Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

If Salo resigned.....


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
42 replies to this topic

#31 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:47 AM

It's funny how many last summer thought Salo should retire. Fast forward one year and suddenly so many are pissed that he's signed with another team.

Honestly, I can understand Gillis only wanting to sign him year by year at this point. He'd be a great depth d-man at this point but given his age and injury history I wouldn't sign him for more than one year either.


Nobody knows what the terms and salary offers were for Sami from the Canucks.
Early on July 1st we were told Gillis' priority-his number one priority-was to sign Salo.
Guess that is where the smoke really was coming from.
He was top 4 last year and looked a lot better than Bieksa and Eddy for the most part.

#32 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:50 AM

Garrison has one year of high end hockey under his belt.
He averages two hits per game.
He has youth and size but as usual,another six year contract is the underlying weakness of this contract.
Unproven D on a six year deal.
Proven Sami can't get two or one and a good bonus with the caveat he will be in a mentorship role within the .org if he hits the wall.
Retain your character.Sami wanted to retire here.
Oh,well.Fun in the sun is ok,too.Good luck,Sami.

#33 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,471 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:05 AM

Garrison has one year of high end hockey under his belt.
He averages two hits per game.
He has youth and size but as usual,another six year contract is the underlying weakness of this contract.
Unproven D on a six year deal.
Proven Sami can't get two or one and a good bonus with the caveat he will be in a mentorship role within the .org if he hits the wall.
Retain your character.Sami wanted to retire here.
Oh,well.Fun in the sun is ok,too.Good luck,Sami.

If he really wanted to stay here he should have signed a one year deal. Had he signed a one year deal given the offer he got from Tampa he would have been an idiot and Gillis would have been foolish to have offered it to him. You can't take a risk of multi year deals on players like Salo when you're a real cup contending team.

You are right about one thing though...good luck Sami.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#34 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:28 AM

Well,Gillis has no problems throwing 20 million at players that don't even want to play here or 12 year deals that last two years.

We don't know what Gillis offered and whether it was even equitable.

My point is the .org should find a way to allow a Canuck warrior and veteran like Sami to serve out his last year or two years here in the city he fought for.

If that was the vantage taken by mgmt they would have found a way to make it work.

If it is all about character and building the franchise and honor and commitment and all the talking points we hear so frequently when the corporate spin is in motion,this would have been one Canuck that deserves to have been retained for the extra half a million.

They just made a six year deal worth how much for Garrison-unproven and a perennial five goal scorer for his entire career but this last one.

So,they risked a six year deal on an unproven guy that they need to score goals and won't offer a two year deal to a proven veteran that was grossly underpaid here?

Good for Sami to go where somebody wants him but the optics aren't great for this Canucks fan.

#35 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,049 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:22 AM

Well,Gillis has no problems throwing 20 million at players that don't even want to play here or 12 year deals that last two years.

We don't know what Gillis offered and whether it was even equitable.

My point is the .org should find a way to allow a Canuck warrior and veteran like Sami to serve out his last year or two years here in the city he fought for.

If that was the vantage taken by mgmt they would have found a way to make it work.

If it is all about character and building the franchise and honor and commitment and all the talking points we hear so frequently when the corporate spin is in motion,this would have been one Canuck that deserves to have been retained for the extra half a million.

They just made a six year deal worth how much for Garrison-unproven and a perennial five goal scorer for his entire career but this last one.

So,they risked a six year deal on an unproven guy that they need to score goals and won't offer a two year deal to a proven veteran that was grossly underpaid here?

Good for Sami to go where somebody wants him but the optics aren't great for this Canucks fan.


It's already been said. Salo wanted a two year deal and Gillis was only offering one year. It didn't sound like money was an issue, it was the term.
Posted Image

#36 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,049 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:24 AM

Nobody knows what the terms and salary offers were for Sami from the Canucks.
Early on July 1st we were told Gillis' priority-his number one priority-was to sign Salo.
Guess that is where the smoke really was coming from.
He was top 4 last year and looked a lot better than Bieksa and Eddy for the most part.


I'd have to disagree on that part.
Posted Image

#37 Spitfire_Spiky

Spitfire_Spiky

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 09

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:48 AM

TB overpaid for Salo. I love the guy and am sad to see him go but he is not worth 7.5 mil for two years. With his injury issues in the past and his age becoming a factor i wouldn't have paid more then 2 mil/yr for 2 yrs or give him a one year worth 3 just to see how he does. I think TB fans in the long run will not appreciate Salo for what he bring to the table and will think he was a bad signing.
Mess with the Best, Die like the Rest

#38 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,049 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:03 AM

Capgeek.You are such an enlightening mass of humanity,Baggins.When it says 7m salary and 4.5 m bonus I count $11.5.Maybe it is 4.6 and a 2.4 signing bonus but ,whatever.I just read it,I don't write it.
http://capgeek.com/p...play.php?id=663

Bieksa's deal was for five years at $23 million, a cap hit of $4.6 million. That's $1.1 million more than he made last year, but he said he was willing to take a hometown discount in order to re-sign. Plus, a significant signing bonus means he will make $7 million next season.

LENGTH: 5 YEAR(S) VALUE: $23,000,000 TYPE: STANDARD EXPIRY STATUS: UFA SEASON AHL SALARY NHL SALARY P. BONUSES S. BONUS CAP HIT 2011-12 $7,000,000 $7,000,000 $0 $4,500,000 $4,600,000 2012-13 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $0 $3,500,000 $4,600,000 2013-14 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $4,600,000 2014-15 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $4,600,000 2015-16 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $0 $0
$4,600,000


Add up his salary and divide by five = cap hit.

Veterans are not eligible for bonuses until over 35 and all bonuses count towards the cap until they can't be earned as per the CBA. There's no way the league would approve a contract for Bieksa that had bonuses attached unless they were included in the yearly salaries as his previous contract was.

Now I will enlighten you. According to their legend "S Bonus" is signing bonus already included in the salary. Now I haven't seen any reference to signing bonuses in Bieksa's current contract. It also makes little sense that $10m of his $23m contract is signing bonus. Bieksa's previous contract did indeed have signing bonus included that cap geek doesn't show as a "S Bonus". He received a $750k signing bonus in the first year which is reflected in the $4.25m paid. The deal was 3 years at $3.5m plus a $750K signing bonus paid up front making the first year $4,25 for cap purposes. So they have the total right but failed show it included a bonus that actually was there. Ultimately I'd say cap geek is unreliable for actual contract breakdown unless you can find anything that says a portion of each year is indeed signing bonus. Although they do have the annual salary and cap hit right while you are wrong that he made $11.5m..

Next time read the fine print. You have been enlightened.


Edit: I found the info. The signing bonuses are correct. It's actually quite brilliant for the player. Signing bonuses are paid up front each year while the actually salary is paid weekly throughout the season. So Bieksa received $4.5 of the $7m up front last season and will receive $3.5 of the $4.5 million up front this coming season. I'd say his bachelors degree in finance paid off. Literally.

Edited by Baggins, 03 July 2012 - 10:20 AM.

Posted Image

#39 Sami Solo

Sami Solo

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:05 AM

Stubborn? You realize if Salo resigns, that's an over-35 contract, which means the cap hit stays on past his retirement.

3.0-3.75M to spend on nothing is stupid. Gilis made the right move by letting salo go if he was asking for a multi-yr deal.


It worked out good for Willie, now Sami can go get a cup before he hangs them up.

#40 NLluvitorleaveit

NLluvitorleaveit

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 387 posts
  • Joined: 24-December 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:16 AM

Can't wait to see him on the PP with Stamkos n Lecavalier :)

Posted Image


#41 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,171 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:19 AM

If it turned out that Garrison was staying in Florida afterall or if he insisted on $6mil per or something silly like that, then Salo would've been retained.

As it were, Salo already signed last season for a discount. That was to prove that he still had some hockey left, imo. Which he did, at least enough to convince Yzerman, who is desperate for immediate top-4 help.

There's nothing to do but wish Salo well and welcome in our replacement. Oh, and i guess complain about everything too, but that'll never stop, no matter the topic/issue. Regards.


TOML
Posted Image

#42 nd84

nd84

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 06

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:53 AM

Get over it, Would of loved to see Salo stay and retire here. He should of been a Canuck for the rest of his career

But this is the business. Asking for two years and an increase of 1.75 million dollars in salary was too much for MG especially with what he wants to do this year, get a little younger
Posted Image

#43 Cr8zyCanuck

Cr8zyCanuck

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 279 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 07

Posted 08 July 2012 - 10:12 PM

Figured I'd put my breakdown of how Salo was underpaid last season in this thread too. Basically, I was "juking the stats" so even a caveman could understand Salo was underpaid.

Salo played in 84.1% of games last season at a 2M price tag. Since he was top 4, and we know the Canucks had a losing record without him in the lineup, I think it fair to say he was underpaid.

Let's look at an average top 4 Dman getting payed quite a bit. Garrison is at 5.5M for this year. Let's divide that by half to be fair, basically saying that Salo is HALF the D-man Garrison was last year (not true at all). 2.75M would have been fair for Salo last year, however let's take out the 15.9% of games he missed last year to be fair to what he was actually worth per game.

We still have 2.31M


Now we need to factor in a non-mathematical factor which would be the intangibles he brings to the ice on a game to game basis. His big shot, puck movement, defensive positioning, his cornering guys off into the boards and stopping rushes, his consistency.

If anyone has the teams winning % without Salo in the lineup Vs. with him.

All I could find is this quote from a Canadian article publishes back in Jan 23, 2011 -The Canucks are barely a .500 team when Salo's out of the lineup

If this is in fact true, then what are we with him the line up? Let's say we're .599 (stats from 2011-2012 show we are overall better than that, but just to be completely flawless mathematically let's say we are only 9.99% better with him in the lineup....we are better than that but for the sake of the argument)

We'll take the 2.23M salary and factor in the X factor which is: 9.99%< X just to be safe and honest

2.23M x .0999 + 2.23 = FINAL ANSWER

2.461 M/ year

Lastly, let's end with this beautiful tribute to Salo.

Posted Image

Grossly underpaid? Nah. Underpaid last year? Yeah. Even whilst being super conservative with %s and going completely under what was fair to Salo, we still come out with OVER 2M/YEAR salary. Poor Salo. Well, not anymore. Tampa is a nice gig. I hear they have Nude Beaches there.





Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.