Mike Gillis Team 1040 Interview

[Nino]

I'm not asking you to say you were mistaken, I'm saying you're doing the same thing again.

My opinion is just different then yours I respect your argument.

[Nino]

Either you trust him or you don't at this point.

Louongo 2.0

[Dogbyte]

Or, perhaps you're just one of those "had is always greener on the other side" guys.

I try not to be I know I've got huge expectations but I've felt we should have sacrificed what we needed to for a player that has some pop. I know it sounds simplistic but these guys can make the difference.

We don't know because we've haven't tried. So, I'm not wrong yet.

[wai_lai416]

Gillis is smoking cracks.. we don't have the team to play the up tempo game.. the Sedins plays the cycle game.. how's that up tempo? we have been massively declining in offense ever since the 2011 playoff.. so i don't see how he thinks we have the right team to play that style when it's literally the same team as 2011 with the top players passed their primes

[Dogbyte]

Gillis is smoking cracks.. we don't have the team to play the up tempo game.. the Sedins plays the cycle game.. how's that up tempo? we have been massively declining in offense ever since the 2011 playoff.. so i don't see how he thinks we have the right team to play that style when it's literally the same team as 2011 with the top players passed their primes

We miss Tanner Glass.

Seriously.

[Crabcakes]

Canucks management structure is: (yes, this is simplified)

Ownership - functions like a board of directors, has ultimate authority, hires General Manager to run team, not involved in operations in any way, conducts yearly review with GM

General Manager - answers only to ownership, responsible for team strategy (style of play etc), hires management (head coach, scouting etc), players, conducts yearly reviews of all staff

Head Coach - coaching players, game decisions....ie executing strategy on the ice, hires supporting coaches

Players

All levels of management must be aligned with respect to executing the overall team strategy. Top down GM > Coach > Players AND bottom up Players > Coach > GM. In general, communications take a stepwise approach (ie GM doesn't speak with Players directly regarding things the Coach would normally discuss except with Coaches permission and knowledge).

When someone deviates from this protocol, authority is compromised.

There is speculation that the Head Coach was actually the choice of Ownership. So, who does Torts really answer to then? Is Gillis going to tell Aquilini he doesn't fit with strategy? Not likely. But, if Torts and Gillis have a difference of opinion, who wins? Maybe Torts feels free to go over Gillis' head.

There is also speculation about the goaltender soap opera. More breakdowns in protocol. Yes, likely.

What of the Gillis interview then? He's tired of being a cuckold. He wants to set his strategy and stick with it. The "personnel" who don't fit or won't fit will be moved. Good for MG for growing a pair.

He is giving ownership an ultimatum. It's Torts or him. What makes what he said so smart is that he makes it clear that there has been interference from ownership and that if they choose to keep Torts and fire MG, then ownership will have difficulty replacing him with somebody who is not desperate for a job (ie who doesn't mind being a puppet). So, if ownership is smart, there is really only one decision. Suck it up and let Torts go.

Is it a fool proof plan? No. There are fools involved.

[AV.]

Gillis gave a fair interview.

Sounds a bit like an ultimatum between him and Torts but I think it only comes to that if Torts is insistent that he won't change his style, which I expect the two will talk with ownership at season's end and discuss.

To be honest, it was relief to hear that Gillis was willing to change up the mold of this team. I was slowly starting to think that a change from Gillis would be the right move as this season went on and the more tasteless interviews he gave but I think he's done enough here to warrant at least one more year to back up what he plans to do.

That said, if Gillis is going to do this right, I propose the following:

1. If Torts isn't the man, go out and find somebody who will maintain the hard-working, honest game that Torts preaches but will also allow for skilled guys to be a bit more creative than to cycle endlessly and hope somebody makes a mistake.

2. Go out and find a true PMD. With respect to the Y. Weber's(I personally love his game and want him back next year) and Diaz's, we need a true guy. Explore all options. Trade the assets necessary to get one or try to acquire one in a Kesler deal, should we go down that route (Vatanen from Anaheim for example).

3. Continue to emphasize on drafting. Detroit, similar position in terms of injuries and age of team, have a bunch of young guys picking up the slack. Stick to that model, Gillis. Barring amazing training camps, there is no shame in seeing Shinks, Jensen, Gaunce, and Fox all in the AHL next year. Same goes for Horvat(but I will admit, I'd like to see him centering our third line).

4. Go out and get a top-6 forward. Higgins and Hansen are great players but they are best suited for the third line and fill the top-six when necessary.

Easier said than done but it is what it is. Here's to some better times upcoming!

[Honky Cat]

Canucks management structure is: (yes, this is simplified)

Ownership - functions like a board of directors, has ultimate authority, hires General Manager to run team, not involved in operations in any way, conducts yearly review with GM

General Manager - answers only to ownership, responsible for team strategy (style of play etc), hires management (head coach, scouting etc), players, conducts yearly reviews of all staff

Head Coach - coaching players, game decisions....ie executing strategy on the ice, hires supporting coaches

Players

All levels of management must be aligned with respect to executing the overall team strategy. Top down GM > Coach > Players AND bottom up Players > Coach > GM. In general, communications take a stepwise approach (ie GM doesn't speak with Players directly regarding things the Coach would normally discuss except with Coaches permission and knowledge).

When someone deviates from this protocol, authority is compromised.

There is speculation that the Head Coach was actually the choice of Ownership. So, who does Torts really answer to then? Is Gillis going to tell Aquilini he doesn't fit with strategy? Not likely. But, if Torts and Gillis have a difference of opinion, who wins? Maybe Torts feels free to go over Gillis' head.

There is also speculation about the goaltender soap opera. More breakdowns in protocol. Yes, likely.

What of the Gillis interview then? He's tired of being a cuckold. He wants to set his strategy and stick with it. The "personnel" who don't fit or won't fit will be moved. Good for MG for growing a pair.

He is giving ownership an ultimatum. It's Torts or him. What makes what he said so smart is that he makes it clear that there has been interference from ownership and that if they choose to keep Torts and fire MG, then ownership will have difficulty replacing him with somebody who is not desperate for a job (ie who doesn't mind being a puppet). So, if ownership is smart, there is really only one decision. Suck it up an let Torts go.

Is it a fool proof plan? No. There are fools involved.

Totally this...even if Gillis is fired at least he has set the record straight..He is a confident honest individual and I don't think he'd be gutted at all,being relieved as GM (for what it is)

Torts is a good guy and good coach,but completely wrong for this team (and market)...If the ownership stands by Torts ..I see nothing but empty seats at the Rog.

[ilduce39]

If ownership really is meddling in affairs beyond the business end then we're screwed. Not a lot of success unless everybody is on the same page (especially the GM and the Head Coach.) You don't think players can sense that disconnect? They sure can - actually makes sense why they're floundering.

That being said, Gillis is not perfect... if he goes there's nothing saying the new GM can't work with Torts if that's the way ownership wants to go. Would be better than a divide.

[Me_]

Chasing the Boston model, how the NHL said they were going to reward skill, so he built towards that then got Bostoned and then tried to follow that.

It worries me if Gillis thinks that the refs wont put the whistles away like they do every playoff since ive been watching for 40 years.

This exactly.

The "new NHL" is still run by old hands.

Nothing will change for the playoffs where a destroying hit and an ensuing goal is what people wait for the entire year.

[alt kilgore]

You also paraphrased him as claiming that Kassian was an "immediate impact player" which was not remotely close to what he actually said.

Again, Gillis said he felt the team needed to get younger and bigger.

Your paraphrase here about 'trading skill for grit', is once again, you taking liberties and rewriting contexts in a way that makes them meaningless imo.

If you have a quote of Gillis saying he was changing his plan, look to trade skill for grit, I'd be interested to see you post it.

I already said I was wrong about gillis saying that kass was an immediate unpack player, not sure how many times you want me to say I was mistaken? It's what I had remembered him saying but it was wrong.

The skill for grit I'm not taking back sorry, I already posted the interview where he talked about getting pushed around and needing to add sandpaper... That may have been the term he used. It was without a departure for the way the nucks were built and he made a point of pointing that out. It was also the start of our scoring decline.... Call it what you want.

Go back listen to the interview he is clear in his direction.

In fact I'd say you are more right than not Nino. About the skill vs. grit comments, and also that Gillis, while not outright saying "immediate impact," he definitely implied that Zack was going to help the team now (2012):

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/02/27/vancouver-canucks-sacrifice-cody-hodgson-for-more-grit/

Gillis suggested that if he learned anything in last year's playoff run it was that the Canucks needed to become a more balanced team, one that relied less on its skill.

"It showed me that to get to the Western Conference final you are going to have to grind it out and to do that you need more balance," he said. "You can't just have skill and have other teams use less skilled players to try to grind them into the ice every night.

"We wanted to get as fast and as big as we could going into these playoffs and we'll see how we did."

......

“There aren’t many of them around in the league. He still has a ways to go to develop I think into his full potential, but he is an NHL player now who is going to help us in a lot of different ways.”

[DIBdaQUIB]

What is the difference, in your mind, between providing explanations and not taking blame? Can MG be both contrite and forthcoming? It appears to me that you paint him into a corner whereby he can't win. Unless he says "I'm the worst GM in the league," then you cannot be satisfied.

I think he says as much, in a frank manner, as any GM would normally comment on with regards to delicate topics.

Of course his message was strategic. That's called being intelligent and calculated. Would prefer it was not those things?

The difference is between an explanation and an excuse. This guy who is know for evasive answers suddenly is Mr. Open, riding in on his white horse with all the answers. Drink the kool aid if you want.

[terrible.dee]

The team will need a whole new face lift. This core has become old and stale.

It's All about The Kessler to ANH, assets to BUFF, draft Reinhart 1st over all deal.

This could be one of the most pivotal off seasons in this teams history.

[MoneypuckOverlord]

Mike gillis will get a new job almost right away. I hope he stays. Huge mistake if he leaves. mark my words.

Please kindly mark these words. If Mike Gillis, things will not get better.

[canucklehead44]

I like Gillis other than handing out so many no trade clauses and letting Ehrhoff walk. Don't think Torts was his decision. Torts is a disaster.

[oldnews]

I tried at the time to explain that even as I said the Hodgson trade was the turning point it was that he started to look for a different type of player, one with more girt, the deal was the point that he openly said he was willing to trade skill for girt. Kass is starting to show he has some skill and and I'm not pinning the scoring problems on him. It was just the point that gillis came out and said he's going in a different direction.

From that point we went from about the best scoring team to about the last. Again not pinning it on zack or even that trade in particular just the point in time that was a turning in the direction he wanted the team to go.

Not sure if I agree with your take on gillis recent statements but (if he stays on as GM) we will see if he turns back to seeking out players with more skill, only time will tell on that one. We have no second line and haven't for years, will he try and add one?

With our decline in scoring came our decline in general you simply need two or three lines that can score to be successful in the NHL. I blame MG in our decline you don't.

My opinion is just different then yours I respect your argument.

Fair enough Nino. The point I was trying to make is that Gillis never actually stated an intent to trade skill for grit, never actually declared a change in plans, to move from a skilled team to a grit team - that may be a characterization that you or others think represents that move, but I think that oversimplifies things, and I also don't think the Canucks ever considered Kassian to be simply a "grit" player. He's a highly skilled big guy with great hands, scored lots of points in his junior and his short stint in the AHL, a very good skater with good vision and offensive instincts. I think the point was balance as opposed to an either/or as you've framed it. What he indicated was an intention to get bigger, faster and younger - something I think is evident in the young forwards that have been added - Kassian, Jensen, Matthias.

You make the point that the team went from high scoring to struggling to score - but most people here are blaming that on the moves he has not made. Gillis has not exactly traded away "skill" and acquired "grit". This is not an explanation for the struggle to score. What the team has is virtually the same top 9 with the exception of Kassian/Hodgson, and Raymond's departure, for quite some time. Booth was a guy who averaged 23 goals in Florida - I don't think that could be considered a departure from skill. Not sure how you see a change in plans there, if anything, most people are complaining about a lack of changes.

When it came to the free agents who have been signed, Santorelli and Richardson hardly suggest a departure from skill in favour of grit - Santorelli is arguably an upgrade on the depth skill the team has had for some time, and Richardson is certainly not less skilled than Lapierre. The blueline has really only seen the emergence of Tanev - not exactly a stereotypical "grit" defenseman, the addition of Weber (again, a smalller defenseman who was signed primarily because of his puck moving and his shot) and Stanton, a very solid young guy with good balance to his game, but certainly not simply "grit".

I guess that would be why I'd question this perceived departure from skill to grit - I don't see any real translation in the actual moves that have taken place. I also don't believe it was Gillis' intent to change the way the team is coached - which is what I believe his comments in that 1040 interview are referring to. I don't believe Gillis ever intended to shift away from the tempo, pressure, puck possession, transition game - I believe what he's stating is his expectation that the team be coached accordingly, that his coach comply with that game planning, suitable to the western conference, or someone prepared to comply will replace him, if in fact the GM position is still in his charge.

[oldnews]

The difference is between an explanation and an excuse. This guy who is know for evasive answers suddenly is Mr. Open, riding in on his white horse with all the answers. Drink the kool aid if you want.

Not sure where you are getting this departure from evasive to open.

To me, this sounds a whole lot like all Gillis' interviews.

The OP states that Gillis "Pretty much called out ownership for trying to meddle" but that is a pretty creative paraphrase. I'd be interested what actual quote or lines from that interview would be used to qualify that claim.

I didn't hear any reference to ownership and only really heard him stress that he expects compliance with a coaching style that suits competitiveness in the western conference. I've heard him repeat the same premises he did many times in the past - the up tempo, puck possession game is nothing new - not exactly an all of a sudden answer on his white horse. Getting bigger, younger, faster - not exactly novel stuff out of Gillis. The only real difference I see in Gilis is a willingness to state that he expects his coach to adjust, as he did with Vigneault, something that was pretty much also public record.

Where is the new ("koolaid") spin here?

[DIBdaQUIB]

Not sure where you are getting this departure from evasive to open.

To me, this sounds a whole lot like all Gillis' interviews.

The OP states that Gillis "Pretty much called out ownership for trying to meddle" but that is a pretty creative paraphrase. I'd be interested what actual quote or lines from that interview would be used to qualify that claim.

I didn't hear any reference to ownership and only really heard him stress that he expects compliance with a coaching style that suits competitiveness in the western conference. I've heard him repeat the same premises he did many times in the past - the up tempo, puck possession game is nothing new - not exactly an all of a sudden answer on his white horse. Getting bigger, younger, faster - not exactly novel stuff out of Gillis. The only real difference I see in Gilis is a willingness to state that he expects his coach to adjust, as he did with Vigneault, something that was pretty much also public record.

Where is the new ("koolaid") spin here?

Until I see Gillis actually do something that reflects what he says, this just sounds like a new version of the "re-set" speech form last year. How has that worked out?

[oldnews]

Until I see Gillis actually do something that reflects what he says, this just sounds like a new version of the "re-set" speech form last year. How has that worked out?

What moves would you like to see?

[theminister]

The difference is between an explanation and an excuse. This guy who is know for evasive answers suddenly is Mr. Open, riding in on his white horse with all the answers. Drink the kool aid if you want.

What he's known for?

Does that mean you're disregarding what he actually said in this interview? Because of the reputation you believe overrides his answers today?

What would make you satisfied for him to say? He admitted to culpability.