Post-Game Talk: 18/19 Endless boilerplate arguments regarding Management thread | Pt. V. Oil up your mouse wheel.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bojack Horvatman

IAMGROOT
Jun 15, 2016
4,037
7,093
image.gif
OMG we now have to deal with sagging skin.....the Horror.
 

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,154
5,850
Vancouver
Wrong.

Gillis needed to be fired for doing a poor job from July 1, 2011 - April 2014.

But I did not ask for this. I asked for competent management that would take this team into a rebuild. That's not what we got.

While Gillis deserved to be fired, I would not have fired him, he IMO deserved more rope.

On a side note, I also wonder what the ownership should be taking blame for... for both GM's although with Benning i don't think it changes my opinion of the job he has done... I can't see a way to judge him that could make him seem competent.
 

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
While Gillis deserved to be fired, I would not have fired him, he IMO deserved more rope.

On a side note, I also wonder what the ownership should be taking blame for... for both GM's although with Benning i don't think it changes my opinion of the job he has done... I can't see a way to judge him that could make him seem competent.

Gillis deserved a reprimand. Everyone is replaceable, IMO... but Gillis deserved to be replaced with a proven track record of better. Gillis was good. Replacing Gillis with Benning was an insult to Gillis. Those that didn't give Gillis his rightly earned respect, deserve this. It was never going to be easy to replace Gillis... but when you replace Gillis with an idiot and don't do your due diligence, this is what you get. If it was acknowledged from the beginning that Gillis deserved a replacement of high standard, that acts as a check and balance. When you don't have respect for what you have, what you get is what you deserve. Many were laughing and belittling at the job Gillis did... not only here or the media, but Linden and Benning themselves.

Weren't you one of the ones who asked for this the most vocally?

I think it is long past time that you and the rest of the "fire Gillis" brigade apologize for your role in getting us into this mess.

So vocally, and constantly...like water slowly dripping on the forehead.

When you post, "be careful what you wish for"... and the response is, "anyone would be better"... I think those that just assumed "anyone would be better" should be enjoying "anyone" just as much as the "Benning Bro's", IMO. Benning is the very definition of "anyone". The job Gillis did was so minimized, that it was largely seen as a happy day because a replacement can only bring better. At the time, it was a sad day when Gillis was fired, and in hindsight, it was still a sad day.

However, realizing now that it was a sad day is, without words, an apology. I accept the apology of Y2K and others. The misguided are pardoned, IMO. Fold up the past, and throw it away. The Wildlings need to fight with those of us on the Wall, because Winter is Here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
When baby whines that his KIA isn't good enough so his dad gives him an Oldsmobile, it's still his fault for whining even though he wanted an aston martin.

So if Benning is fired and we get an even worse GM (assume that’s actually possible), are we all to “blame” as well? Because we didn’t want to ride a rusty unicycle with a flat tire we deserve a stick with hotwheels tires glued to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2kcanucks

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
So if Benning is fired and we get an even worse GM (assume that’s actually possible), are we all to “blame” as well? Because we didn’t want to ride a rusty unicycle with a flat tire we deserve a stick with hotwheels tires glued to?

IMHO, yes. If I'm advocating for something (especially to an annoying and obnoxious level), and in hindsight, it turned out to be a mistake in my mind, I have to own my original position. I have to think about how did I come to that conclusion at the time? What was I missing? And it's perfectly fine to make mistakes, and change thoughts and opinions based on new information... and say, geez, I was sure wrong about that at that time. That's how to get to higher levels of the game, IMO. Those that aren't able to own and rise above their mistakes stay "stuck" to repeat the same errors.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
IMHO, yes. If I'm advocating for something, and in hindsight, it turned out to be a mistake in my mind, I have to own my original position. I have to think about how did I come to that conclusion at the time? What was I missing? And it's perfectly fine to make mistakes, and change thoughts and opinions based on new information... and say, geez, I was sure wrong about that at that time. That's how to get to higher levels of the game, IMO. Those that aren't able to own and rise above their mistakes stay "stuck" to repeat the same errors.

What you are missing is that “we” didn’t hire Benning and won’t hire the next GM. We have no role in the GM who replaces the current one, but that doesn’t mean we should want or expect something better than the current situation.

Further, the future is unknowable so you can’t reasonably hold a future poor outcome against people because they want to change a currently poor situation. Just like you can’t blame a person for leaving an abusive partner if they wind up with another abusive one.

Gillis had his flaws and I think replacing him was justified. Just because the owner went out and hired someone far worse doesn’t change the original position being true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2kcanucks

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,164
2,612
Vancouver
What you are missing is that the future is unknowable and so you can’t hold a future poor outcome against people because they want to change a currently poor situation. Just like you can’t blame a person for leaving an abusive partner should they happen to wind up with another one someday. You can only assess the present, not the unknowable possibilities of the future.

If the future were entirely knowable then sure, but it’s not so I don’t see why dealing with an untenable present should be viewed poorly using hindsight.

While I agree, in the ecosystem of NHL GMs, there are a lot more bad ones than good ones, and even fewer great ones. Gillis was a good but not great GM, meaning there was more downside risk. Benning is a bad GM, so there isn't much downside risk (particularly since the team is unlikely to win with him at the helm) and a bit more upside. It's not an equivalent situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vanuck

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
What you are missing is that the future is unknowable and so you can’t hold a future poor outcome against people because they want to change a currently poor situation. Just like you can’t blame a person for leaving an abusive partner should they happen to wind up with another one someday. You can only assess the present, not the unknowable possibilities of the future.

If the future were entirely knowable then sure, but it’s not so I don’t see why dealing with an untenable present should be viewed poorly using hindsight.

Sure you can. If you're not prepared to identify and assess where you were wrong, you're destined to repeat the same mistakes.

Benning has had ample opportunity to prove me wrong... and I'd have to admit it, if he did.

----
What you are missing is that “we” didn’t hire Benning and won’t hire the next GM. We have no role in the GM who replaces the current one, but that doesn’t mean we should want or expect something better than the current situation.

Obviously, this is just a game... and we are just "armchairing" things for fun, and have little control other than what we decide to cheer for and what we decide to boo. If Benning gets fired, how much "blame" I should get (outside of being blamed for being annoying and obnoxious to "Benning Bro's") is little. But if I'm part of a vocal group that contributed to Gillis getting fired (and I think that what the fans were chanting and arguing played a role in Gillis getting fired?) then yeah, there's some blame there, IMO.

Gillis had his flaws and I think replacing him was justified. Just because the owner went out and hired someone far worse doesn’t change the original position being true.

I think you misjudged the value that Gillis had... and this was an error. Gillis was more difficult to replace than you thought. That was my position at the time, and the same one I hold now.

Of course Gillis had his flaws, and he made mistakes. He deserved a reprimand, IMO. If I was in charge, Gillis would have been scolded. Gillis deserved to be knocked down a few pegs, but not fired... not until there was a better option available. However, to find a better option was NEVER going to be easy. You were wrong in wanting Gillis fired, IMO. You deserve blame, IMO. Obviously, for us, this is all just for fun... but I don't think you can just write off your error as "replacing him was justified". It wasn't. Replacing him was justified if you are confident that better was available and could be had. It's not like Gillis was Weinstein, which would have been understandable to fire him without a better replacement in hand. But Gillis didn't need to be fired.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pomorick

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Sure you can. If you're not prepared to identify and assess where you were wrong, you're destined to repeat the same mistakes.

Sure, but the mistake was in making a poor choice again in the future, not for making the initial change. The initial change is still warranted regardless of the future choice. One doesn’t retroactively negate the other.

And since we (fans) never got to make the choice for Benning, I don’t see what mistake we could be learning from. Aquilini yes, but the fans? They didn’t make the choice. Maybe they should have chanted “Fire Gillis, Hire Yzerman”?
 

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
Sure, but the mistake was in making a poor choice again in the future, not for making the initial change. The initial change is still warranted regardless of the future choice. One doesn’t retroactively negate the other.

And since we (fans) never got to make the choice for Benning, I don’t see what mistake we could be learning from. Aquilini yes, but the fans? They didn’t make the choice. Maybe they should have chanted “Fire Gillis, Hire Yzerman”?

None of this is very serious stuff... This is all for fun, when talking about "blame" in this context. It shouldn't be taken very much to heart by anyone here if a mistake was made here by a poster. Aquilini made a big error and deserves much blame. Those that supported his decision, were wrong. Something to learn: As armchair fans who follow the game closely, what variables should we be looking for in determining what makes a great, good, and bad GM... When should a GM be fired? Why was the initial change warranted? You are talking like that is a fact? Yes, Gillis made a mistake. Yes, Gillis has a history of adapting. Yes, Gillis could have adapted. Yes, Gillis deserved the benefit of the doubt, given what he was able to accomplish as a new GM, who didn't quite have a handle on the "timing" given the NHL environment. Nothing he did, was warranted of a firing. His main problem is that he misjudged the "timing" of certain decisions. Something that was easily correctable with experience, and recognition of the error. Benning's main problem is that he is an idiot. This is much more difficult to correct.

It doesn't matter how much of an asshole Gillis was... or how big of a mistake he made with trading both Luongo and Schneider... Gillis was good enough that finding better would have always been difficult... and if you are not looking to replace him with better, why is he being replaced? Looking back at the big errors, the correct identification and assessment should have been dealing with the goaltending earlier so that the one you chose knew he was your guy (timing issue). Highly correctable. Same with the scouting staff... Waited too long to make changes (highly correctable).
 
Last edited:

Britton

Registered User
Nov 28, 2008
1,651
525
I still think firing gillis was a poor decision because it was incredibly unlikely you were going to be able to replace him with someone better. The only better GM's around were all firmly entrenched with their current franchises and the chances that a new comer would be an improvement on Gillis were minuscule. At best it was going to be a wash.

Yes he made some mistakes and you could probably justify firing him, but it was a poor decision that turned into a horrible one with hindsight.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
None of this is very serious stuff... This is all for fun, when talking about "blame" in this context. It shouldn't be taken very much to heart by anyone here if a mistake was made here by a poster. Aquilini made a big error and deserves much blame. Those that supported his decision, were wrong. Something to learn: As armchair fans who follow the game closely, what variables should we be looking for in determining what makes a great, good, and bad GM... When should a GM be fired? Why was the initial change warranted? You are talking like that is a fact? Yes, Gillis made a mistake. Yes, Gillis has a history of adapting. Yes, Gillis could have adapted. Yes, Gillis deserved the benefit of the doubt, given what he was able to accomplish as a new GM, who didn't quite have a handle on the "timing" given the NHL environment. Nothing he did, was warranted of a firing. His main problem is that he misjudged the "timing" of certain decisions. Something that was easily correctable with experience, and recognition of the error. Benning's main problem is that he is an idiot. This is much more difficult to correct.

It doesn't matter how much of an ******* Gillis was... or how big of a mistake he made... He was good enough that finding better would have always been difficult... and if you are not looking to replace him with better, why is he being replaced?

Ya I’m not taking it seriously but this is an interesting line of debate so I’m just pushing back a bit.

You’re right, Gillis didn’t 100% deserve to be fired i.e. it’s factual but it certainly is debatable. But I don’t see how it really matters. The point I’m advocating is that the performance of the subsequent GM is not relevant to the argument of whether Gillis “deserved” to be fired or whether it was a “good” decision. At the time of the firing, fans knew there were worse GMs out there as well as better ones. Therefore the support for change was based on the hope that we would get one of the “better” ones, just as our desire to be rid of Benning is based on an assumption that our next GM will be one of the “better” ones and not Chiarelli or Dorion. But we don’t know who the owner will hire and we don’t have input into that decision. For that reason it really doesn’t have any connection to the argument for change. They are separate processes and therefore the outcome of one does not change the argument for the other.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
So if Benning is fired and we get an even worse GM (assume that’s actually possible), are we all to “blame” as well? Because we didn’t want to ride a rusty unicycle with a flat tire we deserve a stick with hotwheels tires glued to?

Not really, since we wouldn't have had anything to do with it.

The f***tard protesters and people who chanted for Gillis to be fired, they are directly responsible. It's hubris.

I 100% blame pauser for the mess we are in. It is completely his fault.
 

GetFocht

Indestructible
Jun 11, 2013
9,077
4,373
Canucks need to hire Gillis as President of hockey ops. That interview he had was incredible, any team would be lucky to have him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pomorick

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
Ya I’m not taking it seriously but this is an interesting line of debate so I’m just pushing back a bit.

You’re right, Gillis didn’t 100% deserve to be fired i.e. it’s factual but it certainly is debatable. But I don’t see how it really matters. The point I’m advocating is that the performance of the subsequent GM is not relevant to the argument of whether Gillis “deserved” to be fired or whether it was a “good” decision. At the time of the firing, fans knew there were worse GMs out there as well as better ones. Therefore the support for change was based on the hope that we would get one of the “better” ones, just as our desire to be rid of Benning is based on an assumption that our next GM will be one of the “better” ones and not Chiarelli or Dorion. But we don’t know who the owner will hire and we don’t have input into that decision. For that reason it really doesn’t have any connection to the argument for change. They are separate processes and therefore the outcome of one does not change the argument for the other.

It matters greatly, IMO, if Gillis deserved to be fired or not. If Gillis didn't deserve to be fired because of something he did, why is he being fired? He didn't need to be fired. Mutliple years of bottom feeder while spending to the cap, I get it... Being a Weinstein, I get it... Fire him. Why is the bird in the hand not worth two in the bush? If someone is difficult to replace, you better be sure (or, based on clear rational and evidence) that who you are replacing this someone with is at least just as good, and most preferably, better. You didn't respect the job Gillis did enough, IMO. If you did, you wouldn't quickly assume or believe that the next GM would be one of the "better" ones. The good to great ones are hard to find. Having a good to great NHL GM is a real competitive advantage, and Gillis was a good one. Being good should have bought him a lot more rope than he got. Gillis should have had the rope that Benning used to hang himself with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->