Nice summary. Appreciate it.
Based on your summary I gather that something happened between Gillis and ownership to change it. For my take I think if Gillis told management that he wanted to move out some of the core to get younger and that the end of the line was coming, he got pushback since they were in the finals in 2011 and ownership believed that they should still have 3 years or something left to make a run. That likely caused the rift and disconnect between the 2 sides.
Unfortunately the poor drafting that Gillis admitted to contributed to not having as good a team. Outside of Bo Horvat there’s nothing to write home about of any of his 6 years as the GM when it comes to drafting.
And the performance drop off he takes about, he has to take ownership of the contracts he handed out. Garrison, Hansen, the sedins deals ended in 2018. Burrows and Higgins were to end in 2017. Bieksa and hamhuis and Kesler ended in 2016. Edler ends in 2019. More looking at the Higgins and burrows deals since those were signed in 2012/13. He should have seen the signs then. But he didn’t move on them.
As for Weber, I’m not sure if Poile would say something was close. Only way the Canucks gets him is if Poile oks it either via trade or not matching an offer sheet. Don’t see the Canucks assets in 2012 being able to land Weber. How often does Poile make bad trades?
NTC, Lu was the only one he moved. So I don’t believe it’s as easy as he thinks it would have been to move them. Hamhuis didn’t want to leave in 2016. Bieksa waived in his final year so he was able to sign an extension immediately. Same with burrows when he got moved. Edler has never seemed the type to want to leave. Gillis might have done too good a job about making Vancouver a place guys want to play, as many didn’t want to leave. Throw the twins in that mix too. Biggest asset was Kesler. Anaheim deal was solid if they opted for a prospect like Theodore over Scisba.
Biggest what ifs, if ownership wasn’t meddling, would be whether Gillis would have been able to turn his scouting staff and drafting around. The next item would be his ability to make trades. Significant deals under his regime were Lu for Markstrom and Mathias, Booth for Samuelson, Schneider for Horvat, Ballard for Grabner and 2010 first, the Hoff for a pick. Along with deadline deals for Roy, Higgins, Lappy.
Very good at signing free agents to solid contracts. That’s the lawyer side of him, something that Benning lacks and should be wise enough to hire someone to delegate that duty to.
Would the Canucks be better off if ownership let him run the team as he saw fit? They likely should struggle during the past 4 years. Again, if you are quoting him saying minors and not wanting guys as incentive for them to walive ntc, he may be surprised to get a list of 3 teams to dea with. Minors, the player has to go through waivers. If they get claimed the Canucks get cap space and maybe that team that claims the player sends the player to a desired destination and gets some compensation. So, that’s no threat. In fact, it would destroy all that he tried to build for the franchise if he operated like that. So, how good would any trades have been? Hard to say. Drafting, no clue. Again Horvat is his lone prize in the draft.
Team would be built completely differently. No doubt about that.
Again all this that Gillis is saying is reflection upon what happened being away from it. Would he have this same outline being in the thick of it the past 4 years?
Media is defiantly very negative. He’s right on there.
