Comments on: “…and on the second day, Mike Gillis attempted to generally manage”

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:09:52 +0000

Neb – Sundin is just a poor idea for this team. H would have no supporting cast. And I lost faith in the Sedins carrying this team last year, so what is Vigneault going to do? Sundin/Pyatt? Sundin/Pettinger?? Good lord, that’s not solving anything over an 82 game stretch. Conversely, Sundin could go to, let’s say, Edmonton and based on their midrange moves have anyone from Hemsky to Cole riding shotgun. We have no one which, on top of it all, will make trading that much harder for Gillis. And you’re right, the lack of midrange guys is what is truly frustrating. I could deal with a team full of Coles, Brunettes, Vrbatas or Hagmans and be just fine with no “big” names but we don’t have that. Gillis has delivered, effectively, nothing.

Rinslet – Without question this team is now worse then last year. The only upgrade you could argue would be Wellwood and that is assuming he’ll be healthy enough to contribute significantly. But he’s on track to replace Morrison and is THAT an upgrade? And worst of all is the fact that Luongo – the one guy who will REALLY feel the brunt of this – isn’t going to stay here with this collection in front of him. And you can’t blame him; it’s worse then the Panthers squad he left.

So yes, go cry, it’s ok

By: Rinslet

Rinslet — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 07:56:28 +0000

I just want to curl up in a ball and cry.

Same team from last year… except we’re not even sure if 2 of our top 6 guys in Mo and Nazzy will be back this season. Looks worse than last year?

Only hope is he either trades for a good player (unlikely?) or one of our prospects jumps into the league Patrick Kane/Jonathan Toews style or something… *crosses fingers and begins to pray*

By: nebcanuck

nebcanuck — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:28:51 +0000

Honestly, I’d be quite willing to entertain the Sundin option if we have nothing else, at this point in time. But I’m not convinced that we really wanted any of the huge-name players anyways.

What bothers me is that Gillis hasn’t managed to snare any of the mid-range players. His moves look a lot more like Nonis’ experimental pickups than I like to fathom. I’d be game to rebuild in the draft over a long time, if he had made it clear that this was his plan. But for someone who announced his intention to be a top bidder, I’m underwhelmed by what he’s netted thus far. If he can’t set out to do as he said, then what’s going to happen when we aren’t winning, against his hopes?

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:32:48 +0000

I see more people supporting this idea then trashing it. It’s ripe with problems, but their is an upside in his style of play, his durability and more then anything his ability to track other free agents.

Doesn’t matter, he isn’t coming. And Gillis’s failed attempt at bringing in quality offensive talent by putting all his eggs in one basket will, if nothing else, cause Dave Nonis to choke on his own laughter for months.

By: Rod

Rod — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 15:27:36 +0000

Sundin for two years at 20 million?! That’ll turn out like the Canucks’ last similar big-name experiment: Mark Messier. Seriously, Mike Gillis could do MUCH better than making a 37 year old the highest player in the league.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:04:18 +0000

You and me both. We do gotta give the guy one day, but high marks go to a lot of other teams, including a team by two movie guys. But some teams did little to nothing (Dallas, Sharks, Thrashers for instance).

By: GZ Expat

GZ Expat — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:40:32 +0000

I’ve been left entirely underwhelmed by Gillis’ direction…