King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 So, considering others share my view, is it not conceivable that Gillis was in fact pursuing the best possible recourse to have Weber play for the Canucks, instead of it being an abject failure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 For your point about us losing more than we've gained this offseason, I'd already included in the previous post but I'll include it again: Offseason Progress Report: mid-summer power rankings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 For you point about Garrison being a one hit wonder: Former Panthers defenceman could not pass up chance to play for hometown club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 For your point about Weber would have signed a reasonable deal: Shea Weber’s wish list didn’t include playing for hometown crowd: Canucks GM He talked for 3 hours with Weber and his agent, and discussed "all the different possibilities" that would get Weber to the Canucks. Reasonable - reasonable for what would be most likely to succeed in getting him - wasn't what Weber wanted. Sure, Philly could get Weber but even they'd admit the ball lies in Nashville's court so they are at their mercy. Weber could have made a better decision that would have guaranteed he controlled his destiny, but he chose to "take advantage of the rules that are currently in place" instead to get a long term deal with more money that gave Nashville control over the next 14 years of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 This was again from my other post, and ignoring any repercussions Philly may have to deal with concerning offer sheets in return, ability to re-sign players or make deals with other teams in trades, there is an impact on whether or not the NHL and NHLPA can agree on a CBA so we'll have hockey to watch next year - even if Nashville matches. Just from the size of the deal alone and that it was offered by another of the richest teams in the NHL despite their argument the players need to do their part to help the teams in trouble it looks horrible, especially alongside all the other huge deals offered this summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 I still don't see how it would be considered an "abject failure" if Nashville matched. How can you call it that? It costs the Canucks NOTHING if they do so. N-O-T-H-I-N-G, besides, I guess, the cost of a single long-distance fax. There is NO downside that Philadelphia has exposed themselves to if Nashville chooses to match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grapefruits Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 I wouldn't even bother. Canucks fans are really starting to gain a reputation as a fanbase who doesn't realize what they already have and constantly cries for something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanGnome Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 People just simply need to realize that life isn't at all like NHL '12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 However, if the Preds decide to match your offer, (as Gillis and Gilman determined would happen) then you've essentially locked up the object of your desire for the rest of his career in Nashville. While it's true that he can be traded after one year, you would be in a situation where Poile holds all the cards this time around. Considering he wanted Schenn and Coutourier from Philly and (reportedly) Kesler from Vancouver, it would take a king's ransom to pry him out of Nashville next year, if it were even possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 Because we have SO much. This team is not a Stanley Cup contender as it sits, the teams has never won a Cup and at the rate Gillis is going, we won't. Lets face it, the window of opportunity is shrinking, and Gillis has done very little to fix things. Most of us realize as a fan bast that this team hasn't won a cup in 42 years and isn't about to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 So what Willes is saying, is that out of the half-dozen-or-so coveted D-men available this offseason (Suter, Garrison, Schultz...Weber...Wideman?...???), we only got one of them, but should have got two. Rational, intelligent people would say that getting one of these in a 30-team league is a job well done. But this is Ed Willes. Bonus stupid points for attacking Gillis based not getting a player who may not really be available (even if offering 4 first-rounders and a mammoth contract...Nashville still may match). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Absolutely. And this is the thing that I hate the most about the Salo/Garrison swap; Salo is FAR more proven, and he would've cost FAR less! Where's the logic in the Garrison deal? I don't see it anywhere. Even in his "breakout" season (a whole 33 points), 37 year-old, "bottom six" Sami Salo still almost had as much PPG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 So what Willes is saying, is that out of the half-dozen-or-so coveted D-men available this offseason (Suter, Garrison, Schultz...Weber...Wideman?...???), we only got one of them, but should have got two. Rational, intelligent people would say that getting one of these in a 30-team league is a job well done. But this is Ed Willes. Bonus stupid points for attacking Gillis based not getting a player who may not really be available (even if offering 4 first-rounders and a mammoth contract...Nashville still may match). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 Only a fool would say that Salo's game will improve next year. In fact, at 37, he's very likely to decline. I saw a fair bit of decline last season. Perhaps the rigors of playing 69 regular season games (the most he's played since 2003-04...think about that for a second) wore on him? Whereas Garrison may have been a one-hit wonder (and what a hit it was - outscored Salo's career high of goals in 06-07)...but there is also a chance that with only 194 games under his belt, he's only going to get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cs2016 Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 I never said that Salo was going to improve next year. But he really hasn't shown many signs of decline. The shot is still there, the brain is still there. He's just a rock-solid defenseman, one of the few guys on our team that I feel actually is respected by the opposition, due to his professionalism. Mike Gillis admitted as much on radio yesterday, that the loss of Sami is a serious loss. It is. And over 1 freaking year? Very, very disappointing. Sure, there's a chance that Garrison will only get better, but there's also a pretty good chance that he'll be a total flop, and we'll be whining about his contract for a long time. TBH, I'm thinking that odds are the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 <p> I never said that Salo was going to improve next year. But he really hasn't shown many signs of decline. The shot is still there, the brain is still there. He's just a rock-solid defenseman, one of the few guys on our team that I feel actually is respected by the opposition, due to his professionalism. Mike Gillis admitted as much on radio yesterday, that the loss of Sami is a serious loss. It is. And over 1 freaking year? Very, very disappointing. Sure, there's a chance that Garrison will only get better, but there's also a pretty good chance that he'll be a total flop, and we'll be whining about his contract for a long time. TBH, I'm thinking that odds are the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 24, 2012 Author Share Posted July 24, 2012 That said, this past year was the first time I noticed a steep decline in Salo's game as the year progressed. He definitely lost a step through the course of the season, and his stats bear that as well: First 30 games - 6G, 9A, 15Pts, +6 Last 39 games - 3G, 7A, 10Pts, even Playoffs (5GP) - 0G, 0A, 0Pts, -3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 So what Willes is saying, is that out of the half-dozen-or-so coveted D-men available this offseason (Suter, Garrison, Schultz...Weber...Wideman?...???), we only got one of them, but should have got two. Rational, intelligent people would say that getting one of these in a 30-team league is a job well done. But this is Ed Willes. Bonus stupid points for attacking Gillis based not getting a player who may not really be available (even if offering 4 first-rounders and a mammoth contract...Nashville still may match). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Do me a favour; share with us the same breakdown of Garrison's season/productivity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 I wouldn't even bother. Canucks fans are really starting to gain a reputation as a fanbase who doesn't realize what they already have and constantly cries for something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.