Whose downfall was the biggest: Sutter or Gillis?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

Everyone likes to pretend that Sutter was an excellent GM. The truth is, he got lucky on trading for Kiprusoff for a second and basically rode the success of that move his entire tenure. He had made a handful of questionable trades prior to the Phaneuf, Jokinen debacles.

- Ference + Kobasew for Stuart + Primeau
- Reinprect + Sauve for Mike Leclerc + B. Boucher
- C. Clark + 7th for 6th + 7th



His trading was never overly impressive minus the Kiprusoff deal. His drafting was generally suspect but and he didnt survive as GM long enough to see some of his picks real start to pan out (brodie, backlund). That being said he did not get very good value out of his high picks and/or he traded the pick away before the draft.

His greatest strength as GM was signing (seemingly) good deals. However, he accomplished this by handing every vet under the sun a NTC/NMC.

He also seemed enamoured with signing old veteran nhlers. Some worked (Nolan) others didnt (Hulse, Marchment, Friesen), and some were just ok (Amonte, Bertuzzi).

I really think Sutter gets too much credit as a gm who was excellent and then slowly lost his mind, when in reality, he was never very good, just got lucky with a peaking team at the right time and then slowly let the whole thing collapse.

In addition to Kipper the original Tanguay trade and Cammalleri trade was pretty good and so was getting Bourque from the Hawks. I think he made some pretty solid personnel moves over his tenure and had a decent eye for professional talent. That said his eye for junior talent wasn't nearly as good as he seemed to focus overly on size/grit over pure skill and he totally missed on most of his 1st round draft picks and never left himself with any 2nd round picks so his drafts consisted of a total miss on his first pick and no picks until the 3rd round or later. As much as he helped get an AHL team and focus on scouting he never used that scouting effectively and made them focus too narrowly on measured variables like size.\

Bottom line is the reason this thread exists is because both GM's started off great and self destructed over time. They are both comparable for their rise and fall.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by moon

If the Kipper deal is just him being lucky why not dismiss the Phaneuf deal as unlucky?

Because it's more likely that he didn't realize Kipper would turn into our franchise's best goalie ever than him not realizing he was doing a quality for quantity trade.

[FireFly]

This is an interesting topic even if it has been mooned.

Sutter should have handed back the GM reigns after the first half season and stuck around as coach. THAT was his worst move as GM.

I don't see why everyone is still upset over the Phaneuf trade. Was he going to be our franchise? Well, he is in Toronto and look how well that's working out for them.

I think Darryl's biggest problem as a GM was being handcuffed in regards to Jarome. I don't necessarily blame the ownership for not wanting to trade Iginla as he was their golden goose, but I think more than anything, that is what caused a number of Sutter's bad moves.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Fire

People calling Darryl Sutter a great GM? Wow...

He wasn't a great GM. He was a good GM. He built teams that consistently reached the playoffs, out of essentially nothing. Even now, his impact is felt on this team; our top defense pairing is all on Darryl.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Even now, his impact is felt on this team; our top defense pairing is all on Darryl.

Well yes but he almost let Giordano slip through his fingers.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by moon

Or because he is currently employed as a coach with no signs that he is leaving that position.

By far the 2nd best GM (maybe first but not worth getting into it with the old foggies on the board) this franchise has had. A great GM and there are plenty of teams out there that would have a big upgrade if they did look to add him as GM.

Putting a rock in the GM office would have worked out better than a lot of the GMs this franchise has had sadly.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

In addition to Kipper the original Tanguay trade and Cammalleri trade was pretty good and so was getting Bourque from the Hawks. I think he made some pretty solid personnel moves over his tenure and had a decent eye for professional talent. That said his eye for junior talent wasn't nearly as good as he seemed to focus overly on size/grit over pure skill and he totally missed on most of his 1st round draft picks and never left himself with any 2nd round picks so his drafts consisted of a total miss on his first pick and no picks until the 3rd round or later. As much as he helped get an AHL team and focus on scouting he never used that scouting effectively and made them focus too narrowly on measured variables like size.\

Bottom line is the reason this thread exists is because both GM's started off great and self destructed over time. They are both comparable for their rise and fall.

Agreed here. Personally I don't fault Darryl for trading away 2nd round picks for roster players, he had a contending roster and he went for it.

In the end, Darryl had 48 hours of insanity that left a lot of boat anchors on this team, but he still left them Iginla, Regehr, Bouw and Kiprusoff. As for such "poor" under-26 talent, he left Giordano, Brodie, Backlund. In the end, his downfall is he GM'ed like how he coached - to win the next game.

But yes, in the end, he is indeed the 2nd best GM this organization has had. As Pete said above, that doesn't mean he was a great GM though.

[Hackey]

Luongo/Schneider situation was handled terribly. Hodgson deal was also bad. Phaneuf deal was terrible. Overall I'd say Sutter did a better job but I think Gillis did a decent job as well. Both had some high and low moments. Sutter definitely made more impactful moves.

[Tinordi]

Darryl had alot longer than 48 hours of bad management. His teams successively got worse over 7 years minus one blip. For all the "going for it" and building a contender talk outside of the one lightning in a bottle year he teams won zero playoff rounds until they were in the playoff mix no more by which time he left the team as a pile of ashes.

I do agree however with the point that we just can't make an adequate assessment of either GM because we don't know the role of ownership. I think in both cases there was heavy ownership involvement in the management of the team and personnel. Sutter likely couldn't trade Iginla, Gillis probably had some involvement with Luongo and others.

I would say that I think the Canucks are better positioned at the time of Gillis' firing than the Flames were at the time of Sutter's departure.

[Roof-Daddy]

If the whole Regehr + Kobasew for Thornton rumor from 2005 was true, then arguably one of Darryl's worst moves was one he didn't make.

[CSharp]

Originally Posted by 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.

He never did fire Playfair - the nepotism in him stuck with Playfair when Keenan took over as the head coach. If Darryl just stuck to coaching and not deal with managing the resources, the Flames would have been better off. The coaches he brought in and a lot of the draft choices he and his scouting staff chose were terrible. Who can ever forget Chucko? Yeah, he made some phenomenal deals with Kipper and a bunch of other emotionally charged player for the 2004 cup run, but ever since then, no one really wanted to trade with Sutter because no one wanted to get ripped off like the Sharks got. The Flames really didn't have great prospects to offer for trades. So, Sutter can only sign through free agency when the owners let him spend as much as he wanted.