VeteranNetPresence
Disco Super Fly.
in a perfect world both AV and gillis are both canned if the canucks are knocked out first round.
me2
Go ahead foot
If it happens next year full on rebuild mode.
I won't be upset this year, disappointed maybe, but not upset. It needs to be kept in perspective, there are 4 equal teams at 3-6, four very solid roughly equal teams, it's was a coin toss as to which two make it and which two don't.
I'll look at form when we do my review. If we aren't better than game 1 that'll be a fail, if we play as well as SJ but lose that's just unlucky coin toss.
Aphid Attraction
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2013
- 5,066
- 1,702
Derp Kassian
Registered User
Theres no excuse this year, no cup hangover, same coach who got extended, failed to get rid of goalie where the capspace could've gone to the forwards. All Gillis has talked about is Luck and goaltending being hot like he's managing an 8th seeded team hoping to win a few rounds.
Nucker101
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 21,104
- 16,549
IMO Gillis was an excellent GM when he first came in(outside the organization) with an open mind and some fresh ideas. He knew that upgrades needed to be made and identified the team's weaknesses and addressed them pretty effectively. He even got AV to change his coaching style to more of a puck-possession, skilled, offensive style of play.
However, IMO over time he's started to give AV too much input on player personnel moves/decisions and also allowed AV to go back to more of a defensive, dump and change style system. The Bruins SCF loss also seems to have changed his management style. He hasn't replaced the skill(by skill I mean puck moving/PP/pure offensive ability) players that he's let go over the years in:
Ehrhoff(Garrison is nice, but not a puck mover that can help the transition game and feed the forwards nice passes 5v5 and on the PP, more of a Salo replacement/upgrade that's much more durable/physical and more accurate with his slapper, IMO his defensive "problems" were overstated, I'm still amazed that Ballard wasn't just waived and then Hoff could have been paid the 5 million he probably wanted over 5 or 6 years).
Hodgson(Who knows what really happened here, but either way this organization took a hit offensively and in skill with that trade). Trading for Roy essentially filled that role now and I loved that trade for that exact reason, but Roy is very likely a playoff rental player.
Demitra/Sundin(RIP Pavol, both solid veterans that just brought that confidence to the team that good veteran players do).
Samuelsson(Clearly was slowing down and breaking down, but Booth clearly didn't replace his skill and PP ability, players that play well off of the rush like Booth usually thrive with pass-first centers and skilled, puck-moving d-men and I'm guessing he would have better numbers had Ehrhoff and Hodgson or similar replacement players still had been on the Canucks and if Booth could actually stay healthy).
You can even include a guy like Wellwood, for as much as he's always made fun of, he brought some skill and was useful on the PP. I'd take him over Ebbett.
Another head scratching move was letting Torres walk because the Gillis didn't want to give him a multi-year deal, and then Gillis ends up trying to re-acquire him only to be outbid by the team that we're now playing in the playoffs.
Also, Gillis came into this season with 4 left-handed d-men making top 4 money, after letting two proven top 4 righties in Salo and Hoff walk. And the only proven top 4 righty on the roster was Bieksa, after that it was Tanev and basically nobody until Corrado was called up and thankfully has played very well with all things considered. It's amazing that the scout who recommended Cam Barker even has a job, and that all of the depth d-men that Gillis signed were all lefties.
Also, another thing that scares me is that apparently Kyle Clifford was rumoured to be one of those 6 players that Gillis would have dealt Hodgson for! And I'm not a Kassian hater(It's quite clear that he has great upside if it all comes together for him), but Kyle Clifford projects to be a third liner, maybe a low end 2nd liner at best so that's a scary thought.
However, IMO over time he's started to give AV too much input on player personnel moves/decisions and also allowed AV to go back to more of a defensive, dump and change style system. The Bruins SCF loss also seems to have changed his management style. He hasn't replaced the skill(by skill I mean puck moving/PP/pure offensive ability) players that he's let go over the years in:
Ehrhoff(Garrison is nice, but not a puck mover that can help the transition game and feed the forwards nice passes 5v5 and on the PP, more of a Salo replacement/upgrade that's much more durable/physical and more accurate with his slapper, IMO his defensive "problems" were overstated, I'm still amazed that Ballard wasn't just waived and then Hoff could have been paid the 5 million he probably wanted over 5 or 6 years).
Hodgson(Who knows what really happened here, but either way this organization took a hit offensively and in skill with that trade). Trading for Roy essentially filled that role now and I loved that trade for that exact reason, but Roy is very likely a playoff rental player.
Demitra/Sundin(RIP Pavol, both solid veterans that just brought that confidence to the team that good veteran players do).
Samuelsson(Clearly was slowing down and breaking down, but Booth clearly didn't replace his skill and PP ability, players that play well off of the rush like Booth usually thrive with pass-first centers and skilled, puck-moving d-men and I'm guessing he would have better numbers had Ehrhoff and Hodgson or similar replacement players still had been on the Canucks and if Booth could actually stay healthy).
You can even include a guy like Wellwood, for as much as he's always made fun of, he brought some skill and was useful on the PP. I'd take him over Ebbett.
Another head scratching move was letting Torres walk because the Gillis didn't want to give him a multi-year deal, and then Gillis ends up trying to re-acquire him only to be outbid by the team that we're now playing in the playoffs.
Also, Gillis came into this season with 4 left-handed d-men making top 4 money, after letting two proven top 4 righties in Salo and Hoff walk. And the only proven top 4 righty on the roster was Bieksa, after that it was Tanev and basically nobody until Corrado was called up and thankfully has played very well with all things considered. It's amazing that the scout who recommended Cam Barker even has a job, and that all of the depth d-men that Gillis signed were all lefties.
Also, another thing that scares me is that apparently Kyle Clifford was rumoured to be one of those 6 players that Gillis would have dealt Hodgson for! And I'm not a Kassian hater(It's quite clear that he has great upside if it all comes together for him), but Kyle Clifford projects to be a third liner, maybe a low end 2nd liner at best so that's a scary thought.
Last edited:
Ehrhoff was a defensive liability who loaded up on PP points. He's vastly over-rated around here. Garrison is a much better all around D-man
Hodgson wanted out, and we got a power forward prospect back. He was never going to get the top line ice time here that he got in Buffalo, and he never would have put up similar numbers as a 2C in a more defensively oriented western conference. When he was traded, it wasn't known that Kesler would require surgery, and certainly a puck off the foot can happen to anyone.
Agreed. There was a lot of mourning over Rypien's and Bourdon's tragedy, but Demitra was largely ignored by the fan base and the team after that tragedy in Russia. I think it's a real shame. His last season here was tough, but he did bring secondary scoring. Sundin actually had a decent playoffs that year. 10M for the second season would have been tough to maneuver, but I still believe that was a tactic by MG to scare off the competition and he knew Sundin was wavering on playing one last season, let alone two.
Samuelsson went down early in that 2011 run, and was clearly not going to match his performance from his first season here. The jury is out on Booth since he missed so much time this season, but he was probably a gamble worth taking.
I wouldn't. He would avoid hits and put himself out of position. There is one occasion against Chicago where his avoiding getting hit lead to a breakaway goal against. For all the undeserved flak he takes, at least Ebbett is serviceable defensively.
Torres priced himself out of the market at $1.75M instead of $1M. The Canucks had LTIR room at the deadline for his expiring contract, but that room wasn't available in the off-season.
Salo was aging and fragile, when could we ever count on him to be in the line-up? Buffalo will be dealing with Ehrhoff's mediocre defensive play for the next 8 seasons. He certainly didn't lead them to contention for a playoff spot and the very weak East. Until Ballard's situation is dealt with in the off-season, the D is going to have to deal with LHS playing on RD. Barker was a low risk depth signing and too much has been made of it.
Rumours... Low ball offers happen all the time. He got Kassian.
y2kcanucks said:
I suspect that if they go down in the first round while looking bad, AV's job is definitely on the line. 2nd round? Yeah, not so much. I think MG has bought himself at least a couple more seasons with the 2011 run and the back to back president trophies.
Well I think we are getting a little spoiled around here - 5 staright playoff years after not making them - more wins than any other team during that time period, 2 Presidents Cups trophies - 5 NW division titles, one game from the Holy Grail and we want to can this guy? Give me a break! Maybe Joe Niewendyk is available, or perhaps Brian Burke II, wait how about Garth Snow he should be available soon. Take a step back people and look at how lucky we are - sure I am disappointed with last years playoff and if we go out early this year I will be disappointed but stay the course - damn. Talk to fans of the Devils or Flyers maybe - how about the Flamers or Oilers? Lucky teams they are!
What's available out there is quite literally bottom of the barrel. There are teams out there that have been employing bad GMs for a number of years now. There shouldn't be any consideration given to firing Gillis (no matter what your opinion of him is). None.
You have to be both capable of running a business and being a top hockey mind — not a lot of people can do the latter, let alone the former.
You have to be both capable of running a business and being a top hockey mind — not a lot of people can do the latter, let alone the former.
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 16,580
- 15,518
Demerits? I'll go with one: Jay
I'd be interested to see Gilman would be in-line to take over from Gillis if the chance arrived.
I think Gilman has done a tremendous job here and potentially losing him to another organization would be terrible.
I'd be interested to see Gilman would be in-line to take over from Gillis if the chance arrived.
I think Gilman has done a tremendous job here and potentially losing him to another organization would be terrible.
Proto
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2010
- 11,523
- 1
I think even most of MG's bad moves have been defensible: letting Ehrhoff go, the Ballard and Booth acquisitions, etc. Honestly the only real flaw I've seen is a real reticence to cut bait on some of those bad moves, and a tendency towards being too conservative once the team became elite.
I expect if the team doesn't meet expectations this summer that we'll see some interesting line-up changes.
I expect if the team doesn't meet expectations this summer that we'll see some interesting line-up changes.
mossey3535
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2011
- 13,424
- 9,958
This.
We've seen relatively unknown coaches get to SC Finals and win the Cup. GM's are a whole other story. That's why for me the whole 'who will get to replace AV' isn't even an issue because plenty of first year coaches have won the Cup, and there are lots of good coaches available with possible more to come.
Also, Nonis seemed like a good backup GM right? I thought he was average to as an actual GM. If you're going to roll the dice on a management change, it's a lot less dangerous to replace the coach.
I would say that this team has underperformed in terms of passion, effort and entertainment value in the last two years. That COULD be because of the personnel and I don't think Gillis is a saint. However, until we get a coach who will go back to something RESEMBLING the up-tempo style attacking style they used to play, it's hard to evaluate the players we have now.
I say AV should be fired unless we win a Cup this year. I don't give two craps about the second round, what is so redeeming about that? The very fact that we can play such an underwhelming game in the playoffs at home is more than enough reason to can him. Add in the fact that this is so far a repeat of last season's playoffs just solidifies the argument.
Fire AV. Give Gillis one more year, if you're generous then two years. That's it though.
I certainly wouldn't call Brian Burke "bottom of the barrel". Nearly 1.5 decades later, we're still benefitting significantly from his efforts on Draft Day 1999. He did an excellent job in Vancouver at a time when the financial environment of the NHL was turned almost completely upside-down. Why didn't he ever replace Dan Cloutier, you ask? Probably because John McCaw never gave him access to any money.
Burke & Nonis' fingerprints are still all over this team, and they've done an excellent job in Toronto in accumulating youth and basically assembling a team that should be in the playoffs annually.
The issue with firing a guy like Gillis is that I don't imagine that a guy like Burke would be all that interested in this job. What quality GM's going to want to come to Vancouver, where a pretty clear topping-pattern appears to be in place, with the future of sideways-to-down being likely? Whoever would be Gillis' replacement would be walking into a terrible situation, much like Feaster did in Calgary a couple of years ago after they inexplicably traded Phaneuf, signed Stajan, etc.
digger18
Registered User
I won't be surprised in Gillis is removed if we lose in the 1st round.
MG, being a former player's agent, is very good at signing players at below the market price. He has also uncovered some gems in the college pool. But his trades are below-average, to say the least. His biggest trades: Booth, Ballard and Kassian, have all been terrible (or questionable at least in the last one).
If this team is bounced in the 1st round, it will definitely see a lot of trades coming in the off-season. Is Gillis the right person to do it?
For Aquilini though, there is a more important problem - fans are seemlingly less interested in the team, now that it has been stagnant for a while. This directly eat into the profit of his investment. If ticket sales slow down further, Aquilini may want to change the man on top to give the team a fresh look and more commerical appeal.
MG, being a former player's agent, is very good at signing players at below the market price. He has also uncovered some gems in the college pool. But his trades are below-average, to say the least. His biggest trades: Booth, Ballard and Kassian, have all been terrible (or questionable at least in the last one).
If this team is bounced in the 1st round, it will definitely see a lot of trades coming in the off-season. Is Gillis the right person to do it?
For Aquilini though, there is a more important problem - fans are seemlingly less interested in the team, now that it has been stagnant for a while. This directly eat into the profit of his investment. If ticket sales slow down further, Aquilini may want to change the man on top to give the team a fresh look and more commerical appeal.
I dont mind if you disagree but pullllllease Brian Burke and Dave Nonis - gi ve me a break -- Nonis couldnt make the playoffs here with the star studded cast that Burke assembled for him - can t have it both ways? If I am not mistaken Dan Cloutier profitted nicely from his gift deal from ole Burkie. Niether Burke or Nonis came close to the success Gillis has head here after taking over a team that did not make the playoffs. As for the Leafs one playoff performance in 5 years since Burke went there - riding a goalie drafted by Ferguson - if you think the Leafs are an upper echelon team you need to go back to Hockey 101 my friend - 5 years to wait for thatt??? If that happened in Van he would be ridden out of town...
That is an excellent post. MG's tenure in a nutshell.
Gillis made what looks to me like a big league mistake. He shopped Hodgson in a rental/deadline market. This is not the market to capitalize on an asset like Hodgson in. Teams were caught off guard. This was an off season move if there ever was one.
It was a personal issue that drove MG to want to trade him but he would have been a lot easier on himself by trading for an equivalent player (ideal sized, skilled, centerman,Tyler Seguin, Tyler Ennis anyone ?). Any player that is in the same development and stat curve as Hodgson. Then its a legit lateral trade, for better or for worse.
Instead Gillis trades Hodgson to fill the spot in his ongoing high risk Steve Bernier project (power forward) In the end, Kassian might turn out to be good but MG will probably not be GM of the Canucks to see it.
There was nothing right about the way this trade was executed or the player we acquired considering the window open situation.
struckmatch
Registered User
We need a demerit system for GM's.
de·mer·it
/diˈmerit/
Noun
A mark awarded against someone for a fault or offense.
Synonyms
fault - defect - shortcoming - failing - imperfection - Hodgson trade jk
Grumbler
Registered User
- Oct 25, 2012
- 3,015
- 774
I wouldn't consider them "worst playoff team in the NHL". Certainly teams like maple leafs, islanders are much worse than they are. But would be a big travesty to lose to the sharks considering the history of playoff failures the sharks had are even worse than ours.
gillis gets fired when there's no hope that he can improve the situation. since we're not anywhere near that, gillis owns, gilman owns
