HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Is Mike Gillis a good GM?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2013, 12:06 PM
  #201
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
I'd put him as a middle of the pack GM. Let's see what this next season brings.

  Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:07 PM
  #202
Drij
Registered User
 
Drij's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,739
vCash: 500
I'd say he is average.

Drij is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:08 PM
  #203
HarrisonFord
Lost a bet
 
HarrisonFord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,480
vCash: 500
Slightly below average

HarrisonFord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:15 PM
  #204
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,879
vCash: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
Very true. They will claim them for his predecessors while ignoring the glaring "Out of Playoffs" they sported while in Vancouver and their new team.

No GM is perfect, but most of what Gillis bashers attack him for are revisionist hindsight on moves perceived to be good at the time they were made. There are legit issues, but no one is perfect.
I agree, I remember the Booth trade in particular people thought it was an amazing steal to get a top 6 winger for that. It is to bad he has had health and consistency issues. I said earlier I think he is a meh GM he has done some real good things and some real bad things and I think they even out.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:19 PM
  #205
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHudlinator View Post
I think they main reason you will find people calling Gillis bad is because they feel he isn't responsible for the Canucks doing that well. So showing them those numbers doesn't prove them wrong.
Then they'd be absolutely wrong, wouldn't they. In 2007/08 the Canucks finished 10th last and out of the playoffs, thus Dave Nonis was fired for his inept efforts. Along comes Mike Gillis, I don't personally like the man because of his attitude but that's entirely different than his GM skills, and changes out a whole wack of players. Listed below.

Out went

- Markus Naslund
- Brendan Morrison
- Trevor Linden
- Brad Isbister
- Byron Ritchie
- Lukas Krajicek
- Jeff Cowan
- Mike Weaver
- Aaron Miller

In came

- Pavol Demitra
- Steve Bernier
- Mats Sundin
- Kyle Wellwood
- Ryan Johnson
- Darcy Hordichuk
- Shane O'Brien

"Under Gillis' watch, the core assembled by Brian Burke took a big step forward in 2008-09, losing in the second round. Young players like Alex Edler, Kevin Bieksa and Alex Burrows all took great leaps forward offensively, while Jannik Hansen became a regular checker. Gillis' signings were mostly good, as a team that had struggled to score in 07-08 suddenly became a top-ten scoring team. That was as much about internal development as it was the additions of Demitra and Sundin, though. Demitra was a wash for Naslund, but even a diminished Sundin was clearly an improvement over Brendan Morrison in decline.

So, the team got better. A lot of that was natural development but a fair bit was up to better forwards. Call Gillis' 2008 a solid first effort - he found quality replacements for fading stars as well as improved depth players. The team still had flaws but it was notably better than it was before."

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:23 PM
  #206
GeeoffBrown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,948
vCash: 500
Personally, I think the Canucks fired the wrong guy this off-season. This makes me happy, seeing as I hate the Canucks.

GeeoffBrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:23 PM
  #207
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHudlinator View Post
I agree, I remember the Booth trade in particular people thought it was an amazing steal to get a top 6 winger for that. It is to bad he has had health and consistency issues. I said earlier I think he is a meh GM he has done some real good things and some real bad things and I think they even out.
He's had three glaring mis-steps in his time as the Canucks GM in my opinion.

1. Trading for Ballard five days before free agency, needed more paitience.
2. Keeping Alain Vigneault too long.
3. His handling of the goaltending situation last year, should have moved Schneider last summer.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:26 PM
  #208
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeoffBrown View Post
Personally, I think the Canucks fired the wrong guy this off-season. This makes me happy, seeing as I hate the Canucks.
You don't fire a GM that's put a team together that's accomplished 100+ points, five years running. Pro-rated last year. He definitely fumbled the goaltending situation last year, but his good has outweighted his bad IMO.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:42 PM
  #209
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
He's had three glaring mis-steps in his time as the Canucks GM in my opinion.

1. Trading for Ballard five days before free agency, needed more paitience.
2. Keeping Alain Vigneault too long.
3. His handling of the goaltending situation last year, should have moved Schneider last summer.
1. I can agree with that. The uncertainty of Mitchell's health necessitated action, but patience probably would have been better.
2. AV went to the cup, coached a follow up President's trophy and got knocked out by LA with Daniel injured. Axing him at that point for winning more games in 2 straight years than anyone else would have been a knee jerk move.
3. I don't agree. Terms changed. Until the CBA recapture penalty was created, Luongo was still tradeable. The situation was forced.

Nash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:46 PM
  #210
archangel archangel
Registered User
 
archangel archangel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,199
vCash: 1100
His rep took a hit this season. Most people believed he should have gotten more for schneider and could have if he took the hit and traded him to Edmonton or Calgary. Vancouver has more questions than answers and he is on short leash this year

archangel archangel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:46 PM
  #211
FTB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
You don't fire a GM that's put a team together that's accomplished 100+ points, five years running. Pro-rated last year. He definitely fumbled the goaltending situation last year, but his good has outweighted his bad IMO.
You make excellent points, however I think I'm going to have to defer to the unbiased opinion of the guy that outright hates our team.

FTB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:48 PM
  #212
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,879
vCash: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
He's had three glaring mis-steps in his time as the Canucks GM in my opinion.

1. Trading for Ballard five days before free agency, needed more paitience.
2. Keeping Alain Vigneault too long.
3. His handling of the goaltending situation last year, should have moved Schneider last summer.
I think he has made a couple other very poor choices but like most things on HF he isn't as bad as the mob thinks he is.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:53 PM
  #213
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,879
vCash: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
Then they'd be absolutely wrong, wouldn't they. In 2007/08 the Canucks finished 10th last and out of the playoffs, thus Dave Nonis was fired for his inept efforts. Along comes Mike Gillis, I don't personally like the man because of his attitude but that's entirely different than his GM skills, and changes out a whole wack of players. Listed below.

Out went

- Markus Naslund
- Brendan Morrison
- Trevor Linden
- Brad Isbister
- Byron Ritchie
- Lukas Krajicek
- Jeff Cowan
- Mike Weaver
- Aaron Miller

In came

- Pavol Demitra
- Steve Bernier
- Mats Sundin
- Kyle Wellwood
- Ryan Johnson
- Darcy Hordichuk
- Shane O'Brien

"Under Gillis' watch, the core assembled by Brian Burke took a big step forward in 2008-09, losing in the second round. Young players like Alex Edler, Kevin Bieksa and Alex Burrows all took great leaps forward offensively, while Jannik Hansen became a regular checker. Gillis' signings were mostly good, as a team that had struggled to score in 07-08 suddenly became a top-ten scoring team. That was as much about internal development as it was the additions of Demitra and Sundin, though. Demitra was a wash for Naslund, but even a diminished Sundin was clearly an improvement over Brendan Morrison in decline.

So, the team got better. A lot of that was natural development but a fair bit was up to better forwards. Call Gillis' 2008 a solid first effort - he found quality replacements for fading stars as well as improved depth players. The team still had flaws but it was notably better than it was before."
I think the main argument you are missing here is that the core was there when he was brought in. Now of course pro Gillis/ Canuck fans will say he brought in some good depth players to fill in the blanks and the anti Gillis people will say many of the players he brought in wanted to go to Van he just had to sign the paper.

The truth is some where between he brought in several very good players(the best example is Erhoff) but many of the major ones did want to go to Van before they made it to UFA (Garrison, Hamhius) but he didn't screw it up.

I think he is pretty average at this point but it isn't a black and white issue as he has done good things and bad things.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:54 PM
  #214
Lucbourdon
Kefka cheers for Van
 
Lucbourdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,960
vCash: 500
Other then the luongo contract.

he is the best GM in the league at signing rfas + Ufas.
He is also the second worst GM (Behind feaster) at trading.
All the extra stuff like the sleep doctors should be our owners credit for paying for them.

He is an average GM.

Lucbourdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 12:56 PM
  #215
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHudlinator View Post
I think he has made a couple other very poor choices but like most things on HF he isn't as bad as the mob thinks he is.
I agree. Not talking to Roberto before deciding on trading Cory is maybe the biggest for me. I'm pretty sure things can get smoothed over since Luongo is a true professional, but this whole season has been so taxing on Roberto, I can see why he needs time to absorb it. I just hope the sideshow media can leave it be part way through the season and the relationship happy to the point that he won't want to exercise his out clauses in a few years.

Nash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:06 PM
  #216
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHudlinator View Post
I think the main argument you are missing here is that the core was there when he was brought in. Now of course pro Gillis/ Canuck fans will say he brought in some good depth players to fill in the blanks and the anti Gillis people will say many of the players he brought in wanted to go to Van he just had to sign the paper.

The truth is some where between he brought in several very good players(the best example is Erhoff) but many of the major ones did want to go to Van before they made it to UFA (Garrison, Hamhius) but he didn't screw it up.

I think he is pretty average at this point but it isn't a black and white issue as he has done good things and bad things.
The core was there yes, the point you and most of the other people are missing is that they accomplished nothing under Nonis the three previous years. That's why Nonis was fired. Crosby and Malkin are two of the best players in the league, currently, but they can't win a Cup by themselves. You have to surround your best players with a group that can win. This is where Nonis failed and Mike was more successful, that's all I'm saying.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:09 PM
  #217
Nexus
Registered User
 
Nexus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: Finland
Posts: 205
vCash: 500
Well, I sure wouldn't like him being GM of my team.

Nexus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:10 PM
  #218
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
1. I can agree with that. The uncertainty of Mitchell's health necessitated action, but patience probably would have been better.
2. AV went to the cup, coached a follow up President's trophy and got knocked out by LA with Daniel injured. Axing him at that point for winning more games in 2 straight years than anyone else would have been a knee jerk move.
3. I don't agree. Terms changed. Until the CBA recapture penalty was created, Luongo was still tradeable. The situation was forced.
When you make a long term committment to a player such as they did with Luongo, you don't turn around a year later and try to trade him. They should have traded Schneider last summer. He let the situation go on for the entire year when he shouldn't have, regardless if the rules changed under the new CBA.

As I said, when the organization hitched their ride to Luongo, they needed to stay the course. If Chicago can win a Cup with Crawford, or Detroit can win with Osgood, the Canucks can win with Lu if they put a better team infront of him.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:11 PM
  #219
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexus View Post
Well, I sure wouldn't like him being GM of my team.
You preferred Joe Nieuwendyk?

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:16 PM
  #220
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Other then the luongo contract.

he is the best GM in the league at signing rfas + Ufas.
He is also the second worst GM (Behind feaster) at trading.
All the extra stuff like the sleep doctors should be our owners credit for paying for them.

He is an average GM.
Luongo doesn't have a bad contract, if that's the case then Ken Holland is an idiot two times over for signing Zetterberg and Franzen to similar contracts. Under the rules of the last CBA these contracts were allowed and sanctioned by the NHL.

Where he screwed up is trying to trade that contract, there-in lies the problem! Under the new rules, they are almost impossible contracts to trade. As mentioned, Zetterberg, Franzen, Hossa, Keith, Parise, Suter etc etc all have similar contracts, but no one mentions them because they aren't trying to be traded.


Last edited by Falconator: 07-07-2013 at 01:47 PM.
Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:37 PM
  #221
Howard Beale
Registered User
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NugentHopkinsfan View Post
He had 20 million in cap space when he walked in the door and a core including great goaltending and coaching in place. All he had to do was sign a couple second liners and depth guys without screwing up to put the team into the second round.

You give any GM a young core consisting of 100 point producing Sedins and great two way number two center play and a good defence(better than it is now) and results will come.

And even with all that we only made it past the second round 1 time, what makes you think he can rebuild a team, develop his own core and then add the pieces to put it over the top when he couldn't even manage just the third step?

Yes he took advantage of the Ehrhoff gift, yes he signed Hamhuis but he started with Salo, Mitchell, Ohlund and IMO the defence is worse today than when he started, the top forwards are exactly the same just older and the goaltending the same.
You're talking from hindsight. He didn't inherit 100 point Sedins and a "great two way number two center". He inherited 75-80 point Sedins and a Ryan Kesler with a career-high of 37 points. They were players with potential, yes, but the moves he made were instrumental in helping them to reach their potential. They have specifically said that having Sundin was a major influence in taking their game to the next level, plus Gillis put lots of money into off-ice player development, and acquired Ehrhoff who was important to the powerplay's success.

In 2008, few people expected the Sedins to ever break 90 points, never mind each winning an Art Ross, and Henrik putting up 112 points. They were 27 years old and had only broken 80 points once. To assume they would have reached the peak they did regardless of any moves made by the GM is illogical.

The team he inherited had only 4 proven top-6 players (Sedins, Naslund, Morrison), and two of them left that off-season (Naslund and Morrison).

Here's a reminder of what the 2008 Canucks rosters was like, the team that Gillis inherited:

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary

I see 9 players on the team that were on the 2011 squad (plus Luongo, and Schneider who was in the system).


As for Ohlund, Salo and Mitchell, which one do you think he should have kept? Ohlund was on the decline and got a 7 year offer from Tampa Bay (and has scored a total of 18 points since 2009 when he left, missing 2 entire seasons to injury). Instead of making an absurd offer like that to keep him, Gillis acquired Ehrhoff for pennies. The next season Mitchell walked after being badly concussed, and it was thought that he might never be the same again. Replacing him with Hamhuis was the smart move IMO. And two seasons later, Salo at age 37 (after a career in which he has sustained over 40 injuries), signed with Tampa Bay for $7.5M over 2 years, almost twice the yearly salary he made with the Canucks. Matching that would have been a huge risk, and replacing him with Garrison is an upgrade at this point in Salo's career. Players age and decline, and Gillis made smart moves with the defensemen, letting players walk and replacing them at the right times in their careers, instead of holding on too long.

Howard Beale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:59 PM
  #222
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
When you make a long term committment to a player such as they did with Luongo, you don't turn around a year later and try to trade him. They should have traded Schneider last summer. He let the situation go on for the entire year when he shouldn't have, regardless if the rules changed under the new CBA.

As I said, when the organization hitched their ride to Luongo, they needed to stay the course. If Chicago can win a Cup with Crawford, or Detroit can win with Osgood, the Canucks can win with Lu if they put a better team infront of him.
I've advocated for trading whoever yields the best return from the start. Saying they should have traded Luongo though kind of ignores the fact that he is the guy that put this in the media to begin with. As professional as Luongo has been for pretty much everything else, this was a lapse in judgement on his part. Just by saying he was open to waiving his no trade clause, he caused a media whirlwind. Canucks fans know that Gillis likes operating in stealth and that is when he is most effective. The media circus truly steered the valuation and potential return. The scrutiny involved would make it tough on any GM to make a move for him.

But yes, with some of the goalies that have won the cup, you don't need the Vezina winner on your squad to win.

Nash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 02:10 PM
  #223
A1LeafNation
Thanks Boston.
 
A1LeafNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
You don't fire a GM that's put a team together that's accomplished 100+ points, five years running. Pro-rated last year. He definitely fumbled the goaltending situation last year, but his good has outweighted his bad IMO.
Remind me when he did that. I know Burke and Nonis put that core in Vancouver together, don't know when Gillis did that.

A1LeafNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 02:16 PM
  #224
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1LeafNation View Post
Remind me when he did that. I know Burke and Nonis put that core in Vancouver together, don't know when Gillis did that.
I believe he was the GM starting in 2008/2009, the year previous this same core you speak of finished with 88 points.

2008/09 - 100pts
2009/10 - 103 pts
2010/11 - 117 pts
2011/12 - 111 pts
2012/13 - pro-rated to over 100

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 02:19 PM
  #225
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 106,751
vCash: 500
I would say he is below average GM

Blackhawkswincup 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 07:16 PM.

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.