Island Nucklehead wrote:Why don't we wait and see how Bo Horvat does before saying trading Schneider was a bad move?
Gillis traded Schneid because he couldn't trade Luo.
It's not logical to make Luo the back up for the entire year and then trade your starter.
The fact that Schneid was dealt for Horvat is irrelevant. It's about Gillis being unable to move Luo.
And trading Schneid for a top 10 pick is an easy trade to make because Schneid is a solid goaltender.
You're being critical of Gillis' trades, and calling the Schneider trade a FAIL, right? I don't care what the circumstances were around the trade itself. You can't call the Schneider-Horvat deal a "FAIL" until you see what Horvat becomes.
Island Nucklehead wrote:With all the rumours surrounding Kesler wanting out, and the Canucks spot in the standings, do you think it's Gillis' fault teams are low-balling him? We'll see how he does in the summer.
When people like general managers smell weakness, they take full advantage of it. Yes, I do hold Gillis a little bit accountable for appearing weak and not keeping his house in order.
So it's Gillis' fault the players have gotten themselves hurt or generally under performed to epic levels this year? And isn't NOT trading Kesler because the offers were shit exactly what Gillis should have done? I'm not sure what you're saying here. Should he have dumped Kesler for nothing?
Island Nucklehead wrote:To me, most of those moves are a lot of MEH. Taylor Ellington plays in Europe. Steve Bernier was regarded highly enough to be offer-sheeted by St Louis. The Ballard trade was a disaster, but the Ehrhoff deal probably got us to the finals. Higgins and Lapierre trades also had a huge impact on this team. We gave up nothing for Booth, except cap space. At the time it was low-risk, high reward.
You can judge Gillis's trades at the time or you can judge Gillis's trade right now. Ultimately though, its the results that count when it comes to whether you keep your job or not.
The Hindsight is strong with this one.
Island Nucklehead wrote:You're acting like Connauton is some kind of top prospect, he's a bottom-pairing guy on Dallas.
I'm acting like Derek Roy is no longer part of the Canuck organization and Dallas has two assets that were previously ours.
You must've been really pissed about adding guys like Higgins and Lapierre then, eh? Some deadline deals work, most don't. Derek Roy was the best player in that trade, and he didn't work out, so he wasn't resigned. Unless you think Connauton or Philippe Desrosiers are going to be studs, I don't think you gave up much for the potential of what Derek Roy could have been.
So far, the Buffaslugs are winning this trade hands down.
Hodgson is averaging 18:10 in ice time this season with 16G, 19A and a loverly -25.
Kassian, 13:31, 11g,8a,-10 and 8 games suspended.
and Kassian is having a hell of a time trying to break into the top 6 (considering how goal starved we have been this season, that's pretty bad).
Yeah they sure are. Winning all the way to the #1 overall draft pick. Fantastic rationale.
Mathonwy wrote:Both Detroit and Pittsburgh have cups in the last decade. Won cup, doesn't matter about trades.
I don't understand this argument. Because Pittsburgh won a cup in 2009 that excuses trading for Morrow last year? Bad trades are bad trades, are they not? Would you be critical of the Roy trade if Vancouver won the cup in 2011? This line of thinking is why Kevin Lowe still has a job...