Mike Gillis Should Stay

[cabinessence]

Gretzky for GM Nazzy For Assistant GM!!!! = insta cup... if the team struggles they can just lace them up!

Gretzky won nothing after Edmonton and Naslund never did.

[wallstreetamigo]

Ahhhh so now that your original point has been disproven, you try to change the criteria so it's not.

You try to change it but also fail to mention that not every single one of those GMs has won a Stanley Cup so there's also that

Like I ALSO said, not every trade works out. But the key pieces brought in by all of those GMs were certainly worth the cost they gave up. Carter and Richards fit like gloves in LA and were a huge reason they won the cup. The guys Bowman brought in to re-stock the team after having to tear it down also turned out to be full value as that played a huge role in their second cup win. The Blues have systematically built a powerhouse team and even though their trades may not look good on paper at the time the players certainly fit in and fill the required role. A sum of the parts type of situation that all GM's want to get.

[ilduce39]

I'm usually as glass-is-half-full as anybody when it comes to the Canucks but I need to ask -

What moves has Gillis made in the past 2 years that gives people the confidence that he can rebuild this team into a contender again?

[Junkyard Dog]

Lol, I love this thread. So funny.

[wallstreetamigo]

I'm usually as glass-is-half-full as anybody when it comes to the Canucks but I need to ask -

What moves has Gillis made in the past 2 years that gives people the confidence that he can rebuild this team into a contender again?

Exactly my point. None.

[wallstreetamigo]

Did you really want me to go back and pull up your exact quote? It's only a couple pages back and I even bolded exactly what I was responding too. Is it really that hard for you to admit that you may have been incorrect in saying that those GMs got 'FULL VALUE' in all of their trades? Or did you just want to again deny ever saying that in the first place?

Sure, and while you are at it read all my other posts too. It seems you are myopic.

Anyway, those trades are full value as I describe above. The goal is to win a Stanley Cup. I have zero confidence that Gillis can turn this team into a Stanley Cup contender again around this core. And he is so attached to the core (mostly due to some failed bets on them contract-wise that he has to answer to his bosses for) that he doesn't seem to want to be the one to move any of them to try - at least not for fair value. A new GM without those strings would be a breath of fresh air.

[Junkyard Dog]

I'm usually as glass-is-half-full as anybody when it comes to the Canucks but I need to ask -

What moves has Gillis made in the past 2 years that gives people the confidence that he can rebuild this team into a contender again?

I try not to dwell on the past. it distracts you from the present and prevents you from focusing on the future. 100% confident by the way.

[Ding-Dong]

Like I ALSO said, not every trade works out. But the key pieces brought in by all of those GMs were certainly worth the cost they gave up. Carter and Richards fit like gloves in LA and were a huge reason they won the cup. The guys Bowman brought in to re-stock the team after having to tear it down also turned out to be full value as that played a huge role in their second cup win. The Blues have systematically built a powerhouse team and even though their trades may not look good on paper at the time the players certainly fit in and fill the required role. A sum of the parts type of situation that all GM's want to get.

Specifically look at Peter Chiarelli and the Bruins, Stan Bowman and the Hawks, Doug Armstrong and the Blues, Dean Lombardi and the Kings, Steve Yzerman and the Bolts, and even Dale Tallon and the Panthers. All have done a much better job than Gillis is doing. By a country mile.

All of those GM's have gotten full value in trades, have brought in core pieces/impact players, have drafted very well (better than Gillis), and have made their teams better.

Ahhhhh I get it now. So it's ok when trades don't work out, just as long as it's one of the GMs you listed above or any other GM in the league. It's just not applicable to Mike Gillis because that would discredit your point instead of strengthen it. I'm sorry man, you should have just said that from the beginning.

[Ding-Dong]

Sure, and while you are at it read all my other posts too. It seems you are myopic.

Anyway, those trades are full value as I describe above. The goal is to win a Stanley Cup. I have zero confidence that Gillis can turn this team into a Stanley Cup contender again around this core. And he is so attached to the core (mostly due to some failed bets on them contract-wise that he has to answer to his bosses for) that he doesn't seem to want to be the one to move any of them to try - at least not for fair value. A new GM without those strings would be a breath of fresh air.

Hahaha Yes, that's right. You contradict your very own point in this thread yet I'm the myopic one.

[wallstreetamigo]

Ahhhhh I get it now. So it's ok when trades don't work out, just as long as it's one of the GMs you listed above or any other GM in the league. It's just not applicable to Mike Gillis because that would discredit your point instead of strengthen it. I'm sorry man, you should have just said that from the beginning.

Nope. It's always ok that some trades don't work out for ANY GM. Nature of the beast I'm afraid. But managing the risk with trades is either done well or it is not. Those GM's I mention handle that risk/reward approach better than Gillis does imo.

I a a firm believer that if you want to be the best you don't settle for mediocrity in the guy running the show. Gillis has literally done next to nothing in the past few years to show he is the one to rebuild this team. Getting guys like Stanton, Lack, Santorelli etc. is great. He deserves credit for that and for improving our prospect pool. But that also came at a pretty high cost to the current team. Nothing he has done at the NHL level has made this team better. Lateral moves at absolute best. Leaving big holes unfilled at worst.

[ilduce39]

I try not to dwell on the past. it distracts you from the present and prevents you from focusing on the future. 100% confident by the way.

The past is only as useful as what you can learn from it.. but you still need to learn from it.

I'm confident we can still make the playoffs with some luck, but contend?

Edit: By "make the playoffs" I mean with this group and what we have in the system the next few years.

[Absent Canuck]

Canucks have their first off year in 5 years and suddenly Gillis is a brain dead bum. But when other teams hit stumbling blocks (Chicago back to back first round exits), TB finishing 2nd last in the NHL and somehow people don't bat an eye. The honest truth is it's becuase you don't actively watch/cheer for those other teams. Start cheering for another team and you'll start to realize that they are faced with the same challenges and have similar glarring holes in their rosters. But because you watch the canucks so closely you put everything under a microscope.

I have the NHL package online so I watch almost every team play. The Canucks do not have a lot of 'finishers' . We have size, mobility and experience . In other words, we were built to win .............as long as the twins were winning scoring titles and Kesler winning Selkes while potting 40.

Now that Kesler is floating around pining for the day Burkie can come back and drive him to the airport and the twins settling into their retirement 7 year deals, our team has utterly no hope of winning a cup anytime soon.

I am mad at Gillis because it seems like he wants to appease us with drips of heroin to sedate us while we mire around in mediocrity and never get a franchise draft pick or have any hope of winning a playoff round.

Lets not let him get away with it. He needs to roll up his sleeves and rebuild the team.

[wallstreetamigo]

Hahaha Yes, that's right. You contradict your very own point in this thread yet I'm the myopic one.

Again, maybe you are not able to look at my entire argument rather than blindly suggesting - with no actual discussion around why - that Gillis is the man for the job to refute my points.

At least I try to back my opinion up with something more than one liner insults.

[wallstreetamigo]

If Gillis is still here next year this team is in deep trouble.

[Junkyard Dog]

The past is only as useful as what you can learn from it.. but you still need to learn from it.

I'm confident we can still make the playoffs with some luck, but contend?

I always thought this season was a throw away because the youth movement was thwarted from our youth not being ready. Lineup on paper was crap. If we do make the playoffs we can thank the bottom 6 guys like Santo and our goal-tending. Our star players slumping will be the reason we don't make the playoffs if that's the case.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

With all due respect, Ehrhoff was not nearly as highly coveted prior to coming to Vancouver. Not even close. He was seen as very inconsistent and error prone. The Sedins and the Canucks certainly helped him develop his game and become a better player. But he also helped the Sedins become better players during his time here too.

The thing I hate about CDC and posters like you most is that you focus on one thing that someone says without actually reading all of it. I give full credit to Gillis for getting Ehrhoff. It was a good move. Did he fleece them though? No because they were looking to dump Ehrhoff anyway. It was presented that he somehow convinced them to give Ehrhoff up fr nothing. The reality is they were so desperate to get Heatley they were giving him up for nothing no matter what.

People look at players current value and assume it has always been so. Ehrhoff was seen as expendable because of his defensive game more than anything. And despite the short term memory loss at CDC he was not nearly as bad defensively here as many suggest. Certainly no worse than we saw from guys like Bieksa andEdler on a fairly regular basis at times.

Did Sj get the better end of the deal? No

SJ got fleeced.

An almost identical situation could be said about Luongo deal last year, canucks were desperate to move a goalie (specifically Luongo) to get under the lowering cap. Gillis couldn't get anything worth value for Luongo, so he traded Schneider instead, with a decent return.

But I can already assume because it was Gillis you'd like to spin it around and say Gillis got fleeced under the same circumstances SJ faced, to get under the cap.

So what is it? Are you going to admit SJ got fleece? Or was Gillis justified and made a good deal in the Cory trade.

[Ding-Dong]

Again, maybe you are not able to look at my entire argument rather than blindly suggesting - with no actual discussion around why - that Gillis is the man for the job to refute my points.

At least I try to back my opinion up with something more than one liner insults.

You've backed it with opinion. Every time you're presented with actual facts you try to divert the discussion to something that may lean in your favour. When that gets disproved, you again try and divert it to something else.

I've mentioned in many posts as to why I believe Gillis should remain here with actual facts, but I'll try my best to sum it up.

I'm never against getting better. If we're able to get a GM that we know can do better than Gillis, I'm all for it. Can you guarantee me that getting an assistant GM of another team or an ex-Canuck is going to improve this team better than a Gillis that has been in this organization for 5 years now? No, you can't. You also can't give me someone out there that is currently available with a better track record either. So what does that mean? We've got the best man available right now, and despite some of his history, he's been the best GM that this organization has ever had. Until you're able to find someone that you can not only PROVE is better but also AVAILABLE, then I am extremely comfortable with this GM.

If we could get Lombardi, Chiarelli or Holland, I'd do it in a freaking heartbeat. But don't pretend like their sh*t don't stink either.

[Junkyard Dog]

If Gillis is still here next year this team is in deep trouble.

In your opinion, yes. How reliable is someone else's opinion that I don't know? Not that reliable.

I think we will be fine. At the very least it is safe to say we will be a lot better next year, if not 2015 is a deep draft. Hey, that's just my opinion though.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

I have the NHL package online so I watch almost every team play. The Canucks do not have a lot of 'finishers' . We have size, mobility and experience . In other words, we were built to win .............as long as the twins were winning scoring titles and Kesler winning Selkes while potting 40.

Now that Kesler is floating around pining for the day Burkie can come back and drive him to the airport and the twins settling into their retirement 7 year deals, our team has utterly no hope of winning a cup anytime soon.

I am mad at Gillis because it seems like he wants to appease us with drips of heroin to sedate us while we mire around in mediocrity and never get a franchise draft pick or have any hope of winning a playoff round.

Lets not let him get away with it. He needs to roll up his sleeves and rebuild the team.

Honestly good, I watch other teams too as I have centre ice. But there’s a difference by watching a team and cheering for a team. Over the last 5 years I’ve also been cheering for the caps in the east. Watching them and getting to know all there players I’ve realized that they have the similar problems this team has. They have D that make dumb mistakes like Edler, they have stars that don’t show up every game. One stretch they look like the best team in the league, the next they look like the worst. Every team has this.

Take last year as an example. Canucks were still a top team, if we got blown out of a game by a bottom team, this board would be filled with “this team isn’t good enough to win”, “this team doesn’t have what it takes if we get beat but bottom team”. In fact lately people are still using the NYI loss as justification to why were are not good enough. Well ANA got beat by the flames 7-2 two weeks ago. You still hear the same people whining about this team saying the ducks are elite even though they have their problems as well. Ducks are 4-4-2 in their last 10, they are having terrible scoring problems as Perry is the only one scoring, but because people don’t watch them on a regular basis or cheer for them, they only see the good and not the “holes” which every team has.

Go cheer for the Hawks, Bruins, Ducks, Sharks, or even Penguins, you’ll still have games and stretches that drive you insane and frustrate you, for the same reasons people complain about this team

[aGENT]

I'm usually as glass-is-half-full as anybody when it comes to the Canucks but I need to ask -

What moves has Gillis made in the past 2 years that gives people the confidence that he can rebuild this team into a contender again?

A couple off the top of my head...

-VASTLY improved our prospect pool while maintaining a competitive NHL club.

-Not only getting ANY value for Schneider or Luongo given the entire world knowing we had to lose at least one due to having two starters AND the cap dropping (plus Lu wanting out) but actually getting decent return (and cap space).

-Continuing to find excellent value players (Richardson, Santorelli, Stanton etc), unsigned UFA's (Fox etc.) to support the core/prospect pool.

And not in the last two years but he has a 1 for 1 track record so far in taking a core and tweaking it to get to the finals. Personally I'd like to see what that level of vision/planning can look like with bringing in a new core the old one can support.