Whose downfall was the biggest: Sutter or Gillis?

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by moon

Sutter left Iginla, Kipper, Regehr and Bouwmeester all with a ton of value that could have been moved.

Not Sutters fault that Feaster is an idiot and misjudged the team and as unwilling to do a rebuild.

Gillis was a much bigger downfall and much, much worse GM. At least Sutter made a lot of moves to make the Flames a top team and didn't just inherit everything and add little or negative pieces.

I hate going off topic, but it was not Feasters decision whether to rebuild or not. He laid out two plans to upper management/ownership, one to rebuild and one to not. The decision was made higher up, made to sustain a fan base and sell tickets.

[moon]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

I hate going off topic, but it was not Feasters decision whether to rebuild or not. He laid out two plans to upper management/ownership, one to rebuild and one to not. The decision was made higher up, made to sustain a fan base and sell tickets.

This has been discussed to death here but that goes against every single thing Feaster has ever said. He always said he was against the rebuild and he thought the team was competitive.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by jg13

Gillis was worse in my opinion.

Hodgeson for Kassian stands out to me the most next to the goalie fiasco.

Hodgson for Kassian as a good trade right?

because Hodgson is so garbage defensively they finally moved him off center because he couldn't be trusted

Kassian has 26 even strength points playing just under 13 minutes per game

Hodgson has 24 points even strength points playing 18 minutes per game

that trade is looking better for the Canucks every day

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by old-fart

I don't think it is a particularly fair comparison. Sutter took a garbage team with very few pieces that had missed the playoffs for 7 straight years and led them to a single goal away from the Stanley Cup and years of respectability, before falling back into mediocrity.

Gillis took over a pretty stacked team, didn't do much, got a lot of credit for work done long before he got there, then stood by and watched as it sank into oblivion.

edit: what ComixZone said.

the Vancouver Canucks the year before Gillis was hired

21st in the NHL in points
22nd in the NHL in scoring

They were still relying on Naslund, Morrison, Ohlund, Cooke, Pyatt as top 6 forwards or top 4 d

the 3rd and 4th line included the names Ritchie, Isbister, Cowan who were all out of the league after they left Vancouver

that Canucks team has a good core in place of the Sedins/Kesler/Edler/Luongo but the team around it was garbage

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by CSharp

As for Sutter, after the initial run for the cup and the Flames were at the top, he was not able to re-enforce any depth at the center position. He kept tinkering with the big solid defencemen that was the trademark of the Flames and ignored bolstering the depth of the forward lines. Then, to top it all of, it was his unwavering nepotism that got this whole club into the downward spiral. I guess hiring Brent Sutter and firing Iron Mike was the topping for the disaster in addition to the greediness to get J-Bo. Maybe if Brent wasn't coaching those 3 years and Hartley was, the complexion of the team would be totally different.

Big game hunting for Bouwmeester definitely failed. Darryl's biggest problem as a GM was his obsession with goals against. He got his wish, Brent had the team 5th in GA and 29th in GF. Not even attempting to replace the 50+ goals from Bertuzzi & Cammalleri was a big mistake. He absolutely would not admit Jokinen didn't work out in any scenario (even after trading him away for trash)

Another big strike against Sutter was his refusal to use the LTIR for cap/roster relief in 2008-2009. The team violated the CBA by icing only 15 skaters for multiple games because he couldn't manage the roster properly. Trading Brandon Prust 500 times was also annoying.

I think Darryl's downfall was bigger.

[d_phaneuf]

I think they are essentially the same just different

both reached the same high essentially game 7 of a SC final,

Darryl then had a gradual downfall whereas Gillis had more success but faded extremely quickly once the light started to go out

[browna]

Gillis for sure.

Sutter did go up and down, one season the team could score, but not keep it out of the net (especially come playoff time)...changes made, and then they couldn't score but had solid defense. Rinse/repeat. The Phaneuf trade was to add scoring to a lineup that had injury issues and were missing that extra goal a game, to get into the playoffs.

But Sutter brought complete credibility back to the organization on and off the ice after years of being the joke of the league. He was able to make deals with guys due to his reputation as a straight shooter and protecting his players. Made bold moves under the radar like Jokinen (1st round) Bouwmeester, Tanguay, etc, as well as other solid low profile moves that turned into something more (Nilson, Simon, Yelle, Kipper, Hamrlik, Bourque, tough love for Giordano). He did what he needed to try and make the playoffs each year.

The lack of playoffs success was his downfall and having a coach that didn't get him into the playoffs and past round 1. I think the owners (one of them anyways) thought the grass might be greener on the other side and got tired of the Sutter show...but said owner got hoodwinked into hiring JF full time and since reverted back to a straight shooter in Burke.

If Sutter came back as coach after Playfair as he wished to do instead of getting Keenan, I think the late 2000's Flames story turns out a bit different and the Flames are in a different spot today as well.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Big game hunting for Bouwmeester definitely failed. Darryl's biggest problem as a GM was his obsession with goals against. He got his wish, Brent had the team 5th in GA and 29th in GF. Not even attempting to replace the 50+ goals from Bertuzzi & Cammalleri was a big mistake. He absolutely would not admit Jokinen didn't work out in any scenario (even after trading him away for trash)

Another big strike against Sutter was his refusal to use the LTIR for cap/roster relief in 2008-2009. The team violated the CBA by icing only 15 skaters for multiple games because he couldn't manage the roster properly. Trading Brandon Prust 500 times was also annoying.

I think Darryl's downfall was bigger.

A lot of revisionist history. Especially LTIR (late in season) and not managing roster properly.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

They were discussing it on the Fan 960 the other day. I think they came to the conclusion, that Gillis' best trade was trading two C level prospects for Ehrhoff.

That is probably true, he also made some good trades and free agent signings in 2011 bringing in Torres, Malholtra, Samuelsson, and Higgens. Those players added a lot to that team. He inherited a great core, but he did add some tweaks to make it better.

He had so many poor trades though, most of them involving Florida, a team that he was inexplicably fascinated with… make enough trades with Florida and eventually you will become Florida I guess.

Also Gillis was always trying to find that moneypuck player and dumpster diving for Sturm and the like. I guess it is nothing ventured nothing lost but still nothing gained.

[Iggy Snipe]

Darryls was worse because he fired Jim Playfair after having a good season, then fired Mike Keenan after he got the Flames in he playoffs for two straight seasons, then hires his brother, who misses the playoffs for 3 years in a row.

Both coach firings were BS. I said it after the Playfair got fired. I don't get it. You shouldn't fire the coach if your team makes the playoffs. That is kind of a win in its own.

Our first round exits were not coaching. A little luck and there all first round wins. We had a couple game sixes and sevens. Anything could have happened.

Coaching was the biggest mistake. Brent Sutter was garbage in Calgary. Absolute garbage.

[Psytic]

I'm going with Gillis. Sutter is the only reason this organization has had any respectability since the 80's. He raised the team up to contender status and did everything outside of win the cup. He wasn't able to sustain it, but very few teams can. We had a few good years and he did leave us with some good trade pieces which Feaster is to blame for getting us a poor return on.

[Roof-Daddy]

Keenan stated that it was ownership that forced his firing, and not Darryl Sutter.

Or at least Keenan claimed that was what Sutter told him.

[1991 Canadian]

No question it is Gillis. Gillis inherited a much better core and team than Sutter did. Although Sutter is often remembered for the work he did to screw up the Flames, he is also the guy that built them up in the first place. I still like to remember him for his excellent coaching record and hidden gem moves (Kipper, Giordano).

If Gillis managed the canucks properly, he could have gotten a few more contender years of the Sedins-Luongo-Bieksa core (like San Jose has been milking with Thornton-Marleau-Niemi).

But instead, he's traded away Grabner and a 1st for Keith Ballard. A proven young goal scorer in Hodgson for Kassian. A 2nd for a rental in Roy. He's traded away two starting goaltenders for essentially Bo Horvat.

The cupboards are bare and the trophy case is bare. At least if Kevin Lowe were to be fired, oiler fans can say "at least he got us Nurse, RNH, Hall, etc..".

With Gillis, all canuck fans can say as "at least he got us Horvat".

[Erick Estrada]

The Phaneuf trade will go down as one of the worst in a long time but outside of that Sutter didn't make a lot of really bad trades as maybe the Ference to Boston trade is close. He had a few dud UFA signings but mostly those were 5/6 defensemen failures. Sutter had a meltdown at the very end for sure but I believe his overall body of work is better and he has a better eye for talent than Gillis who made a lot of moves but only few were positive.

Gillis never had a Phaneuf debacle but overall had some bad failures in the Luongo/Schneider debacle, mismanagement of the best player he ever drafted in Hodgson and poor trade to Buffalo, Demitra & Sundin signings. His trades however were really where he failed as you can look at the meagre overall return for Luongo/Schneider, Hodgson (for Dustin Penner V2), Bernier (for 2nd and 3rd round pick), Ballard (for Grabner and Bernier), David Booth (for Sturm (bad UFA signing) and Samuelsson). Canucks fans also at the time thought a lot of the long term contracts to keep his UFA's were great deals except a few years later they all look bad and they almost all include NTC's. I really don't understand the love he still had at the end for Panthers players and at the end bringing so many of them in played a role in the team declining. The only really good moves he ever made was bringing in Samuelson and the Erhoff trade. He made some other decent lower impact deals for bottom 6 players but overall he just could never hit that home run trade or signing.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

No question it is Gillis. Gillis inherited a much better core and team than Sutter did. Although Sutter is often remembered for the work he did to screw up the Flames, he is also the guy that built them up in the first place. I still like to remember him for his excellent coaching record and hidden gem moves (Kipper, Giordano).

If Gillis managed the canucks properly, he could have gotten a few more contender years of the Sedins-Luongo-Bieksa core (like San Jose has been milking with Thornton-Marleau-Niemi).

But instead, he's traded away Grabner and a 1st for Keith Ballard. A proven young goal scorer in Hodgson for Kassian. A 2nd for a rental in Roy. He's traded away two starting goaltenders for essentially Bo Horvat.

The cupboards are bare and the trophy case is bare. At least if Kevin Lowe were to be fired, oiler fans can say "at least he got us Nurse, RNH, Hall, etc..".

With Gillis, all canuck fans can say as "at least he got us Horvat".

So sucking makes for a good GM? (or president)

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So sucking makes for a good GM? (or president)

No kidding. The village idiot could steer a team to 30th place finishes and first overall picks. I don't think Lowe deserves credit for anything positive since 2006.

[kyuss275]

Gillis hands down. Mentioning Sutter in the same breath as gillis is an insult.

Last year I said the 3 worst gm's in the nhl were gillis, tambellini, and Feaster. No surprise all 3 are no longer employed as GM. I would be shocked if any of the 3 ever got another chance to be a NHL GM again.

[CalgaryFan1988]

I think Sutters biggest mistakes were undervaluing the team he had. Trading a lot of youth for older players ultimately gutted the Flames' depth and chemistry IMO.

Sutter was a bad GM and a great coach.

Gillis..... You'll see the damage he inflicted to the Canucks over the next few seasons. Too early to fully see the extent of his damage yet.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I think Sutters biggest mistakes were undervaluing the team he had. Trading a lot of youth for older players ultimately gutted the Flames' depth and chemistry IMO.

Sutter was a bad GM and a great coach.

Gillis..... You'll see the damage he inflicted to the Canucks over the next few seasons. Too early to fully see the extent of his damage yet.

To clarify...did you mean overvaluing?

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by timbit

To clarify...did you mean overvaluing?

After the '04 run I found he got rid of a lot of players, who turned out to be quite decent, and he didn't get much for them via trade.

Off the top of my head, there could be more, but.......

Kobasew/Ference
Chris Clark
Mike Commodore
Toni Lydman

I don't think he really knew what he had in some of those players. While none of them turned out to be "stars", I think they had a good team ambiance and replacing them with players like MCCarty, etc, didn't pan out.