HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Top 5 Mike Gillis Mistakes

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-15-2012, 06:39 AM
  #1
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Top 5 Mike Gillis Mistakes

Inspired by this CanucksArmy blog: http://canucksarmy.com/2012/10/12/th...ike-gillis-era



What do you feel are the top 5 mistakes of Mike Gillis's tenure? IMO, they are as follows (in no particular order):



1. Bernier: For a player that had notable motivation and skill based issues, it seemed odd to pursue him. Low IQ player expect to be a Top6er?

2. Mitchell - Whenever you have a tough minute cruncher of any variety or style, you keep them. PCS or not, Gillis should have risked it.

3. Weaver - Seemed minor at the time, but letting Weaver walk for nothing seemed like Gillis didn't know what he had.

4. Ballard - All things being equal, this is not a poor trade on its own IMO. However, it can be when viewed with the Mitchell exit/Grabner progressing/Ballard's inability to mesh with the system.

5. O'Brien - Should have dealt him for a pick and not Parent.







The ones that stay with me are Weaver and Bernier. Bernier for getting a low hockey IQ player to play with the twins...? And Weaver just because he was in-house and would have been a great right-shot option moving forward.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 10-15-2012 at 06:45 AM.
Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 07:17 AM
  #2
BrockH
HFBoards Sponsor
 
BrockH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
4. Ballard - All things being equal, this is not a poor trade on its own IMO. However, it can be when viewed with the Mitchell exit/Grabner progressing/Ballard's inability to mesh with the system.
This statement by itself just makes me want to ignore the entire list. How do people not get it? Grabner was not making the team out of training camp. Hence, he would have been claimed off waivers for nothing anyway. Unless you think we should start giving players spots based on potential, when they clearly haven't done anything to earn that spot to date?

Edit: Bernier was a mistake/long shot, but at the same time we only gave up a late 2nd and late 3rd. So not a terrible error in my mind, though probably still the worst in the list.

Ballard/O'Brien were only errors if there were better offers out there, and I don't know if there were. Yes, I'm disappointed with the returns, but we weren't negotiating from a huge point of power.

Weaver...he's 34. Even after a couple okay seasons the "what we had" statement seems to hugely overstate his worth.

I guess, to me a mistake is something that I think was avoidable. Your definition of mistake seems not to take into account circumstances, and instead just to weigh the choice based on 20/20 hindsight. If someone gives me 2:1 odds on a coin flip, and I take the bet, even if I lose that bet I still don't think it was a mistake to make it.


Last edited by BrockH: 10-15-2012 at 07:31 AM.
BrockH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 07:56 AM
  #3
Maccas
Registered User
 
Maccas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: England
Country: England
Posts: 395
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrockH View Post
This statement by itself just makes me want to ignore the entire list. How do people not get it? Grabner was not making the team out of training camp. Hence, he would have been claimed off waivers for nothing anyway. Unless you think we should start giving players spots based on potential, when they clearly haven't done anything to earn that spot to date?
This.
I don't see the Ballard trade as a mistake at all, it is how Ballard has been dealt with which is the issue.
When we lost Ehrhoff we lost a D-man who could skate, someone who could gain the line on the PP and even join the rush. Ballard has the tools to be able to do this too but just isn't allowed to.
By being forced to play an Aaron Rome-esque game they have taken away Ballards strengths and it shows.
To be honest if Ballard was allowed to do things like this more often then I think it would be a massively different story.

Maccas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 07:56 AM
  #4
Bougieman
Registered User
 
Bougieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,451
vCash: 200
Not a bad list.

I'll tell you this, though. If those are the worst crimes he's committed in that period of time, weez laughin'.

Bougieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 08:04 AM
  #5
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrockH View Post
This statement by itself just makes me want to ignore the entire list. How do people not get it? Grabner was not making the team out of training camp. Hence, he would have been claimed off waivers for nothing anyway. Unless you think we should start giving players spots based on potential, when they clearly haven't done anything to earn that spot to date?

Oh I "get it". I'm ok with the trade. I just think it can be viewed as a mistake given how Mitchell and Grabner have adjusted.


Quote:
Edit: Bernier was a mistake/long shot, but at the same time we only gave up a late 2nd and late 3rd. So not a terrible error in my mind, though probably still the worst in the list.

Ballard/O'Brien were only errors if there were better offers out there, and I don't know if there were. Yes, I'm disappointed with the returns, but we weren't negotiating from a huge point of power.

True, but I still feel O'Brien should have been dumped for a pick rather than a project like Parent.


Quote:
Weaver...he's 34. Even after a couple okay seasons the "what we had" statement seems to hugely overstate his worth.

I don't think it does. I think Gillis had a vision for his team and Weaver didn't fit the mold. However, his preference for advanced stats would have outlined Weaver's importance. It was bad timing.


Quote:
I guess, to me a mistake is something that I think was avoidable. Your definition of mistake seems not to take into account circumstances, and instead just to weigh the choice based on 20/20 hindsight. If someone gives me 2:1 odds on a coin flip, and I take the bet, even if I lose that bet I still don't think it was a mistake to make it.


Mistake may be too strong a word because as you've explained, there are valid reasons behind each action regardless of outcome. It may just be that Gillis didn't take the right risks, given the information at hand. So not mistakes so much as missed opportunities.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 09:29 AM
  #6
Yossarian54
Registered User
 
Yossarian54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Australia
Posts: 1,385
vCash: 500
That list is pretty bad, happily for us - which is how I think it is supposed to read. It doesn't read as 'mistakes' so much but 'what moves can we happily pontificate about in hindsight that were actually reasonable ones at that particular point in time'.

The only one in that article I think is a valid misjudgement is the Shirokov dump.

Personally I can only pick out one major one in the last couple of years which is letting Ehrhoff walk. Which has really been discussed ad nauseum.

Yossarian54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 10:15 AM
  #7
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Inspired by this CanucksArmy blog: http://canucksarmy.com/2012/10/12/th...ike-gillis-era



What do you feel are the top 5 mistakes of Mike Gillis's tenure? IMO, they are as follows (in no particular order):



1. Bernier: For a player that had notable motivation and skill based issues, it seemed odd to pursue him. Low IQ player expect to be a Top6er?

2. Mitchell - Whenever you have a tough minute cruncher of any variety or style, you keep them. PCS or not, Gillis should have risked it.

3. Weaver - Seemed minor at the time, but letting Weaver walk for nothing seemed like Gillis didn't know what he had.

4. Ballard - All things being equal, this is not a poor trade on its own IMO. However, it can be when viewed with the Mitchell exit/Grabner progressing/Ballard's inability to mesh with the system.

5. O'Brien - Should have dealt him for a pick and not Parent.







The ones that stay with me are Weaver and Bernier. Bernier for getting a low hockey IQ player to play with the twins...? And Weaver just because he was in-house and would have been a great right-shot option moving forward.
I think that's a good list. At the time I agreed with the decision to let Mitchell walk. In hindsight that was the wrong decision but at the time he was coming off a major concussion and we had him and Salo in our top 4. Every year our defence was decimated with injuries. I thought that we had to start getting younger and healthier on defence.
I'd probably add the Sturm signing as that one looked bad from the very beginning. But there was little damage really as he traded him quickly in the Booth trade.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 10:27 AM
  #8
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,447
vCash: 500
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Garrison
Mitchell - Tanev

Mmmmmm...

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 10:37 AM
  #9
vector209
Registered User
 
vector209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 624
vCash: 500
Ehrhoff. That is all. All other oversights can be forgiven but that. He was that one small part of the machine that kept everything in sync.

vector209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 10:46 AM
  #10
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 5,542
vCash: 50
1) No goon rule. Anti-toughness is just idiotic in sports.

2) Failed to recognize potential in 2010. Elects not to bolster roster for a cup run.

3) M.Schnieder

4) Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo and Wellwood not re-signed.

5) Extends Vignault.

JuniorNelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 10:47 AM
  #11
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,853
vCash: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by vector209 View Post
Ehrhoff. That is all. All other oversights can be forgiven but that. He was that one small part of the machine that kept everything in sync.
I agree. Everything is minor compared to letting Ehrhoff go.

Disclaimer: I am not going to rehash the typical Ehrhoff argument. He was the piece that put us over the top and that's my argument.

shortshorts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:10 AM
  #12
Mitts McCann
Registered User
 
Mitts McCann's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,761
vCash: 500
Lol....you can make an argument in defense of Gillis for all of those.....

Mitts McCann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:16 AM
  #13
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 22,709
vCash: 500
Grabner progressing?

He is what he was went we dealt him. A very talented but extremely lazy player. Looks like he can put up the goals when he feels like it - unfortunately for a good team (Canucks/Panthers) - he doesn't do it nearly enough.

For a "elite team" with no holes, they can afford to carry his lazy butt. In hindsight, it does look like a big mistake getting Ballard - I'd put a fair bit of the blame on Bowness there (as been said, having actually coached him in the past - you'd think of all people, *HE* would not whether Ballard would be a good fit for our system).

Mitchell was still answering the door when he heard the phone rang so giving him a long-term contract (given his prior injury history - forget about the cheapshot he got from Malkin) wasn't really an option.


Last edited by Barney Gumble: 10-15-2012 at 11:22 AM.
Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:37 AM
  #14
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,228
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by vector209 View Post
Ehrhoff. That is all. All other oversights can be forgiven but that. He was that one small part of the machine that kept everything in sync.
This.

Although the one's to watch are the impending Luongo trade and how Kassian develops.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:37 AM
  #15
Grub
First Line Troll
 
Grub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: B.C
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,347
vCash: 500
How about letting go of our best puck moving defensemen at his prime for absolutely nothing.

Erhoff... we sure miss him in the powerplay.

The fact you left out Erhoff and put weaver in there is well...absurd.

Erhoff like a poster said was the machine that kept our face paced offensive style moving during the 2010/2011 season.

Don't know how Mike Gillis could not analyze this.

Mike Gillis is a terrible gm... the fact we still have 12 million tied up in goal tending, 4.2 on a sixth pairing defensemen?

My god, one of the most overrated GM ever.

Grub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:41 AM
  #16
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,207
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniorNelson View Post
1) No goon rule. Anti-toughness is just idiotic in sports.

2) Failed to recognize potential in 2010. Elects not to bolster roster for a cup run.

3) M.Schnieder

4) Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo and Wellwood not re-signed.

5) Extends Vignault.
1) agreed to an extent. We need to play tough, but gooning it up too much is counterproductive.

2) he signed Mats Sundin. What more did you want?

3) small mistake that lasted what? A month?

4) letting Ohlund walk was the right move, he had regressed big time in his final few years here. Letting Mitchell walk was the right move at the time too given his injuries. Letting Salo walk at that price was wise as well, and letting Wellwood walk wasn't a huge loss.

5) not too thrilled with AV especially after last season.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:48 AM
  #17
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,207
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
My list:

1) Steve Bernier - we needed a winger for the Sedins and Bernier appeared to be a good fit. It's too bad we didn't get Backes because Bernier ended up being a disaster.

2) Letting Ehrhoff walk - We have yet to replace the element that he brought to our team. A swift skating puck moving defenseman. We have someone like that in Ballard but we don't use him.

3) Keeping AV - many breakdowns over the past few seasons can be attributed to AV's style and lack of adjustments.

4) Trading Cody Hodgson at the 2012 trade deadline - Hodgson was producing well offensively. Our 2nd line center was hurt and we could have given a larger role to Hodgson and potentially boost his value even more. At the very least we wouldn't be taking a rookie 20 goal scorer off of a playoff offensively inept team.

5) Not addressing the teams offensive weaknesses up front. That hole on the right side, with lack of toughness, has been unfilled for far too long.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:48 AM
  #18
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,228
vCash: 1815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grub View Post
Mike Gillis is a terrible gm... the fact we still have 12 million tied up in goal tending, 4.2 on a sixth pairing defensemen?


1) It's 9.3 mil
2) It's a lockout, he can't trade one of them until a new CBA is in place. Unless you wanted him to accept Schenn straight up for Luongo, in which case we'd have another 4 mil 3rd pairing defenseman.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:48 AM
  #19
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grub View Post
How about letting go of our best puck moving defensemen at his prime for absolutely nothing.

Erhoff... we sure miss him in the powerplay.

The fact you left out Erhoff and put weaver in there is well...absurd.

Erhoff like a poster said was the machine that kept our face paced offensive style moving during the 2010/2011 season.

Don't know how Mike Gillis could not analyze this.

Mike Gillis is a terrible gm... the fact we still have 12 million tied up in goal tending, 4.2 on a sixth pairing defensemen?

My god, one of the most overrated GM ever.
By any reasonable measurement he's one of the better GM's in the league. It's easy to look at his mistakes and overlook his great moves. Letting Ehrhoff walk was definitely a mistake but getting a player like that for Pat White (cough...a previous GM's mistake) was pure magic. Gillis has made some other great moves as well but his biggest success IMO has been to make this a destination where players want to be. We don't land every free agent but we appear to be among the teams that many free agents are interested in signing with.

He's built a team that can compete every year. If he can add a piece or two on a Luongo trade we should be able to take another run this year as well.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 11:52 AM
  #20
Taelin
Resident Hipster
 
Taelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,059
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
My list:

1) Steve Bernier - we needed a winger for the Sedins and Bernier appeared to be a good fit. It's too bad we didn't get Backes because Bernier ended up being a disaster.

2) Letting Ehrhoff walk - We have yet to replace the element that he brought to our team. A swift skating puck moving defenseman. We have someone like that in Ballard but we don't use him.

3) Keeping AV - many breakdowns over the past few seasons can be attributed to AV's style and lack of adjustments.

4) Trading Cody Hodgson at the 2012 trade deadline - Hodgson was producing well offensively. Our 2nd line center was hurt and we could have given a larger role to Hodgson and potentially boost his value even more. At the very least we wouldn't be taking a rookie 20 goal scorer off of a playoff offensively inept team.


5) Not addressing the teams offensive weaknesses up front. That hole on the right side, with lack of toughness, has been unfilled for far too long.
Hodgson was very sheltered in his time here in Vancouver. If we had given him Kesler's minutes, not only would he not be producing as much, but would probably be giving up a lot of goals in return (as he did in Buffalo).

Taelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 12:01 PM
  #21
crazyforhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Inspired by this CanucksArmy blog: http://canucksarmy.com/2012/10/12/th...ike-gillis-era



What do you feel are the top 5 mistakes of Mike Gillis's tenure? IMO, they are as follows (in no particular order):



1. Bernier: For a player that had notable motivation and skill based issues, it seemed odd to pursue him. Low IQ player expect to be a Top6er?

2. Mitchell - Whenever you have a tough minute cruncher of any variety or style, you keep them. PCS or not, Gillis should have risked it.

3. Weaver - Seemed minor at the time, but letting Weaver walk for nothing seemed like Gillis didn't know what he had.

4. Ballard - All things being equal, this is not a poor trade on its own IMO. However, it can be when viewed with the Mitchell exit/Grabner progressing/Ballard's inability to mesh with the system.

5. O'Brien - Should have dealt him for a pick and not Parent.







The ones that stay with me are Weaver and Bernier. Bernier for getting a low hockey IQ player to play with the twins...? And Weaver just because he was in-house and would have been a great right-shot option moving forward.
Mitchell was a writeoff at the time.....we needed dmen and it didnt look like willie was going to play that year......wasnt symptom free until august and by then we were cap tight---had been agressive in signing dmen (hamhuis and ballard-in a very tight dman market) as Willie became avaliable and it was risky if one hit would put Mitchell on the Dl again.......unfortunate but pretty hard to label this as a miss or mistake.


Bernier turned out to be a miss but in a very short market on pwer forwards...looked okay.....turned out to be a suberb 4th liner in the long run..


weaver is still just an okay dman.....dime a dozen imo.... good 6th dman


ballard trade was a gutsy move with Mitchel a UFA and not expected to play again the following year......and we needing two top 4 guys.....

with Hamhuis,Michelak,Martin Gonchar avaliable as the only truly possible top 4 dmen that year ....+ alot of teams desperate for dmen.....was a stroke of genuis to get two top 4 dmen before the season started...heavy price for ballard ...and not playing up to standard....hindsight



SOB was getting rid of a problem and a error prone dman for cap space and possible a talented dman if he turned it around...didnt happen.....pick would have been down the road......hindsight might have been better to get a pick


overall well thought trades aquistions some that didnt pan out and others all about circumstance.

crazyforhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 12:04 PM
  #22
Evo
Bean Bag Jim
 
Evo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 369
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Inspired by this CanucksArmy blog: http://canucksarmy.com/2012/10/12/th...ike-gillis-era



What do you feel are the top 5 mistakes of Mike Gillis's tenure? IMO, they are as follows (in no particular order):



1. Bernier: For a player that had notable motivation and skill based issues, it seemed odd to pursue him. Low IQ player expect to be a Top6er?

2. Mitchell - Whenever you have a tough minute cruncher of any variety or style, you keep them. PCS or not, Gillis should have risked it.

3. Weaver - Seemed minor at the time, but letting Weaver walk for nothing seemed like Gillis didn't know what he had.

4. Ballard - All things being equal, this is not a poor trade on its own IMO. However, it can be when viewed with the Mitchell exit/Grabner progressing/Ballard's inability to mesh with the system.

5. O'Brien - Should have dealt him for a pick and not Parent.







The ones that stay with me are Weaver and Bernier. Bernier for getting a low hockey IQ player to play with the twins...? And Weaver just because he was in-house and would have been a great right-shot option moving forward.
1 - Bernier: Trade seemed alright at the time. To me the mistake was more taking his time getting him signed, leading to the offer sheet from the Blues shenanigans

2/3 - Mitchell, Weaver: I wouldn't have signed them either at the time

4 - Ballard: Didn't like the trade at the time because I thought Gillis overpaid big time, don't like it now for obvious reasons.

5 - SOB: He had just cleared waivers before we traded him. Gillis wasn't getting a pick for him.

My top 5:

1 - Keeping Ballard over Ehrhoff in 2011 summer
2 - Luongo's extension (too long and ended up putting himself in the situation he's in now)
3 - Too liberal with contracts (Rai & Schneider within 3 days of each other, Anthony, etc)
4 - Pro-scouting blunders (Sturm, M. Schneider, Gragnani, Ballard, Alberts especially for the 2010 playoffs)
5 - Not getting enough value in Hodgson trade; also, timing of the trade (personal opinion)

Evo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 12:04 PM
  #23
VinnyC
trust in linden CREW
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 新香
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,313
vCash: 500
I think GMMGs big mistake was Ballard and everything that surrounded it. Simply put, the moment Hamhuis was signed he would be a long shot from getting Top 4 minutes. Making the trade to account for inevitably losing Mitchell was fine, but he should've been traded away after the Cup run so we could re-sign Ehrhoff, even for little value.

Ballard doesn't have Hoffs IQ, passing or shooting ability. They aren't on the same league offensively.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 12:05 PM
  #24
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,207
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taelin View Post
Hodgson was very sheltered in his time here in Vancouver. If we had given him Kesler's minutes, not only would he not be producing as much, but would probably be giving up a lot of goals in return (as he did in Buffalo).
How was he sheltered? Because of his offensive zone starts? Isn't that how an offensive rookie should be used?

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2012, 12:09 PM
  #25
Taelin
Resident Hipster
 
Taelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,059
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
How was he sheltered? Because of his offensive zone starts? Isn't that how an offensive rookie should be used?
Wasn't there a stat saying he was on for twice as many goals against as he was on for goals for?

Taelin 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 05:14 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.