Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Strombone1

Mike Gillis on Team 1040 - 9/28/12

350 posts in this topic

Nice attempt at spinning your own question!

That's not what I said his job was. Read your initial question again.

EDIT: here's your question: Is Mike Gillis required to choose to adhere to players demands?

And the answer, for the second time, is YES. Try reading it a little slower.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI - Sami Salo - 28 years old - "breakout" season in Vancouver - 9 goals, 21 assists.

Year before that at 27 - 66 games, 4 goals, 14 assists - just breaking into the league.

You're whining about Garrison being 28, but it sounds familiar doesn't it.

Such a risky move to give up Schaeffer to acquire him...

Uh, no, a great, calculated risk.

Garrison. Ditto. And being a UFA, cost no assets.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No the answer is still no. There was no spinning; that's been your m.o.

Mike Gillis does not have to adhere to demands which means he can choose to or not to. The player ultimately makes the choice to stay or go. Salo got a good offer from the Canucks and a great offer from the Lightning. Just because he got a great offer doesn't suddenly make the Canucks offer s**t.

Still an extremely simple concept you've yet to grasp king.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YOUR question: Is Mike Gillis required to choose to adhere to players demands?

Please read it very sloooooowly. Yes, Mike Gillis is required to choose whether he will or will not adhere to their demands. I am not saying that he *MUST* adhere to their demands, I am saying that he must *CHOOSE* whether he will or he won't. Has it sunken in yet? Don't feel too bad, it took MC Fatigue a few times, too, but it was your own question, so I'd think that you'd maybe be a bit quicker.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that Gillis doesn't have to adhere to demands King and thank you for agreeing although I fear you may only be agreeing because you thought you were disagreeing with me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christian Ehrhoff:

Mar 2, 2012

"It was a business decision by [Canucks General Manager] Mike Gillis, and I moved on, I'm happy where I'm at right now. We'll see how the fans saw that transaction. That's going to determine if they boo me or cheer."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MayRay,Salo is the franchise leader in most every category for D men.

Get a clue ,bud.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erhoff is not worth 40 mil, or 18 in the first 2 years even Garth Snow knew that when he first traded for Erhoff's rights. He's a great defenseman don't get me wrong but it was more a collection of circumstances, namely a shallow free agent pool that allowed Erhoff to clean up. Matt Carle, a similar defenseman in many respects managed 33 million this past year. Erhoff was asking too much, and I was pleased when Gillis walked away.

Garrison is a young defensive defenseman with a huge offensive outbreak last season. If you were to watch his highlights you would see he has a bomb of a shot that will score regardless of his defensive partner. Defenseman mature later that forwards, especially since Garrison was never drafted and played college for 4 years only making his professional career possible at 22.

I also liked that Gillis didn't sign Torres, or Bitz for the same matter. These are guys that took multi game suspensions in the playoffs, costly penalties in deciding games. The last thing any coach wants is to worry about refs making calls directed towards notorious offenders.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yah as much as i liked torres i understand why gillis only gave him the offer he did

and bitz , well

i got no idea why some of you people think we should have resigned him

one goal from a sedin pass and a few decent fights , the guys damaged goods , obviously has groin issues and cdc was crying and calling for gillis's head for not signing him

pathetic site really

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loyalty is acknowledging the veterans that served the franchise with dedication, honor and distinction.

Sami exemplified those characteristics for this club,city and Vancouver Canucks fans:

Canucks Defensemen All -Time Records -Sami Salo:

  • 5th in points with 236

  • 3rd in goals with 74

  • 1st in game-winning goals with 20

  • 3rd in shots on goal with 1078

  • 1st in power play goals with 48

  • 1st in postseason games played with 74

  • 1st (tied) in postseason goals

Fourth all time in games played for all Canucks in the playoffs-leads all Canucks rear guards in history of franchise.

Fifth all time points leader for a Canuck rear guard in Canucks playoff history.

Fourth all time for PP goals scored by all Canucks in the playoffs -leads all Canucks rear guards in history of franchise.

Fifth all time points scored by a Canucks defensemen in franchise history.

Third all-time in Canucks history for O/T goals -leads all Canucks defensemen in this category.

Sami should have retired as a Canuck but was instead paid lip service.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it does, actually. By definition, the measure of value is what somebody will pay for it.

The GM makes the decision to sign the player, so, yes, they are "worth" the contract, as it relates to the context of a marketplace. Whether they perform to the level of the contract is a different question.

HOW DID HE NOT LET HIM WALK?

Gillis knew that Salo wanted a 2-year deal. GILLIS CHOSE TO NOT GIVE HIM WHAT HE WANTED. As a result, he went elsewhere to get what he wanted. That is an example of Mike Gillis knowing what one of his players wanted, making a decision to not offer it to him, and suffering the consequences.

If you want to sell your car for $X, and somebody offers you $Y, and you respond with $X again, and he walks away, 2 decisions have been made:

  • Buyer thinks your car's worth $Y, and that's what he's willing to pay for it.

  • You think your car's worth $X, and you're not willing to receive anything less for it.

So he made the decision to offer you $Y, you made the decision to say "no". Two decisions have been made. No different than Gillis and Salo. Two decisions!

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:picard:

I did not say that he was. Read the thread. Players make demands; all players do. Gillis' job is to decide whether to adhere to them or not. He decided to let both Ehrhoff and Salo go. I don't see how this is even debatable.

This EOTM guy seems to think that it somehow wasn't Gillis' choice for these two to leave, when, in fact, it was. Gillis is paid to make investment decisions, really. He chose to invest in Jason Garrison, at the cost of Sami Salo. He chose to invest in Keith Ballard, probably at the ultimate cost of Christian Ehrhoff. This is his job.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. That's what he does, as a GM. Player X wants $Y. It's up to Gillis to choose whether to sign him or not.

He chose to not sign Ehrhoff to an amount required by Ehrhoff to sign in Vancouver. That's how these things work.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gillis knew that Salo wanted a 2-year deal. GILLIS CHOSE TO NOT GIVE HIM WHAT HE WANTED. As a result, he went elsewhere to get what he wanted.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of u who said we know what Salo can bring to the table but we are uncertain with what Garrison can is just plain bias. Salo is 38 years old, how can u be sure he can continue to do what he has been done? Look at Ohlund and what happened to him after TBL signed him? We need younger player in this team. I personally believe that choosing Garrison over Salo is a smart choice, not saying MG chose Garrison over Salo but Garrison can potentially do better than what Salo did. Why do we always have to look at the negative side of things? Yes we are uncertain what Garrison can bring to the table but that does not mean he is gonna do worse than Salo, there is a big fat chance that he will do better than Salo.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of u who said we know what Salo can bring to the table but we are uncertain with what Garrison can is just plain bias. Salo is 38 years old, how can u be sure he can continue to do what he has been done? Look at Ohlund and what happened to him after TBL signed him? We need younger player in this team. I personally believe that choosing Garrison over Salo is a smart choice, not saying MG chose Garrison over Salo but Garrison can potentially do better than what Salo did. Why do we always have to look at the negative side of things? Yes we are uncertain what Garrison can bring to the table but that does not mean he is gonna do worse than Salo, there is a big fat chance that he will do better than Salo.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of arguing here, like the passion and fire, what I have trouble accepting is Gillis low balling serviceable d men- Salo, Mitchell, Erhoff, but yet we keep Keith Balllllllaaaaard!!

WTF

I'm aware of Mitchell's injury situation, but Gillis low balled him, and new Mitchell wouldn't sign and went and traded grabner, 1st (Howden-who i don't give a crap about, but that's besides the point) for Ballard (yes bernier was included too).

So in order to keep Ballard on our team, we have lost:

Salo

Mitchell

1st round pick

Grabner

Erhoff

Holy crap, why is this madness continuing?

Where does Ballard fit in in our "payroll"

Algorithm??? If Bieksa is 4.6, shouldn't Ballard at 4.2 be contributing at a similar level.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of arguing here, like the passion and fire, what I have trouble accepting is Gillis low balling serviceable d men- Salo, Mitchell, Erhoff, but yet we keep Keith Balllllllaaaaard!!

WTF

I'm aware of Mitchell's injury situation, but Gillis low balled him, and new Mitchell wouldn't sign and went and traded grabner, 1st (Howden-who i don't give a crap about, but that's besides the point) for Ballard (yes bernier was included too).

So in order to keep Ballard on our team, we have lost:

Salo

Mitchell

1st round pick

Grabner

Erhoff

Holy crap, why is this madness continuing?

Where does Ballard fit in in our "payroll"

Algorithm??? If Bieksa is 4.6, shouldn't Ballard at 4.2 be contributing at a similar level.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.