HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

The Doug Gilmour Trade

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-15-2011, 06:27 PM
  #1
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 32,330
vCash: 500
The Doug Gilmour Trade

In honor of Gilmour's induction into the HHOF, it is fitting to revisit what is probably the biggest trade in NHL history (in terms of bodies being moved).

http://www.hockeydraftcentral.com/1982/82134.html
Quote:
Announced he was leaving Calgary Flames on Jan. 1, 1992, because he was unhappy with team's refusal to renegotiate his contract and was disappointed with an arbitrator's decision to award him $750,000 for 1991-92 rather than the $1 million he was asking. The walkout prompted Calgary to send him to Toronto as the key player in a 10-player trade on Jan. 2, 1992, making it the largest trade of players in NHL history
January 2, 1992:
Toronto acquires Doug Gilmour, Jamie Macoun, Ric Nattress, Kent Manderville and Rick Wamsley from Calgary for Gary Leeman, Alexander Godynyuk, Jeff Reese, Michel Petit and Craig Berube.



Although the Leafs failed to reach the Cup finals during Gilmour's six-year tenure with the team, he enjoyed his most productive seasons of his career in 92-93 and 93-94, capturing the Selke in '93.

While I understand that the Flames were dealing from a position of weakness with Gilmour going public with his demands to be traded, I am puzzled as to why Calgary settled for a struggling Gary Leeman in return for one of their top players.

At the time of the trade, Gilmour was producing at a point per game pace with 38 points in 38 games. After the trade, he produced 49 points in 40 games.

Leeman had 20 points in 34 games before the trade. After the trade, he scored only 2 goals and 9 points in 29 games with the Flames. Leeman wouldn't last long with the Flames as they'd trade him a year later to Montreal for Brian Skrudland.

Ziggy Stardust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2011, 06:53 PM
  #2
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,546
vCash: 500
Yeah that was a horrible trade for Calgary no doubt.

I just have to say, Gilmour is almost Christ-like in Toronto. Yeah its been a slow 45 years that the most revered player since 1967 never even took us to the Cup final but either way Gilmour is loved here like he's a legend.

But what's he like in St. Louis or Calgary? Flames fans, what do you think of Gilmour personally? I have always wondered what the general consensus is in those cities. He left them both via trades and he left on a controversial note both times.

I don't know Gilmour on a personal level. I know he's on his third marriage which might not tell the whole story but it might be something that Flames fans wouldn't be shocked by.

I am interested because you wouldn't be caught dead saying anything that isn't praise worthy of Gilmour in Toronto. In Toronto they bash Vince Carter, Bryan McCabe etc. till the cows come home but I have never heard a bad word said about Dougie.

How is he revered in the other cities he played that he left turbulently?

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2011, 07:21 PM
  #3
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 32,330
vCash: 500
I'm unaware of what happened with Gilmour in Calgary besides a contract squabble, but it appears that he felt disrespected by the Flames. Isn't his arbitration case with Calgary considered to be one of the more volatile cases? I seem to recall hearing that Gilmour was almost in tears after the Flames ripped him to shreds at his arbitration hearing.

If you read his hockeydraftcentral.com profile (linked in the original post), it details what happened in St. Louis that resulted in his trade, something him or the Blues organization can't entirely be faulted for. The Blues got a far worse return when they dealt Gilmour to Calgary. I guess you can call it even seeing how the Blues had ripped off Calgary for Brett Hull months earlier.

Ziggy Stardust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2011, 09:06 AM
  #4
Johnny Engine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,387
vCash: 500
One thing that I've always wondered about is how the Flames managed to get so bent over on the rest of the trade.

How highly were Michel Petit and Alexander Godynyuk regarded at the time? Petit seems like MA Bergeron: a suitcase with ok offensive numbers but a hideous +/-(for what it's worth), and I really can't find any evidence that Godynyuk was ever good. Is that worth giving up a solid defenseman like Macoun, when you're already taking a downgrade on a problematic Gilmour?

Question being, why did the Flames start in a position of weakness, and then keep digging a hole?

Johnny Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2011, 10:33 AM
  #5
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,026
vCash: 500
nothing about that trade, except that gimour had to be moved, made sense at the time either. gilmour was criminally underrated at the time, but gary leeman? after his injuries, it was like cheechoo in the years after his rocket year.

as for michel petit, think zarley zalapski-- teams saw his physical abilities and kept acquiring him thinking he would capitalize on it and be elite. even as late as '92, it was like, "if this big strong offensively gifted d-man can put it all together... could we have a poor man's larry robinson?" turns out he was more of a physical patrice brisebois. decent point producer and puck mover, not even close to a difference maker.

i remember seeing the trade and thinking, did the news report forget the key part of the deal coming to calgary? after gilmour/leeman, the flames got easily the worse d-man and the inferior back up goalie. the prospect swap (manderville/godynyuk) was a wash at best, and the only useful piece the flames got, role player craig berube, they gave away after a year.

still a weird trade considering the good (considering the circumstances) returns they got for vernon (chiasson), nieuwendyk (iginla), fleury (regehr), suter (jeep patrick, nylander, zalapski), roberts and kidd (cassels and giguere), even the macinnis trade (housley) wasn't as much of a complete bag of crap. i guess the flames did basically give away mccrimmon, mullen, otto (FA), and makarov though.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2011, 11:25 AM
  #6
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
nothing about that trade, except that gimour had to be moved, made sense at the time either. gilmour was criminally underrated at the time, but gary leeman? after his injuries, it was like cheechoo in the years after his rocket year.

as for michel petit, think zarley zalapski-- teams saw his physical abilities and kept acquiring him thinking he would capitalize on it and be elite. even as late as '92, it was like, "if this big strong offensively gifted d-man can put it all together... could we have a poor man's larry robinson?" turns out he was more of a physical patrice brisebois. decent point producer and puck mover, not even close to a difference maker.

i remember seeing the trade and thinking, did the news report forget the key part of the deal coming to calgary? after gilmour/leeman, the flames got easily the worse d-man and the inferior back up goalie. the prospect swap (manderville/godynyuk) was a wash at best, and the only useful piece the flames got, role player craig berube, they gave away after a year.

still a weird trade considering the good (considering the circumstances) returns they got for vernon (chiasson), nieuwendyk (iginla), fleury (regehr), suter (jeep patrick, nylander, zalapski), roberts and kidd (cassels and giguere), even the macinnis trade (housley) wasn't as much of a complete bag of crap. i guess the flames did basically give away mccrimmon, mullen, otto (FA), and makarov though.
The worst part of the McCrimmon trade is that they flipped that pick with New Jersey and drafted Trevor Kidd while the Devils drafted Martin Broudeur.

Edit. The pick itself was a 2nd rounder though (David Harlock).

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2011, 03:09 PM
  #7
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 32,330
vCash: 500
The Flames certainly gutted themselves (and Doug Risebrough was a terrible GM, just as he continued to be in Minnesota). Just look at how quickly that team dissolved after their Cup win in 1989. I thought trading MacInnis for Housley was a huge downgrade for Calgary. Another huge blow to that franchise was losing Gary Suter. Their blueline was never the same after that.

Toronto really did improve drastically with the addition of Gilmour. They got some help with other additions as well but Gilmour was largely responsible for bringing some respectability back to the Maple Leafs franchise, with some help from the Calgary Flames.

Ziggy Stardust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2011, 12:06 AM
  #8
Herb25*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
The Blues should've never traded Gilmour.

Herb25* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2011, 03:39 PM
  #9
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,546
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herb25 View Post
The Blues should've never traded Gilmour.
They had very little choice.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2011, 03:51 PM
  #10
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Engine View Post
One thing that I've always wondered about is how the Flames managed to get so bent over on the rest of the trade.

How highly were Michel Petit and Alexander Godynyuk regarded at the time? Petit seems like MA Bergeron: a suitcase with ok offensive numbers but a hideous +/-(for what it's worth), and I really can't find any evidence that Godynyuk was ever good. Is that worth giving up a solid defenseman like Macoun, when you're already taking a downgrade on a problematic Gilmour?

Question being, why did the Flames start in a position of weakness, and then keep digging a hole?
The answer is most likely the reason for more trades than any one issue, money. Toronto took on veteran players and gave back guys who weren't making much in comparison. The idea that Risebrough had no idea what he was giving up in talent compared to what he was receiving never made sense to me.

mooseOAK* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2011, 04:23 PM
  #12
Johnny Engine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK View Post
The answer is most likely the reason for more trades than any one issue, money. Toronto took on veteran players and gave back guys who weren't making much in comparison. The idea that Risebrough had no idea what he was giving up in talent compared to what he was receiving never made sense to me.
You're probably right, but I'm sure if you asked Risebrough to make an honest prediction for the players involved in the trade, you'd probably get a scenario something like:

Leeman settles into a 50-60 point top-6 player, Petit a reliable PPQB for a few years, Berube would energize the dressing room, Godynyuk is an NHLer, and Reese would be a 30-game backup.
On the other end, Gilmour is a ppg player and wears out his welcome in 3 years, leading to another trade, Nattress and Macoun hit a downslope and play on the bottom pairing within a year or so, Manderville amounts to nothing, and Walmsley fades away.

In that scenario, Toronto pays for a forward upgrade with Petit, with some bonus veteran depth on defense. They definitely win the trade, but it isn't a fleecing.
I can't imagine how cash-strapped a team would have to be to knowingly trade a franchise player and a defensive fixture for a pack of crap.

Johnny Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2011, 05:13 PM
  #13
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,382
vCash: 500
This circumstances around this trade, combined with the babysitter incident, are why Gilmour had to wait to get into the HHOF.

I believe itís the only case in modern NHL history where a player under contract walked out on his team mid-season for financial reasons. However well things might have worked out in Toronto afterward, it didnít speak well for his character and is a major black mark on his career.

Holding out while under contract to start a season is bad enough, but to walk out on your team and teammates mid-season because you donít like your contract is inexcusable.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2011, 05:38 PM
  #14
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 32,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
This circumstances around this trade, combined with the babysitter incident, are why Gilmour had to wait to get into the HHOF.

I believe itís the only case in modern NHL history where a player under contract walked out on his team mid-season for financial reasons. However well things might have worked out in Toronto afterward, it didnít speak well for his character and is a major black mark on his career.

Holding out while under contract to start a season is bad enough, but to walk out on your team and teammates mid-season because you donít like your contract is inexcusable.
It is reminiscent of what happened with Kirk Muller and the Islanders, which ironically also resulted in him being dealt to the Toronto Maple Leafs.
http://www.hockeydraftcentral.com/1984/84002.html
Quote:
Muller was never happy during his short stint with the New York Islanders, which began after he was traded to the team by Montreal on April 5, 1995. Besides not wanting to play for a losing team, Muller had been looking to renegotiate his contract. The Islanders were unwilling to offer anything more than a four-year, $8.7 million deal, which Muller's agent, Mike Barnett, rejected. Just 15 games into the 1995-96 season, the situation came to a head when Muller demanded a trade.

Unwilling to let him remain with the team, Islanders general manager Don Maloney and head coach Mike Milbury sent Muller home to California with the intention of trading him. The Islanders executives were concerned that Muller's negative attitude would reflect poorly on the team, particularly since he was not playing as well as he could. On Dec. 2, 1995, Maloney was fired and replaced by Darcy Regier, who was told to clean up the Muller mess by making a trade. Regier was soon replaced by Milbury, who ordered Muller to return to the team on Dec. 20, 1995.

Muller refused to return, and the Islanders suspended him without pay. Milbury looked for a trade, but accused Barnett of sabotaging deals by telling other teams what Muller's terms would be. On Jan. 6, 1996, Milbury announced that he would not trade Muller until he agreed to report to any team that obtained him. Milbury also insisted that Muller honor his three-year, $6.2 million (Canadian) contract.

Milbury had tried to send Muller to Edmonton, but Barnett had told the Oilers that Muller did not want to play there and would insist on a contract renegotiation. Finally, on Jan. 23, 1996, the Islanders made a three-way deal with Toronto and Ottawa, enabling Muller to resume his career. First, the Islanders sent future considerations to Toronto in exchange for Ken Belanger and Damian Rhodes. The Islanders then traded Rhodes and Wade Redden to Ottawa in exchange for Don Beaupre, Martin Straka and Bryan Berard. The Islanders then sent Muller and Beaupre to Toronto to settle the future considerations and complete the trade.

Ziggy Stardust is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:54 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.