Would You Appreciate Gillis More If...

[Jiggs50]

I was for keeping Gillis but I can live with Trevor Linden and understand the change in direction. With that being said I also find annoying how people discredit MG. It's ridiculous when people say Gillis inherited this team from Burke and Nonis and they are the reason we went to the final. Did the additions of Erhoff, Hamhuis, Torres, Malhotra, Lappy, Higgins, and Samuelsson not mean anything??

Anyway I'll get to the main point of this thread. Say in 3-4 years the core of this team turns into guys like Horvat, Lack, Jensen, Kassian, Tanev, Shinkaruk, Fox, Gaunce, Corrado, Cederholm, Subban, Cassels etc etc...All MG draft picks or signings.

Will Mike Gillis be praised for this? Will your perception of MG change?

[CowtownCanuck]

Based on the OPs question, I would appreciate our scouting staff.

Gillis will be known for his free agent signing and lack thereof. One of his classic blunders I don't see many comments about is chasing the "white whale". He spent half a season and held aside free agent signings and cap space just to sign Mats Sundin for half a season at $5 million, I won't argue his play or influence on the team, especially the twins. I do question the logic of how much money and time he wasted on chasing the signing.

[goalie13]

It wouldn't change anything, but then again, I'm not a huge MG basher. I never liked the guy much, but I didn't hate him either. I think he was just an average GM. He made a few good trades and signings, he made few bad ones. I also think he did benefit from inheriting a team on the rise.

Unless a GM goes totally off the board, drafting is mostly to do with scouting. MG gets credit for obtaining the draft pick that got us Horvat, but he has also traded away plenty of picks.

[Honky Cat]

Down the road the pundits could say Gillis set the table for this team...but it's unlikely because none of our prospects are franchise players like the Sedins were,when Gillis first got here....Personally,I think he was just hitting his stride as GM,and should have been given another year...I think his personality brought him down as well,he could be prickly ,and as someone pointed out 'he could make dumb people feel dumb'.

[Heretic]

No - unfortunately, MG will go down in history for mis managing 2 top 10 goalies and losing both.

[TOMapleLaughs]

I have full appreciation for what he's done here already. What has happened since 2011 is just par for the course for Canadian teams that lose in the finals.

Time will tell whether Linden is able to right this ship, but yes, the recent Gillis draft picks will help.

I think the groundwork for having additional success has been established. But the bottom line is whether we get the right players or not. At the moment our lineup is not close. Too many holes. Too many projects. Too little speed. Too little overall ability.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Realistically what do we expect a new Gm to come in and do to this team. A complete overall? Unlikely.. Our off season will likely involve signing 1 or 2 UFA and possibly trading one of Garrison/Edler, but still that seems unlikely as well. A Kesler trade would be a big jump but we will see if that happens.

The 2014 season will start with this team icing relatively the same roster we iced last season with the possibility of a few youth added into the mix. And honestly I’m OK with that. Anyone else who is ok with that must also be on the same belief that we were ok with the direction this team was heading with Gillis.

I just really hope we don’t start trending away from our youth movement for false cup run hope. If anything this team needs to keep stock piling our prospect pool.

[terrible.dee]

I was for keeping Gillis but I can live with Trevor Linden and understand the change in direction. With that being said I also find annoying how people discredit MG. It's ridiculous when people say Gillis inherited this team from Burke and Nonis and they are the reason we went to the final. Did the additions of Erhoff, Hamhuis, Torres, Malhotra, Lappy, Higgins, and Samuelsson not mean anything??

Anyway I'll get to the main point of this thread. Say in 3-4 years the core of this team turns into guys like Horvat, Lack, Jensen, Kassian, Tanev, Shinkaruk, Fox, Gaunce, Corrado, Cederholm, Subban, Cassels etc etc...All MG draft picks or signings.

Will Mike Gillis be praised for this? Will your perception of MG change?

Kassian and Horvat will be remembered as "Gillis guys"

These are guys he put his b@lls on the line to acquire,

If they turn out to be great ALL credit goes to MG

[BedBeats™2.0]

I was for keeping Gillis but I can live with Trevor Linden and understand the change in direction. With that being said I also find annoying how people discredit MG. It's ridiculous when people say Gillis inherited this team from Burke and Nonis and they are the reason we went to the final. Did the additions of Erhoff, Hamhuis, Torres, Malhotra, Lappy, Higgins, and Samuelsson not mean anything??

Anyway I'll get to the main point of this thread. Say in 3-4 years the core of this team turns into guys like Horvat, Lack, Jensen, Kassian, Tanev, Shinkaruk, Fox, Gaunce, Corrado, Cederholm, Subban, Cassels etc etc...All MG draft picks or signings.

Will Mike Gillis be praised for this? Will your perception of MG change?

My perception of him has been pretty transparent.

The apex of his blunders is the Lu/Schneids situation. That will always be a major footnote in describing the Gillis era. For me all the other negatives that many folks consider monumental do not wash over me.

The rest of his time here for me will be remembered positively.

Hands down, he helped lead some of the most exciting times for this team.

Plus he was a bit whacky. I always liked that about him.

[theminister]

I don't think I ever under appreciated MG. I didn't like him as a person but I thought he was more than competent in most aspects of his job. I do believe that he was unfairly criticized for things which were outside of his control. He was fairly criticized for things under his control but I still believe his positive moves, in context, out weighed his negative moves.

But, yes, if Nonis was getting credit for building our core of this current team from certain people then those same people should give MG credit if our core in 3 years is mainly made up of MG acquisitions. The new GM should get credit for good player evaluations and resignings, just as MG did, if they decide to go that path.

[Mikael Samuelsson]

2032 ROH if we don't win a cup by then.

[Red Light Racicot]

Those prospects are nothing to sneeze at, but they really arent all that impressive neither.

While he indeed deserves a ton of credit for his additions to the team was most deserving of the award he won in 2011... well... all of that came undone and then some, and then some more.

Im sorry to say it looks like making good decisions were the exception, not the rule with Gillis.

I doubt anyone outside Gillis apologists are going to remember him as being astute. The perceptions of him around the hockey world are very much as I have just explained.

[oldnews]

I don't think I'll bother waiting for hindsight.

I appreciate the job that Gillis did and think he has left behind one hell of a context to work with. I personally would love to inherit such a situation.

First of all, I think the roster is multiples better than it appeared this year. There is a great deal of talent on the roster - the only players on the roster that imo lived up to their potential this year are Higgins, the young guys, and the free agent signings.

The team has cap space for the first time in a long time - has the bulk of the team signed to reasonable terms - and the only contract I have a problem with has only 1 year remaining. They can sign their RFAs and hopefully Santorelli, and in all likelihood, particularly if they part with Booth and/or another contract, will have the space to really pursue anyone on the market that they really want. A Linden/Benning combination for example would likely carrry some quality credibility with potential UFAs.

If Aquilini carries through with what seemed to be a decision to move on from Tortorella, Vancouver might even be a more attractive destination.

The prospect pool is in better shape than it has been in for a very long time. There is a lot of talent there, and the potential to really bolster it even more if a core guy like Kesler or whomever were moved in a youth weighted deal. It will be interesting to see what guys like him feel with the change of leadership - the desire to move on may change.

Gillis had a very good season working with very little. Santo, Richardson, and Stanton were outstanding bargain acquisitions to add to the likes of Tanev, Lack and a knack of making a lot out of essentially free assets. Eriksson, Lain, and Cox could prove to be further Gillis freebies who pay off.

The most difficult roadblock in the retool - Roberto Luongo - has been moved to the one destination he apparently was willing to go - and the return imo was top notch in an extremely talented, big young goaltender and a solid, big young versatile center. The heavy lifting imo was done just before the deadline. Any other moves will be much easier sells imo.

So all in all, I have to think that the new administration has some very solid grounding to move forward on. They also have the benefit of lowered expectations as it's hard to imagine the team having underachieved any more significantly.

The renewal of the Canucks identity would seem the final benefit. For a short period after Gillis was fired, there was room for the Keenan era 2.0 anxieties to build with Tortorella remaining and the possibility that the idea moving forward would be to accommodate him with a complimentary GM. I think Linden's hiring and the comments of F. Aquilini pretty squarely moved in an altogether different direction.

I think aside from the fact that Gillis and Tortorella appeared to be on entirely different pages - what is left behind imo looks like a hell of a lot to work with, particularly with the youth just emerging near NHL readiness to supplement the depth of the roster and the flexibility the team has in cap space moving forward. Those things overlapping imo give the next GM a nice dilemma to work with.

[Westcoasting]

I'll remember him as another GM with great success for one season and a bunch of other disappointments for the other seasons.

[terrible.dee]

I think MG will go down as one our best GM's ever.

Even when his moves didn't work out, I understood why he was making them.

Now, for everyone accusing him of "blundering" the Goalie situation, whether he did so or not depends on a couple of things:

1. What, if anything was on the table for Luongo last year? I've head no credible reports that ANYTHING was offered, he was untradable and therefore was not traded. If anyone knows anything different please enlighten me.

2. Gillis turned a redundant asset (starting goalie) into a major building block for the future, a 2 way center with size. This guy could be our future Linden, or he may be a bust, I don't know, but it was a risk work taking and I would have done the same thing.

We won't know if the Corry trade was a "Blunder" until we see what Horvat's got, and that might not be for another year or two.

[CroSen]

 

I think MG will go down as one our best GM's ever.

Even when his moves didn't work out, I understood why he was making them.

Now, for everyone accusing him of "blundering" the Goalie situation, whether he did so or not depends on a couple of things:

1. What, if anything was on the table for Luongo last year? I've head no credible reports that ANYTHING was offered, he was untradable and therefore was not traded. If anyone knows anything different please enlighten me.

2. Gillis turned a redundant asset (starting goalie) into a major building block for the future, a 2 way center with size. This guy could be our future Linden, or he may be a bust, I don't know, but it was a risk work taking and I would have done the same thing.

We won't know if the Corry trade was a "Blunder" until we see what Horvat's got, and that might not be for another year or two.

 

1. It is hard to know what to think. I think Gillis lost credability because it went like this;

a) Luongo is untradeable due to his contract

Big PR mishap (Starting Lack in the outdoor game)

c) A week later and all of sudden Luongo is tradeable!

Again, it is hard to know however that makes things seem fishy.

2. Most of the sources I have heard/read have said that the guy you are talking about will be second line at best, likely third.

[Dragonfruits]

The whole lost 2 goalies for nothing crap needs to stop and people need to realize the situation

A lot of you say oh Luongo is gone could of kept Schneider why did he trade both?

Well if Luongo opened is mind up to other teams instead of being stubborn wanting to go back to Florida with the current ownership back then which made the move impossible the team could of had Schneider and Lack right now.

Instead Luongo stuck to his guns only wanted to go to Florida force Gillis to move Schneider still got 9th overall in a deep draft and if you looked at recent goalie trades it was fair value.

Now the rumour was still Luongo wanted out nobody will ever know the truth or how long Florida and Vancouver were talking about this trade but it seems like new ownership for Florida was set on going after Luongo to have a true number 1 and sell tickets or at least try too.

As for the trade itself i think people should be thanking Gillis for at least getting some young players back with potential and only 800k against the cap instead of getting another bad contract back like most analysts said would be the most likely scenario if and when Luongo did get traded

It's very easy to look at Schneider now and how well he is doing but at the time the value was fair LA probably could of gotten more the way Bernier is playing right now both situations are identical even Varlamov now

[puckdontlie]

I'll remember Gillis like how I remember Burke... some success hockeywise but not enough great moves to overcome the arrogant attitude and circus acts.

[Jack Fig]

I was for keeping Gillis but I can live with Trevor Linden and understand the change in direction. With that being said I also find annoying how people discredit MG. It's ridiculous when people say Gillis inherited this team from Burke and Nonis and they are the reason we went to the final. Did the additions of Erhoff, Hamhuis, Torres, Malhotra, Lappy, Higgins, and Samuelsson not mean anything??

Anyway I'll get to the main point of this thread. Say in 3-4 years the core of this team turns into guys like Horvat, Lack, Jensen, Kassian, Tanev, Shinkaruk, Fox, Gaunce, Corrado, Cederholm, Subban, Cassels etc etc...All MG draft picks or signings.

Will Mike Gillis be praised for this? Will your perception of MG change?

The list of prospects are just that...names. There's no guarantee they form the next anything. I expect some of them will work out just fine and I expect some of them won't. Will they be the core of a contending team in 3/4 years or the core of a lousy team? Or maybe they'll just be support pieces? I never like to look too far ahead with young guys.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

thats the thing about gillis, because he wasn't good with people skills with the media, they harped on every mistake he made but he made very few of them. To recount them

Hodgson trade timing

Ballard trade

Booth trade

Goalie trades

Roy trade

Pahlson trade

thats basically it, the rest was okay or understandable. And from all of these trades we got a lot of prospects which include Horvat, Kassian, Cole Cassels(third round pick from booth trade), Maithas and Markstrom. Thats actually not bad. I was against firing him too but hey what can we do now. Anyways if linden can hire a GM that has the ability to sign agents like gillis did I'm a happy man.

And I am confident he can.