56
Photo Credit: CanucksTV

Laurence Gilman’s Tell-All: on Horvat, Newport Sports, and the Canucks’ Poor Draft Record

It’s not often that a former Canucks front office member stays in touch with the media. Laurence Gilman is an exception. After being relieved of his duties in 2015, the Winnipeg native and his family stayed put in Vancouver. Aside from the temporary consultancy for the NHL’s expansion draft, Gilman has stayed out of the spotlight for the most part. Despite being let go in 2015, he remained under contract with the organization until June 30th of this year. Now that his contract has expired, he’s free to do media availability to his discretion. Earlier this week, he made a two-hour appearance on TSN 1040 to give fans an inside look at the Canucks hockey operations during his seven-year tenure.

A lot goes on in the offices of Rogers Arena that fans don’t often get to see. From preparing marketing strategies to discussions in scouting meetings, some of the most fascinating aspects of the business are basically kept lock tight. Although it is obviously an extensive process, Gilman gave a brief summary on what goes down when a player’s contract is up for renewal.

Gilman on the contract negotiation process:“There’s a lot of dialogue that takes place well before any sort of formal negotiations. In most instances, the team will put forth the formal offer. In my experience, that number shouldn’t come as a shock to the other side. There’s a lot of theorizing, there’s a lot of pointing out other contracts, discussing the market, discussing the player’s role, discussing the evolution of the player.”

Bo Horvat’s three-year entry-level contract expired at the end of the season, and because he hadn’t yet signed a new contract, he became a restricted free agent. The 22 year-old has a significant amount of leverage in these negotiations. One may certainly deem him the next face of the franchise, he’s a front-runner to be the next Team Captain, he’s exceeded the expectations placed upon him when he was first drafted, and lastly, he represents the next wave of future Canucks. Towards the end of the season, Benning warned that negotiations may take a significant amount of time, so it should come to no surprise that the off-season is half over and no announcement has been made. Gilman says Benning’s comment was likely an indicator that the two parties were far apart in their ask.

Newport Sports Management represents some of the league’s top players such as Drew Doughty, Erik Karlsson, Henrik Lundqvist, and PK Subban. Don Meehan, Horvat’s agent, has represented the likes of Steven Stamkos, Brad Richards, Zach Parise, and Phil Kessel. There’s been much speculation as to how Horvat’s contract will turn out. Long term? Bridge? Above or under $5 million? It’s been reported that the Canucks didn’t want to go as long as 7 or 8 years, but that could be the ballpark Horvat’s camp is running. Gilman, a lawyer like many agents, said, “If I’m representing him, it doesn’t start with anything less than a 5.”

Gilman on Newport Sports:“I’ve known Don Meehan for more than 23 years. Newport Sports – I know their operations intimately. The last contract I negotiated was Chris Tanev, which involved numerous face-to-face meetings. At the end of the day, Don Meehan and Newport Sports are deal makers. When push comes to shove, they’re trying to get a deal done. There are agents that use the thread of hold-out and follow through with it, but that’s not the experience I’ve had with Newport Sports. Having said that, they understand the value of their clients and where the market is.”

After the Cody Hodgson saga, there have been worries that Horvat’s parents would potentially meddle in the negotiation process. There’s no question that his entire family has been supportive. They go to games in the east, they fly out for games in Vancouver, and they allowed CanucksTV into their home for a behind-the-scenes look at their life in Rodney, Ontario. But could the humble family be an active meddler in their son’s hockey career? Gilman doesn’t think so.

Gilman on Horvat’s parents: “I do have experience with Tim Horvat. My dealings with him were as good as they were with any parent. He’s a parent who’s involved in his son’s career. When we sent Bo down on a conditioning stint to Utica, Bo’s father was there and I talked to him a couple times. His parents were in Vancouver often. They’re superb people and I would venture to speculate that they’re not hindering the situation at all. They’re incredibly supportive of their son and the organization. It’s all good.”

When the Canucks drafted Horvat in 2013, it seemed almost certain that he would pan out as a third-line, two-way centreman. Going into his fourth NHL season, it’s safe to say he’s silenced the critics. Horvat is averaging exactly .50 PPG in his career, and he’s only going up.

Gilman on the 2013 NHL Draft:“We knew we were taking Horvat. We were negotiating with teams that were higher than New Jersey, and we were taking Bo irrespectively. We didn’t have him at the top, there was Barkov and a couple high-end players ahead of him. We had him very high.”

Gilman on drafting Horvat:“Our position on Bo was that we felt he was going to be a player cut in the same mold as a Patrice Bergeron or Jonathan Toews without the prolific offensive upside. We saw him as second-line centre who was going to be an exceptional two-way centre – a matchup player who would shut down the opposing team’s top offensive players, a guy on your powerplay, a guy who could kill penalties, and a guy who’d be a leader on your team.”

With regards to the moves made amongst the scouting staff, one may certainly be justified in saying it’s been a long time coming. Of the 37 players drafted, only two have played over 200 games – Bo Horvat and Cody Hodgson. Ben Hutton will get there, as will Brendan Gaunce and probably Kevin Cannauton and Jordan Schroeder, but those two have yet to staple themselves as NHL regulars.

Gilman on the Canucks scouting staff during his tenure:“I oversaw the staff and changes were made immediately when Mike Gillis came on. The guys that were there – members of the Ring of Honour or long-standing Canucks – were given the opportunity to prove themselves. At the same time, there were a multitude of changes made – young scouts were brought in, including Judd (Brackett). We were constantly evaluating the staff and eventually we determined that we needed to make changes that were systemic, and we identified Eric Crawford as the person we wanted to put in charge of the process and put a layer in between me and Ron Delorme. I think the Horvat draft was his first draft, so there were five years before he took charge.”

Gilman on what he would re-do with Canucks scouting:“We weren’t happy with the results, and that’s why we made the changes we made. I wouldn’t point out an individual, but if I were to go back in time, I think we might have waited too long to put Eric Crawford in charge. I would have put him in at least a year earlier.”

Although a number of scouts were released, at least they can say they went out with the bang. When the news first broke that there were changed to be made, it appeared as if there were a sense of relief. Just when it seemed fans had had enough, the scouting staff pull off what could potentially be their best draft in a decade. Nothing is set in stone, but the 2017 selections look to be good ones. If future draft classes look anything like this past year’s, I think the Canucks’ future looks a lot brighter than it did back in 2011.

  • Canucks Realist

    Until Jim Benning actually drafts a player of Bo Horvat’s caliber (especially at 9) and signs an undrafted player as good as Chris Tanev this so called draft guru’s tenure can only be termed as an epic fail.

    • TheRealPB

      It’s usually that kind of hyperbole that’s destined to be an epic fail. It’s likely that Boeser is of Horvat’s calibre and Demko, Juolevi and Petterson also have that potential. As far as undrafted FA, Stetcher looks like a pretty decent find. It’s really way too early to tell. There are many things I actually really liked about Gillis and his strategy to go all-in to try and maximize the window with the last core made sense. But let’s be real about his drafting — getting one actually good player in six drafts is shocking. Even if you allow for Hodgson and Hutton, that’s still amazingly bad.

      • Forward Thinker

        How do you figure it to be an epic failure? Stetcher looks very good. Dahlen and Goldobin are steals for Benning. Joulevi appears to be an outstanding prospect. Petterssen looks like a great pick as do both second and Third rounders this year. He had some signings in free agency that one questions, but he has made some good ones this year. Has he hit one out of the park yet? It is too early to say, but he has made some good moves which may yet pay off big time.

      • Canucks Realist

        Should, could and maybes just don’t cut it for me. Imo the biggest mistake observers make when it comes to drafting is the failure to see it’s about quality over quantity.

        Aside from those rare franchise changing generational talents, one Bure, Karlsson, Kesler, Datsyuk or Brett Hull type pick is what defines a GM and his legacy for his club. Jim Benning is nowhere close to rivalling the kind of players mentioned in this post or in my original post by his former Vancouver GM peers. The hyperbole is therefore more relevant to those suggesting that the likes of Juolevi and Petterson are going to make a similar impact, as it’s already clear to many that they simply will not.

        I’m not impressed at all with or talent pool and after Benning is let go (soon) the next GM will gut the team and start anew again. That’s what it needs and this season will prove it.

        • Forward Thinker

          It is very early to judge Bennings body of work. Boeser, Petterssen, Dahlen, Goldobin, Stetcher, Joulevi and DiPietro all appear to have a lot of potential. He has also picked a couple in the second round this year who may well be keepers and in the seventh took a flyer on a really good, albeit pretty small, guy. How about we just chill a couple years before judging Bennings body of work. It is easy to look at Burks work and call it. Success ten years later, but at the time he was criticized for taking the Sedins.

        • Rodeobill

          I see what you are getting at, I definitely agree with quality over quantity. This draft, however, seems to stray away from the previous draft’s approach in that most bets seem placed on high ceilings rather than the safe ones.

        • TheRealPB

          This is nonsensical. Those picks are all over the place Karlsson and Kesler were later 1st rounders, Datsyuk and Hull dropped because of other concerns and Bure would have been a higher pick had the Canucks not figured out a loophole in his eligibility. They are from different eras and some of them WERE generational talents. Kesler is of course not nearly within the league of the others as neither are Tanev or Horvat. It is much closer to suggest that the Canucks prospects have the potential to become any of those three than any of the other players you’ve mentioned. And what would a new GM “gut” on the Canucks roster? It’s already mostly devoid of NHL talent, at least not talent in its prime. You do realize we’ve been in the midst of a rebuild for a few years now?

        • Neil B

          Drafting isn’t about “quality over quantity”. It’s about minimizing error and maximizing opportunity. *One* way to do this is to accumulate picks in the hope that at least one blindly-thrown dart hits. Another would be to take highly-valued low-yield picks (for instance, second rounders, with a rough 1 in 5 odds of producing an NHLer) and trade them for AHL players with NHL potential.

          Of the players you listed, by the way, only Bure among the forwards was a significant NHL presence before his Draft+5 year, and Karlsson didn’t show what he had until Draft+3. Had one judged their respective GMs at the same point in their processes, all but Quinn would have failed. Since Benning has just completed his fourth draft for Vancouver, it might be a touch early to make a rational decision on his performance at the drafting table.

          And, by the way, ‘contrarian’ is no more rational than ‘homer’. While it may be “clear to many that they [current Canucks prospects] simply will not” have an impact commensurate with the players you named, those who actually make a living judging the quality of prospects rate the Canucks system currently as a top-15 to top-10 franchise, up from the high-20s ranking it had before Benning. While Benning has many flaws as a GM, trying to pick a fight with him over his draft/development record is really just setting yourself up for failure. If you want to sound like a realist, rather than a reactionary, try focusing on his assessing of competition, his concept of team composition, his over-built sense of loyalty, or his ability to acquire front-office staff.

          • Dud

            Absolutely brutal post. Get over yourself lol. Of course it’s about quality over quantity. One top draft pick by someone who knows what they are doing is worth infinitly more than half a dozen mediocre slug who won’t be a game changer.

            You don’t metaphorically throw half a dozen shots anywhere on a dart board and hope for the best, you go for the bullseye!

    • Forward Thinker

      How do you figure it to be an epic failure? Stetcher looks very good. Dahlen and Goldobin are steals for Benning. Joulevi appears to be an outstanding prospect. Petterssen looks like a great pick as do both second and Third rounders this year. He had some signings in free agency that one questions, but he has made some good ones this year. Has he hit one out of the park yet? It is too early to say, but he has made some good moves which may yet pay off big time.

    • canucksville1

      Gilman all but admitted that their drafting record was terrible. The previous management is conceding that they were not good enough at drafting and should have made changes sooner than later.

    • Fred-65

      I wouldn’t say a failure but like making a trade the team that ends up with the best player is generally considered the winner. Fact is Gillis ended up with bringing in Horvat and Tanev and they’re the bedrock of the franchise. Benning has drafted some good players …nothing of the same stature as Horvat/Tanev and frankly as much as we like late picks he blew it with the high pick waste in Virtanen and then compounded it with McCann and the subsequent trade for Gudbranson. You can’t overlook that fact. Benning has drafted higher than any other GM in recent memory. Look at this chart about the chance of success for lower picks

      http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

      there’s a huge difference

      • DJ_44

        …. Horvat and Tanev and they’re the bedrock of the franchise.

        ….nothing of the same stature as Horvat/Tanev

        I like Bo, and I am a huge Tanev fan, but bedrock of the franchise? That’s a bit rich.

        One, the Canucks did not draft Tanev; they signed him as a college FA. Credit where it is due. I also like McEnemy and his progression, and McEnemy, in my opinion, has the best potential to be a NHL blueliner as any of the Gillis/Gilman defensive prospects.

        As far as not drafting anyone of Bo’s statue (and this is not a sleight on Bo), but I think Boeser will best Bo in a season (nevermind draft position). Gaudette will also have the ability to be at Bo’s level.

        In short, It is too early to tell. It is too early to say for sure Boeser will be great, or Jake is a bust.

        But please, continue with the narrative, we never tire of reading it.

        • Fred-65

          MAYBE Boeser will be better than Horvat and lets hope that’s the case but as we stand today Horvat is the best upcoming forward and his salary will soon reflect that. Tanev sure was a FA signing, that’s a technicallity in my books, Gillis acquired him. Gillis because his teams were so successful drafted lower than Benning as I pointed out that makes a huge difference. It’s the price you pay for success…2 Presidents Trophies and a game 7 of the SC. The FACT is Gillis enjoyed more success than any Vcr GM before him and if we’re going to be honest Benning will be praised if he ever, ever, achieves the same. Don’t get me wrong I’m not a Benning hater, he’s made some good ( not great) aquisitions with late round picks and that counts., but drafting with two # 5 slots, one #6 slot things other GM’s could only dream of. I hope Benning has a long and successful career as the GM of Vcr, but to be declared as the best right now is hopeful thinking. As Joe Friday used to say “just gimme the facts” 🙂

      • Canucks Realist

        Excellent post Fred. LinBenning fantasists fail to see that one Horvat/Tanev pick is more relevant towards building a contender than any of the 28 picks in four drafts that Jimbo has made.

        When you look at cup winners of the last 17 years since the turn of the millenium, every one of them has drafted elite players in key positions regardless of position – Benning simply has not and anyone dreaming that the likes of Demko, Virtanen, Petterson, Juolevi, Lind and Gaudette etc will put us over the top are consuming way too much of BC’s number one export… we are going nowhere under this dire leadership.

    • mathonwy

      Yup.

      Drafting is the reason why Jimbo was hired.

      The Canucks took massive hits on
      – contract / cap management (Sutter, Eriksson, Sbisa, Miller, Dorsett)
      – personnel management (Higgins, Vrbata, Kassian)
      – professional scouting (Bartkowski, Prust, Clendening, Sbisa, Vey, Etem, Larsen, Gudbranson)
      – overall organizational intelligence

      when they hired draft guru Jim Benning and Harvard english major / Ryan O’Reilly offer sheet architect John Weisbrod.
      And so far, what we gave up and what we gained is not even remotely close to balancing out.

    • Almo89

      May need to change your user name to “Canucks Troll”. You are creating benchmarks and standards to judge the current management that we all know have yet to be completed. In doing so you overlooking or selectively ignoring the accomplishments that have already occurred. For example: Gillis & Co. did not trade up in 2013 and get MacKinnion, or Barkov, or Drouin, etc. After the Schneider trade, he had two first round picks at his disposal! That makes him the worst GM evar!

  • Capologist

    Great to see Mr Gilman still around. His mastery of the cap was outstanding in helping to keep our core together during the glory years. Can’t understand why Benning got rid, another bad management move, as Horvat’s lack of a contract clearly shows. Gilman/Gillis would have had it in the bag at a decent price and term by now.

    • Canuck4Life20

      I don’t think their cap management was anything special. Sure, they managed to get some players on lower cap hits but they had to give out too much term and no trade clauses, which made many of those contracts worthless on the trade market just a few years later. They also didn’t do much with the extra cap space that they gained, constantly missing on their depth signings and not having any young players to step into the lineup on entry level deals.

      They did a good job in 2011 adding Lapierre and Higgins for the Cup run, but outside of that I really have a tough time seeing many tangible results from their cap management.

      • mathonwy

        Signing 28 year old Burr to a 8M/4Y/2Maav deal where he scored 67/48/52/24 points was “nothing special”.
        Signing 26 year old Kes to a 30M/6Y/5Maav deal was “nothing special”.
        Signing 28 year old Hammer to a 27M/6Y/4.5Maav deal was “nothing special”.
        Signing 23 year old Edler to a 13M/4Y/3.25Maav deal was “nothing special”.
        Signing 33 year old Sammuelsson to a 7.5M/3Y/2.5Maav deal where Sammy scored 53 pts and 50 pts was “nothing special”.
        Signing 21 year old Tanev as a free agent was “nothing special”.
        Turning Patrick White in Christian Ehrhoff was “nothing special”.

        If you don’t find anything “special” with the above transactions, then I can’t even fathom how even less special Jimbo’s transactions probably seem to you.

        • Canuck4Life20

          Burrows – great signing
          Kesler – full no trade clause resulted in Kesler demanding a trade to only one team, significantly reducing the return the got back for him.
          Hamhuis – full no trade clause resulted in him walking away for nothing.
          Edler – currently untradable
          Sammuelsson – a three year contract for a 33 year old was too much term. He was traded in the final year of his contract.
          Signing Tanev and trading for Ehrhoff have nothing to do with cap management.

          So you managed to point out one example that I actually agree was a good signing, and Burrows contract was followed up with an overpayment that everyone was surprised with the return Benning was able to bring back.

          Just because someone doesn’t agree with your opinion doesn’t mean that they are a troll junior.

          • mathonwy

            By your reply and by the looks of the cheers and trashes, it seems that there is the quite the cohort on CanucksArmy that have no concept of what ‘cap management’ actually means.
            Good cap management =
            – Negotiating contracts where you are getting more value than you are paying for. IE More bang for your buck. See moneyball.
            – Building a winning team composed of these below-market contracts while remaining under the salary cap.
            In the era of the salary cap, you can not win a Stanley Cup by paying full fare for all of your players. You need to be savvy, cagey and very smart to be able to persuade NHL players to sign below-market contracts and that’s exactly what Gillis and Gilman were.

            Burr – one of the greatest bargains in all of Canuck history and the return we got for him from Ottawa doesn’t hold a candle to the value we got for only $2M in the 10-11 era.
            Kes – singlehandedly willed us past Nashville, a three-time Selke finalist one-time Selke winner and despite Jimbo not being able to trade his way out of a paper bag, Kes netted us 2-time Stanley Cup winner Nick Bonino, Jared McCann and Luca Sbisa. You mentioning how Kesler tied Jimbo’s hands as a way to refute the great contract Kes was on is especially telling in terms of your unfamiliarity with what cap management actually is.
            Hamhuis – absolutely hilarious you are refuting the fact that Hammer, a top pairing d-man at that point of time, being signed to a 4.5M aav contract means nothing because of Jimbo’s incompetence as a general manager. Jimbo’s incompetence when he did absolutely nothing at the 15-16 trade deadline and Jimbo’s incompetence for not resigning Hammer and instead relying on Gudbranson and Larsen resulting in a 16/17 29 out of 30 finish.
            Edler – You DO realize that a player’s performance today in 2017 has ZERO bearing on how he performed at the time of contract signing right? Right?
            Sammy – Cool story but your opinion really doesn’t mean jack all as he DID score 53 and 50 points for the Canucks before he was traded and spending 2.5M for a 50+ player is what you call VALUE which is a concept that this management team knows absolutely nothing about. Unless you count spending 6M for 24 points value….
            Tanev, Ehrhoff – Last time I checked, both players had salaries that counted against the salary cap.

            I honestly don’t care whether you agree or don’t agree. Your arguments are terrible and demonstrate that you really don’t know what cap management is about.

            PS. The only person that used the word “troll” is you.

          • Canuck4Life20

            Strong cap management should also include looking beyond the current season and setting up the team for continued success in the future. Many of Gillis’ moves at the time looked good, but handcuffed the team a few years later. The contracts that were a great ‘bang for your buck’ in 2010-12 became albatrosses just a couple years later. Gillis made some good moves, but in my opinion his complete lack of vision for the future of the team has not been kind to his legacy.

          • Bert

            You don’t sound like a Canucks fan respectful of the Gillis/Gilman perennial greatness pal. Mathinwy has proven all his points and kicked your ass so hard i can feel the sting from here. Ouch!

            Please name us a Stanley Cup winning team since say 2009 (Boston, LA x2, Chicago x3 and Pittsburgh x3) that has not sacrificed the future to remain in contention. You cannot build through the draft or hold on to assets when you are consistently in win now like we were under Gillis/Gilman. Ask Chicago about that!

            We have had four drafts and plenty of high picks now to restock and get back in the game… what’s happened pal, cuz it’s nothing to do with the previous regime, it’s all on Benning, Weisel-brod and Linden!

          • TheRealRusty

            Canuck4Li – who could have predicted that little Gary B would retroactively make Lui’s contract an albatross with cap recapture clause? I mean what kind of bush league penalizes a team for a signing made within the context of its CBA, then move the goal post without any warning? OH… the same little dictator that allowed the Devils to get out of the boat anchor of a contract given to Kolvachuk with repercussion. Can you say #NHLbushleague?

          • Canuck4Life20

            Chicago is a great example to prove my point. Thanks Bert.

            They didn’t hand out no trade clauses like candy and have been able to get value back in picks and prospects for the players that they were forced to trade away.

            And the results speak for themselves. The Canucks have ended up at the bottom of the league while the Hawks continue to remain competitive by brining in young pieces to compliment their higher paid core.

            It’s hard to believe that anyone could bring up Chicago as an example of being worse at cap management than the Canucks. The results and current states of the two franchises clearly show something different.

          • Bert

            Wow, not too bright are ya pal.

            You were whining about building for the future during a cup competing window – Chicago are a prme example with EIGHT NMC/NTCs on the roster. Despite their SC success by riding their key core (Toews, Kane, Keith,Seabrook ) they are now in panic mode following two first round exits. With 20 mill plus tied up in two players, numerous roster moves of key players and younger talent to accomodate them and no top draft picks coming up the hawks are a prime example of how you have no chance of planning for the future whilst in win now mode. Class dismissed.

            tying up 20 mill plus per season in two players and jettisoning many key players every year they are now blowing it up in panic mode and scrambling to bring back members of the old gang whilst giving up many younger assets and getting low draft picks due to high regular season finishes. It’s getting ugly, fast.

          • Canuck4Life20

            The Blackhawks won three Stanley Cups in six years despite ongoing roster churn. But you go ahead with your brand new account and keep insulting my intelligence and telling everyone how much better Gillis was at cap management than Bowman and the Blackhawks have been.

          • Bert

            How can i insult what isn’t there pal, you’re clearly as thick as sh*t!

            Gilman/Gillis did a great job of cap managing an elite team and signed the Sedins in their prime for only 6 mill each and also lost none of the core. Outstanding management.

            The fact you can’t see or acknowledge that proves that you are a loser and no fan of the Vancouver Canucks… if you were you’d have loved every minute of those unrivalled glory years under Mike and Lawrence so f-you pal!

          • Canuck4Life20

            When you’ve lost the argument throw out a straw man and start with the childish insults. Great job Bert. Just like you’ve done with all the rest of your accounts.

      • Capologist

        Lifer is just another troll, no true Canucks fan would overlook all these outstanding moves made by Gillis/Gilman as listed by mathonwy.

        Let’s also remember Mike and Lawrence also locked up the Sedins heading into their prime for 5 years at a bargain $6.1 million when Burkey and every GM in the league was sniffing around with more dollars!

        Some of you need to man up and appreciate what you had because you sure aren’t gonna see it again under LinBenning.

  • Naslund

    Don’t forget that Gillis was not drafting in the top ten every year. It’s a lot harder to draft star players when you’re winning the President’s Trophy all the time.

    • Capologist

      Yep, this is why i take no notice of the Gilman/Gillis bashers. They were told by management to focus on winning now and they did just that with numerous division titles, 2 Presidents trophies, playoffs every season and a game 7 cup run.

      Looking back it was pretty amazing how Gilman/Gillis kept the core intact and under the cap year upon year when most teams in the league wanted our best players.

      Some fans with short memories are never satisfied and in fact pig ignorant considering they were singing from the rooftops under Laurence and Mike for years. I’m not and therefore thank both for the happy memories. Amazing times!

    • Bud Poile

      In terms of Mike Gillis’ record……..
      Not only did he not compile that many draft picks, he made poor selections with the ones he had.
      …..the man flat out could not draft hockey players.
      Mike Gillis bears responsibility in both letting Delorme run the show for as long as he did, as well as in failing to recoup the draft picks he traded away while chasing a championship.

      https://canucksarmy.com/2017/02/01/time-has-made-mike-gillis-draft-record-look-better-but-it-s-still-bad/

      • Bert

        Why are you ranting on about the Gillis era pal? Who cares, Vancouver has never been a great drafting team but we were all too busy celebrating the most successful period of dominance in Canucks history to worry about it and i bet a g-note you were as well eh…

        The current management has had four drafts to rectify the matter and springboard us back to contention… tell us, how has that turned out pal?

  • mathonwy

    We have here proof positive that the Tanev contract that the pro-Benning crowd loves to give Jimbo so much credit for when talking about his contract incompetence was in fact the handiwork of Mr. Gilman.
    Mr. Gilman gets Tanev signed to $4.45Mx5Y contract on March 24, 2015 (confirmed)
    ‘Someone’ resigns Derek Dorsett to a ridiculous $2.65Mx4Y contract and ‘someone’ resigns Luca Sbisa to a ridiculous $3.6Mx3Y contract on April 8, 2015.
    Mr. Gilman (and Mr. Henning) get their pink slips on Jul 3, 2015.
    Absolutely ridiculous.
    The only missing paragraph from the interview would be asking Mr. Gilman wtf happened with the Dorsett and Sbisa extensions but I guarantee you the answer would be an incredibly short and terse:

    ‘No comment’.

    • WT?

      Dear Gillis fans,
      You seem to have missed a few key details- the kind that get you fired

      -Trading Away Luongo for Mathias/Markstrom
      -Trading Away Dale Weise for Raphael Diaz
      -Losing Alain Vigneault to save his ass
      -Losing Cory Schneider instead of trading Luongo
      -Making a Luongo contract (that was un-tradeable)
      -Signing Torts ( a coach who never even bothered to move to Canada)
      -Trading Away Shane O’Brien for ??
      -Trading Away 2nd round pick for Derek Roy
      -Trading Away 2x 4th round picks for Sammy Phalsson
      -Trading Away Mikael Samuelsson (crazy considering Gillis wanted to be the Red Wings 2.0)
      -Inheriting David Booth’s contract
      -Signing Marco Sturm
      -Trading Away Ehrhoff for a 4th round pick (even Bieksa got us a 2nd)
      -Trading Away Micheal Grabner for Keith Ballard
      -Trading Away Sergei Shirokov for Mike Duco?? (please see KHL records)
      -Offering Mats Sundin for 2years/20mil (Had he signed, Canucks would have lost the Sedins)
      – Telling Manny Malhotra he can’t play “for his own safety”
      -Losing Willie Mitchell “for his own safety”

      In all fairness, Benning has another 2 years to accomplish this level of mastery.

    • WT?

      Dear Gillis fans,

      You seem to have missed a few key details- the kind that get your ass fired.
      Unfortunately these small details also occurred on Gilman’s watch, and are very likely reasons he has yet to be reemployed…

      -Trading Away Luongo for Mathias/Markstrom
      -Trading Away Dale Weise for Raphael Diaz
      -Losing Alain Vigneault to save his ass
      -Losing Cory Schneider instead of trading Luongo
      -Making a Luongo contract (that was un-tradeable)
      -Signing Torts ( a coach who never even bothered to move to Canada)
      -Trading Away Shane O’Brien for ??
      -Trading Away 2nd round pick for Derek Roy
      -Trading Away 2x 4th round picks for Sammy Phalsson
      -Trading Away Mikael Samuelsson (crazy considering Gillis wanted to be the Red Wings 2.0)
      -Inheriting David Booth’s contract
      -Signing Marco Sturm
      -Trading Away Ehrhoff for a 4th round pick (even Bieksa got us a 2nd)
      -Trading Away Micheal Grabner for Keith Ballard
      -Trading Away Sergei Shirokov for Mike Duco?? (please see KHL records)
      -Offering Mats Sundin for 2years/20mil (Had he signed, Canucks would have lost the Sedins)
      – Telling Manny Malhotra he can’t play “for his own safety”
      -Losing Willie Mitchell “for his own safety”

      In all fairness, Benning has another 2 years to accomplish this level of mastery.

      • canucksville1

        Gilman on what he would re-do with Canucks scouting:“We weren’t happy with the results, and that’s why we made the changes we made. I wouldn’t point out an individual, but if I were to go back in time, I think we might have waited too long to put Eric Crawford in charge. I would have put him in at least a year earlier.”

        Even after an open admission of guilt by the right hand man of Gillis, the Gillis defenders are still in denial. The Gillis management group knew full well that there was something wrong with their scouting department. Gilman openly admitted it. There’s no room for interpretation about what Gilman said in this article.

        • Bert

          Stop obsessing on drafting Bud, the Canucks have never drafted well and Benning is carrying on that infamous tradition. The difference is, he isn’t winning either!

          • Dud

            Wow all of this ^^ – so true, no one cares when you are winning as we did as an elite team under Gillis and Gilman.

            All this redundant revisionist history is so old, stale and boringgg, like Bud P. Thanks for the best years Larry and Mike.

  • TheRealRusty

    Canuck4Li – who could have predicted that little Gary B would retroactively make Lui’s contract an albatross with cap recapture clause? I mean what kind of bush league penalizes a team for a signing made within the context of its CBA, then move the goal post without any warning? OH… the same little dictator that allowed the Devils to get out of the boat anchor of a contract given to Kolvachuk with repercussion. Can you say #NHLbushleague?