will play in the next few years even though it hurts the Sedins' production. All part of the "process", if you will.

AV used the Sedins well by letting them do whatever they wanted and never putting them on the PK or defensive zones. That's never going to happen with 90% of the other players, so why advocate the laid-back, don't play any prospects style? AV developed those players over years (along with Sundin doing a good share for Kesler). Torts has turned Dalpe, Archibald and Weise (to some extent) some of the best 4th liners we've ever had, even better than some third liners we've had at some point, in half a season. I'm personally excited to see what he will do for the development of the likes of Gaunce, Jensen and Shinkaruk.

You could say MG let go of those pieces because he saw the rebuild coming. Spending over 1.5-2+M on bottom 6 players is for when you are making playoff and cup runs, not when rebuilding. What would Torres have done for us right now? Not much but eat away more cap than a third liner should.

The window is never closed on a team that wins the President's trophy. Our loss in 2012 wasn't a result of a window being closed, it was due to us facing a Kings team that breezed through everyone.

If the Sedins are to stick around for a rebuild, they would be the players the young guys looks up to. So it should be important for them to be producing, rather than having their talents be wasted on a style that isn't effective for them.

Dalpe, Archibald and Weise are certainly not some of the best 4th liners we've ever had.

MG wouldn't be going for a rebuild right after a trip to the finals, he'd be trying to get us back there again. He ended up letting go of some players that he should've kept. (Most noticeably, Ehrhoff and Salo.)

[Ugli Fruit]

The window is never closed on a team that wins the President's trophy. Our loss in 2012 wasn't a result of a window being closed, it was due to us facing a Kings team that breezed through everyone.

If the Sedins are to stick around for a rebuild, they would be the players the young guys looks up to. So it should be important for them to be producing, rather than having their talents be wasted on a style that isn't effective for them.

Dalpe, Archibald and Weise are certainly not some of the best 4th liners we've ever had.

MG wouldn't be going for a rebuild right after a trip to the finals, he'd be trying to get us back there again. He ended up letting go of some players that he should've kept. (Most noticeably, Ehrhoff and Salo.)

We can get into more and more details but really you've been largely overlooking the main point of my OP. So while I agree with you that Ehrhoff and Salo should have been untouchables, this bit here is all irrelevant. Main point is Gillis making these recent trades in light of the Sedins' shocking underperformance (Hurts to see but it's true that the Sedins are only good when sheltered) has really set up a good platform for the next generation.

[BanTSN]

Upsides:

Jensen: 2nd line LW. 1st line longshot. What? He's a RW? ... Wrong wing!

Zac Dalpe: 2nd line C - Reaaaal longshot.

Darren Archibald: 3rd line grinder. 4th line probable.

Jannik Weber: Depth defender.

Tanev: 1B or 2nd pairing defenseman.

It's good that we have some kids, but we're seriously going to need more than this asap if Torts is to even keep his job.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

It really is a process.

Awesome post +1

I never realized how pretty his eyes are. In that regard he belongs with raymond.

[nuck nit]

Gillis love for the 21st place team with a 28th place PP.

I guess we have to hit the bottom before the goofs get it.

[DIBdaQUIB]

Gillis love for the 21st place team with a 28th place PP.

I guess we have to hit the bottom before the goofs get it.

Love is blind!

[The Magician]

We could re-tool/mini rebuild if Kesler signs another deal here and the Sedins go second line.

[oldnews]

People need to think about the youth gap in context imo.

What has made these past few months a disaster? Aside from the injuries, the coach drama/suspension, the Olympic schedule combined with the Canucks specifically exhausting schedule (something addressed in the thread regarding the Pacific division's pre-Olympic skid), and the challenges of moving cap or 'resetting' in a cap drop, post CBA context: aside from those things there is another not so obvious underlying problem imo that Gillis identified some time ago, and moved in the last couple seasons to address.

This team, ideally would be a year or two further along in the development of their prospect pool and their AHL franchise.

That can only be attributed in small part to the current management.

If you look at the pre-Gillis years, through poor youth management and a few cases of tragedy, the Canucks were on course for contention, but also a talent gap.

2005 - Raymond would be the only player to become a Canuck regular. Their young star defenseman loses his life (RIP Luc Bourdon).

2006 - Grabner is the only NHL talent added through the draft, and that was debatable until after being dealt for a needed blueliner and subsequently being waived by Florida.

2007 - the Canucks land no NHL talent in the draft. Gillis later rescues the proceeds by dealing Patrick White for Ehrhoff, however despite the tremendous take in that deal, the underlying reality is a remaining lack of talent coming into the system.

2008 - Gillis is hired. The Canucks 1st round pick, and Gillis' first draft pick, would eventually prove to be unsatisfied, as a rookie, with his role as a 3rd line center behind Hart and Selke veterans. He is dealt to address the most pressing need in the organization - a young power forward - I liked the deal and still do, but it remains the case that through these four years of drafting, the Canucks really added only Kassian and Raymond in terms of talented youth. Their second round pick Sauve looked promising but suffered a serious setback in a car accident and hasn't really managed to become the player he appeared to be early in his career.

Where Gillis was highly successful was finding extremely good value in NHL roster players like Higgins, Malhotra, Lapierre, etc, to be carried through to the present with players like Richardson, Santorelli, Stanton.... He's done this in the context of having highly competitive teams that needed depth now - the costs to the prospect pool were moderate, but certainly didn't reverse the reality that the cupboards were scarce from the years preceding his tenure, and the players he was drafting were just starting to emerge. In addition, a combination of late picks and taking a few seasons to develop better footing didn't exactly expedite the process. They dealt their 1st once in the process - Howden becoming that pick (after their guy wasn't availabe - apparently Tinordi).

Which pretty much brings us to 2010/11 - when the Canucks not only were peaking in terms of their competiveness and contention, but were also starting to lay groundwork that they'd be able to take advantage of in due course.

They signed Tanev and Lack in the unsigned free agency market - a pair of obvious successes.

Their drafting (although still somewhat early to judge, nevertheless) appears to improve significantly. They take Jensen late, and add Corrado, Grenier, Tommernes, Blomstrand. They added Gaunce and Hutton the following year, They've continued to supplement in the unsigned FA market with Fox, Eriksson, Archibald and Lain. And then last year they started to reverse the buying trend, selling to add Horvat, as well as Shinkaruk, Cassells, Cederholm, Subban.

They have also obviously been quite successful in the UFA market, adding a pair of their top 4 in Hamhuis and Garrison, as well as numerous quality depth forwards.

The gap however, is a problem that becomes more evident the past few years when the team is hammered by injuries, and the development of their prospect pool somewhat lagging. With a fair amount of quite young talent, they nevertheless lacked NHL ready talent - and the premier players they had acquired - Jensen and Schroeder have also suffered injuries/setbacks.

The Canucks imo had a very solid core, but when the cap dropped, they did not have the NHL ready youth to step in, and they were in a tight spot, unable to be going out and buying - thankfully they excercised a lot of restraint in that sense. Simultaneously, moving cap or contracts became more difficult as all teams faced cap and financial challenges. People can pine that some magical cheap top 6 wasn't presto-d out of play-dough, but imo they protest too much.

People can also use 'closing window' analogies and hitting rock bottom rationalizations for tearing things down (in the context of terrible sellers markets to boot), but in the end, I think these two months are truly as bad as it gets. A whole number of factors combined - but the one thing that is closing is that gap between the core and the youth, something for the most part that resulted from dry years from 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009...

From there forward however.... Tanev, Lack, Kassian, Jensen, Schroeder, Horvat, Gaunce, Shinkaruk, Fox, Eriksson, Corrado, Cassells, Grenier, Hutton, Archibald, Lain, Tommernes, and now Matthias, Markstrom...

So I can't share the panic or the impatience - and am squarely not in the fire Gillis crowd. There is a 'process'/continuum that imo saw a fairly marked underlying shift or upturn from 2010 to present, a gap that I think is on the cusp of closing in the sense of the roster. Whereas the team was lacking youth to supplement and lessen the impact of injuries, and were limited by cap space, it now has a great deal more youth, a significant amount of cap space, the bulk of it's roster signed to very reasonable terms (spare me the complaints about Gillis contracts post-Luongo) and a great deal more options than it's had in a very long time.

The last thing I'd want to see is that groundwork handed over to some of the names being bantered around.

[youngdad]

This is very intelligent and well thought out. A few caveats.

1. You didn't mention any of the bad deals MG has made. Obviously no GM is perfect and burners are bound to happen. I can overlook these in the total balance of things.

2. The mismanagement of the Jennings goalies. I knew it would do more then just prolong things. The distraction, the stress on the team psyche was real. You can't have a goalie controversy that hot for 2 years!! It gets old and tiresome to the whole team. Don't sit on your asset, poop or get off the pot!

3. Torts. High risk/potentially high reward hiring. The more his system sinks in, the worse this team seems to get.

4. You don't have a crystal ball. How many of those young players you mentioned will amount to anything useful in the National Hockey League? This "process" we have been going through might lead nowhere. The pot at the end of the rainbow may be filled with something else...

Otherwise your post raised some very good points and did restore a small shred of my faith in the future of the Vancouver Canucks.

People need to think about the youth gap in context imo.

What has made these past few months a disaster? Aside from the injuries, the coach drama/suspension, the Olympic schedule combined with the Canucks specifically exhausting schedule (something addressed in the thread regarding the Pacific division's pre-Olympic skid), and the challenges of moving cap or 'resetting' in a cap drop, post CBA context. Aside from those things there is another not so obvious underlying problem imo that Gillis identified some time ago, and moved in the last couple seasons to address.

This team, ideally would be a year or two further along in the development of their prospect pool and their AHL franchise.

That can only be attributed in small part to the current management.

If you look at the pre-Gillis years, through poor youth management and a few cases of tragedy, the Canucks were on course for contention, but also a talent gap.

2005 - Raymond would be the only player to become a Canuck regular. Their young star defenseman loses his life (RIP Luc Bourdon).

2006 - Grabner is the only NHL talent added through the draft, and that was debatable until after being dealt for a needed blueliner and subsequently being waived by Florida.

2007 - the Canucks land no NHL talent in the draft. Gillis rescues the proceeds by dealing Patrick White for Ehrhoff, however despite the tremendous take in that deal, the underlying reality is a remaining lack of talent coming into the system.

2008 - the Canucks 1st round pick, and Gillis' first draft pick, would eventually prove to be unsatisfied, as a rookie, with his role as a 3rd line center behind Hart and Selke veterans. He is dealt to address the most pressing need in the organization - a young power forward - I liked the deal and still do, but it remains the case that through these four years of drafting, the Canucks really added only Kassian and Raymond in terms of talented youth. Their second round pick Sauve looked promising but suffered a serious setback in a car accident and hasn't really managed to become the player he appeared to be early in his career.

Where Gillis was highly successful was finding extremely good value in NHL roster players like Higgins, Malhotra, Lapierre, etc, to be carried through to the present with players like Richardson, Santorelli, Stanton.... He's done this in the context of having highly competitive teams that needed depth now - the costs to the prospect pool were moderate, but certainly didn't reverse the reality that the cupboards were scarce from the years preceding his tenure, and the players he was drafting were just starting to emerge. In addition, a combination of late picks and taking a few seasons to develop better footing didn't exactly expedite the process. They dealt their 1st once in the process - Howden becoming that pick (after their guy wasn't availabe - apparently Tinordi).

Which pretty much brings us to 2010/11 - when the Canucks not only were peaking in terms of their competiveness and contention, but were also starting to lay groundwork that they'd be able to take advantage of in due course.

They signed Tanev and Lack in the unsigned free agency market - a pair of obvious successes.

Their drafting (although still somewhat early to judge, nevertheless) appears to improve significantly. They take Jensen late, and add Corrado, Grenier, Tommernes, Blomstrand. They've add Gaunce and Hutton the following year, They've continued to supplement in the unsigned FA market with Fox, Eriksson, Archibald and Lain. And then last year they started to reverse the buying trend, selling to add Horvat, as well as Shinkaruk, Cassells, Cederholm, Subban.

They have also obviously been quite successful in the UFA market, adding a pair of their top 4 in Hamhuis and Garrison, as well as numerous quality depth forwards.

The gap however, is a problem that becomes evident the past few years when the team is hammered by injuries, and the development of their prospect pool somewhat lagging. With a fair amount of quite young talent, they nevertheless lacked NHL ready talent - and the premier players they had acquired - Jensen and Schroeder have also suffered injuries/setbacks.

The Canucks imo had a very solid core, but when the cap dropped, they did not have the NHL ready youth to step in, and they were in a tight spot to be going buying - thankfully they excercised a lot of restraint in that sense. Simultaneously, moving cap or contracts became more difficult as all teams faced cap and financial challenges. People can pine that some magical cheap top 6 wasn't presto-d out of play-dough, but imo they too much.

protest

People can also use 'closing window' analogies and hitting rock bottom rationalizations for tearing things down (in the context of terrible sellers markets to boot), but in the end, I think these two months are truly as bad as it gets. A whole number of factors combined - but the one thing that is closing is that gap between the core and the youth, something for the most part that resulted from dry years from 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009...

From there forward however.... Tanev, Lack, Kassian, Jensen, Schroeder, Horvat, Gaunce, Shinkaruk, Fox, Eriksson, Corrado, Cassells, Grenier, Hutton, Archibald, Lain, Tommernes, and now Matthias, Markstrom...

So I can't share the panic or the impatience - and am squarely not in the fire Gillis crowd. There is a 'process'/continuum that imo saw a fairly marked underlying shift or upturn from 2010 to present, a gap that I think is on the cusp of closing in the sense of the roster. Whereas the team was lacking youth to supplement and lessen the impact of injuries, and were limited by cap space, it now has a great deal more youth, a significant amount of cap space, the bulk of it's roster signed to very reasonable terms (spare me the complaints about Gillis contracts post-Luongo) and a great deal more options than it's had in a very long time.

The last thing I'd want to see is that groundwork handed over to some of the names being bantered around.

[Canuck Surfer]

People need to think about the youth gap in context imo.

What has made these past few months a disaster? Aside from the injuries, the coach drama/suspension, the Olympic schedule combined with the Canucks specifically exhausting schedule (something addressed in the thread regarding the Pacific division's pre-Olympic skid), and the challenges of moving cap or 'resetting' in a cap drop, post CBA context. Aside from those things there is another not so obvious underlying problem imo that Gillis identified some time ago, and moved in the last couple seasons to address.

This team, ideally would be a year or two further along in the development of their prospect pool and their AHL franchise.

That can only be attributed in small part to the current management.

If you look at the pre-Gillis years, through poor youth management and a few cases of tragedy, the Canucks were on course for contention, but also a talent gap.

2005 - Raymond would be the only player to become a Canuck regular. Their young star defenseman loses his life (RIP Luc Bourdon).

2006 - Grabner is the only NHL talent added through the draft, and that was debatable until after being dealt for a needed blueliner and subsequently being waived by Florida.

2007 - the Canucks land no NHL talent in the draft. Gillis rescues the proceeds by dealing Patrick White for Ehrhoff, however despite the tremendous take in that deal, the underlying reality is a remaining lack of talent coming into the system.

2008 - the Canucks 1st round pick, and Gillis' first draft pick, would eventually prove to be unsatisfied, as a rookie, with his role as a 3rd line center behind Hart and Selke veterans. He is dealt to address the most pressing need in the organization - a young power forward - I liked the deal and still do, but it remains the case that through these four years of drafting, the Canucks really added only Kassian and Raymond in terms of talented youth. Their second round pick Sauve looked promising but suffered a serious setback in a car accident and hasn't really managed to become the player he appeared to be early in his career.

Where Gillis was highly successful was finding extremely good value in NHL roster players like Higgins, Malhotra, Lapierre, etc, to be carried through to the present with players like Richardson, Santorelli, Stanton.... He's done this in the context of having highly competitive teams that needed depth now - the costs to the prospect pool were moderate, but certainly didn't reverse the reality that the cupboards were scarce from the years preceding his tenure, and the players he was drafting were just starting to emerge. In addition, a combination of late picks and taking a few seasons to develop better footing didn't exactly expedite the process. They dealt their 1st once in the process - Howden becoming that pick (after their guy wasn't availabe - apparently Tinordi).

Which pretty much brings us to 2010/11 - when the Canucks not only were peaking in terms of their competiveness and contention, but were also starting to lay groundwork that they'd be able to take advantage of in due course.

They signed Tanev and Lack in the unsigned free agency market - a pair of obvious successes.

Their drafting (although still somewhat early to judge, nevertheless) appears to improve significantly. They take Jensen late, and add Corrado, Grenier, Tommernes, Blomstrand. They've add Gaunce and Hutton the following year, They've continued to supplement in the unsigned FA market with Fox, Eriksson, Archibald and Lain. And then last year they started to reverse the buying trend, selling to add Horvat, as well as Shinkaruk, Cassells, Cederholm, Subban.

They have also obviously been quite successful in the UFA market, adding a pair of their top 4 in Hamhuis and Garrison, as well as numerous quality depth forwards.

The gap however, is a problem that becomes evident the past few years when the team is hammered by injuries, and the development of their prospect pool somewhat lagging. With a fair amount of quite young talent, they nevertheless lacked NHL ready talent - and the premier players they had acquired - Jensen and Schroeder have also suffered injuries/setbacks.

The Canucks imo had a very solid core, but when the cap dropped, they did not have the NHL ready youth to step in, and they were in a tight spot to be going buying - thankfully they excercised a lot of restraint in that sense. Simultaneously, moving cap or contracts became more difficult as all teams faced cap and financial challenges. People can pine that some magical cheap top 6 wasn't presto-d out of play-dough, but imo they too much.

protest

People can also use 'closing window' analogies and hitting rock bottom rationalizations for tearing things down (in the context of terrible sellers markets to boot), but in the end, I think these two months are truly as bad as it gets. A whole number of factors combined - but the one thing that is closing is that gap between the core and the youth, something for the most part that resulted from dry years from 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009...

From there forward however.... Tanev, Lack, Kassian, Jensen, Schroeder, Horvat, Gaunce, Shinkaruk, Fox, Eriksson, Corrado, Cassells, Grenier, Hutton, Archibald, Lain, Tommernes, and now Matthias, Markstrom...

So I can't share the panic or the impatience - and am squarely not in the fire Gillis crowd. There is a 'process'/continuum that imo saw a fairly marked underlying shift or upturn from 2010 to present, a gap that I think is on the cusp of closing in the sense of the roster. Whereas the team was lacking youth to supplement and lessen the impact of injuries, and were limited by cap space, it now has a great deal more youth, a significant amount of cap space, the bulk of it's roster signed to very reasonable terms (spare me the complaints about Gillis contracts post-Luongo) and a great deal more options than it's had in a very long time.

The last thing I'd want to see is that groundwork handed over to some of the names being bantered around.

Thats fair to a point. Really 2008 - 2011 is where we should have valid guys mixed now mixed and integral to our core? If we're evaluating Gillis anyay. He did inherit an existing void from 06/07. He also added to it amazingly? Converted dead pieces in acquiring Errhof as he deserves credit for. But lets look at 2008 drafts onwards next.

We have value, but nothing prolific from the 2008 through 2011 drafts. A shame cuz we drafted top ten where you should get top 6 forward / top 4 D in '08. Kassian is productive not excelling. He'll have a productive career, laugh at Kyle Beach, but I see no reason to believe he will substantially elevate his game. Schroeder gets fail marks from me. Jensen has potential. Its possible Corrado will be our best drafted player from that period? All in all we really only have one regular contributor in the line up ATM in Kassian from those draft years. And he's not breaking the bank. That, in a nutshell, is one key reason we are lumbering.

The other is no goals from Danny / Hank / Burrows, our top line in 2014. Different issue. I would not have predicted that so I will not hang the GM on it.

Corrado aside, and even then, we have no drafted player who projects as a blue chip defensive prospect. Some guys may beat the odd's and make the NHL; Hutton, Subban, McNally. But as long shots with development to accomplish first. I think Cedarholme from this past year has the next best chance behind Corrado, albeit not the highest upside. We really do not have a great defensive prospect pool at all, might even have trouble fielding a decent AHL squad next year.

I'm happy with our remaining pieces from drafts from 2012 on. Not before. As such it comes as no surprise Gillis is looking at trading for players who fit and fill in exactly that void they should have filled. In particular I argue we needed / still need a top defensive prospect. Hey Gillis has crafted a lot better defence than we should expect considering defensive prospects he inherited. But its a defence also void of top end puck skills. On the plus, we do have lots of quality center prospects, just not ready yet. Hence us expending assets on Mathias.Goaltending is fine, we have some wing talent but could add more. Gillis would ideally have young burgeoning prospect talent that might have given him options, still on ELC's or bridge contracts, for roles currently filled by guys like Burrows or previously by Errhof.

Instead we labour through a tough year.

PS not in the fire Gillis camp either. Not at this stage. Turned around our drafting in 2012. Our cap management this year. Getting back to the guy who was filling holes (albeit spending cap money he inherited from Nonis) deftly in 2009 / 010. But there was that void where I was grumpy! Bought himself another chance with me.

[Ride the red Pony]

People need to think about the youth gap in context imo.

What has made these past few months a disaster? Aside from the injuries, the coach drama/suspension, the Olympic schedule combined with the Canucks specifically exhausting schedule (something addressed in the thread regarding the Pacific division's pre-Olympic skid), and the challenges of moving cap or 'resetting' in a cap drop, post CBA context. Aside from those things there is another not so obvious underlying problem imo that Gillis identified some time ago, and moved in the last couple seasons to address.

This team, ideally would be a year or two further along in the development of their prospect pool and their AHL franchise.

That can only be attributed in small part to the current management.

If you look at the pre-Gillis years, through poor youth management and a few cases of tragedy, the Canucks were on course for contention, but also a talent gap.

2005 - Raymond would be the only player to become a Canuck regular. Their young star defenseman loses his life (RIP Luc Bourdon).

2006 - Grabner is the only NHL talent added through the draft, and that was debatable until after being dealt for a needed blueliner and subsequently being waived by Florida.

2007 - the Canucks land no NHL talent in the draft. Gillis rescues the proceeds by dealing Patrick White for Ehrhoff, however despite the tremendous take in that deal, the underlying reality is a remaining lack of talent coming into the system.

2008 - the Canucks 1st round pick, and Gillis' first draft pick, would eventually prove to be unsatisfied, as a rookie, with his role as a 3rd line center behind Hart and Selke veterans. He is dealt to address the most pressing need in the organization - a young power forward - I liked the deal and still do, but it remains the case that through these four years of drafting, the Canucks really added only Kassian and Raymond in terms of talented youth. Their second round pick Sauve looked promising but suffered a serious setback in a car accident and hasn't really managed to become the player he appeared to be early in his career.

Where Gillis was highly successful was finding extremely good value in NHL roster players like Higgins, Malhotra, Lapierre, etc, to be carried through to the present with players like Richardson, Santorelli, Stanton.... He's done this in the context of having highly competitive teams that needed depth now - the costs to the prospect pool were moderate, but certainly didn't reverse the reality that the cupboards were scarce from the years preceding his tenure, and the players he was drafting were just starting to emerge. In addition, a combination of late picks and taking a few seasons to develop better footing didn't exactly expedite the process. They dealt their 1st once in the process - Howden becoming that pick (after their guy wasn't availabe - apparently Tinordi).

Which pretty much brings us to 2010/11 - when the Canucks not only were peaking in terms of their competiveness and contention, but were also starting to lay groundwork that they'd be able to take advantage of in due course.

They signed Tanev and Lack in the unsigned free agency market - a pair of obvious successes.

Their drafting (although still somewhat early to judge, nevertheless) appears to improve significantly. They take Jensen late, and add Corrado, Grenier, Tommernes, Blomstrand. They've add Gaunce and Hutton the following year, They've continued to supplement in the unsigned FA market with Fox, Eriksson, Archibald and Lain. And then last year they started to reverse the buying trend, selling to add Horvat, as well as Shinkaruk, Cassells, Cederholm, Subban.

They have also obviously been quite successful in the UFA market, adding a pair of their top 4 in Hamhuis and Garrison, as well as numerous quality depth forwards.

The gap however, is a problem that becomes evident the past few years when the team is hammered by injuries, and the development of their prospect pool somewhat lagging. With a fair amount of quite young talent, they nevertheless lacked NHL ready talent - and the premier players they had acquired - Jensen and Schroeder have also suffered injuries/setbacks.

The Canucks imo had a very solid core, but when the cap dropped, they did not have the NHL ready youth to step in, and they were in a tight spot to be going buying - thankfully they excercised a lot of restraint in that sense. Simultaneously, moving cap or contracts became more difficult as all teams faced cap and financial challenges. People can pine that some magical cheap top 6 wasn't presto-d out of play-dough, but imo they too much.

protest

People can also use 'closing window' analogies and hitting rock bottom rationalizations for tearing things down (in the context of terrible sellers markets to boot), but in the end, I think these two months are truly as bad as it gets. A whole number of factors combined - but the one thing that is closing is that gap between the core and the youth, something for the most part that resulted from dry years from 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009...

From there forward however.... Tanev, Lack, Kassian, Jensen, Schroeder, Horvat, Gaunce, Shinkaruk, Fox, Eriksson, Corrado, Cassells, Grenier, Hutton, Archibald, Lain, Tommernes, and now Matthias, Markstrom...

So I can't share the panic or the impatience - and am squarely not in the fire Gillis crowd. There is a 'process'/continuum that imo saw a fairly marked underlying shift or upturn from 2010 to present, a gap that I think is on the cusp of closing in the sense of the roster. Whereas the team was lacking youth to supplement and lessen the impact of injuries, and were limited by cap space, it now has a great deal more youth, a significant amount of cap space, the bulk of it's roster signed to very reasonable terms (spare me the complaints about Gillis contracts post-Luongo) and a great deal more options than it's had in a very long time.

The last thing I'd want to see is that groundwork handed over to some of the names being bantered around.

Well said OldNews.