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

For the third time I Salute our Moneypuck Overlord!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-01-2011, 10:24 AM
  #76
R0bert0 Lu0ng0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,465
vCash: 500
For me the most impressive moves yesterday were the ones Gillis didn't make.

He didn't panic and outbid the Kings for Penner (likely losing a younger and cheaper player with similar offensive talent in Raymond along with picks and prospects), he didn't trade a roster player for a has been like Jason Arnott - instead he traded two mid-round picks and two players signed as unrestricted free agents for a pair of young forwards with a lot of experience, strong work ethics and NHL size and abilities.

Our fourth line - one of the worst in the league at the start of this season - now boasts two guys who are accustomed to playing over ten minutes of even strength time a game, three guys who can contribute on the penalty kill (Higgins played two minutes a game on one of the league's best) and a guy who can go out on the powerplay if need be.

We no longer have an improving two-way player who should not be on the fourth line, we no longer have a prototypical fourth liner who can't handle the puck at all. We have a respectable - even good - fourth line to go with our top three lines which are all in the coversation for the best at their level in the league (when the individuals on those lines are on their games).

Moreover we have options. Lapierre and Glass could play on the third line and Higgins could even play in the top six if necessary.

All of this for one of the Canucks most inexpensive deadline day shopping sprees on record. We didn't give up a recent first rounder, we didn't give up a handful of top 50 draft picks, we simply moved out a couple of players who have fallen down the depth chart all year and a couple of 3rds.

I am totally okay with that cost, and like many I am excited that our "Moneypuck Overlord" positioned the team to be able to have such a modest shopping list - hence the praise going on in this thread.

R0bert0 Lu0ng0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:18 AM
  #77
The Big Foot
Registered User
 
The Big Foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Bhutan
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 500
^ Why do people think Glass can play anywhere other than the fourth line? Just because he has played on the third doesn't mean it's a good idea.

He's been great in his role this year and you couldn't and shouldn't ask for anything more from the guy.

The Big Foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:30 AM
  #78
R0bert0 Lu0ng0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,465
vCash: 500
I'm not saying he's one of our top nine forwards - I'm saying he has earned the coach's trust to play there and he plays a physical, defensively responsible game that could fit there if AV decided to change things up.

I don't see what's so controversial about that. And really, if that's the only thing in my post you can disagree with that's fine - it's not exactly central to my point.

R0bert0 Lu0ng0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:55 AM
  #79
putridgasbag
Grand Poohba
 
putridgasbag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Comox Valley
Posts: 1,200
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeJerry View Post
I don't think we need to hold off for the playoffs to heap praise on MG. The team is better and deeper at every position than at any time in club history (I know that's not saying much). #1 in the league. A nice collection of prospects.

Most importantly, the way the team is viewed from both inside and outside the organization has changed. Players are proud to be part of the team. Players like the twins & Kesler took less $ to stay here. UFA's like Hamhuis & Malhotra leave better offers on the table to sign here.

We may get knocked out in the first round but this team is built for success for a long time. And it's all thanks to one man.
I think that Gillis has done a good job so far but if this team goes out in the first round it is all for naught. I think we should at least hold off deifying him until the goal has been reached.

As for the claim that the Sedins and Kesler took less to play here because of Gillis... Who knows. I think that in the case of the Sedins they might have signed earlier and cheaper with Nonis. Vancouver was a desirable location for a lot of players before Gillis and I am sure it will be after Gillis. I believe that Vancouver has been fairly lucky in that 4 of the last 5 GMs have been solid guys who built decent teams.

putridgasbag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:39 PM
  #80
chopkins
Super Bowl Champs
 
chopkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk February View Post
DING DING DING!

You are a winner! You have officially poseted the dumbest thing I have ever read on this board. Congratulations!

"None of the current prospects you listed have proven anything in the NHL."

THAT'S WHY THEY ARE PROSPECTS.

You don't call a guy with 17 years, 1200 games, and 3 Stanley Cup rings a prospect becuase he's "proven" something in the NHL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanuck87 View Post
^^^ Maybe you didn't understand the point that was trying to be made?
This.



Gillis draftees have played a combined 11 games in the NHL for a total of 2 points (Hodgson and Sauve). That's thousands of games and points below Burke and Nonis draftees combined. Until Hodgson, Schroeder, Rodin, etc. prove themselves in the NHL like the Sedins, Kesler, etc. have, you can't say that Gillis has turned around our drafting.

Dumbest thing you've ever read on these boards? When did you make your account? Yesterday? Give me a break.

chopkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:53 PM
  #81
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,985
vCash: 500
Without wading into the who drafted better debate, I would say that, for me, development is the issue. We never had the luxury of developing prospects in the minors. The entire Canuck history is littered with draft picks who were going to save the franchise and launch us into the elite category of contenders. Some worked out and some were traded before they had the chance to work out.

Gillis has said, many times, he does not want to trade bona fide prospects for short term help. I suppose one could point to Kesler as someone who spent time in the minors and I'm sure there are a couple of others. But what Gillis seems to do is plan for development in the minors. That is the major differnece. It gives our guys time to develop a pro game skill set without having to save the franchise.

ddawg1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 03:07 PM
  #82
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,387
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
And to think people thought Nonis was a great GM

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 03:39 PM
  #83
Andy Dufresne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthVanCanuck View Post
This.

Gillis draftees have played a combined 11 games in the NHL for a total of 2 points (Hodgson and Sauve). That's thousands of games and points below Burke and Nonis draftees combined. Until Hodgson, Schroeder, Rodin, etc. prove themselves in the NHL like the Sedins, Kesler, etc. have, you can't say that Gillis has turned around our drafting.

Dumbest thing you've ever read on these boards? When did you make your account? Yesterday? Give me a break.
The biggest problem with looking at Burke's drafting record as being 2 Sedin's, Umberger, Kesler and Bieksa is that those were the only NHL regulars he ever drafted in the 5 years he was Canuck GM. Umberger doesn't even count based on how that situation played out. That's 1 pick (out of 41 total) outside the first round that ever became an NHL regular.

That said it's NOT dumb to state that Gillis' track record at the draft is unclear at best. If you're point was that we get way too excited about most prospects then you were right on the money, but that's just what fans do (not just Canuck fans). I still remember being excited about Vydareny (hell of a skater!).

Right now I'd say only 1 of Gillis' picks can be called questionable, the rest are ???, and that's just how it is 3 years after the draft (especially without many high picks).

Andy Dufresne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2011, 06:27 PM
  #84
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,387
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthVanCanuck View Post
A quick look at Gillis' work over the past 2.5 years...

2008:

Sedin-Sedin-Pyatt
Naslund-Morrison-Raymond
Burrows-Kesler-Linden
Pettinger-Ritchie-Isbister

Mitchell-Bieksa
Ohlund-Salo
Edler-Krajicek

Luongo
Sanford

2011:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson
Higgins-Malhotra-Hansen
Torres-Lapierre-Glass

Edler-Ehrhoff
Hamhuis-Bieksa
Ballard-Salo

Luongo
Schneider


I bolded who I feel is the better of their counterpart from the other roster. The score is 16-4 for the 2011 team, with the only arguable position being, IMO, Luongo vs. Luongo. Obviously much of the current team remains from three years ago and a lot of their progress is due to natural development. However, the signing of Sundin led to the breakup of Kesler/Burrows, which led to huge improvements in both of their games and the Sedins especially. That's 4 players improved as an indirect result of Gillis signing Sundin. Looking at the overall tradeoff:


In:

Ehrhoff
Hamhuis
Ballard
Malhotra
Samuelsson
Hansen (I know he was already drafted)
Higgins
Torres
Glass
Lapierre
Schneider
(I know)

Out:

Ohlund
Mitchell
Krajicek
Naslund
Morrison
Pyatt
Linden
Pettinger
Ritchie
Isbister
Sanford


I once again bolded the better counterparts. I think there have been enough improvements to give Gillis a lot of credit for the current state of the team. Gone are the useless Isbisters and Ritchies of the 4th line. I won't get into prospects, though I'd say that has improved slightly. Edler/Bourdon/Schneider have been replaced by Hodgson/Schroeder/Tanev.
Honestly, Ehrhoff and Hamhuis are a huge upgrade to Ohlund and Mitchell, which really tips the scales in favour of Gillis.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2011, 06:30 PM
  #85
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
That pettinger ritchie isbister 4th line hurts my feelings.

Crows* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2011, 07:05 PM
  #86
alternate
Registered User
 
alternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
That pettinger ritchie isbister 4th line hurts my feelings.
Why? Heck of a lot better than Hordy-RJ-Rypien

alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2011, 07:09 PM
  #87
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pauser View Post
Honestly, Ehrhoff and Hamhuis are a huge upgrade to Ohlund and Mitchell, which really tips the scales in favour of Gillis.
Agreed. It's not the Ohlund from 98-2002 we're talking about here.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2011, 07:16 PM
  #88
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthVanCanuck View Post
A quick look at Gillis' work over the past 2.5 years...

2008:

Sedin-Sedin-Pyatt
Naslund-Morrison-Raymond
Burrows-Kesler-Linden
Pettinger-Ritchie-Isbister

Mitchell-Bieksa
Ohlund-Salo
Edler-Krajicek

Luongo
Sanford

2011:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson
Higgins-Malhotra-Hansen
Torres-Lapierre-Glass

Edler-Ehrhoff
Hamhuis-Bieksa
Ballard-Salo

Luongo
Schneider


I bolded who I feel is the better of their counterpart from the other roster. The score is 16-4 for the 2011 team, with the only arguable position being, IMO, Luongo vs. Luongo. Obviously much of the current team remains from three years ago and a lot of their progress is due to natural development. However, the signing of Sundin led to the breakup of Kesler/Burrows, which led to huge improvements in both of their games and the Sedins especially. That's 4 players improved as an indirect result of Gillis signing Sundin. Looking at the overall tradeoff:


In:

Ehrhoff
Hamhuis
Ballard
Malhotra
Samuelsson
Hansen (I know he was already drafted)
Higgins
Torres
Glass
Lapierre
Schneider
(I know)

Out:

Ohlund
Mitchell
Krajicek
Naslund
Morrison
Pyatt
Linden
Pettinger
Ritchie
Isbister
Sanford


I once again bolded the better counterparts. I think there have been enough improvements to give Gillis a lot of credit for the current state of the team. Gone are the useless Isbisters and Ritchies of the 4th line. I won't get into prospects, though I'd say that has improved slightly. Edler/Bourdon/Schneider have been replaced by Hodgson/Schroeder/Tanev.
If I can nitpick, I don't think there was ever a point when Burrows was better than Higgins but Kesler wasn't as good as Malhotra.

Shareefruck 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 02:12 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.