Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Do you think Salo was underpaid last year?


kj29

Do you think Salo was underpaid last year?  

157 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Ok, my point was that Salo should have given the 2 year 2 million per deal he requested at the end of our cup run season.

That's what i said this time last year.

Time for you to man up, no more hiding, go ahead and answer directly.

should Gillis have signed Salo to the 2 year 2 mill? Remember champ, man up and answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already answered that when I explained why he shouldn't have...champ.

No. This is a cup contending team that spends a lot of money. Salo is a risk to sign for multiple years for all the reasons I already stated.

Seriously...if you're going to ask questions you should make sure they haven't already been answered. It shows your lack of ability to actually have a discussion with give and take rather than trying to create something to point to your conclusion.

Did you really say that last July 1st when Salo signed with the Canucks? I mean that should be pretty easy to prove because you can just go back in your post history.

Champ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whoa, buddy, remember, no excuses. C'mon now, lets talk direct like you wanted to.

Would you take Salo at one year, 2 mill this year? If so last year was a mistake, but you can't answer that without an extended excuse. Look champ, man up. We both know you won't.

Lou contract, good or bad?

Coho trade, good or bad?

Ballard trade, good or bad?

The problem is you see your excuses as fact, so can never be objective.

man up, champ, do it for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whoa, buddy, remember, no excuses. C'mon now, lets talk direct like you wanted to.

Would you take Salo at one year, 2 mill this year? If so last year was a mistake, but you can't answer that without an extended excuse. Look champ, man up. We both know you won't.

Lou contract, good or bad?

Coho trade, good or bad?

Ballard trade, good or bad?

The problem is you see your excuses as fact, so can never be objective.

man up, champ, do it for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Salo was negotiating his last contract with the Canucks he was not a top 4 and he was not leading the team in PP goals.

He was this year.Usually means more bargaining power or a larger contract.

He had also just come off a contract that saw him paid very well (3.5 mil) given the salary cap at the time he signed it. It also had a NTC. This heart and soul guy was rewarded.

Not this year.He is in Tampa after clearly stating he wanted to stay here.

The contract he signed last season with the Canucks was after playing just 27 games and being a -3. His career was being called into question and some might say the contract he got from the Canucks (Also on July 1st BTW) could very possibly have been more than or equal to what he would have gotten offered on the open market...if he got any offers at all. My gut tells me he probably took a bit of a pay cut to be here but I doubt it was much of a pay cut. Certainly he wouldn't have turned down a contract like what he signed yesterday. That's just an educated guess based on the information at the time though...which is worlds better than making an argument about something that happened a year ago with details that happened after the fact.

Your stating his career was 'called into question' ,'very possibly' and 'my gut tells me' and 'educated guess' should be reserved for horse shoes and not the hockey gospel hour.

Now don't get me wrong...Sami is great and I'm going to miss him but you're usual trying to find every way possible to be able to use the phrase "Gillis fail" is just as ridiculously inaccurate as it usually is.

We agree that most of us will miss Sami.

I wanted the team to retain Sami.You and Gillis don't. Gillis and Employee fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you're right he was this year and it would still have been a mistake to offer him a multi year deal.

He's in Tampa because he didn't accept a 1 year deal. He made the right choice because what he wanted wasn't being offered to him here.

Yeah except that his career was being called into question after having such an injury plagued season given that he's also an injury plagued player. Fact is...he signed with the Canucks. Fact is we know from this season that being a free agent and being offered a contract more to his liking means he leaves. That's not a knock on him because he'd be foolish not to have taken it. Gillis also would hvae been foolish to offer it.

.

This is also incorrect. I absolutely wanted the team to retain Salo...so did Gillis given his response regarding Salo prior to and after he signed in Tampa. What was that about horseshoes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're calling me a complete moron when you can't grasp a simple concept that has been explained to you several times now. I mean time and time again you have just completely missed the point and made a comment so far off base that it's mind boggling to try to figure out your "thought process".

That's rich.

Again...My opinion is that for this team giving Salo a multi year deal at this point in his career is foolish and a mistake. I'd take Salo at 3 million...or hell at 3.75 ...but only on a one year contract.

I'm not sure how much more simply that can be explained but perhaps you just don't have the capacities to grasp it.

It's funny you two guys...attached at the hip you are...funny indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the point you are trying to make, but you were just wrong, that's it.

I said last year that Gillis should have given Salo 2 yrs, 4 mill

you agreed with Gillis that it was too much of a risk.

You view this as a good decision that didn't work out, I view this as you being wrong, or making a mistake.

simple

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You clearly didn't understand...that or you're just trolling. Yeah 2 years for him is a risk but we've already been over that...or I have and you've done your best to avoid having to actually say anything about it. You however have made your argument so convoluted it's amazing. It's not wrong it's just different from your opinion.

You've yet to give a good reason to sign him multi year at the time and you've also yet to show me where you said at the time he should have been signed for 2 years at 4 mil. I checked the signing thread from last year and you were nowhere to be seen in that one. Bottom line is until you can actually present something reasonably intelligent that counters what I'm saying and what Gillis did...you haven't got much of an argument and you certainly can't dictate what's right and wrong.

You can view things to be wrong or a mistake all you want. In fact you may be right...but my god all your "i'm right, you're wrong, you're a moron, champ etc etc etc garbage if laughable and makes most of what you have to say a joke.

Bottom line is most of the time anything I've seen from you is not right. It might not be wrong but it's not right and only because you refuse to take in any other information. Your opinions are not facts. Stop being so worried about being right...more often than not you won't be right (and haven't) but you sure will(do) look foolish trying.

Last words all yours buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the point you are trying to make, but you were just wrong, that's it.

I said last year that Gillis should have given Salo 2 yrs, 4 mill

you agreed with Gillis that it was too much of a risk.

You view this as a good decision that didn't work out, I view this as you being wrong, or making a mistake.

simple

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whoa, buddy, remember, no excuses. C'mon now, lets talk direct like you wanted to.

Would you take Salo at one year, 2 mill this year? If so last year was a mistake, but you can't answer that without an extended excuse. Look champ, man up. We both know you won't.

Lou contract, good or bad?

Coho trade, good or bad?

Ballard trade, good or bad?

The problem is you see your excuses as fact, so can never be objective.

man up, champ, do it for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I talked about it last October, it came up in the "waive marco Sturm" thread, I brought it back up but it got locked for some unknown reason. anyway, it's right there for you to check out.

I'm a diehard, I live on the east coast. the friggin home games start at 11pm and i watch just about em all. its nice when they play on hte weekend so i can watch em the next morning. Anyway, I'm sure we have that in common but I really hate the direction this team has gone in. I feel this team started to be built when Burke drafted the twins, it's taken close to a decade to get where we are and our current gm has made so many bad decisions we have missed our window. that's why i get so frustrated as posters continually make excuses for his poor decisions. We'll never come close to agreeing but that's where I'm coming from. Pure frustration and disappointment in what's happened to this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sick of hearing people play the injury card where Salo is concerned. So he only played 69 games - anyone could have been injured by that cheap shot low bridge rat move. We were lucky he recovered so well. That injury may have effected him down the stretch as he was unbelievable before that hit, and still solid after he came back. I hope Sami goes ninja and lays a beating on his adversar!

Sami might just be my favorite all-time Canuck.

But this was not a fail move by either side. It is 100% understandable that he followed the best opportunity. I am also not about to blame Gillis for making a move to acquire Garrison.

Even if we had re-signed Sami, the Canucks would have still been looking for another guy who they could expect to give them 20 minutes a game. The right player was available - big, young, two way defenseman who is from and wants to play here - a guy that can be a part of the team for years to come. The Canucks simply had to take advantage of Garrison's availability and add him when not having to give up assets to do so.

At the same time, we couldn't expect Salo to sign for less term or value than he could get elsewhere. We also can't expect him to play 6 or 7th man minutes when a team like Tampa needs him to play a bigger role, and were willing to pay him accordingly.

It is sad, but those are the circumstances. I would have loved to have him back, but it is one of those contexts where the player and the team's best interests didn't intersect. I wish Sami all the best. There is no one I would rather see score the SC winning goal. The message he sent to us was pure gold - that's the kind of person he is. He was a great deal when we acquired him and has been ever since. Rock hard ride free Sami!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...