Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Tony Gallagher: "I suspect ownership had a small influence in drafting Virtanen. Before he departed, Gillis told me that they liked Larkin."


homersexual

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

Gillis wasn't around for that draft? So who's 'they'? 

 

If the Canucks had taken Larkin at 6 they would've been flamed too. He wasn't projected that high. 

That was the draft where Gillis wanted to begin the tear down, and rebuild.  Rumours abound that is why Gillis was fired; the owner wanted to continue to compete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

Gillis wasn't around for that draft? So who's 'they'? 

 

If the Canucks had taken Larkin at 6 they would've been flamed too. He wasn't projected that high. 

They would have been flamed but you don't draft to appease the crowd. Not to mention a dominant season in college would go a long ways to silencing any critics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DeNiro said:

It's Tony Gallagher, guys the almost as big of a sh*t disturber as Botchford.

 

None of that is true. I've seen video of Benning pushing for Virtanen in draft meetings.

This isn't about Benning. This is about who the Canucks liked under Gillis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

It's Tony Gallagher, guys the almost as big of a sh*t disturber as Botchford.

 

None of that is true. I've seen video of Benning pushing for Virtanen in draft meetings.

Perhaps after being pushed himself DeNiro?

 

There is much influence over management from ownership..  gone are the years where management gave their reasoning and calculation  to ownership..  Ownership needs to trust management and only play Devils Advocate.  

Miss that Griffith's era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Toews said:

This isn't about Benning. This is about who the Canucks liked under Gillis.

 

Lots of teams probably "liked" Larkin. Doesn't mean they would have taken him top 10.

 

My guess is Gillis would have taken Nylander after Gradin pushed strongly for him. Which still would have probably been the better pick.

 

This is all hearsay though, I'm not gonna take it too seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

Perhaps after being pushed himself DeNiro?

 

There is much influence over management from ownership..  gone are the years where management gave their reasoning and calculation  to ownership..  Ownership needs to trust management and only play Devils Advocate.  

Miss that Griffith's era.

 

I'll criticize ownership as much as the next guy, but Gallagher is clearly pulling this out of his as$. He even says himself "I suspect", which means he's guessing.

 

The idea that ownership sat there in draft meetings is beyond ridiculous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad/ horrible  owner,  bad gm, bad coach,  bad team.  Only ten years till we're competitive again. Ownership choosing the oilers model. Pretend to be good for 4 years,realize your not good but it's to late to fix 2 years, begin to build 2 years, hire hockey people that are  actually proven and have a real plan  2 years. Become respectable and competative for 10 years. Rise repeat

 

learn from others mistakes skip the first six years NOW. 

 

Nothing will improve under this ownership its gotten worse every year since they got full control. Keep hiring rookie  puppets/scapegoats axe them the minute the grow a spine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

 

Lots of teams probably "liked" Larkin. Doesn't mean they would have taken him top 10.

 

My guess is Gillis would have taken Nylander after Gradin pushed strongly for him. Which still would have probably been the better pick.

 

This is all hearsay though, I'm not gonna take it too seriously.

They could have been planning to trade down, acquire more picks for the rebuild. The fact that Gallagher singles out Larkin tells me they liked him more than the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

Gillis wasn't around for that draft? So who's 'they'? 

 

If the Canucks had taken Larkin at 6 they would've been flamed too. He wasn't projected that high. 

 

Tony g is just trying to spin this since he likes to troll canucks. but if people actually read it. "Before he departed". So really. In fairness when gillis got fired canucks weren't picking in the 6th spot. We were closer to 12-15. So that does make sense if they had there eye on Larkin. He was in the canucks range at the time. 

 

tony should go back under his bridge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Tony g is just trying to spin this since he likes to troll canucks. but if people actually read it. "Before he departed". So really. In fairness when gillis got fired canucks weren't picking in the 6th spot. We were closer to 12-15. So that does make sense if they had there eye on Larkin. He was in the canucks range at the time. 

 

tony should go back under his bridge. 

This is a good point, one which I overlooked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

 

I'll criticize ownership as much as the next guy, but Gallagher is clearly pulling this out of his as$. He even says himself "I suspect", which means he's guessing.

 

The idea that ownership sat there in draft meetings is beyond ridiculous. 

 

Bingo.

 

Although I still do think ownership pulls strings here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...