Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Mike Gillis on Team 1040 - 9/28/12


  • Please log in to reply
349 replies to this topic

#1 Strombone1

Strombone1

    GDT Master

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 11

Posted 28 September 2012 - 08:57 AM

*
POPULAR

Heading to Chicago for the weekend to watch their opening camp

Planning on moving out 2 weeks at a time and having everybody ready to go if and when the season starts

Kassian's training is going to pay off. he's in a much better shape than he was when he arrived here. he's done everything we've asked him.

Tanev going to the AHL - it gives him an opportunity to do more. He's a very good player in his zone. We like to see him to do more. Take more offensive chances. There's no place better to do it than the AHL.

Yakupov/Jensen - he's a big kid, needs to prove his pace a bit and to do that he needs to skate with bigger players.

Alex Burrows - he's playing with two great players. "I think he's also made them better players". He kills penalties, plays in key situations. very deserving on an extension. Happy to get it done and have him here for the next 5.

Edler - in a new CBA his status could change. this wasn't much of a factor for us. we have a strict payroll/guide line we put together. unlike other teams, we don't do things for certain reasons. it would have been nice to get him signed. we'll take care of it as it comes.

Kesler (diving) - there was no list. just a discussion. the purpose is to make the game easier to officiate. everyone felt strongly but all kinds of players embellish. he came up because they showed a clip that he happened to be on. I was supportive of it, it has gotten out of hand in a lot of cases and it's time to reign it in.

Luongo - is a trade about the most value you can get? even if it's from a divison rival? our objective is to improve our team. we trade to get better and that's what we're going to try to achieve. we are prohibited to have an discussions about any players other than players that are injured, on payroll. there really is nothing we can do at this time.

Surprised about the amount of money and contract thrown out this summer. not sure how it's going to affect those guys. We have players that wanna play in Vancouver.

Edited by Strombone1, 28 September 2012 - 09:02 AM.

  • 11

Player of the Game - Wall of Fame
2013-14 GDT Registrations
Canucks Game Prediction Challenge


#2 Lonny_Bohonos_14

Lonny_Bohonos_14

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,924 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 09

Posted 28 September 2012 - 09:05 AM

Thanks for the summary.

Sounds like Gillis could be hard balling Edler... This could come down to the wire - or we could see Eddie being moved.
  • 1

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#3 Wheels22

Wheels22

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,017 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 28 September 2012 - 10:40 AM

Hopefully Edler won't be just in it for the money.. Hopefully he will be happy making decent cash(around 5 mill), while playing for the contending team that gave him his chance to play in the NHL
  • 4

#4 Derp...

Derp...

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 12

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:05 AM

Excited for the Wolves season to start. Sounds like we might have a good look at what we can expect from our younger guys down the road. Wish Jensen was eligible though, be nice to get some chemistry going early for some of those guys. MG also said he is not able to talk to other teams, or players about trades, so he's probably enjoying a little freedom from the Luongo situation.
  • 0
Sig too big.

#5 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:11 AM

*
POPULAR

Can't believe MG would let Edler go like he did with Erhoff. That was a massive mistake, especially when keith Ballards 4.2 mill was waving hello.
If we lose Edler and keep Ballard, that would be a huge blow to the team
  • 10

#6 Canuck250

Canuck250

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 09

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:32 AM

if we lose edler it is because he would not accept less then 5 mil per season. As you can tell by how much we are going to pay our D, right now the top is what 4.6? If eddie would take 4.6 that is a done deal. If he wants to be the top payed D, 4.7 up to maybe 5 per season then it gets a bit tricker for what MG is trying to do. It is all about how greedy will eddie be.. I hope not because Edler is one of my fav canucks so I want him to stay.
  • 0

#7 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:42 AM

Thanks for the summary.

He can't let Edler go! Alex has been one of my favorite Canucks ever since he joined the team!
  • 0

#8 shawn antoski

shawn antoski

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 753 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:45 AM

Gillis is awesome. I think hes the best GM in the league. He always says the right things, he's never said anythng to piss me off ever
  • 3

#9 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,349 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 September 2012 - 11:46 AM

Thank you for the summary.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#10 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 12:51 PM

*
POPULAR

Best GM in the league? Wow, dream on- traded away Erhoff for nothing, traded for Ballard who sucks, lost out on Schultz, has Ballard, Luongo, Raymond on the books who are dead weight and is now penny pinching with our best young player.
He is a good GM who has made some bone head moves. Not to mention the Hodgson debacle

Edited by eretz canucks, 28 September 2012 - 01:12 PM.

  • 9

#11 Canucksbiggestfan

Canucksbiggestfan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,027 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 07

Posted 28 September 2012 - 12:58 PM

*
POPULAR

Best GM in the league? Wow, dream on- traded away Erhoff for nothing, traded for Ballard who sucks, lost out on Schultz, has Ballard, Luongo, Hamhuis, Raymond on the books who are dead weight and is now penny pinching with our best young player.
He is a good GM who has made some bone head moves. Not to mention the Hodgson debacle


Your post was a fail when you said that Hamhuis is on the books and is dead weight.
  • 33
Posted Image

Posted Image

#12 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 01:12 PM

The Hamhuis bit was a typo, he is a bargain and among MGs best moves
Losing Edler would be a terrible move
  • 1

#13 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,568 posts
  • Joined: 13-March 12

Posted 28 September 2012 - 01:20 PM

Best GM in the league? Wow, dream on- traded away Erhoff for nothing, traded for Ballard who sucks, lost out on Schultz, has Ballard, Luongo, Raymond on the books who are dead weight and is now penny pinching with our best young player.
He is a good GM who has made some bone head moves. Not to mention the Hodgson debacle

LOL!! Hammer dead weight? = joke. Hamhuis is the cornerstone of our d and an exemplary human being. Give your head a shake.
LOST out on Shultz? = joke. Guess every one of the other 29 gm's that 'lost out
on Shultz suck too huh?
Psssst!!!!!! Newsflash!! MG DIDN't trade Erhoff. Erhoff sniffed out the huge payday and left.
Hogson debacle?? Obvious Cody nut-hugger response. Reports are Cody wanted out because of ice time etc. If true....good riddance.
Gillis isn't perfect I agree but your post is full of troll, or fail. Depending on who's looking....
  • 3
" I don't understand, can somebody tell me what's going on? Why is there a drunk Chinese man doing push-ups on my front lawn?......and why's he wearing lipstick??"

#14 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 01:24 PM

Thanks for the summary.

Sounds like Gillis could be hard balling Edler... This could come down to the wire - or we could see Eddie being moved.


Wouldn't be the end of the world, IMO. He is not untouchable.
  • 0

#15 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 01:32 PM

if we lose edler it is because he would not accept less then 5 mil per season. As you can tell by how much we are going to pay our D, right now the top is what 4.6?


Can you blame him?

He'd probably get 6 - 6.5 on the open market, which is 30 - 40% higher than that amount. Can we really expect someone to do that for the benefit of playing for the Canucks? This whole "hometown discount" thing is really non-existent, anyway, except in Hamhuis' case. And Hamhuis made it very obvious that the first factor was coming home to BC, with money being a distant ancillary factor. Daniel & Henrik maybe would've made a bit more back in 2009 if they signed with Toronto, but not much, and certainly not even close to 30 - 40% more. When Kesler signed, a lot thought the amount was too high. Same with Luongo. They may look like "discounts" now, but they need to be evaluated in the context of when they were signed.
  • 0

#16 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 01:46 PM

I'm fine with trading Edler if we get fair value for him, but the safest and easiest bet would be to sign him for 6-7 yrs between 5-6 mill a year which is fair money. Compared to the market, 5.5-5.7 is very fair and 6 mill is likely in an open market- as many teams have a lot of cap space and a great need for a guy like Edler.

Losing Edler for nothing would be a huge mistake. And yes, we did trade Erhoff, more than 24 hrs before the July 1st UFA opening. We traded him to NYI for a 4th- well done gillis, well done! Way to keep Ballard and trade Erhoff!!!
  • 0

#17 rawkdrummer

rawkdrummer

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,053 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 28 September 2012 - 01:56 PM

Can you blame him?

He'd probably get 6 - 6.5 on the open market, which is 30 - 40% higher than that amount. Can we really expect someone to do that for the benefit of playing for the Canucks? This whole "hometown discount" thing is really non-existent, anyway, except in Hamhuis' case. And Hamhuis made it very obvious that the first factor was coming home to BC, with money being a distant ancillary factor. Daniel & Henrik maybe would've made a bit more back in 2009 if they signed with Toronto, but not much, and certainly not even close to 30 - 40% more. When Kesler signed, a lot thought the amount was too high. Same with Luongo. They may look like "discounts" now, but they need to be evaluated in the context of when they were signed.


You can Jason Garrison to that list. He too could of got more signing elsewhere.
  • 0

#18 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:10 PM

You can Jason Garrison to that list. He too could of got more signing elsewhere.


Highly doubt that. He's had one notable season.

And again, the difference would be immaterial. Edler taking $4.7M instead of getting $6M as a UFA is far different.
  • 2

#19 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:12 PM

Losing Edler for nothing would be a huge mistake. And yes, we did trade Erhoff, more than 24 hrs before the July 1st UFA opening. We traded him to NYI for a 4th- well done gillis, well done! Way to keep Ballard and trade Erhoff!!!


If Gillis loses Edler for nothing, he should lose his job.

And I do agree about Ehrhoff, as well. Huge mistake in being too cheap to sign him.
  • 3

#20 Franksedin

Franksedin

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 181 posts
  • Joined: 02-January 11

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:18 PM

It isn't about letting the hoff walk...it's about a salary cap and staying competitive in that structure. He wanted a ton o money and signing him to it might have meant losing Edler or burrows, or maybe some of depth the team has. Maybe unloading Ballard and finding a way to keep him would have been better but it certainly wasn't a horrible decision.
  • 1

#21 Biznow

Biznow

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 308 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 06

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:26 PM

yah, I really appreciate it when you guys write summaries of these things, 'cause I often miss them, so thanks a lot strombone1.

Gillis is the best GM this team has had in years, he has helped turn this into a first class organization from top to bottom.

Hodgson - The debate about the hodgson situation will always be there, but really none of us has any idea of the true story. Hodgson seemed to have a unique sense of entitlement which I think contradicted a lot of the team-first, potential captain hype he was getting. I think this confused a lot of people into thinking we were getting the next Trevor Linden, when in fact Linden is the kind of guy that would have worked hard at whatever roll he was given and proven beyond a doubt he earned his time. My opinion on the matter is that Hodgson didn't want to be in Van. Gillis managed to keep this mostly under wraps up until the point the kid was traded. If this managed to get out, it would have destroyed Hodgsons value, much like the situation that we're in with Luongo right now. He took a deal with the most potential to fill an organizational need, the power forward we've always wanted. Kassian isn't that guy right now, but he really does have the potential to be. Give him 3 years to mature, then judge this trade. And remember, some players take a bit longer than others to develop, most notably our current conquering heroes Daniel and Henrik Sedin.


Schultz/Doan/Weber etc. - Out of all the other teams, Gillis had Van in the running right down to the wire on these deals, thats the only reason they're debated now. The reason he has the Canucks in the running on all these deals is because he makes Vancouver look like an attractive option.

Edler - He's either posturing to get a better deal done with Edler, or preparing us for the very slight possibility that Edler gets traded, or both. Don't get your panties in a bunch yet though, because if the unthinkable happened, and Edler had to be traded, it would be for a kings ransom. It would still suck, but life would go on.

Ehrhoff - clearly in it for the money, I'm not judging, just saying. The choice was probably to sign Ehrhoff for a shorter term, very lucrative contract, that would have went over the internal cap that has helped us sign players like Hamhuis and Garrison for decent money, or be roped in to another long term contract. The deal simply couldn't be done. At least he managed to get anything at all in a 4th rounder, when many teams UFAs walk for absolutely nothing.

Edited by Biznow, 28 September 2012 - 02:28 PM.

  • 3

Posted Image~Biznow


#22 Kesler's Nose

Kesler's Nose

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 11

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:33 PM

Can you blame him?

He'd probably get 6 - 6.5 on the open market, which is 30 - 40% higher than that amount. Can we really expect someone to do that for the benefit of playing for the Canucks? This whole "hometown discount" thing is really non-existent, anyway, except in Hamhuis' case. And Hamhuis made it very obvious that the first factor was coming home to BC, with money being a distant ancillary factor. Daniel & Henrik maybe would've made a bit more back in 2009 if they signed with Toronto, but not much, and certainly not even close to 30 - 40% more. When Kesler signed, a lot thought the amount was too high. Same with Luongo. They may look like "discounts" now, but they need to be evaluated in the context of when they were signed.


Not with a new CBA, maybe that's what MG was waiting for? lol Either way, I think he should be paid 5-5.5 mil a season if he sticks with us. He's our future star D-man, even now he's really good and very beneficial to our PP. But we'll see how it plays out, I agree with most, it would be a huge blow to our team to let him go.

EDIT: Umm, I think Bieksa took a discount.. It's not just because you happen to be from BC, it's because they have been with the team since the start of their NHL career. (Bur for example, taking 2 mil a season back in the day was a steal in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th years) :huh: Ehrhoff was different, he started out in San Jose. So I could see why the money was more of a factor, and you can see how it's turned out for him so far. :lol:

Edited by Kesler's Nose, 28 September 2012 - 02:56 PM.

  • 0

"It's an opportunity, we don't look at it as a last chance... We look at it as an opportunity to do something great. We are going to take it period by period, shift by shift. You just have to be better than the guy across from you... Every guy in this locker room I can say believes we can do this." - Ryan Kesler

Posted Image


#23 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:47 PM

Edler for both Schenns and Matt Read
  • 0

#24 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,152 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 28 September 2012 - 02:53 PM

Losing Edler for nothing would be a huge mistake. And yes, we did trade Erhoff, more than 24 hrs before the July 1st UFA opening. We traded him to NYI for a 4th- well done gillis, well done! Way to keep Ballard and trade Erhoff!!!


Agree with what you have said except Ballard was not able to be traded or they would have.AV certainly has not been able to use him as his injury history has hampered his involvement here,
Ehrhoff for a fourth is the joke.This guy was the offensive d man this team needed and had as a role model for Eddie.
Kept Bieksa and demanded Ehrhoff take Bieksa money.Right.Smooth move,Gillis.
Now Eddie may be taking Samulsson's advice-or is that Matthias or Sami's?
The 'hometown discount' schtick is over.
  • 0

#25 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,706 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:11 PM

Can you blame him?

He'd probably get 6 - 6.5 on the open market, which is 30 - 40% higher than that amount. Can we really expect someone to do that for the benefit of playing for the Canucks? This whole "hometown discount" thing is really non-existent, anyway, except in Hamhuis' case. And Hamhuis made it very obvious that the first factor was coming home to BC, with money being a distant ancillary factor. Daniel & Henrik maybe would've made a bit more back in 2009 if they signed with Toronto, but not much, and certainly not even close to 30 - 40% more. When Kesler signed, a lot thought the amount was too high. Same with Luongo. They may look like "discounts" now, but they need to be evaluated in the context of when they were signed.


I think you're off. Under the last CBA Edler would be fielding offers in the 7m range possibly as high as 7.5m. The Sedins would have been in the same range. Kesler in the 6 range and possibly to 6.5. Bieksa in the 5.5 area and Garrett could have grabbed around 6 this past summer. Most Canuck fans shoot really low on open market value because of what players have signed for to stay here. Watching what UFA's sign for with new teams around the league is a better indication of the open market value our players could have received.
  • 2
Posted Image

#26 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,706 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:17 PM

Agree with what you have said except Ballard was not able to be traded or they would have.AV certainly has not been able to use him as his injury history has hampered his involvement here,
Ehrhoff for a fourth is the joke.This guy was the offensive d man this team needed and had as a role model for Eddie.
Kept Bieksa and demanded Ehrhoff take Bieksa money.Right.Smooth move,Gillis.
Now Eddie may be taking Samulsson's advice-or is that Matthias or Sami's?
The 'hometown discount' schtick is over.


Any evidence that Ballard has been shopped, or just passing more arse gas off as fact?

Ehrhoffs RIGHTS for a fourth. There's a difference. When you're not going to re-sign a player something is always better than nothing.

Btw, I didn't see Ehrhoff as Eddies role model at all. Eddie actually hits and plays D. If anything Ehrhoff should have paid more attention to Eddie.
  • 2
Posted Image

#27 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:19 PM

EDIT: Umm, I think Bieksa took a discount.. It's not just because you happen to be from BC, it's because they have been with the team since the start of their NHL career. (Bur for example, taking 2 mil a season back in the day was a steal in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th years) :huh: Ehrhoff was different, he started out in San Jose. So I could see why the money was more of a factor, and you can see how it's turned out for him so far. :lol:


Bieksa took a discount? Again, maybe, but I'm not convinced that a lot of other teams would've been lining up to give him a 5-year, $23M deal. IMO, he's clearly the most overrated Canuck on the roster. If he had the personality of Aaron Rome, he'd be half as popular.

And you're again bringing up a deal where, at the time of signing, it was not a "discount". Mike Gillis took a gamble on Burrows, when he signed. That was his breakout year, and Gillis gave him a 4-year deal under the presumption that the breakout would continue. In this case, he was right, and it was a great contract. But again, at the time, it was a gamble. Prior to that year, and even during most of that year, he was firmly entrenched on the bottom-six.

As for Ehrhoff, and your "see how it turned out for him so far" comment, his team only played 5 less games than the Vancouver Canucks did, so I guess it's been a flop for both sides, no?
  • 1

#28 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,706 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:23 PM

Not with a new CBA, maybe that's what MG was waiting for? lol Either way, I think he should be paid 5-5.5 mil a season if he sticks with us. He's our future star D-man, even now he's really good and very beneficial to our PP. But we'll see how it plays out, I agree with most, it would be a huge blow to our team to let him go.

EDIT: Umm, I think Bieksa took a discount.. It's not just because you happen to be from BC, it's because they have been with the team since the start of their NHL career. (Bur for example, taking 2 mil a season back in the day was a steal in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th years) :huh: Ehrhoff was different, he started out in San Jose. So I could see why the money was more of a factor, and you can see how it's turned out for him so far. :lol:


That the difficulty now. It's impossible to say what market value will be until the new CBA is signed. At this point you can only speculate what they would have gotten under the expired CBA.
  • 0
Posted Image

#29 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:28 PM

I think you're off. Under the last CBA Edler would be fielding offers in the 7m range possibly as high as 7.5m. The Sedins would have been in the same range. Kesler in the 6 range and possibly to 6.5. Bieksa in the 5.5 area and Garrett could have grabbed around 6 this past summer. Most Canuck fans shoot really low on open market value because of what players have signed for to stay here. Watching what UFA's sign for with new teams around the league is a better indication of the open market value our players could have received.


$7 - $7.5M for Alex Edler maybe if he was a UFA this year and there was some really desperate, crazy team who values him as high as Ryan Suter. But I would call that unlikely. He's not at the level of a Suter, or a Weber. At $6 - $6.5, there would've been a lot of interest, I would think.

It doesn't matter what the Kesler's or the Sedin's would've got this year, because their deals were signed in 2011 and 2009. Different contexts. And at the time of signing, not a lot of people were saying "hometown discount".

And you really think that Jason Garrison could've got $6M+ this summer? Really? You really think that 28 year-old Jason Garrison, who's basically signing his first NHL contract worth any notable amount of money, chose to play in Vancouver at an amount that's 25% less than what he could've got elsewhere? I call that total BS, and impossible to believe. If he received a higher offer, it would've almost definitely been from some perennial dog like Long Island, and maybe for $50 - $100K more than what we gave him.
  • 2

#30 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 28 September 2012 - 03:29 PM

That the difficulty now. It's impossible to say what market value will be until the new CBA is signed. At this point you can only speculate what they would have gotten under the expired CBA.


What you can be sure of, though, is that Edler's not happy that a deal failed to get done, and will be more likely to leave/demand a certain amount to sign.
  • 1




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.