I'm just curious, which members of the Ottawa "core" did they move in the re-tool? Is it Danny "I killed my best friend" Heatley you are referring to?

If the Sens had moved Alfredson at any point in the past five years I could see your point, but moving the Sedin's is not a "re-tool".
- 1970vintage

Depends what you get for them...

Took the core way too far. Dale Weise along with other "core guys" who have done nothing at the NHL level should not make a "core" list. And these guys who have no experience aren't exactly Seth Jones and Nathan Mackinnon.

Depends what you get for them...
- KB3Point0

No it doesn't, trading the Sedins would completely change the identity of the team, that is not a "re-tool". I'm not saying that I wouldn't trade the Sedin's if it made the team better, only that what the other guy was saying makes no sense.

My core would be:



Everyone else is available.

wonders how creative Gillis is going to Be with LUONGO...?
... will he be delt before Draft?

wonders how creative Gillis is going to Be with LUONGO...?
... will he be delt before Draft?
- Canuckfan2006

He just may end up being bought out.

No it doesn't, trading the Sedins would completely change the identity of the team, that is not a "re-tool". I'm not saying that I wouldn't trade the Sedin's if it made the team better, only that what the other guy was saying makes no sense.

My core would be:



Everyone else is available.
- 1970vintage

Exactly. If a complete overhaul is the direction which management chooses, I think you have to get rid of them. GMMG and co believe they need to move a few pieces, you keep them.

He just may end up being bought out.
- Canuckleafer

When i look at Gillis' trade record since he got to Van, i just don't see any great moves. His signigns have been pretty good, but overall as a GM he hasn't impressed me that much. The Luongo thing puts a huge blemish on his record too.

When i look at Gillis' trade record since he got to Van, i just don't see any great moves. His signigns have been pretty good, but overall as a GM he hasn't impressed me that much. The Luongo thing puts a huge blemish on his record too.
- clark_griswold

If you take hindsight out of the equation, every single one of his trades were cause for excitement before AV got ahold of the acquisitions & sabotaged their careers.

http://www.robthehockeygu...ike-gillis-trade-history/

i watch the canucks quite a bit, but i don't claim to know as much as you fans obviously.

When i look at Gillis' trade record since he got to Van, i just don't see any great moves. His signigns have been pretty good, but overall as a GM he hasn't impressed me that much. The Luongo thing puts a huge blemish on his record too.
- clark_griswold

I don't know, 5 years, 5 NW title, 2 Prez and within a game of winning the Cup.

I'm pretty good with that.

Sure there has been some stinkers, but he added some good players and didn't overpay via trade.

Booth for SAmmy and a bag of pucks
Ehrhoff for White
Lappy for a pick
Higgins for a pick
Krijcek for SOB

Just to name a few.

If you take hindsight out of the equation, every single one of his trades were cause for excitement before AV got ahold of the acquisitions & sabotaged their careers.
- DrChristianTroy

Hindsight is 20/20 but people should remember what was happening at the time of these trades as well:

Ballard: The Canucks were desperate for quality D-men. At the time Ballard was a top 4 d man that could hit and had some offensive up side. It was a toss up on who was going to stay Grabner or Raymond and Gillis went with Raymond. Bernier was useless, the 1st round pick hurt, but like I said the Canucks were desperate for defenceman.

Booth: The Canucks traded 2 aging soon to be UFA vets on the decline for a top six 30 goal scorer. Even though Booth has been a bust so far, at the time of the trade most Canucks fans were pretty happy with the trade.

Hodgson: There were alleged behinds the scenes stuff here with Cody and at the time the Canucks were pretty deep down the middle (Sedin, Kesler, Paulsson, Lapierre, Malhotra, Schroader) and they were coming off getting man handled by Boston in the final. Gillis traded for a potential top 6 power forward. While the timing of that trade was a little off, I still don't think we can thorw Gillis under the bus on this one quite yet. I still think Kassian has the potnetial to be an impact top 6 forward.

I wonder how Panthers fans feel about the Ballard deal?

Bernier- did jack all down there
Grabner- was given the boot
Howden- hasn't done anything as of yet.

Even in the Ballard deal Vancouver made out better than the have Panthers so far.

I don't know, 5 years, 5 NW title, 2 Prez and within a game of winning the Cup.

I'm pretty good with that.

Sure there has been some stinkers, but he added some good players and didn't overpay via trade.

Booth for SAmmy and a bag of pucks
Ehrhoff for White
Lappy for a pick
Higgins for a pick
Krijcek for SOB

How much did he have to do with all the success? that's like saying nonis did a way better job than burke in TO since Nonis made the playoffs while burke didn't. My point was MAJOR trades (ie: Luongo). Just asking for opinions on how he has done, or if you would have faith in him doing a major retooling. He has done some okay tweaking, but as for a full overhaul he hasn't shown much in the way of major trades IMO

Just to name a few.
- IanEsplen

[quote=clark_griswold]
damn my post didn't go through..i was just referring to his major trade history, not tweaking. Are you guys confident in him retooling?

Plus he didn't have much to do with that success - that's like me saying Nonis did more than Burke did since he was the one who actually made the playoffs

I like much of your core. However, for me, Schroeder does not make the list. Neither does Jensen. But Edler does. So does Hansen. I'm okay with Weise - totally understand your logic there. But Tanev stays too IMO.

So guys I am willing to move IF the price is right: Burrows, Higgins, Bieksa.

Guys I want to move even if the price ISN'T right: Booth, Ballard, Luongo.

Guys I can go either way with: Jensen, Schroeder, Weise, Rodin

Weise as a core We need a real 4 th line

Higgins as a must keep

A bunch of players that have never played as must keeps
- VANTEL

Yep, agreed.

I wonder how Panthers fans feel about the Ballard deal?

Bernier- did jack all down there
Grabner- was given the boot
Howden- hasn't done anything as of yet.

Even in the Ballard deal Vancouver made out better than the have Panthers so far.
- IanEsplen

They might have made out better on the ice but considering Ballard comes with a 4.2m cap hit even that is highly debatable. One thing for sure, Grabner would make our team instantly better. throwing in Howden as a prospect turns that deal into the worst of the Gillis era.

I like much of your core. However, for me, Schroeder does not make the list. Neither does Jensen. But Edler does. So does Hansen. I'm okay with Weise - totally understand your logic there. But Tanev stays too IMO.

So guys I am willing to move IF the price is right: Burrows, Higgins, Bieksa.

Guys I want to move even if the price ISN'T right: Booth, Ballard, Luongo.

Guys I can go either way with: Jensen, Schroeder, Weise, Rodin
- edge100

Why no Jensen?

He's without question their top prospect, and the only one with 1st line potential—although I suspect he tops out as a 2nd liner.

And why no Schroeder?

He showed a lot of promise this season, despite both AV and Arniel not using him properly. Obviously you trade him if the return is worth it, but I imagine his trade value isn't all that high right now.

Rodin is gone. His body can't hack the NA game. Headed back to Sweden and might not even receive a qualifying offer.

I'm probably the biggest Edler fan on this site, but the Canucks arguably have the depth to move him, and he's the only "moveable" asset they have that would return a top 6 forward, which they desperately need.

Why no Jensen?

He's without question their top prospect, and the only one with 1st line potential—although I suspect he tops out as a 2nd liner.

And why no Schroeder?

He showed a lot of promise this season, despite both AV and Arniel not using him properly. Obviously you trade him if the return is worth it, but I imagine his trade value isn't all that high right now.

Rodin is gone. His body can't hack the NA game. Headed back to Sweden and might not even receive a qualifying offer.

I'm probably the biggest Edler fan on this site, but the Canucks arguably have the depth to move him, and he's the only "moveable" asset they have that would return a top 6 forward, which they desperately need.
- Fosco

Is Schroeder good enough for 2 nd line duties? He is not big enough for third line duties as an energy guy.IMO

Is Schroeder good enough for 2 nd line duties? He is not big enough for third line duties as an energy guy.IMO
- VANTEL

I'd like to see our 4th line act as that "energy" line, with the 3rd as a scoring line. Lines 1-3 should be scoring lines IMO. In that regard Schroeder should be good enough to center the 3rd but may become expendable if Guance wins that spot and Kesler remains as the #2 C.

If you were Gillis would you buy out Booth and Ballard and offersheet Alex Pietrangelo for 7.5 mil 6 year deal? You know Flyers will.

Cost 4 firsts

No it doesn't, trading the Sedins would completely change the identity of the team, that is not a "re-tool". I'm not saying that I wouldn't trade the Sedin's if it made the team better, only that what the other guy was saying makes no sense.

My core would be:



Everyone else is available.
- 1970vintage

Whatever. A re-tool can involve an identity change. Think the Flyers before the 2011-12 season. They re-tooled. Their re-tool shipped out Richards & Carter. It changed the identity of their team as much, or even more, than trading the Sedins would do in Vancouver. But it was just them re-tooling. If the Canucks get players who can contribute immediately for the twins, then it is a re-tooling. If they were to simply get draft picks and prospects, then no, that would not be re-tooling.

Hindsight is 20/20 but people should remember what was happening at the time of these trades as well:

Ballard: The Canucks were desperate for quality D-men. At the time Ballard was a top 4 d man that could hit and had some offensive up side. It was a toss up on who was going to stay Grabner or Raymond and Gillis went with Raymond. Bernier was useless, the 1st round pick hurt, but like I said the Canucks were desperate for defenceman.

Booth: The Canucks traded 2 aging soon to be UFA vets on the decline for a top six 30 goal scorer. Even though Booth has been a bust so far, at the time of the trade most Canucks fans were pretty happy with the trade.

Hodgson: There were alleged behinds the scenes stuff here with Cody and at the time the Canucks were pretty deep down the middle (Sedin, Kesler, Paulsson, Lapierre, Malhotra, Schroader) and they were coming off getting man handled by Boston in the final. Gillis traded for a potential top 6 power forward. While the timing of that trade was a little off, I still don't think we can thorw Gillis under the bus on this one quite yet. I still think Kassian has the potnetial to be an impact top 6 forward.
- fiveandagame

I'd agree with all of this, except perhaps the Ballard trade. It was before my time on HB but I remember having some discussions with friends on losing Grabner, especially after the spark he had just shown in the playoffs. Throwing in a 1st rounder (making it essentially 2 1st rounders for a 3/4 Dman) was an overpayment IMO opinion, even at the time.

Unofficial Poll:

Should Henrik automatically retain the "C" under the new staff?

I vote "NO" (but that doesn't mean he can't earn it once they get here).

If you were Gillis would you buy out Booth and Ballard and offersheet Alex Pietrangelo for 7.5 mil 6 year deal? You know Flyers will.

Cost 4 firsts
- VANTEL

Booth isn't getting bought out.

$7.5M for Pietrangelo would require getting rid of Luongo, Ballard, Booth, AND either Hamhuis, Edler, Bieksa, or Garrison. On top of the 4 first rounders. Too much for one guy.