Rounoush Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 I am so happy the sane people in this article are getting more thumbs up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 You know what was intended with the other points and yet chose to ignore them in favour of your tunnel-vision view (where are the other opinions the confirm what Willes was reporting? would you turn down Burrows for someone like Modano now just because he started producing at a late age? etc). I'll focus on the above sections though. What did Anaheim have a surplus of: starting goalies, or #1 defenceman? Obviously Anaheim felt Hiller was the one to go forward with, so much so they even waived Bryzgalov since they felt he was such an up and comer. Which player in Boston had the largest effect on the hockey team outside of the rink? Thomas' outspoken personal opinion on politics and religion have far outweighed his usefulness to the team while Chara knows how to keep his mouth shut and play hockey. Neither are a particularly compelling argument over who is more important to their team as a player considering who was on the trade block. For the last part, I've mentioned this many times, but the Canucks did meet with Weber a week before he signed the offer sheet. They discussed their options and what they were willing to give, and at least one of two things resulted: 1. Weber didn't like what was offered. 2. What was offered would have likely been matched. Neither situation alone would be Gillis' fault, yet you're happy to suggest Weber would have signed for less if only we'd tried. If you can't accept other people putting out scenarios about why signing such a long term, big money deal could be bad, then you should at least try and keep up with the facts of the situation in that Gillis did meet with Weber to discuss an offer sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancanwincup Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 i dont think you understand the magnitude of a impact weber could have on the canucks....he isnt coming here through free agency anymore, its gonna haft to be through trade...what would rather give up...edler, tanev, booth etc... or 4 late first rounders.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Did you just say Weber met with the Canucks? An RFA from another team met with a G.M that had no permission to speak with that player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 the four first round picks would be the equivalent of gance, jensen, schroeder and this years first rounder for weber and a monster 14 year contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiredatwork Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 I can honestly say I wouldn't have been thrilled if Gillis did what Holms did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 It's funny, because Canucks fans are calling for Gillis' head because he didn't offersheet Weber. Meanwhile, I've seen many Philly fans complaining about Holmgren's decision and how they're going to be in trouble within a couple of years, when their RFAs/UFAs need raises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Um, how the hell do you think offer sheets are signed? The players (RFA's) meet with other teams. What planet are you living on?I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Questions: -if Weber didn't like what was offered, how is that NOT Gillis' fault? -if Gillis shrugged his shoulders and said "meh, what's the point, NAS will just match, anyway, how is that NOT Gillis' fault? I'm not happy to suggest that Weber would've signed for less, but I am happy to suggest that the first REASONABLE offer sent his way probably would've been signed, with "reasonable" being anything from a Suter-equivalent and up. And if Gillis wasn't prepared to offer anything of that magnitude, than the meeting was a complete waste of time, as Gillis is crazy if he thinks Weber would sign for less because he's a nice guy from Sicamous (that's why the player agent exists). Both of these are directly Gillis' fault, yet you somehow say they're not. Explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Lol Nice try to look smart but you're incorrect sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 it doesnt matter if this guy is legit source or not, the canucks as an organization really screwed the pooch on this one.... GROW A PAIR AND MAKE A BOLD MOVE FOR GOD SAKES!!! 4 late first rounders for an all-world defenseman!??!!?!?!? WHERE DO I SIGN!?!?!?!? gillis's patience really screwed him, the franchise and the fans big time on this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnsey Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 only 1 team of 30 could have gotten Schultz and/or Weber. Schultz - On a personal note, Schultz made the right move. He gets a better chance(in regards to playing time) on the Oilers and gets to prove that he can play at the NHL level. After his existing contract he can sign with the team that can contend for a cup. Note to mention that the money this guy will earn is outrageous. He hasn't even had a NHL game on his stats yet, and he is getting paid $3M+ Weber - I would like to keep our draft picks instead of signing a player for 10+ years at $7M+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Lol Nice try to look smart but you're incorrect sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEAN HARNETT Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 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...
Ryan Strome Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Correct me then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 If Weber only wanted a massive deal like what Philly offered, then a majority of teams in the league wouldn't match that. Whittle down the remaining teams by where Weber wasn't considering going, and you don't have many left. It's a very small percentage of NHL teams that'd be willing or capable of offering this type of deal where Weber would actually sign it. Clearly Nashville isn't one of those teams or he would have done so with them. You believe Gillis should offer that type of deal, I don't. You don't see the pitfalls of that type of deal as major enough to worry about, I do. Guess which side Gillis falls on, and I'd say he's smarter than either of us concerning hockey in general and specifically the Canucks position on what deals they can and cannot offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEAN HARNETT Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Why don't you go ahead and explain to me how offer sheets are signed if the RFA in question cannot speak with other teams. It's been documented (I forget where, I'll have to sift through Twitter) that Shea Weber and his agent actually visited about 6 different cities to talk with other teams. Those teams include the Sharks, Rangers, Flyers, Canucks and I forget the other two. So yeah, there's that. Can somebody confirm this for me? I don't feel like scouring the internet for where I read that but I know I did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 You want a controlled and steady game? I guess you're not happy with Aaron Rome's departure than, am I right? For $4.6M and 6 years, I want something a lot more than "controlled and steady". BTW - would you call Christian Ehrhoff "controlled and steady"? He was pretty successful during his days here, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 You're right. He indeed did speak with 5 teams including the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuxFan09 Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Offer sheets are offer sheets, its a risk. No other team can speak with another teams rfa's unless that team was given permission to do so. Poile never gave Mg or the Nucks permission. Btw i from planet earth, you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.