Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Ed Willes' Tweets on Gillis/Weber


  • Please log in to reply
548 replies to this topic

#421 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,087 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 01:50 PM

What kind of proof are you looking for? Last 5 years in the NHL:

-Edler: 364 GP, 42 G, 181 PTS

-Weber: 373 GP, 80 G, 213 PTS

Seems pretty convincing, to me.

And this is discounting the MENTAL edge, which Weber has over Edler, that is massive. Think Edler will ever be wearing the "C" of an NHL team? Think again. He's a bit like Kyle Wellwood; immense talent, aloof, lackadaisical personality. Edler was BAD in this year's playoffs. His nickname speaks for itself - think you'll ever hear Shea Weber referred to as Bambi?

NOT COMPARABLE.


Take the last three years. Better sample. Both are getting close to their potential, if they haven't reached it already.

Weber: 238 games. 140 points.
Edler: 237 games. 142 points.

(Injured with only 51 games 10-11. Took the mean of the seasons before and after that and got 79 games. Seems fair, he's always been a mid 70+ game guy. He was on pace for 51 points that year)

Of course he was bad in this years' playoffs. Then again the entire team was too. "What have you done for me lately". Typical Vancouver market. And the C means what, exactly? Every great player went without the C and had to earn it at one point. Plus, the C is often rewarded to the best player of the team in the first place; Naslund and now Henrik being the most recent examples. The Predators have never had a player of their dominance offensively, not even close. It's not a knock against Edler. And for every captain you can find, you can find a mediocre to crappy captain. Just because Weber has the C doesn't mean he trumps Edler.

Oh, and the whole Bambi remark: Mattias Ohlund, commenting "He [Edler] was like Bambi when he first came into the league but now he realized how big and strong he is. When he hits guys, he hurts them.

Tell Mattias he doesn't know what he's talking about.
  • 3
Posted Image

#422 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,179 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 11

Posted 23 July 2012 - 01:58 PM

Take the last three years. Better sample. Both are getting close to their potential, if they haven't reached it already.

Weber: 238 games. 140 points.
Edler: 237 games. 142 points.

(Injured with only 51 games 10-11. Took the mean of the seasons before and after that and got 79 games. Seems fair, he's always been a mid 70+ game guy. He was on pace for 51 points that year)

Of course he was bad in this years' playoffs. Then again the entire team was too. "What have you done for me lately". Typical Vancouver market. And the C means what, exactly? Every great player went without the C and had to earn it at one point. Plus, the C is often rewarded to the best player of the team in the first place; Naslund and now Henrik being the most recent examples. The Predators have never had a player of their dominance offensively, not even close. It's not a knock against Edler. And for every captain you can find, you can find a mediocre to crappy captain. Just because Weber has the C doesn't mean he trumps Edler.

Oh, and the whole Bambi remark: Mattias Ohlund, commenting "He [Edler] was like Bambi when he first came into the league but now he realized how big and strong he is. When he hits guys, he hurts them.

Tell Mattias he doesn't know what he's talking about.


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.
  • 3

#423 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 03:10 PM

Oh, and the whole Bambi remark: Mattias Ohlund, commenting "He [Edler] was like Bambi when he first came into the league but now he realized how big and strong he is. When he hits guys, he hurts them.


Yes, he's big and strong. Yes, when he hits guys, it hurts. The roadblock to Alex Edler's success is ALEX EDLER. Some guys just aren't wired to be superstars, and I think it's pretty obvious, from his totally inconsistent play, that he's one of those guys. Some guys just don't understand/accept/appreciate how good they COULD be, and that's Edler to a fault. If he was traded to Nashville in a package to get Weber, he'd probably go on to fade into near complete obscurity, going on to have a solid but unremarkable NHL career (similar to Sami Salo), because he's just not wired to be in the limelight.

There's nothing wrong with that, and I do like him a lot, but he is NO Shea Weber, that is for sure.
  • 0

#424 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,087 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 06:58 PM

Yes, he's big and strong. Yes, when he hits guys, it hurts. The roadblock to Alex Edler's success is ALEX EDLER. Some guys just aren't wired to be superstars, and I think it's pretty obvious, from his totally inconsistent play, that he's one of those guys. Some guys just don't understand/accept/appreciate how good they COULD be, and that's Edler to a fault. If he was traded to Nashville in a package to get Weber, he'd probably go on to fade into near complete obscurity, going on to have a solid but unremarkable NHL career (similar to Sami Salo), because he's just not wired to be in the limelight.

There's nothing wrong with that, and I do like him a lot, but he is NO Shea Weber, that is for sure.


Inconsistent? When? I think he's consistently been our best guy at both ends. Whatever, blah blah blah. All irrelevant debate, whatever. Where are you getting these expectations from? I don't think anyone credible ever labeled Edler as a future superstar anyway. I think his ceiling has been capped as a reliable top pairing guy and that's it. Just because CDC says he's the next Lidstrom doesn't actually mean that's even remotely close to being true. Same with Salo. If he was wired to be a star, he wouldn't have been drafted in the 9th round. If people set realistic expectations, they probably wouldn't be disappointed. And on a side note, it's crazy to think about Salo here because if the Sens never drafted him with the third last pick in that draft, his life may be completely different right now. He may have never made the NHL, never played with the Canucks and if someone brought up the name, we'd respond with "who?"

But with all that said, I think would accept a trade involving Edler and whatever reasonable for Weber, but I'm totally against the offer sheet that would keep us in prospect pool mediocrity for a long time. Also would be hesitant to have that massive cap hit -- but at least we didn't give up what future we have in picks.
  • 0
Posted Image

#425 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 07:04 PM

I'm totally against the offer sheet that would keep us in prospect pool mediocrity for a long time. Also would be hesitant to have that massive cap hit -- but at least we didn't give up what future we have in picks.


Um. You're talking about the Vancouver Canucks, right?

Prospect pool "mediocrity" would be an improvement, for this franchise.
  • 0

#426 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,087 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 07:04 PM

Um. You're talking about the Vancouver Canucks, right?

Prospect pool "mediocrity" would be an improvement, for this franchise.


:lol:

Lets just agree it's not very good
  • 0
Posted Image

#427 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,177 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 23 July 2012 - 07:07 PM

Can't wait till Nashville matches and it's Holmgren and weber that are the idiots that screwed this up. Mike Gillis presented him with a way he can get out of Nashville but he would have risk what is coming in the next Cba.. He did not want to do that and will end up In Nashville if they match. It's not a bad thing for weber because he still gets what his top priority is, a massive contract. He can still demand a trade and most likely will because Nashville is going to suck when they can't afford any decent players after paying out the bonus money.

I feel like weber kind of shot his cup chances in the foot if Nashville matches. Sure he gets his money but it's going to handcuff poile from being able to surround him with talent. This also forces whatever team that trades for him to trade 2 or 3 key pieces of their team, aswell as a couple first rounders hindering their future.. But hey, who cares because he's going to make way more money now.

Wether u like MG or not he was still the guy that offered weber a way out of Nashville.. but in the end he chose the money over cup chances.


  • 1

#428 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 07:44 PM

Wether u like MG or not he was still the guy that offered weber a way out of Nashville.. but in the end he chose the money over cup chances.


First of all, MG didn't offer Weber anything, and whether you like it or not, anybody in Weber's situation with half a brain would've acted in the same manner. Money DOES matter, especially when you're talking about generational wealth.

Signing a 1-year deal under the assumption that you'll become a UFA next year is LOADED with risks, with the SOLE reward being that you get to choose exactly where you want to play. Thing is, all reports say that Weber likes it in Nashville just fine. So if they do match, that's OK. If they don't match, Philly's a fantastic city. Regarding future Cup chances...perhaps, but the one thing that Nashville has, which many teams don't, is a serious ability to scout and draft. I am VERY bullish on Ryan Ellis, I think he's the next Mike Green, at a minimum. They'll have more challenges from a financial perspective, but let's not forget that they've won as many Cups in their history as we have; 0.
  • 0

#429 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,177 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:31 PM

Are you going to keep crying about it after Nashville matches and gillis was completely right?
  • 0

#430 PrimeMinisterBure

PrimeMinisterBure

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:50 PM

Are you going to keep crying about it after Nashville matches and gillis was completely right?


You say that as though it's a fact that Nashvile is going to match. That's the same mentality operated by Gillis and all the other losers of the Canucks management that resulted in this organzation completely missing out on landing such a high-quality player. Darren Dreger, who knows much more about this situation than you and the other defeatists in this thread, is now reporting that it's likely the case that the Preds won't match the Fylers' offer, due to Holmgren taking the very same action that Gillis could have easily taken with the amount of revenue this franchise generates and the wealth its owners hold: he offered too much money for a small organization like Nashville to match. Even if Dreger and his sources are wrong and the Preds do match, it doesn't forgive Gillis from making all the wrong/idiotic/loser-mentality moves he did in this scenario.
  • 0

#431 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,341 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:56 PM

Well then, let's simplify. I'm going to summarize the main points you've made in this thread and you can correct me if they're wrong.

1. Gillis' attempts to get Weber were nothing short of a failure. In fact, he did very little (upgrade from your initial opinion of nothing at all) to try and secure Weber's services.

2. We are worse off than we were last year. Losing Salo and Rome and replacing them with Garrison plus depth D and our prospects is a definite downgrade.

3. Jason Garrison is a one hit wonder and not worth anything near the contract he signed. His offence was due to Campbell and none of us even knew who he was last year.

4. Weber would have signed here for less had we offered. He wanted to come here, Aquilini wanted him here, but Gillis did nothing.

5. The Philly offer sheet was purely what the market would bear. On top of that, there is no downside whatsoever for them in doing so.

Feel free to take some time and see if I've missed anything you want to add as well, and put in your corrections.

EDIT: for clarity and spelling.

Agreed.

Agreed.

I agree that I've said that it's a bad contract. The second sentence is unimportant.

I think Weber probably would've agreed to the first REASONABLE offer that was sent his way from one of the 5 teams of interest.

Agreed. There's no downside to them if Nashville matches, correct. There is downside inherent in the contract, like any contract.

I'm not going to bother going and getting the other quotes for points where you made adjustments, so let's go with your answers. I'll put them in separate posts to try and make it easy for you to follow.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#432 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,341 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:58 PM

For your point about it being an absolute failure not to submit an offer sheet: SHOULD GILLIS HAVE MADE THE HOLMGREN OFFER?

Is it fair to criticize Mike Gillis for not being as bat-crap crazy as Paul Holmgren? I don't really think so, not that it will stop anyone.

The stock of Mike Gillis, the team's generally conservative General Manager, has taken a sizable hit over the past six months in the eyes of Vancouver's more emotional hockey fans. That will happen when you trade a young player like Cody Hodgson, a perfect vessel for the hopes and dreams of cultish Canadian hockey fans, then lose in the postseason in five games...

Canucks fans wanted bold moves this summer and instead the club missed out on Justin Schultz, has yet to move Roberto Luongo, is likely to strike out on Shane Doan and now: they're sitting on the sidelines while Philadelphia makes a bold play for Shea Weber, the ultimate object of desire for any true born British Columbian hockey fan.

First of all, it's worth remembering that the Canucks at least explored this particular possibility. As per Elliotte Friedman:

@Elliotte Friedman@FriedgeHNIC
Credit to @DarrenDreger, the story is true. I thought it would be Philly or Vancouver.
18 Jul 12


Vancouver's interest was confirmed by Weber's agent, and Laurence Gilman told Brad Zeimer that "it's safe to assume" that the spectre of a Shea Weber offer sheet was "discussed internally" at Rogers Arena.

So what does this tell us? It tells us that the Canucks were aggressive in pursuing every possible recourse that could maybe, just maybe see Shea Weber suit up in green, white and blue.

But they weren't so aggressive as to lob this particular grenade into David Poile's bunker. Is that stupid? Is it limp-wristed?

For all of Paul Holmgren's bluster and balls - admirable qualities no doubt - he's chosen to pursue Shea Weber using a tactic that will almost certainly fail. I thought Canucks fans wanted Shea Weber on their team, I didn't realize that what they actually wanted was Mike Gillis to make a big show of pursuing Shea Weber.

Again, here's the rub: the Canucks considered an offer-sheet for Shea Weber. While they weren't in on trade talks for Weber, I doubt that has anything to do with a lack of effort, and significantly more to do with David Poile's asking price (start the discussion as Ryan Kesler). In the meantime they met with Weber, and considered the offer sheet route internally, but decided against a tactic that the management team, apparently, saw as sure to fail.

To anyone looking at this situation critically earlier this summer, it was apparent that unless Shea Weber wanted out of Nashville at any cost, the Canucks were going to be a long-shot at best to land his services. Ultimately, Shea Weber didn't really want out of Nasvhille (despite his recent comments), and it's quite clear that he prioritized cashing out before the current CBA expires over getting out of dodge. Agreeing to this offer sheet with Philadelphia isn't the "get out of town" move, it's the "I make big money, I drive big cars" maneuver.

Let's get back to Mike Gillis, the man who didn't extend Shea Weber an offer sheet. Simply put, I just don't get criticizing Canucks management for failing to pursue a course of action that (probably) won't succeed. Some people may point to the "one year offer sheet" but seriously that scenario was never going to happen becasue such a deal would've left Weber's long-term financial future exposed to the uncertainty of CBA negotiations. Weber was looking at a situation where he had to either sign now or wait until next summer when his new deal might've been subject to a term limit or worse, that he'd have to remain an RFA because of an extension of "years accrued." The one year offer sheet was a non-starter.

Mike Gillis also didn't manage to orchestrate a trade for Shea Weber, but no one else could either. Poile reportedly was dragging his feet on an offer from the Flyers that would've included three young roster players plus, leading Holmgren to force his hand by signing Weber to this deal. Short of moving Ryan Kesler, the Canucks were never going to be able to compete with a Flyers package on the trade market.

Finally, Mike Gillis didn't make an offer that would closely mirror the one Holmgren made to Weber. Maybe he should have, and certainly there is no denying that the structure of Holmgren's offer is devious and subtly brilliant. For the next few days, Flyers fans will have images of Shea Weber sporting Halloween colours and absolutely wrecking people on Broad Street. The fantasies will be glorious, but then Nashville will (probably) match, those dreams will evaporate, and Holmgren will have simply done David Poile a favour by having locked up his franchise cornerstone long-term (albeit at an exorbitant price).

This is what the anger and criticism being directed towards Mike Gillis over the past few days is actually all about, I think: the death of the Shea Weber fantasy. But if the Canucks were going to make a move to go after an elite, 1A defenseman, I'd prefer them to go about it in a way that actually, you know, lands that blue-chip 1A blueliner! For the Canucks, who didn't have the trade chips to compete with the Rangers, Flyers or Red Wings, the only real hope was that Weber wanted out of Nashville and was committed to doing everything in his power to hit unrestricted free-agency, personal costs be damned.

It didn't turn out that way and it was never going too. Because the Predators are likely to match this and any Weber offer, I think there's another way of looking at this: the Canucks may have been spoiling their one possible shot at Weber if they'd extended the Sicamous, B.C. native an offer sheet. Based on the way the recruitment of other BC born defenseman like Dan Hamhuis (his rights were traded twice, he still went to July 1st and left money on the table to come to Vancouver) and Jason Garrison (left at least one million per season on the table this summer) played out, the Canucks may have even had an inside track...

Paul Holmgren's gambit is cunning, and mad, and has a very outside shot of working. If it does, it'll undoubtedly be the best move made by an NHL General Manager since Dean Lombardi somehow (thanks to Holmgren, actually) managed to add two top-line player to a loaded roster for cents on the dollar in the span of ten months. Still, I remain convinced that the Predators will match or else run the risk of becoming the Montreal Expos, and that Holmgren's maneuverings will have been for naught.

For the Canucks, their conservatism on this end makes a good deal of sense to me. I don't like the result, since I think Weber is exactly the type of piece this Canucks team needs to really put the club over the top, but the thought process behind it seems sensible. As a fan, that's all you can really ask for.

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?
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#433 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,341 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:59 PM

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

2. Vancouver Canucks -- "The Presidents' Trophy winning team managed to snag one of the top defenders in free agency (Jason Garrison) and even managed to get him on a bit of a discount when compared to the rest of the market. Garrison is more than just a booming slap shot from the point, he's also a quality all-around defender. Don't expect him to score 16 goals again like he did this past season, but that shouldn't subtract too much from his overall value." -- Northwest Division Progress Report
The Canucks Are… Better. How can they not be after adding a quality top-four defenseman to a roster that just finished the regular season with the best record in the league?
...

Add that the Canucks are beginning to look to prospects to fill some of the depth roles formerly held by players like Rome, and getting younger while keeping at least similar quality to what Salo offers at this point, and it's an area that has improved, in my opinion and that of others. The offseason isn't even over yet, but you're ready to damn the Canucks as worse than last year.

Rome is decent, and Salo is very steady despite being on the tail end of his career, but at least Salo was looking for a larger contract than we were willing to give. He ended up with the highest cap hit of his career, at 37 years of age no less.

Garrison is at least equal to what Salo can bring defensively, and can bring a more physical game (something people keep saying we are lacking in) while potentially at least matching or exceeding Salo's point totals, particularly in the role Salo was accustomed to last year, with time alongside Edler, and on the PP with the Sedins.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#434 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,341 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:00 PM

For you point about Garrison being a one hit wonder: Former Panthers defenceman could not pass up chance to play for hometown club

The chance to play at home was too good for Jason Garrison to pass up.

The new Vancouver Canucks defenceman had a chance to sign for bigger dollars elsewhere, but he opted to join the NHL club that he grew up watching instead.

"I don't think you should take anything for granted," Garrison said Monday on a conference call. "I really look forward to playing in Vancouver. That's where I'm from, and it's definitely something I'm really excited about, and I can't wait for it to start."

Garrison was speaking a day after the Canucks signed the former Florida Panther to a six-year contract worth an average of US$4.6 million a season. Garrison hails from the oceanside Vancouver-area community of White Rock, B.C. He joins the Canucks after four seasons with the Panthers organization, where he emerged as a 23-minutes-per-game defenceman.

Garrison, 27, recorded 16 goals—a new Panthers club record for defencemen—and 17 assists for 33 points in 77 games with Florida last season. He also compiled a modest 32 penalty minutes.

The six-foot-two, 220-pound former University of Minnesota-Duluth rearguard added a goal and two assists in the playoffs.

Even if 16 goals is the high of his career, he's certainly capable of a fair portion of that, and teams were willing to offer more to get him. He played a physical game, and had very good shutdown stats in his own end the past two seasons.

Another point in his favour is he ony had 32 penalty minutes last season. Bieksa, Ballard, Hamhuis, Rome, Alberts and Edler all had more, so Garrison fits the bill of a responsible defender as well, similar to Salo's cerebral play. Playing without Campbell and paired with Mike Weaver as the Panthers leading shutdown pair the season prior, he only had 26 penalty minutes.

His contract is only $600K above Tom Gilbert's, whose deal was signed 4 years ago when the cap was lower. Joni Pitkanen and Marc Giordano have both taken similar deals but staying with their current teams rather than in free agency and are around the same age. All have more years of offensive production, granted, yet so does Matt Carle, and he earned $5.5M in a 6 year deal this year in free agency with Tampa. His deal is more suggestive of what the market will bear for free agents and Garrison got less.

And from my earlier post: The Orca Defence Corp: Analyzing the Vancouver Canucks’ Blueline

While the loss of Salo will be a blow for the Vancouver team, a top 4 defensive unit of Kevin Bieksa, Dan Hamhuis, Alex Edler and the newly acquired Jason Garrison looks as good as any top 4 group currently in the NHL today. While the Canucks do not have a franchise defenseman such as Shea Weber or Zdeno Chara, they do have a solid top four which in true Mike Gillis style, not one player has a cap hit over $4.6 million a season.

Whether Hamhuis and Bieksa stay as the top pairing remains to be seen but it seems the combination of left sided defenseman Alex Edler and Jason Garrison, who has the ability to play both left and right, will at least start the season on the same line. Edler and Garrison will both be expected to lead the defensive point production and see plenty of power-play time, with both coming off record points seasons, Edler registering 11 goals and 49 points and Garrison with 16 goals and 33 points last regular season.


Weber took his entitlement to a larger deal rather than come play near home after a year, or ask for a trade from Nashville rather than pursue an offer sheet, which he could have chosen to do.

You spoke about what accepting deals that the market would bear, and Garrison accept less than the market would bear to play where he wanted.

But then I'm stepping on the next point.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#435 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,341 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:01 PM

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

“People assume anybody born in B.C. automatically wants to play for the Vancouver Canucks,” GM Mike Gillis said while co-hosting the midday show on TEAM 1040 Monday.

“I really like the guy. I think he’s a terrific player. I think at the end of the day, the market place really didn’t matter. He was determined to take advantage of the rules that are currently in place and he did so.”

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.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#436 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,341 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:04 PM

For your point that Philly has no downside to Nashville matching the offer sheet: Why NHL teams cry poor despite the league’s record growth

Where the league is suffering and why we may have yet another lockout (the third under Bettman) is ( a ) the bottom 10 teams have revenues so low they can’t cover their expenses and ( b ) those at the top have little intention of helping them do so more than they already are.

It’s an owner versus owner problem more than it is an owner versus player one, with Thursday’s massive offer sheet the perfect example of how a high spending team can go after one receiving revenue sharing and just hanging on.

The fact the players are again being asked to save the stragglers rubs many on the PA side the wrong way.

“Under the current CBA, NHL teams have received over $3-billion in revenue that would have previously gone towards player salaries,” one such source said this week. “The issue is not whether the players should now give up more revenue, it’s what did the owners do with this $3-billion?

“We know what they didn’t do. NHL clubs did not meaningfully revenue share between the big and small markets. After accepting a salary cap, a 24 per cent rollback and making other significant concessions last time, with revenues up over 50 per cent since 2005, why look to the players again?”
...
But pushing the players to fix this can only take them so far here. For the rest of the solution, this is a league that needs to look in the mirror at what’s really happening and why some of its teams are losing this much money.

Or give up the ruse that that’s what they’re fighting to correct in the first place.

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.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#437 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:05 PM

Its all conjecture but needless to say Gillis admitted he was not prepared to offer Weber some gargantuan deal the way the Flyers did.

I really hope the Preds match.
  • 0
Posted Image

#438 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:25 PM

Ed Willes is a hack. Just like 90% of the Province sport writers


I agree, but his biggest priority is to get people to pay attention to him and to try to stir up controversy. Judging by the 300 or more (and counting) posts here I'd say he was successful.

I'm on the fence with this topic.

If Gillis/Gilman put together an offer resembling Philly's, and IF (a big if) Nashville didn't match it (and I think they will match PHI's offer), then a true #1Dman, which is something VAN has never had in 42 years of existence, on board with its elite forwards and new #1 goalie could mean at least one Cup. IF (and again that's a risk and pure spec) we took one Cup in the next two-three years, I wouldn't care that VAN's future after that took a hit for the length of Weber's contract what with no 4 1st-rounders and other necessities based on a reduced cap.

But no Weber (and no Doan, if that happens) means the pressure on Gillis and crew to win it all increases dramatically in the next two-three years. As the OP said many posts ago -- and barring any dramatic blue-chip prospect successes in a Luongo deal -- after the Sedins decline noticeably, we'll be just another mid-pack playoff team who'll have to depend on unreal goaltending (possible) and getting crazy over-the-top production in the playoffs, something we haven't been noted for so far.

A ton of variables, but it's nice to dream, as Botch's column pointed out.

Probably moot in a few days anyway since I think NSH has no choice -- if they don't want the franchise to implode -- but to sign Weber, and either convince him to stay after next season, or to trade him in a year or two for a better package than PHI's low 1st rounders.
  • 0

#439 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,469 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 23 July 2012 - 11:06 PM

However, statistically speaking, he is no better offensively than Edler is. Weber is a better goal scorer, yes, but so what? Overall, he is not better than Edler offensively.



Edler plays with the #1 and #5 offenses in the league (last 2 years). Though Nashville's offense improved last year, they've had below-average forwards for much of Weber's career.

People complain about our disappearing PP in the playoffs. A Weber blasting and delegating on the point would go a long way to correct that. (Without Ehrhoff, Edler had zero confidence on the point vs LA, even while acknowledging D Sedin's absence in the first three games.)
  • 0

#440 Mastaj

Mastaj

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 929 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 04

Posted 24 July 2012 - 01:23 AM

I think that interview with Gillis on the Team1040 showed he was willing to "go big". A 1-year, $14million dollar offer, that STILL would have cost us 4 first rounders? Sure, maybe it was not 14 years and $110million, but again, that type of offer CLEARLY needs ownerships permission, which they obviously didn't give. If you're angry at a lack of moves, it should be directed at ownership, not just the GM.

Oh, and I guess those posters still claiming that an RFA can't meet with other teams still don't believe it, even after it was documented that Gillis met with Weber in Kelowna to discuss a contract?
  • 0
Go Banana!!
-Ralph Wiggum

#441 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 06:17 AM

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?


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.

And regarding your posted article, "aggressive", to me, means offering him something. Not getting together for tea. Do you really think that the Canucks were as aggressive as Friedman seems to suggest? They didn't offer him anything! Classic tire-kicking window-shoppers, nothing else.
  • 0

#442 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 06:20 AM

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


I addressed your "Power Rankings" retort a few days ago, and I'm sure that it'd be no task to search the internet to find a few bloggers who think the Canucks have gotten worse.

Add that the Canucks are beginning to look to prospects to fill some of the depth roles formerly held by players like Rome, and getting younger while keeping at least similar quality to what Salo offers at this point, and it's an area that has improved, in my opinion and that of others. The offseason isn't even over yet, but you're ready to damn the Canucks as worse than last year.


Because that was the QUESTION! I'm not Miss Cleo, I don't know what the future holds, and/or what the Canucks will do for the remainder of the off-season. TODAY, they are a worse team. Do you disagree?
  • 0

#443 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 06:27 AM

For you point about Garrison being a one hit wonder: Former Panthers defenceman could not pass up chance to play for hometown club


Seriously, rah-rah articles don't strengthen your points. Just stop.

Joni Pitkanen and Marc Giordano have both taken similar deals but staying with their current teams rather than in free agency and are around the same age. All have more years of offensive production, granted, yet so does Matt Carle, and he earned $5.5M in a 6 year deal this year in free agency with Tampa. His deal is more suggestive of what the market will bear for free agents and Garrison got less.


Please, go compare the careers of Pitkanen, Giordano, and Carle to Garrison, and come back and answer which one is BY FAR the least proven - and thus the most risky.

Weber took his entitlement to a larger deal rather than come play near home after a year, or ask for a trade from Nashville rather than pursue an offer sheet, which he could have chosen to do.


Of course he took the deal, because he risks losing TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS if he didn't. Does that make sense to you?

You spoke about what accepting deals that the market would bear, and Garrison accept less than the market would bear to play where he wanted.


Yeah, well, I can guarantee you that the Canucks would've been within, say, 5% of the highest offer, 10% TOPS, and I suspect that the team they would've been competing with would've been some east coast dog like the Islanders. If you're suggesting that Garrison took an extreme hometown discount to play here, you're delusional.
  • 0

#444 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 06:33 AM

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.


If the market place "doesn't really matter", as appears to be Mike Gillis' excuse for the day, THEN WHY DID HE SPECIFICALLY SEEK OUT AND MEET WITH ONLY 5 TEAMS?! Answer me that one.

And you're missing an important point - there's nothing WRONG with Nashville! They're a highly respected NHL organization, which is why Weber would be OK remaining there.
  • 0

#445 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 06:36 AM

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.


Who cares?

Failing to act because of some rule which MAY be changed is a total loser's strategy. If Nashville doesn't match, PHILLY is on the hook for all that money, nobody else. It's THEIR gamble.
  • 0

#446 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,017 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 24 July 2012 - 07:16 AM

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.

I don't really agree with that.

By presenting Weber with the kind of offer sheet that Philly did, you're basically going all or nothing. We'll forget about the huge Cap implications and the blow to what is already a weak prospect pool, if Weber actually becomes a Canuck, mission accomplished.

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.

My feeling is that the only way the Canucks were ever going to land Shea Weber, is if he really wanted to come here. From what I have seen and read, that turns out not to be the case, despite what Ed Willes has speculated.
  • 1
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#447 Grapefruits

Grapefruits

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,223 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 08

Posted 24 July 2012 - 07:41 AM

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.


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.
  • 0

wmmkuv.jpg


#448 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 687 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 24 July 2012 - 07:45 AM

People just simply need to realize that life isn't at all like NHL '12
  • 0

#449 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 08:06 AM

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.


Well, Gillis has had since 2008 to land him through trade, so that's really not an excuse, either. Nashville not being willing to trade him is exactly why the offer from Philadelphia made so much sense, Nashville's going to need to pony up big time if they want to keep him.
  • 0

#450 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 24 July 2012 - 08:08 AM

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.


I agree, but I also think that Shea Weber would've increased our odds exponentially, especially as it relates to THIS year.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.