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

How much demerits is a first round knock out worth against a GM ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-03-2013, 02:52 PM
  #51
Haka
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 319
vCash: 500
Are you all blaming AV for trapping this year when we had no second line? Clearly AV is capable of producing a team who can score goals when there is the personel to do so.

And I'm not really harping on Gillis either. I like what he's done with the team. A lot of what happens is just luck and injuries. The one big criticism I have of Gillis going into this season, is not having a backup plan for Malhotra's retirement. It was clear that he was basically sure Malhotra wouldn't be an option this season, or at least a very low chance. Schroeder does not fit the big 3rd line good defensive center role. We should have solved that somehow. If we had a guy capable of doing the heavy lifting all year, I think the look of the team would have been much different.

That being said, long term, Henrik focusing on becoming a 60ft player might be better for our success in the long run.

Basically what I'm saying is, I like Gillis, but ***** happens, I hope my team wins.

Haka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 04:38 PM
  #52
luongoisdaman
Registered User
 
luongoisdaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,094
vCash: 500
One Jay Demerit.

luongoisdaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 06:34 PM
  #53
King of the ES*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank View Post
I dont mind if you disagree but pullllllease Brian Burke and Dave Nonis - gi ve me a break -- Nonis couldnt make the playoffs here with the star studded cast that Burke assembled for him - can t have it both ways? If I am not mistaken Dan Cloutier profitted nicely from his gift deal from ole Burkie. Niether Burke or Nonis came close to the success Gillis has head here after taking over a team that did not make the playoffs. As for the Leafs one playoff performance in 5 years since Burke went there - riding a goalie drafted by Ferguson - if you think the Leafs are an upper echelon team you need to go back to Hockey 101 my friend - 5 years to wait for thatt??? If that happened in Van he would be ridden out of town...
Lots of wrong things about this post.

1 - Nonis did make the playoffs. He was only here for 3 seasons, first of all. After the lockout the Canucks didn't make the playoffs, so Nonis retooled by making perhaps the best trade in this franchise's history by acquiring Roberto Luongo, signing Willie Mitchell to a contract, and going on to win the division in '07 when virtually the whole world expected Calgary to.

2 - Dan Cloutier. I can't stress enough that it was a completely different state of affairs in the NHL over those years. The $CAD was worth $0.60, most of the Canadian teams were on the verge of bankruptcy, and there were essentially 3 - 5 teams spending money on free agents; Detroit, Colorado, NYR, Philly, NJ. That's about it. That was the competitive landscape. The Canucks could not compete. They didn't have money.

3 - On levels of success. Yes, obviously, Gillis has had the most success. But is that because of Mike Gillis, or is that because he got the job when he did? A lot of people say that Brian Burke rode the coattails of his predecessor in Anaheim to get a Cup ring - Gillis has been even more reliant on previous regimes. 5 years later, and 4/6 of the top-six are from Burke/Nonis' days, both goalies, Edler, Bieksa, Raymond, Hansen, and I'm probably missing someone. Gillis has really not done much at all to alter the core of this team.

King of the ES* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 06:42 PM
  #54
King of the ES*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grumbler View Post
I wouldn't consider them "worst playoff team in the NHL". Certainly teams like maple leafs, islanders are much worse than they are. But would be a big travesty to lose to the sharks considering the history of playoff failures the sharks had are even worse than ours.
Based on what? Inexperience? That's about all you can stand on, really. The difference between Toronto and Vancouver this year was 2 points. NYI? 4 points.

In fact, Toronto had 4 more ES wins than Vancouver did, and 2 less loser points.

King of the ES* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 06:53 PM
  #55
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Based on what? Inexperience? That's about all you can stand on, really. The difference between Toronto and Vancouver this year was 2 points. NYI? 4 points.

In fact, Toronto had 4 more ES wins than Vancouver did, and 2 less loser points.
You probably also think LA was the worst playoff team last year.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 07:00 PM
  #56
Spectrefire
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Last night was a flat-out embarrassment. Getting eliminated by the Sharks, who I personally rank as the worst playoff team in the NHL, should rank up there with this franchise's biggest travesties. AV would obviously be fired, probably not Gillis, though, even though he is clearly the one more responsible for this team failing to improve/win a Cup.
Soooo... you know absolutely nothing about hockey? Good to know.

The Sharks are a very good playoff team. Niemi has had a Vezina type season, and any team with as deep of a center depth as they have should be considered a serious threat.

Thorton, Couture, Pavelski, Gomez. That's a VERY enviable center depth for any team in this league.

Spectrefire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 07:10 PM
  #57
IComeInPeace
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: LA
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,204
vCash: 500
I wouldn't say the Sharks are the worst team in the playoffs, but...
1) they had a better team 2 seasons ago
2) Thornton and Marleau are gone
3) key guys from that team (Clowe and Murray) have moved on

Sure a guy like Couture is better, but not enough to offset the above.

On paper this team is not as good as the Sharks team from two years ago, that's why Wilson was a seller, and not a buyer at the deadline.

They may however play a better team game, and be better suited for the game today (closer checking, less penalty calls).

If the Canucks lose again in the 1st round, our team is to blame. The fact the Kings won the Cup last yr was the worst thing to happen to us at that point. It made it easy to say "see we lost to another really great team."

With the age of our key players, and taking into consideration that Kesler may have a short stay at the top because he's potentially not physically suited for the type of game he has to play to be most effective, I think we could have done more to capitalize on the opportunity we have.

But, I'd like to take this opportunity to say the world is always bleakest for hockey fans after a game 1 playoff loss.

"WE MUST CHILL."

IComeInPeace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 07:31 PM
  #58
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Lots of wrong things about this post.

1 - Nonis did make the playoffs. He was only here for 3 seasons, first of all. After the lockout the Canucks didn't make the playoffs, so Nonis retooled by making perhaps the best trade in this franchise's history by acquiring Roberto Luongo, signing Willie Mitchell to a contract, and going on to win the division in '07 when virtually the whole world expected Calgary to.

2 - Dan Cloutier. I can't stress enough that it was a completely different state of affairs in the NHL over those years. The $CAD was worth $0.60, most of the Canadian teams were on the verge of bankruptcy, and there were essentially 3 - 5 teams spending money on free agents; Detroit, Colorado, NYR, Philly, NJ. That's about it. That was the competitive landscape. The Canucks could not compete. They didn't have money.

3 - On levels of success. Yes, obviously, Gillis has had the most success. But is that because of Mike Gillis, or is that because he got the job when he did? A lot of people say that Brian Burke rode the coattails of his predecessor in Anaheim to get a Cup ring - Gillis has been even more reliant on previous regimes. 5 years later, and 4/6 of the top-six are from Burke/Nonis' days, both goalies, Edler, Bieksa, Raymond, Hansen, and I'm probably missing someone. Gillis has really not done much at all to alter the core of this team.
Oh man, there is so much that I agree with in this post that I am just going to say thanks for taking the time to look rationally at the Nonis vs Gillis era so that I don't have to type it out again.

Until Gillis has to find replacement for the core players he inherited from the previous management, I will always be reluctant to call him a "great GM". Great contract negotiator? Sure. But how great can you truly be when you inherit 4 of your top 6 forwards and 2/3 of your 3rd line, both of your goaltenders, and 2 of your top 4 D? Not to mention he has struggled mightily to add fill in the rest of the top 6 forwards in the five years he has been here. Lets see how he does when Sedins, Kesler, and Burrows finally need replacing ...

CanaFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 07:36 PM
  #59
GrogZilla
Registered User
 
GrogZilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 308
vCash: 500
Gillis has done a lot of positive things for this organization that tend to get overlooked.

He's done an excellent job of at least his 1st round picks.
Hodgson (now Kassian) Schroeder Jensen Gaunce all looking like they'll be solid NHL players.
After some of the draft records we've had over the year, it's nice to see actual NHL players being drafted.

Tanev & Corrado looking like solid NHL D for years to come.

Several other late round picks, free agent signings that look like they may turn into players.

If you're going to give out demerits for 1st round exits, you need to balance it out with positive marks for young player acquisition.
what's the opposite of demerits? Brownie points?

He's spent money on off ice things. Going all out to turn this into a class organization that looks after its players.

He has certainly made mistakes, but in the history of Canuck GM's he may be at the top of the list.
I for one wouldn't be in a rush to replace him, way too easy to end up with a guy who turns out to be a real disaster.

GrogZilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 07:36 PM
  #60
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Getting eliminated by the Sharks, who I personally rank as the worst playoff team in the NHL, should rank up there with this franchise's biggest travesties.
I must say that you have a lot of unique opinions.... I think very few people will agree with you that the Sharks are the worst team in the playoffs, or that losing this series would be one of the franchise's biggest travesties.

The Sharks were 9th best in terms of betting odds for winning the Stanley Cup, while the Canucks were 8th. That would reflect the polling of many people who are willing to put money behind their opinions.

The Canucks should be slight favourites over the Sharks. Thus losing this series would be a disappointment that should result in changes being made, but given the often disappointing history of the franchise, wouldn't rank particularly high on the travesty list.

As for the original question - certainly if the Canucks lose in the first round again, somebody will likely take the fall for it. In that case I'd say that AV is likely gone, and that will buy Gillis one more year to make some better progress with a new coach. Probably depends on how the series goes too. If we lose in four, and score 4-5 goals the entire series, that's going to result in a major overhaul I'd assume.

Zarpan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 07:48 PM
  #61
LiquidSnake*
Agent of Chaos...
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Lots of wrong things about this post.

1 - Nonis did make the playoffs. He was only here for 3 seasons, first of all. After the lockout the Canucks didn't make the playoffs, so Nonis retooled by making perhaps the best trade in this franchise's history by acquiring Roberto Luongo, signing Willie Mitchell to a contract, and going on to win the division in '07 when virtually the whole world expected Calgary to.

2 - Dan Cloutier. I can't stress enough that it was a completely different state of affairs in the NHL over those years. The $CAD was worth $0.60, most of the Canadian teams were on the verge of bankruptcy, and there were essentially 3 - 5 teams spending money on free agents; Detroit, Colorado, NYR, Philly, NJ. That's about it. That was the competitive landscape. The Canucks could not compete. They didn't have money.

3 - On levels of success. Yes, obviously, Gillis has had the most success. But is that because of Mike Gillis, or is that because he got the job when he did? A lot of people say that Brian Burke rode the coattails of his predecessor in Anaheim to get a Cup ring - Gillis has been even more reliant on previous regimes. 5 years later, and 4/6 of the top-six are from Burke/Nonis' days, both goalies, Edler, Bieksa, Raymond, Hansen, and I'm probably missing someone. Gillis has really not done much at all to alter the core of this team.
In Nonis' 3 seasons he made the playoffs once. Traded away about 204 -2nd rd picks for rentals that he had no intention of retaining and all that made no impact.

Brian Burke made some solid moves that has set this team up. Yet he could never for the life of him address the goalie issue and also let Umberger essentially walk for the garbage he traded for him.

You may think Burke wouldn't want to come here, but there isn't no chance that ownership or majority of discerning fans would want him back anyways.

His ego is worse than its ever been. Perfect example is of him being in Afganistan for day 1 of free agency.

If you're going to use Mitchell as a guy who Nonis signed instead of him wanting to come home, then Gillis Gf Hamhuis and Garrison.

LiquidSnake* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:10 PM
  #62
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post
In Nonis' 3 seasons he made the playoffs once. Traded away about 204 -2nd rd picks for rentals that he had no intention of retaining and all that made no impact.
Ah yeah, the 2nd round picks were given away like candy by Nonis. Trades the 46th overall pick for 170 minutes of Mika Noronen. Ouch.

Zarpan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:15 PM
  #63
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by luongoisdaman View Post
One Jay Demerit.
Who's Jay..?

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:31 PM
  #64
King of the ES*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarpan View Post
Ah yeah, the 2nd round picks were given away like candy by Nonis. Trades the 46th overall pick for 170 minutes of Mika Noronen. Ouch.
What'd we give up for Derek Roy, again?

That'll go down in history as a big, big mistake, too. Don't look now, but Connauton's got 9 points in 12 games on the Texas Stars, including 2 goals and 3 points in 3 playoff games. Bad, bad trade.

King of the ES* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:37 PM
  #65
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,687
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
What'd we give up for Derek Roy, again?

That'll go down in history as a big, big mistake, too. Don't look now, but Connauton's got 9 points in 12 games on the Texas Stars, including 2 goals and 3 points in 3 playoff games. Bad, bad trade.
loll

Verviticus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:50 PM
  #66
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarpan View Post
Ah yeah, the 2nd round picks were given away like candy by Nonis. Trades the 46th overall pick for 170 minutes of Mika Noronen. Ouch.
He picked a good time to hand them out because if you follow the trail, barely any of them turned into good hockey players.

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:56 PM
  #67
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrogZilla View Post

If you're going to give out demerits for 1st round exits, you need to balance it out with positive marks for young player acquisition.
what's the opposite of demerits? Brownie points?
This thing has merit.


LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 08:58 PM
  #68
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
He picked a good time to hand them out because if you follow the trail, barely any of them turned into good hockey players.
#61 (Wayne Simmonds) for Brent Sopel was pretty bad as was #46 (Jonas Enroth) for Mika Noronen.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 09:05 PM
  #69
GrogZilla
Registered User
 
GrogZilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
This thing has merit.

16 teams made the playoffs & all but 2 of them (NY up & coming I) & (TO just happy to be here Leafs) think they have a chance to win the Stanley Cup.

13 of them are going to be disappointed.

You don't fire the GM for failing to win the hardest prize in pro sports.

GrogZilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 10:30 PM
  #70
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
#61 (Wayne Simmonds) for Brent Sopel was pretty bad as was #46 (Jonas Enroth) for Mika Noronen.
I will give you Simmonds but Enroth is the worst goal tender in the national hockey league

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2013, 10:37 PM
  #71
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
I will give you Simmonds but Enroth is the worst goal tender in the national hockey league
On the pathetic Sabres, he just had .917 and .919 Sv% the last two years. He's not even close to the worst goaltender in the league. He's one of the better back-ups in fact.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 12:30 AM
  #72
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
On the pathetic Sabres, he just had .917 and .919 Sv% the last two years. He's not even close to the worst goaltender in the league. He's one of the better back-ups in fact.
There was a TSN bad goals top 10 compilation in 2010 and Enroth was on for 5 of them I believe. Im trying to find it. It was bad.

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 02:18 AM
  #73
TheDiver*
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrogZilla View Post
Gillis has done a lot of positive things for this organization that tend to get overlooked.

He's done an excellent job of at least his 1st round picks.
Hodgson (now Kassian) Schroeder Jensen Gaunce all looking like they'll be solid NHL players.
After some of the draft records we've had over the year, it's nice to see actual NHL players being drafted.

Tanev & Corrado looking like solid NHL D for years to come.

Several other late round picks, free agent signings that look like they may turn into players.

If you're going to give out demerits for 1st round exits, you need to balance it out with positive marks for young player acquisition.
what's the opposite of demerits? Brownie points?

He's spent money on off ice things. Going all out to turn this into a class organization that looks after its players.

He has certainly made mistakes, but in the history of Canuck GM's he may be at the top of the list.
I for one wouldn't be in a rush to replace him, way too easy to end up with a guy who turns out to be a real disaster.

1. Hodgson looks like he is an NHLer. Kassian...the jury is still out. He looks like Jim Sandlak most nights.
Schroeder...same thing. He could be Brandon Reid for all we know has shown little offense. And Gaunce has not played. Jensen is another question mark. The fact is, the playoffs are here and there are not a tonne of Gillis picks in the lineup (Just Cannata and Corrado, both due to injuries), and none in the top 9.

His best move in terms of youth? Signing Tanev

What do you mean late round picks who "look like" they can play? They all "look like" they can play. That's how they get drafted.

2. His personnel moves HAVE NOT been solid.

Here is the Mike Gillis All-Star Team outside of draft picks:


Sturm---Roy----Torres (who was subsequently let go)
Booth---Sundin (past his prime)---Higgins
Lapierre---Ebbett---Wellwood
Weise---Malhotra----Sestito

Hamhuis---Garrison
O'Brien---Ehrhoff (who he subsequently let go)
Ballard---Tanev
Barker


I would say he has about a C rating right now.


Plus...dont' forget his stupid off-ice decisions such as naming Roberto Luongo as Captain.

TheDiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:58 AM
  #74
VanCanucks14
Registered User
 
VanCanucks14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,903
vCash: 500
I always read the title as dermatitis.

VanCanucks14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 04:18 AM
  #75
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
He picked a good time to hand them out because if you follow the trail, barely any of them turned into good hockey players.
Although our drafting hasn't been superb, we probably would have picked different players, and there's probably a 30+% chance of a 2nd round pick turning into a useful regular at least.

Zarpan 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 11:45 PM.

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.