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

#151 Ray Canuck

Ray Canuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:41 PM

wonder how long it will be before we see soccer type signings, where teams just sell players for money.
  • 0
Posted Image
"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Mark Twain

#152 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:42 PM

Gillis is letting the organization and fans down for sure, he needs to surround the sedins with toughness and more scoring, has not done that, he has tho, disgruntled our best prospect since bure and then traded him away without getting full value. Trading Luongo would have been way easier if we could sweeten the deal with hodgson, Gills wet the bed thinking he absolutely needed to trade Cody at the deadline because he may not do well in the playoffs or down the stretch- poor management. There is some serious group think going on between gillis and gillman and there little war room.


OFFER SHEET VORACEK to 4.5 mill, with a NTC in the first year of a 2-3 yr contract. If philly gets weber, they cant offord this contract and because of the NTC they can't match and then trade him. Gillis is too stupid to figure this out though
  • 0

#153 AnInconvenienceBrah

AnInconvenienceBrah

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 486 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 12

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:45 PM

You make it sound so feasible. Did you attempt this in NHL 12 first?


this kinda lame joke is kinda played out now, maybe time for some new material, it was funny like 5 years ago when it first started up.

Edler should be able to return a top 6 winger and a top prospect, he's a young top 10/15 D man and his cap hit is very attractive, he's big and hits, Ballard came off of a good season and a strong playoffs he holds value, nothing I said is a long shot or not feasible, think about it if we did sign Weber teams that missed out would be calling Gillis about our D as if we did sign and land Weber we would have Weber, Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Garrison, Ballard , Tanev and Alberts so we'd have 2 guys we could afford to trade for upgrades for the farm and in the top 6 and teams that missed out would be in a big need.
  • 0

#154 Canuckfan1968

Canuckfan1968

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 960 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 05

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:47 PM

lol what is funny so many critics on garrisons signing, I would rather have a younger guy with a big shot then have a guy made of glass with a big shot. Salo has been here for a long time its time to move on. The least you can do is give him the chance to prove himself. Weber on the other hand is overated and good for philly if they want to waste money on a guy like weber all hell to them I dont want another lengthy contract like loungo's we see how that has handcuffed the organization. You complain about how gillis gave up cody hogdsons but what is Burke and nonis doing in toronto absolutely nothing, that organization gave way to much away for kessel, talk about selling the farm. I will stick with Gillis he has made alot of smart choices, so let him do his job.

Edited by Canuckfan1968, 21 July 2012 - 02:48 PM.

  • 0

#155 canuck_trevor16

canuck_trevor16

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,657 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 07

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:49 PM

lol what is funny so many critics on garrisons signing, I would rather have a younger guy with a big shot then have a guy made of glass with a big shot. Salo has been here for a long time its time to move on. The least you can do is give him the chance to prove himself. Weber on the other hand is overated and good for philly if they want to waste money on a guy like weber all hell to them I dont want another lengthy contract like loungo's we see how that has handcuffed the organization. You complain about how gillis gave up cody hogdsons but what is Burke and nonis doing in toronto absolutely nothing, that organization gave way to much away for kessel, talk about selling the farm.


Tyler Seguin-number 1 center?

Seguin long-term would have help leaf built around a franchise player

Edited by canuck_trevor16, 21 July 2012 - 02:50 PM.

  • 0

One day some of us will look back on the year and look at the chicago, and most of us will realize that it was a small bump in the road to the cup


WIN THE CUP FOR SALO CAMPAIGN

#156 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:49 PM

I laughed when I read those tweets. So dramatic. The media sensationalizes things to make a living. How am I expected to believe that not giving Weber a disgustingly large offer sheet is like a black mark on the current management's regime? Give me a break. The Canucks were one of the few teams that made Weber and his agent a presentation. Gillis tried. He's just not in the business of doling out gobs of money like Holmgren is. especially when he already has a very strong D core as is.

Despite what you irrational people here may think, Philadelphia NEEDED Weber. The Canucks didn't.

Edited by NuxFan09, 21 July 2012 - 02:50 PM.

  • 1

#157 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,157 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:50 PM

What if Garrison becomes the next Gragnani and isn't quite the "PP Specialist" that he's heralded as?

THIS IS A RISK THAT EXISTS WITH EVERY CONTRACT THAT'S SIGNED! How old are you? I'm not debating with a pre-teen, am I?


Difference being Garrison is signed to 6 years not 14, and is signed to a cap hit easy to deal with... Pretty incomparable risk.
  • 0

#158 Kesheniel

Kesheniel

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,157 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:51 PM

I laughed when I read those tweets. So dramatic. The media sensationalizes things to make a living. How am I expected to believe that not giving Weber a disgustingly large offer sheet is like a black mark on the current management's regime? Give me a break. The Canucks were one of the few teams that made Weber and his agent a presentation. Gillis tried. He's just not in the business of doling out gobs of money like Holmgren is. especially when he already has a very strong D core as is.

Despite what you irrational people here may think, Philadelphia NEEDED Weber. The Canucks didn't.


Thank god someone here has a freaking brain...

Edited by Kesheniel, 21 July 2012 - 02:51 PM.

  • 0

#159 AnInconvenienceBrah

AnInconvenienceBrah

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 486 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 12

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:51 PM

Gillis is letting the organization and fans down for sure, he needs to surround the sedins with toughness and more scoring, has not done that, he has tho, disgruntled our best prospect since bure and then traded him away without getting full value. Trading Luongo would have been way easier if we could sweeten the deal with hodgson, Gills wet the bed thinking he absolutely needed to trade Cody at the deadline because he may not do well in the playoffs or down the stretch- poor management. There is some serious group think going on between gillis and gillman and there little war room.


OFFER SHEET VORACEK to 4.5 mill, with a NTC in the first year of a 2-3 yr contract. If philly gets weber, they cant offord this contract and because of the NTC they can't match and then trade him. Gillis is too stupid to figure this out though


NTC in Voracek contract can't kick in next year or a few seasons from now with how the CBA is currently,
  • 0

#160 hockeyking

hockeyking

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 497 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 11

Posted 21 July 2012 - 02:54 PM

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....


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.
  • 0

#161 Rounoush

Rounoush

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,102 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 10

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:01 PM

I am so happy the sane people in this article are getting more thumbs up. :)
  • 0
Posted Image
Thanks a bunch to khalifawiz501 for the signature.

#162 Ryan Strome

Ryan Strome

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,958 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:02 PM

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.


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.

Edited by hockeyville88, 22 July 2012 - 10:49 AM.
Swear filter bypass, personal attack

  • 1



#163 Vancanwincup

Vancanwincup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 12

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:05 PM

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....


His cap hit would put Van in the situation of having to give up a Edler, booth, ballard, Burrows.. ect anyways. So no I not going to give up Elder mybe Burrows + 4 first rounds draft picks for Weber. Especial when Edler is not that far behind Weber in talent and play.
  • 1

#164 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:05 PM

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.


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?

Edited by hockeyville88, 22 July 2012 - 10:49 AM.

  • 4

#165 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:08 PM

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.


OK, well, we're currently worse on paper than we were last year, Kesler's going to miss the first 20 - 25% of the season, and we've got our two best players who could be far less effective going forward as they were in the last three years.

In other words, we won't win a Cup, Sedin's will retire, and it's back to "any team that gets into the playoffs, has a chance to win" type of environment for the Canucks, with, really, no future in sight.

I, for one, would like to see the Sedin's raise a Cup, and Gillis should be doing ALL that he can to try and make that happen between now and the final 2 years of their deal. Dumping Salo, acquiring Garrison, and holding $10M worth of goaltenders isn't going to make that happen. NOW is the time for Mike Gillis to make "a few bold moves". NOW.

Edited by King of the ES, 21 July 2012 - 03:09 PM.

  • 0

#166 tiredatwork

tiredatwork

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 814 posts
  • Joined: 15-May 09

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:08 PM

I can honestly say I wouldn't have been thrilled if Gillis did what Holms did.


Comedy. Whatever Gillis does it the right decision in your mind. period. I do think you actually believe that statement though.
  • 1

#167 DefCon1

DefCon1

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,401 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 08

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:10 PM

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.


Am just waiting for the time when Nashville gets its revenge and sends a juicy offer sheet towards Couturier or Brayden Schenn. I bet you Gillis will also offer sheet some of their youngsters while Weber and Bryz are locked up.
  • 0

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Posted Image

QUOTE (Rye and Kesler @ Jun 29 2009, 10:24 PM) Where is Celebrities? I am tryin to find it on Club vibes but i can't find it. Is it relatively new? Sounds good though we will have to check it out.

I think Germany is the exception because they should know how to use their own balls.

QUOTE (pacecar @ Aug 2 2009, 11:53 AM) Sheep are ok but horses, ewww.


Posted Image


#168 Ryan Strome

Ryan Strome

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,958 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:11 PM

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


Lol
Nice try to look smart but you're incorrect sir.
  • 0



#169 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,473 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:12 PM

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.

Clearly you're only looking to get what you want out of this thread, but I'll play along one last time.

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.

That's without even taking into consideration how such a deal looks right at the start of CBA negotiations after the NHL has just asked the NHLA to accept major cutbacks in revenue sharing and rolllbacks to salary. From just the optics perspective it's a horrible move.

That hardly makes it Gillis' fault, like he's to blame for something when he had competition from 29 other teams in the league, at least 5 of which were serious contenders. It's even less likely you can assign blame when you don't have all the details of what was discussed with each team and what Weber was thinking.

Could Gillis have offered the extremes in this case: a lowball offer sheet or a deal similar to the one Weber signed? Sure, but would either have been smart considering all the factors (not just is it financially possible)?

If Nashville is prepared to match 99.9% of any deal you could offer under the current CBA, then your likelihood of success is pretty small. That means Weber will be very careful about what he signs, even if its a fair or above market value offer. If he takes a deal that compensates him well with a team in his home province, but Nashville will match, what's the point? Gillis could offer it, but it doesn't mean Weber will sign it if he feels it'll leave him stuck in Nashville when he wants out.

Somehow you say both of these are directly Gillis' fault (there's that word again) for not offering the ridiculous numbers that are even beyond what prompted the NHL to put extra guidelines around contracts just a few years ago with the Luongo, Hossa, Zetterberg and Kovalchuck deals. The Suter/Parise/Weber deals fit those guidelines just barely, but they certainly push the limits and don't fit the spirit of what's intended to be a reasonable deal.

In the end, your version of reasonable is not in line with many other people's. It seems there are even Philly fans that agree it's not a reasonable contract.

Enjoy your close-minded opinions of what's reasonable and feel free to cheer for a team like Philly who has a GM not afraid to make stupid bold moves.
  • 2

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#170 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:13 PM

Lol
Nice try to look smart but you're incorrect sir.


Correct me then.
  • 0

#171 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,410 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:14 PM

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


Hey man .. you been smokin' from yer "billy-bong" again? .. a bit TOO dramatic?? ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#172 Burnsey

Burnsey

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,804 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 08

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:18 PM

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+

Edited by Burnsey, 21 July 2012 - 03:23 PM.

  • 0

team-canada-jarome-iginla-photo.jpg


#173 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:19 PM

Lol
Nice try to look smart but you're incorrect sir.


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.

Edited by NuxFan09, 21 July 2012 - 03:20 PM.

  • 0

#174 SEAN HARNETT

SEAN HARNETT

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 05

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:21 PM

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!


Whoa Whoa Whoa...... Salo got a 2 year deal @ 3.75 per as Garisson is a@ 4.6 per. Thats not that much more for Garrison. People are also forgetting that Garrison was sought after buy other teams who were offering MORE MONEY then Vancouver. Garrison is only now just entering his prime years. Garrison is a very good defensemen who only now has really started to reach his offensive potential. Even if he doesn't hit the goal totals of last season, he will bring many more elements that will make him a valuable contributor to the Canucks. He has size, good skating ability, makes a good first pass, and can play on the penalty kill. Those are all great intangibles without even mentioning his great shot from the point.

Lets face it, Salo for is good as he is, is now 37 and still as injury prone as ever. I loved him here, but a two year deal is risky for an injury prone player on a +35 contract.
  • 0
:towel:

#175 Ryan Strome

Ryan Strome

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,958 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:21 PM

Correct me then.


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?
  • 0



#176 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:22 PM

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.


Sure I see the pitfalls, but this is the market that we're playing in. Jesus, undrafted 28 year-old Jason Garrison can have a 33-point season playing alongside Brian Campbell and be awarded a 6-year deal at $4.6M per, and you're whining about what Shea Weber got? I don't get it.

If this deal is too rich for Gillis, then we're in trouble, because this is the reality of the marketplace. Suter. Parise. Crosby. Etc. This is the market that we're operating in.

That's without even taking into consideration how such a deal looks right at the start of CBA negotiations after the NHL has just asked the NHLA to accept major cutbacks in revenue sharing and rolllbacks to salary. From just the optics perspective it's a horrible move.


Who cares? Why is it bad optics? It's a FREE MARKET. Players are FREE AGENTS. They get what they can. Again, this is the world that we live in. You can whine about it, or you can play ball.

If Nashville is prepared to match 99.9% of any deal you could offer under the current CBA, then your likelihood of success is pretty small. That means Weber will be very careful about what he signs, even if its a fair or above market value offer. If he takes a deal that compensates him well with a team in his home province, but Nashville will match, what's the point? Gillis could offer it, but it doesn't mean Weber will sign it if he feels it'll leave him stuck in Nashville when he wants out.


There's no downside risk to the Canucks AT ALL in offering a deal like that. Weber will be stuck in Nashville if they match, anyway. So what are you trying to say? How does it hurt the Canucks if Nashville matches? It doesn't.
  • 0

#177 SEAN HARNETT

SEAN HARNETT

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 05

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:22 PM

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.


You're right. He indeed did speak with 5 teams including the Canucks.
  • 0
:towel:

#178 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,473 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:23 PM

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?

And we offered Ehrhoff basically that deal, the same as what Bieksa was getting. You expect to not have to overpay a player already with your team where you know you might have to in order to attract a free agent to your team. Ehrhoff didn't accept and took another one of those long term deals that aren't looking as much like a good idea now.

Care to make a list of all the long term deals out there that have been obvious wins for the teams involved?

And as far as Rome being controlled and steady, his late hit on Horton that was a major turning point in the SCF might disagree. Even beyond that, you got what you paid for with his minimal salary, which was hardly any offence in any year of his NHL career. Doubling his previous career totals for goals doesn't count when he'd only had 2 up until that point. Or are you suggesting Rome will then get a bunch more goals like Garrison did this year after his 4 goal season and then be due for a raise the season after? Nice try though.

Garrison has at least had one year of an offensive breakout while having multiple years of top shutdown/defensive play - that's what has elevated him above a 6/7/8 D-man like Rome, and elevated his price tag as a result.
  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#179 Ryan Strome

Ryan Strome

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,958 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:25 PM

You're right. He indeed did speak with 5 teams including the Canucks.


No he didn't

Please share your evidence. As what you 2 are stating is called tampering unless Poile gave permission, to my knowledge he did not.
  • 0



#180 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

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

Posted 21 July 2012 - 03:25 PM

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?


LOL. So you're telling me that Flyers GM Paul Holmgren just sort of put it out there that he would like to sign Weber to a 14 year, $110 million contract and that's all it took? Weber didn't sign anything? All it takes is for a GM to put it out there they want to sign this RFA or that RFA and suddenly that player is theirs unless the player's current team matches?

The answer is no. The player has to actually, you know, SIGN the offer sheet, meaning he has to have had discussions with the team that made the offer.

Wow.
  • 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.