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

Mike Gillis Discussion Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-18-2013, 06:58 PM
  #901
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,826
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
The same way he did in Vancouver and the same way the Sedins have in previous years despite leading the forwards in ice time. A shut down pairing works in concert with a checking line to handle the other teams' top lines while Ehrhoff plays mostly with his team's top 2 lines against other teams' depth players.

Regardless of what adjective you want to use to describe his minutes, the fact remains that on the aggregate he plays against players with the lowest Corsi ratings. And when the argument that he's playing well is based on the idea that his teammates' Corsi ratings suffer when they're not with him, that's a pretty important point to consider.
well yeah, you make good points that the numbers need to be taken with context - but there's still a stark difference with ehrhoff vs his team and foligno/sulzer vs his team (ehrhoff gets partnered with sulzer considerably, and we know what sulzer is from his time here)

Verviticus is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:05 PM
  #902
Outside99*
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
The same way he did in Vancouver and the same way the Sedins have in previous years despite leading the forwards in ice time. A shut down pairing works in concert with a checking line to handle the other teams' top lines while Ehrhoff plays mostly with his team's top 2 lines against other teams' depth players.

Regardless of what adjective you want to use to describe his minutes, the fact remains that on the aggregate he plays against players with the lowest Corsi ratings. And when the argument that he's playing well is based on the idea that his teammates' Corsi ratings suffer when they're not with him, that's a pretty important point to consider.
Good point but doesn't everybody do that?

There is after all a limit to how many minutes you can play someone - so its not necessarily that he's worse defensively but that his comparative advantage* dictates playing the minutes you describe.

* economics definition

Outside99* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:09 PM
  #903
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 18,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
I don't really care about the reasons, (in this case Edler - Ehrhoff getting easier minutes) the fact remains that the team was better at ES (regardless of the Sedins production at ES). It's an instance, much like the twins themselves, where the sum is greater than the value of it's parts. We deploy the twins in the offensive zone, we put Kesler and a shutdown C in the defensive zone, and we enable Edler - Ehrhoff to play soft mintues and rack up the points. I don't really care how it's done, but the bottom line is we were better at ES as a team with Ehrhoff, amongst other things. There is no denying this, at the end of the day we were a better team with him than without. We can't maximize the talents in the same way, as we lost one of those talents due to an arbitrary, internal salary cap. Poor decision and our team has been worse ever since.

Goal differential is but one metric to judge a team's ES ability. Fenwick is another. Raw Corsi is yet another. If the team strings together a bunch of wins, which the happened in 2011, ES differential will inflate accordingly. This, what you really want to say is the team won more. Which is different than saying Ehrhoff caused the team to win more. See the logic?

Aside from opendoor's good catch about save percentage differences, there are other stats making a case for this team. On the whole though, this team is stronger at ES, it's just injured + lesser goaltending + poor PP. Those are the difference makers right now.



Quote:
What putrid stint are you referring to? I don't recall San Jose fans saying he was bad in the playoffs, in fact the vast majority said he was their best defenceman against the Ducks before he came here.

Sorry, his playoff issues have been completely exaggerated and are a convenient form of justification for a very poor managerial decision.

Nope. He was soft then, and he is soft now. That's not exaggeration, that's just what he is. Also, it's unclear when he injured his shoulder during the run, and he wasn't really useful prior to that either. In fact, I think the reason Gillis eventually decided he wasn't worth what he would be asking is because he was severely outplayed by other Dmen during that whole run, and he left a bad impression with everyone about how much they could rely upon him in tough games.


Quote:
That's fine we're 6th in fenwick close, where we 3 years ago in fenwick close? How about 5-5 F/A or goal differential? We are worse with Garrison, who still doesn't really fit in to our top 4 due, again to him being a natural LS D, than we were with the Edler-Ehrhoff pairing.

And I think you're looking at the Garrison signing wrong, for the reasons I've already listed.

It's analagous to signing another goaltender for 4M+, after we trade Luongo and anoint Schneider as the undisputed . Maybe for some reason Lundqvist becomes available next year, and he's willing to sign with Van for 4M per season. Should we do it? According to your philosophy yes, as he's a great player who we're getting good value for. For me, I think it's pointless and redundant given the fact Schneider is our goaltender. Same thing with Garrison when we already have Hamhuis and Edler.

We finished 4th in 2010-2011: http://behindthenet.ca/fenwick_2010....&section=close

So this team being 6th, with worse goaltending, with a worse PP (which could affect momentum at ES), injuries to their 2nd line etc... is impressive. And Garrison has been this team's best Dman this year IMO. He's not "pointless and redundant" when he's actually helping the team.

For a natural LHD, he's been matched with Hamhuis on the right side and has steadied him this year. That brings value. Would you rather go with a much inferior RHD Dman simply because he plays that side? I think that's faulty logic. The point is to make this team better period, and in that sense, Garrison brings quality to the defense, regardless of the side.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:10 PM
  #904
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,826
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Good point but doesn't everybody do that?

There is after all a limit to how many minutes you can play someone - so its not necessarily that he's worse defensively but that his comparative advantage* dictates playing the minutes you describe.

* economics definition
well the argument to be made would be that because of his softer minutes he's able to control play in the way that he does. if he plays half the game against grinders and low quality competition then you would expect these numbers.

nobody is saying hes bad defensively because of these numbers, but rather than ONLY looking at his possession stats might be misleading because of the quality of competition he's against

Verviticus is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:11 PM
  #905
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Good point but doesn't everybody do that?

There is after all a limit to how many minutes you can play someone - so its not necessarily that he's worse defensively but that his comparative advantage* dictates playing the minutes you describe.

* economics definition
No, I wasn't implying that he's bad defensively or anything. I think that's a largely undeserved reputation for him. Ehrhoff's usage makes perfect sense given that it plays to his strengths.

My point was more that I'd be leery of using With Or Without You Corsi numbers to suggest that he's driving the Sabres team given that pretty much any time a teammate is on the ice without him, they're facing tougher matchups than they would with him. It's only natural that their ratings would drop in that situation even if their level of play didn't.

opendoor is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:21 PM
  #906
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 18,125
vCash: 500
I would have liked to see Gillis get Ehrhoff signed, as he was a big part of the team. But I disagree with the notion Garrison is somehow redundant. Look at this defense without Garrison - it's awful. Players that can play 25:00 a night against the opposition's top players and win those minutes are extremely rare and valuable. If you can add such a valuable piece without moving any assets and the dollars are reasonable, it's a complete no-brainer.

Drop the Sopel is online now  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:27 PM
  #907
Outside99*
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
No, I wasn't implying that he's bad defensively or anything. I think that's a largely undeserved reputation for him. Ehrhoff's usage makes perfect sense given that it plays to his strengths.

My point was more that I'd be leery of using With Or Without You Corsi numbers to suggest that he's driving the Sabres team given that pretty much any time a teammate is on the ice without him, they're facing tougher matchups than they would with him. It's only natural that their ratings would drop in that situation even if their level of play didn't.
We're on the same page then.

Outside99* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:29 PM
  #908
King of the ES*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Garrison's on the other hand is done when he's 33 so there's little chance of him regressing due to age.
I guess that depends on expectations. Garrison's already our 4th defenceman, so there's really not a lot of downside. IMO, it's already very clearly a bad contract.

King of the ES* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:30 PM
  #909
Outside99*
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
well the argument to be made would be that because of his softer minutes he's able to control play in the way that he does. if he plays half the game against grinders and low quality competition then you would expect these numbers.

nobody is saying hes bad defensively because of these numbers, but rather than ONLY looking at his possession stats might be misleading because of the quality of competition he's against
Agreed and that was the experience here and there nothing inherently wrong with that - you are after all supposed to exploit the enemies' weaknesses (I still can't get out of my head Kane and Toews jumping over the boards mere seconds after AV sent the 4th line out).

Outside99* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:42 PM
  #910
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 18,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
I guess that depends on expectations. Garrison's already our 4th defenceman, so there's really not a lot of downside. IMO, it's already very clearly a bad contract.
$4.6mil is a bad contract for a #3 dman just entering his prime? Maybe if the cap was $40mil.

Willis Mitchell made $3.5mil when the cap was 50% lower than it is right now. I didn't regret that signing for a minute. IMO Garrison brings about the same value to a team Mitchell did at that time. Mitchell is a bit better defensively but Garrison has the big shot and can chip in 10-15 goals.

Drop the Sopel is online now  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:45 PM
  #911
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,826
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
I guess that depends on expectations. Garrison's already our 4th defenceman, so there's really not a lot of downside. IMO, it's already very clearly a bad contract.
you have a Really Super Amazing Terrible Awful Mega Bad opinion then!!

like there's no connection between that opinion and reality in any way. i dont even have a point to attack, its just like "i really think jon sim was a 2nd line centre"


Last edited by Verviticus: 03-18-2013 at 07:55 PM.
Verviticus is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 07:58 PM
  #912
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,096
vCash: 500
Guys we could have Ehrhoff and Garrison... but instead we have Keith Ballard sitting in the press box WASTING 4.2 million bucks!

That is terrible management, keeping ballard this long when he clearly doesn't fit, MG is too afraid to make a coaching change so it should've been obvious a long time ago Ballard doesn't fit, Ehrhoff on the other hand fit perfectly!

I just view that as bad management, same with the goaltending situation and not being able to bring in an impact top 6 forward since 2008... Every area of the team has been subject to poor management IMO over the last 2 years. Oh and there's only one guy in the farm that looks promising, after criticizing the drafting and developing of the guy that brought us Edler, Schneider, Grabner, Raymond, Hansen, Bourdon(rip), found Burrows in just 4 years one of which was a lockout...

BoHorvatFan is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 08:07 PM
  #913
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 18,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
Guys we could have Ehrhoff and Garrison... but instead we have Keith Ballard sitting in the press box WASTING 4.2 million bucks!

That is terrible management, keeping ballard this long when he clearly doesn't fit, MG is too afraid to make a coaching change so it should've been obvious a long time ago Ballard doesn't fit, Ehrhoff on the other hand fit perfectly!

I just view that as bad management, same with the goaltending situation and not being able to bring in an impact top 6 forward since 2008... Every area of the team has been subject to poor management IMO over the last 2 years. Oh and there's only one guy in the farm that looks promising, after criticizing the drafting and developing of the guy that brought us Edler, Schneider, Grabner, Raymond, Hansen, Bourdon(rip), found Burrows in just 4 years one of which was a lockout...
Completely wrong. It was Ehrhoff vs 5.3m+, not Ehrhoff vs Ballard. Gillis just didn't think he was worth that cap-hit.

What's better for asset management? Invoking a team wide covenant that all the vets have bought into, or having a salary free for all every time you have to sign a player? Think about that.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 08:11 PM
  #914
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
What's better for asset management?
Whichever one has us winning more championships.

 
Old
03-18-2013, 08:16 PM
  #915
John Bender*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,713
vCash: 500
Gillis is afraid to dump Ballard due to his ego. It's a running problem with Gillis - he is completely unable to admit when he ****s up. Ballard should never have been on this years roster.

John Bender* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 08:17 PM
  #916
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,826
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Whichever one has us winning more championships.
hm, do we have any magical machines to tell us the numbers

Verviticus is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 08:18 PM
  #917
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Completely wrong. It was Ehrhoff vs 5.3m+, not Ehrhoff vs Ballard. Gillis just didn't think he was worth that cap-hit.

What's better for asset management? Invoking a team wide covenant that all the vets have bought into, or having a salary free for all every time you have to sign a player? Think about that.
Ehrhoff at 5.2 vs Ballard at 4.2.... give me Ehrhoff every day of the week.


You want to talk about asset management? paying Booth, Ballard, and a back up goalie a minimum of 12.4 million(13.7 if Luongo is the back up that week) is good asset management?

I'm sure you can allocate 1 million of that pile of waste to a puck moving d-men that fit here perfectly and was a huge part of our transition game and style of play.

BoHorvatFan is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 08:26 PM
  #918
LolClarkson*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanGrossman View Post
Gillis is afraid to dump Ballard due to his ego. It's a running problem with Gillis - he is completely unable to admit when he ****s up. Ballard should never have been on this years roster.
That's right.

Also, it goes to show that just because we started Schnieder in the playoffs didn't mean he officially took over as #1. Even though the media and fans jumped to that conclusion.

Because by that logic, Ballard should have been traded,waived or bought out before this season because he sat in the playoffs.

LolClarkson* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 08:31 PM
  #919
John Bender*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
That's right.

Also, it goes to show that just because we started Schnieder in the playoffs didn't mean he officially took over as #1. Even though the media and fans jumped to that conclusion.

Because by that logic, Ballard should have been traded,waived or bought out before this season because he sat in the playoffs.
I think Gillis is pretty open about his attempts to trade Luongo. I think the team HAD decided that Schneider was their guy. Perhaps that's changed now that Gillis is realizing nobody wants to give up anything of the ilk Gillis wants for Luongo.

Another **** up by Gilly. Misjudged the market for LUongo by a mile. Now the team is starting Luongo in attempts to convince us that he is the #1 guy - probably because there are only halfway decent offers for Schneider.

John Bender* is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 09:06 PM
  #920
vanuck
#Gaunce4GM
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,112
vCash: 500
This is pretty funny. First they harp on the guy for signing Garrison, then Ehrhoff, and now Ballard. Who's next - Hamhuis?

If he was really so afraid to admit a mistake, Booth wouldn't be here. You know, the guy who so many of you love to pile on him for getting.

vanuck is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 09:55 PM
  #921
Fat Tony
Fire Benning
 
Fat Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
Also, it goes to show that just because we started Schnieder in the playoffs didn't mean he officially took over as #1. Even though the media and fans jumped to that conclusion.
And Schneider's agent.

Fat Tony is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 10:38 PM
  #922
Diamonddog01
Diamond in the rough
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Goal differential is but one metric to judge a team's ES ability. Fenwick is another. Raw Corsi is yet another. If the team strings together a bunch of wins, which the happened in 2011, ES differential will inflate accordingly. This, what you really want to say is the team won more. Which is different than saying Ehrhoff caused the team to win more. See the logic?
I've said the team is better with Ehrhoff than without and that Ehrhoff was one of several factors that made the team better. If the team won more with him, then yes, I would say that we were a better team. Fairly straightforward deductive logic.

Team wins more with Ehrhoff and healthy 3rd line C
Winning = being better

Therefore

The team is better with Ehrhoff and a healthy 3rd line C

Ehrhoff was a huge factor, followed by a healthy Malhotra.

My ultimate point was that as he was such an amazing fit, and did contribute to the Canucks being a much better team than they currently are, and it was shortsighted to let him walk over 0.7K per season or whatever the difference was. I see that recognizing has brought the Gillis apologists out in full force, but it seems as though many are desperately trying to convince yourselves that losing Ehrhoff was no biggie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Nope. He was soft then, and he is soft now. That's not exaggeration, that's just what he is. Also, it's unclear when he injured his shoulder during the run, and he wasn't really useful prior to that either. In fact, I think the reason Gillis eventually decided he wasn't worth what he would be asking is because he was severely outplayed by other Dmen during that whole run, and he left a bad impression with everyone about how much they could rely upon him in tough games.
Saying he's soft is quite different from stating he is putrid, or was horrible in the playoffs, etc. He was never going to be the second coming of Scott Stevens, but I don't think he was severely outplayed at all, and this is a case of revisionist history. He wasn't great, but you make it sound like he was the worst player on the team each and every game. That wasn't the case, and he was injured. Again, he was the best player vs the Ducks when he was a Shark, and he had a shoulder injury which required offseason surgery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
So this team being 6th, with worse goaltending, with a worse PP (which could affect momentum at ES), injuries to their 2nd line etc... is impressive. And Garrison has been this team's best Dman this year IMO. He's not "pointless and redundant" when he's actually helping the team.

For a natural LHD, he's been matched with Hamhuis on the right side and has steadied him this year. That brings value. Would you rather go with a much inferior RHD Dman simply because he plays that side? I think that's faulty logic. The point is to make this team better period, and in that sense, Garrison brings quality to the defense, regardless of the side.
Is he really helping the team that much? We are worse in the standings. The sv% comment was more tongue-in-cheek than anything else, but I do think that having stable, balanced pairings with defencemen playing their natural sides is better than the island of misfit toys Bowness and AV seem to be taking at the moment.

I wouldn't say that Hamhuis - Garrison pairing as been amazing, and once again the Edler - Bieksa pairing is bleeding goals against.

I would rather have a cheaper and inferior RHD that makes each pairing more effective, yes. You are looking at these players individually and out of context, both Ehrhoff and Garrison. I'm looking at thing holistically, or from a big picture perspective, and how certain parts result in a sum greater than the value of the individual pieces, as we saw with Ehrhoff when he was paired with Edler and saw icetime with the Sedins.

Diamonddog01 is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 11:15 PM
  #923
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
This is pretty funny. First they harp on the guy for signing Garrison, then Ehrhoff, and now Ballard. Who's next - Hamhuis?

If he was really so afraid to admit a mistake, Booth wouldn't be here. You know, the guy who so many of you love to pile on him for getting.
This post makes no sense, are you saying Gillis made a mistake by getting Booth?(which would be correct) but has proven he's not afraid to admit a mistake by keeping Booth????

I don't get it.

BoHorvatFan is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 11:42 PM
  #924
vanuck
#Gaunce4GM
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
This post makes no sense, are you saying Gillis made a mistake by getting Booth?(which would be correct) but has proven he's not afraid to admit a mistake by keeping Booth????

I don't get it.
What I meant was he wasn't afraid to admit the signing of Sturm was a mistake.

vanuck is offline  
Old
03-18-2013, 11:44 PM
  #925
luongo321
Registered User
 
luongo321's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,171
vCash: 50
Gillis should have fired AV after last season. Unacceptable play from jan 2012 onwards. No compete. Just can't reach that extra gear consistently anymore.

Also, he totally ****ed up the goalie situation. Schneider would have brought us back a hell of a lot last season. Can you imagine what we could have gotten in return for a schneider/hodgson trade? Hell, even a luongo/hodgson trade in the offseason. It was quite clear that the canucks were probably going to trade a goalie after last season so they should have done a hodgson/goalie trade package. Gillis ****ed this up. Keep making our players take discounts and then keeping Ballard in the pressbox.Wonderfuljob.


Last edited by luongo321: 03-18-2013 at 11:49 PM.
luongo321 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 07:11 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.