HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Mike Gillis Discussion Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-17-2013, 12:54 PM
  #826
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by petrishriekandgo View Post
I really think it wasn't the Boston Bruins as much as it was how the league let that series be played/officiated. We saw it during the 2nd half of last season and throughout the Kings run and we're seeing it again now.
We're also seeing it in the way we play. Our D has also moved to much more obstructing of incoming players (not a criticism, an observation) which means they aren't turning around as quick, which means our response to dump ins has meaningfully changed, which means our breakout/transition game has changed, which means etc etc etc.

Trickle down officiating.

Reffing standards matter!

 
Old
03-17-2013, 03:18 PM
  #827
ayoshi
Registered User
 
ayoshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 378
vCash: 500
If the Canucks get bounced in the first round or miss the playoffs you gotta replace Gillis.

Unfortunately, Gillis still has the "fire the coach" card he will probably play, which also serves to extend his own life

ayoshi is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 03:25 PM
  #828
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayoshi View Post
If the Canucks get bounced in the first round or miss the playoffs you gotta replace Gillis.

Unfortunately, Gillis still has the "fire the coach" card he will probably play, which also serves to extend his own life
He also has the trade a #1 goalie up his sleeve too.

He ain't going anywhere soon (Gillis).

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 03:25 PM
  #829
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by petrishriekandgo View Post
I really think it wasn't the Boston Bruins as much as it was how the league let that series be played/officiated. We saw it during the 2nd half of last season and throughout the Kings run and we're seeing it again now.

Gillis had planned to push the envelope on speed and skill and the Canucks team that made it to the cup final (and dominated like no team in 2 decades in the reg season) was almost the perfect make-up to do that. BUT, it's not a playoff winning formula.

Sure one could argue that with a healthy lineup they may have taken the cup regardless of how the game was allowed to be played BUT it doesn't change the fact that the NHL game changes when it matters the most.

Gillis isn't reacting to the Bruins, he's just succumbing (regretfully) to the type of teams the NHL system rewards.

So, yah, we're stuck between two philosophies right now... it would be interesting to see where we'd be if we were healthy BUT everyone has issue across the league.

Bottom line is Gillis needs to make a move, a playoff structured move and the Canucks need to bear down, period.
In my opinion is was our injuries that (Malhotra's catastrophic eye-injury had a domino effect which led to more wear and tear on our other centres) that cost us the cup.

We still made it to game 7 though - so I would disagree that we couldn't win in the playoffs.

Should've kept the Hoff.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 03:33 PM
  #830
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,758
vCash: 500
To add to that point, Gillis couldn't have anticipated or handled the Malhotra situation that differently. So I'll give him a pass there.

I won't give him a pass on Mitchell though, or Ehrhoff obviously.

It's weird, Gillis seems to have this "insurance policy" in effect regarding the defense, so he trades for Ballard as he's not sure if Hamhuis will sign. Then he signs Garrison, in my opinion partly because he's a good player who took less to play here, but also in case Edler doesn't re-sign.

So we get insurance, but in the end we have 4 LH defenceman making 4 million or more. Anyone else see an issue with that?

If he just kept Mitchell on a 1 or 2 year 3M a year deal - he wouldn't have needed to trade for Ballard. If he kept the Hoff at 5x5 he wouldn't have had to sign Garrison. Our defense would've been something like this last year

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Ehrhoff
Mitchell - Tanev

which looks a lot better than the weird hodge-podge of LH shots we currently have, and are back to where we were before Ehrhoff - no ****ing ****** PMD.

He puts himself in a bad position because he lets good, serviceable defensemen who want to stay here leave - then want to go for a home run by landing good UFA's, but also feels the need to have insurance in case he doesn't land them...but this is poor strategy for our defense.

With Luongo, hated that contract when it was signed and hate it even more now. I feel that despite the TSN video, despite how professional things are being handled, it still is a distraction in the back of their minds (how could it not be?) and Gillis needs to move him - now. Get what you can and move on.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 03:33 PM
  #831
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,899
vCash: 500
This is interesting. The reason people see this team a mish mash is due to the following:

Hodgson for Kassian
Booth for Samuelsson
Ehrhoff for the money/Ballard

Are these the moves in total? These moves make skill team into a grinding team? I didn't know Sammy was overtly skilled when compared to Booth? And Ehrhoff walked for the cash, which we used to sign Garrison. They were never going to pay him 5m+. Then it's Hodgson for a non-skilled Kassian? Isn't Kassian skilled?

People are assuming that the players brought in are not skilled, by comparison, but they clearly are. Further, the changes to the 2011 haven't been that significant at all. This team is still primarily based around skilled forwards, not grinders. 3 players do not make a team.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 03:43 PM
  #832
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
This is interesting. The reason people see this team a mish mash is due to the following:

Hodgson for Kassian
Booth for Samuelsson
Ehrhoff for the money/Ballard

Are these the moves in total? These moves make skill team into a grinding team? I didn't know Sammy was overtly skilled when compared to Booth? And Ehrhoff walked for the cash, which we used to sign Garrison. They were never going to pay him 5m+. Then it's Hodgson for a non-skilled Kassian? Isn't Kassian skilled?

People are assuming that the players brought in are not skilled, by comparison, but they clearly are. Further, the changes to the 2011 haven't been that significant at all. This team is still primarily based around skilled forwards, not grinders. 3 players do not make a team.
And we've been a worse team for it ever since. I have no issues with the Hodgson trade, or the Booth trade (or how he's handled the forward corps in general).

My issue is that we needed a PMD badly so he went out and got us Ehrhoff. Since Ehrhoff's departure we've needed a PMD, and instead we pick up Garrison...good player, whom I quite like, but not what we needed.

It would be akin to spending 5M on Weiss with a healthy Sedin, Kesler and Malhotra, Unnecessary.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 03:59 PM
  #833
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
And we've been a worse team for it ever since. I have no issues with the Hodgson trade, or the Booth trade (or how he's handled the forward corps in general).

My issue is that we needed a PMD badly so he went out and got us Ehrhoff. Since Ehrhoff's departure we've needed a PMD, and instead we pick up Garrison...good player, whom I quite like, but not what we needed.

It would be akin to spending 5M on Weiss with a healthy Sedin, Kesler and Malhotra, Unnecessary.
This team is better at ES now than it was with Ehrhoff, but worse on the PP. I take that trade off. I don't see Garrison as redundant, they needed a big minute defensive Dman past Hamhuis. Now they have 3 stabilizing Ds on each pairing. He was a necessary addition.

I'm mixed on Ehrhoff. He was good, but got abused in the playoffs. Sucked losing him and now looking at the right side D, but if all that we lost was a soft regular season PMD, then I'm ok with it. The point is, it's not like this team is skill deficient without him. Over a large sample, they still have the skill. But now people are acting like this team has a dearth of talent an it's just not the case.

This team still has enough skill to be a skilled team, and is growing its other attributes. It's not all of a sudden devoid of skill. Maybe it's not being brought out, but that's another matter.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 04:05 PM
  #834
Fat Tony
Registered User
 
Fat Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
This team is better at ES now than it was with Ehrhoff, but worse on the PP.
What criteria did you use to make that assessment?

Fat Tony is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 04:18 PM
  #835
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
This team is better at ES now than it was with Ehrhoff, but worse on the PP. I take that trade off. I don't see Garrison as redundant, they needed a big minute defensive Dman past Hamhuis. Now they have 3 stabilizing Ds on each pairing. He was a necessary addition.

I'm mixed on Ehrhoff. He was good, but got abused in the playoffs. Sucked losing him and now looking at the right side D, but if all that we lost was a soft regular season PMD, then I'm ok with it. The point is, it's not like this team is skill deficient without him. Over a large sample, they still have the skill. But now people are acting like this team has a dearth of talent an it's just not the case.

This team still has enough skill to be a skilled team, and is growing its other attributes. It's not all of a sudden devoid of skill. Maybe it's not being brought out, but that's another matter.
I'll repeat what the other poster said, with Ehrhoff in 2011 our 5-5 F/A was at 1.32, and we had the best goal differential at +77.

Last year, without the Hoff, our 5-5 F/A was at 1.19 and our goal differential dropped to +51.

This year our 5-5 F/A is 1.10, and our goal differential is exactly even.

So we have been getting progessively worse at even strength, and our goal differential (which is obviously related to special teams) has also gone down the toilet.

Ehrhoff was "abused" in the playoffs has he had a shoulder injury, and it seems that the nature of his playoff issues has been greatly exaggerated over time. There were one or two plays we "his compete level" wasn't enough, but that was true of the entire team against Boston.

I don't think Garrison was a necessary addition at all. I think Schultz was a necessary addition, and Gillis tried to land him, but Garrison? First of all he's not really playing on the 3rd pairing so we don't have "3 stabilizing D's on each pairing". We've seen mostly Garrison and Edler and now Hamhuis Garrison.

He was a totally unnecessary acquisition given the pre-existing abundance of LH defenceman. With Hamhuis and Edler having those two spots locked up it was again, like picking up another big-ticket centre with Sedin, Kesler and Malhotra all healthy and making their currents salaries.

We needed a RH defenceman or LH who naturally plays on the right side, preferably a PMD. Not another shutdown LHD.

Furthermore we didn't just lose a 'soft regular season PMD', we lost the only PMD the team had, and we lost our dynamite transition game, and we lost our terrifying PP at the same time. I'm not ok with it, nor am I ok with progressively becoming a crappier team - which the stats and our standings over the past 3 years demonstrate.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 04:27 PM
  #836
Fat Tony
Registered User
 
Fat Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
I think Schultz was a necessary addition, and Gillis tried to land him, but Garrison?
Schultz is a rightie too. I imagine icetime and team role were big factors in his opting for the Oilers.

Fat Tony is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 04:30 PM
  #837
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Tony View Post
Schultz is a rightie too. I imagine icetime and team role were big factors in his opting for the Oilers.
I don't doubt that. And I'm happy we were in the mix until the very end. I'm not begrudging Gillis trying, and failing, to land the most coveted defenceman on the market last season.

But Garrison is redundant, despite being a great player signed to a friendly cap hit. The top 4 D pairings have not looked good at any point (quite frankly they've been a mess all season), and having 3 natural left side LHD with 1 RHD is the exact, specific reason for that.

Unless we can get a good PMD signed to an ELC for a few more years, who plays the right side and could score 40 points with Edler, it was a poor decision and a bit mystifying.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 05:13 PM
  #838
biturbo19
Registered User
 
biturbo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,434
vCash: 500
The scary thing about the makeup of the blueline as Gillis has built it right now, is that there's no moving parts. It's basically locked in for the long haul. Everyone has a NTC, aside from Ballard (who is going to be very tough to move, but is clearly the guy who has to go, but isn't really a core piece anyway) and Tanev (why would you even think about moving him?).

I mean, we're talking half a decade of our defence locked in with big ticket guys, and we're still not even sure all 4 of the 'big guys' can play in the top-4 together.

And then we have Gillis' immense 'patience' saddling us with a player in Ballard who still isn't being used @ $4.2M and multiple years left...instead of Ehrhoff who had an immense impact on multiple crucial aspects of our game.

It's just scary that if in the next year or two, this team continues on it's downward trend overall...there's not a whole lot that can be done to change the makeup of that blueline. Gillis has been handing NTCs out like candy, to shave $500k off various contracts.

biturbo19 is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 05:42 PM
  #839
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 9,221
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
To add to that point, Gillis couldn't have anticipated or handled the Malhotra situation that differently. So I'll give him a pass there.

I won't give him a pass on Mitchell though, or Ehrhoff obviously.
What's strange is that you're willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on Manny due to hindsight, but not Mitchell?

vanuck is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 05:50 PM
  #840
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,545
vCash: 500
I think obviously having 5 defenceman in the 4-5 million cap hit range is just silly. You should pay a big #1 top dollars like 6.5-7, have two in the 4-5 range and then the rest would be cap friendly hits of 2 or under.

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 06:03 PM
  #841
Lundface
Registered User
 
Lundface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
I think obviously having 5 defenceman in the 4-5 million cap hit range is just silly. You should pay a big #1 top dollars like 6.5-7, have two in the 4-5 range and then the rest would be cap friendly hits of 2 or under.
While thats ideal, this defence is easily good enough to win a cup with..on paper.

And that's the problem. The coaches aren't getting anywhere close to enough out of the defence they have

Garrison and Tanev has been good, but Garrison isn't being fully utilized. Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Ballard are flat out underperforming/being misused.

The goaltenders are underperforming now too. I can understand this team not scoring goals at the moment with the lack of talent upfront, but this team is giving up way too many goals for the personnel they have. That is 100% on the coaching staff, and a big reason why its time for a change.

Lundface is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 06:24 PM
  #842
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
And we've been a worse team for it ever since. I have no issues with the Hodgson trade, or the Booth trade (or how he's handled the forward corps in general).

My issue is that we needed a PMD badly so he went out and got us Ehrhoff. Since Ehrhoff's departure we've needed a PMD, and instead we pick up Garrison...good player, whom I quite like, but not what we needed.

It would be akin to spending 5M on Weiss with a healthy Sedin, Kesler and Malhotra, Unnecessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
This team is better at ES now than it was with Ehrhoff, but worse on the PP. I take that trade off. I don't see Garrison as redundant, they needed a big minute defensive Dman past Hamhuis. Now they have 3 stabilizing Ds on each pairing. He was a necessary addition.

I'm mixed on Ehrhoff. He was good, but got abused in the playoffs. Sucked losing him and now looking at the right side D, but if all that we lost was a soft regular season PMD, then I'm ok with it. The point is, it's not like this team is skill deficient without him. Over a large sample, they still have the skill. But now people are acting like this team has a dearth of talent an it's just not the case.

This team still has enough skill to be a skilled team, and is growing its other attributes. It's not all of a sudden devoid of skill. Maybe it's not being brought out, but that's another matter.
I agree with Bleach Clean.

Teams have won cups with guys like Garrison, while we have lost a cup and lost in the playoffs with guys like Ehrhoff.

I think our PP could be fine if the coaches could pull there heads out of there A**es.

But this trade off is better at even strength since Garrison is better defensively and can handle big minutes and big assignments and better for the playoffs for the same reasons and a few more.

Sergei Shirokov is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 07:47 PM
  #843
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,494
vCash: 500
Agreed all around. Garrison <=> Ehrhoff isn't the reason we're losing at all. We still have tons of talent to stack the PP, but the coaching has been very poor, even before 'Hoff walked. We hardly did anything on the man advantage from January 2011 on and when we scored it was against teams like Columbus and Colorado.

VinnyC is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 07:55 PM
  #844
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,983
vCash: 500
Wasn't Ehrhoff -14 in the playoffs?

I'd take him back now that 45% of his salad has been paid, but it was the right move to walk away at his salary demands.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 08:02 PM
  #845
GranvilleIsland
Canucklehead
 
GranvilleIsland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 391
vCash: 500
Gillis needs to step up here. Either fire the coach or add an impact player to the core if this nonchalant play continues.

GranvilleIsland is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 08:08 PM
  #846
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 695
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Wasn't Ehrhoff -14 in the playoffs?

I'd take him back now that 45% of his salad has been paid, but it was the right move to walk away at his salary demands.
really? the first two years were inconsequential, its the last 6 that will be a problem

Verviticus is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 08:11 PM
  #847
Linden
[hello] :)
 
Linden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 36,013
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GranvilleIsland View Post
Gillis needs to step up here. Either fire the coach or add an impact player to the core if this nonchalant play continues.
this is my thinking as well, we need some new life in this team

Linden is online now  
Old
03-17-2013, 08:29 PM
  #848
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,527
vCash: 500
People seem to think it's an easy cause and effect situation where players from 2011 that are no longer here were the keys to our team succeeding. Not very true at all - this team still shows it is capable of being dominant. What we seem to overlook and instead took it for the norm, was the level of play from our core players. Henrik, Daniel, Kesler et al. had career years in 2011 and played the best hockey we've ever seen from them. It was a deviation from the norm. We were so great that year because players were producing well above what they used to contribute and are doing now. We can still be one of the best teams in the league, but we need consistency and great intensity and a desire to win. Sometimes you get the vibe that players and fans alike expect that we can win, rather than put in the work to win.

To be honest, I think Vigneault can do little to turn this around. We know how he lets his players lead and that aside from strategy, he's not there to be a rah-rah kind of guy. He can't suddenly jump in and be more controlling and vocal with the team, I think that will be lost on the guys who have been here a while and seen his other side.

We have a lineup that's thinned out and we need some depth. I don't really know what the moves to make are, or who would really remedy our missing holes, but injuries have mounted up and if you don't react quick enough in this shortened season to address the needs (not too late yet), we'll be out of it in the next 4 weeks.

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 08:45 PM
  #849
Whale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
I don't know what Ehrhoff ya'll are talking about, yes he was good for the PP, but he was also a turnover machine at times, and in the end he wanted to cash in long term more than he wanted to win a cup. You can't force a UFA to sign, and how did he end up here at all?

Oh yeah, Gillis made one of the most lopsided trades in franchise history, Rahimi and White, seriously?

As for the poster who said it is better to have a big contract #1 and a bunch of schills, what happens when your 30 minute mr everything gets injured? Not to mention that these guys are almost impossible to acqire, by HF standards I think that there is only one in the league. Go watch Kesler split Weber and Suter for a bit of a reality check.

Whale is offline  
Old
03-17-2013, 09:02 PM
  #850
Trelane
Registered User
 
Trelane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Salusa Secundus
Posts: 351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
I think obviously having 5 defenceman in the 4-5 million cap hit range is just silly. You should pay a big #1 top dollars like 6.5-7, have two in the 4-5 range and then the rest would be cap friendly hits of 2 or under.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
It's weird, Gillis seems to have this "insurance policy" in effect regarding the defense, so he trades for Ballard as he's not sure if Hamhuis will sign. Then he signs Garrison, in my opinion partly because he's a good player who took less to play here, but also in case Edler doesn't re-sign.
So we get insurance, but in the end we have 4 LH defenceman making 4 million or more. Anyone else see an issue with that?
There is method to Gillis’ apparent D madness. Its called self preservation.

The only reason he has a job as GM is because his predecessor literally ran out of D men. Remember that for better part of that 2nd season under Noonis the club was merrily humming along, comfortably in the playoffs when in quick succession something like 4 D men went down, including 3 of the top 4, some for prolonged periods, if memory serves. They had a brutal 4th quarter and narrowly missed the playoffs.

Taking the helm, MG must have told himself that whatever else happens he would never be caught with an all AHL D. Consequently, he has always been content to have 5 guys paid as top 4 and maintained 8 instead of the usual 7 on the 23 man roster. I thought having Salo was the clincher, but obviously there was more to it since the policy has been continued.

MG was proven right in years past when he’s had occasion where 3 good D men were out at the same time, but now he has more pressing issues. When you regularly park 4.2 in the press-box and the club’s lack of offence begs for more cap allocation to forwards, no question it is high time to reconsider.

Also, the D down on the farm can’t be pleased knowing that so many veterans are ahead of them and that the chance of getting called up is virtually zero absent multiple injuries.


Last edited by Trelane: 03-17-2013 at 09:15 PM.
Trelane is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:22 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.