Monteeun Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Although,if Gillis refused to pay Ehrhoff what he felt he was worth,Gillis effectively made Ehrhoff contemplate the other,highly lucrative offers that were presented to him. Assuming Gillis refused to adequately pay him more than Bieksa as the reports all state,then Gillis let him go,at best, and pushed him out,at least. 50 point NHL d man for a fourth rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 I heard they couldnt agree on term. Not necessarily the money but the length of contract... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monteeun Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Jason Garrison ring a bell? Yeah,Gragnani and Garrison are going to replace a 50 point offensive d man. Let Salo go,let Ehrhoff go,now the Edler rumours. Just who is going to pass the puck to our fabled offensive d men left remaining? Wait,there are no offensive d men left if Edler goes. So much for playing with Campbell potential players,Jason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 A post I agree with. It shows that Bieksa took a discount to stay (money talks) while Ehrhoff wanted the money more than the team. Ehrhoff walked and tried to pass it off as signing with the best team to give him a chance to win the cup (nonsense walks). If I had to make a choice between keeping Bieksa and keeping Ehrhoff, I'd keep Bieksa any day. He simply brings far more to the table without giving much up in production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 A post I agree with. It shows that Bieksa took a discount to stay (money talks) while Ehrhoff wanted the money more than the team. Ehrhoff walked and tried to pass it off as signing with the best team to give him a chance to win the cup (nonsense walks). If I had to make a choice between keeping Bieksa and keeping Ehrhoff, I'd keep Bieksa any day. He simply brings far more to the table without giving much up in production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 My memory of that trade was the belief that Gillis had sold out the year. In the long term there will be ample opportunity to get good value, maybe even win this trade, though Cody is more certain a very productive player. I can't escape the feeling that trade significantly lowered our chances of winning in our cup window and that the trade contributed to our poor finish. Gillis's problem is we keep trading for the protypical perfect "guy" for our needs (think Booth as a power forward, think Ballard as a puck rushing D), but playing the wrong side of the rink for where we have a roster spot available. And why in the world we traded for Gragnani as a left D when we already had no room for Connauton. Most of Booth (a left wing) and Ballards (a left D) problems have related to the fact we slotted them both in on the right side where they are simply not as comfortable. Kassian was acquired because Hansen and Weise were our only natural right wingers for example. And the best example is accumulating goalies! We have too many goalies, too many left wing (Danny, Burrows, Booth, Raymond, Higgins, Jensen) and too many left D (Edler, Hamhuis, Garrison, Ballard, Connauton) but we remain lacking physical players on the right side, upfront and on D. If you go a block too far without getting lost, you can make 3 left turns and end up in the same place as having just making the correct right turn. At least kassian will help the right side, hopefully sooner than later plus Burrows / Garrison play well offside. It's time to just balance all of the line up! So many left turns! 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, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Actually I can say he walked, and the only reason Ehrhoff was traded was so that the Canucks didn't end with nothing knowing that he wouldn't sign here and that he was determined to go to the highest bidder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Actually I can say he walked, and the only reason Ehrhoff was traded was so that the Canucks didn't end with nothing knowing that he wouldn't sign here and that he was determined to go to the highest bidder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 We have a winner! And I would absolutely, unequivocally, without much of a second thought choose Ehrhoff over Bieksa. And isn't it funny that money was apparently such an issue with Ehrhoff, yet 365 days later Mike Gillis throws a 6-year, $4.6M per deal Jason Garrison's way, an undrafted 28 year-old coming off of his lone decent NHL season. That's wise logic, if I've ever seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watermelons Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 I personally believe that Gillis knows how much Edler is worth and won't lowball him with a deal that is 30-40% less than the market value. I think that Gillis will be offering him at least $5.5 million (although Gillis would probably give something like $6.2-$6.5 million)... The problem with the contract might be the length of the deal. Gillis might not want to sign Edler to a 5+ year deal because we all saw how bad Edler can be when he isn't on his game. Who is to say Edler will remain consistent throughout all the years we signed him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cIutch Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 yah hes really worth that giant waste of a contract he has now 40 mill for a guy who produced 30 points without the sedins i understand we needed someone to man the point but we got that in garrison now , your all acting like erhoff is way better then he really was , he played a roll hes replaceable and gillis new this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Jason Garrison ring a bell? Yeah,Gragnani and Garrison are going to replace a 50 point offensive d man. Let Salo go,let Ehrhoff go,now the Edler rumours. Just who is going to pass the puck to our fabled offensive d men left remaining? Wait,there are no offensive d men left if Edler goes. So much for playing with Campbell potential players,Jason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 He was not offered an adequate contract.He stated he wished to stay in Vancouver but Gillis refused to adequately compensate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monteeun Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 We have a winner! And I would absolutely, unequivocally, without much of a second thought choose Ehrhoff over Bieksa. And isn't it funny that money was apparently such an issue with Ehrhoff, yet 365 days later Mike Gillis throws a 6-year, $4.6M per deal Jason Garrison's way, an undrafted 28 year-old coming off of his lone decent NHL season. That's wise logic, if I've ever seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cIutch Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 lol @ someone comparing gragnani to garrison LOL LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 We have a winner! And I would absolutely, unequivocally, without much of a second thought choose Ehrhoff over Bieksa. And isn't it funny that money was apparently such an issue with Ehrhoff, yet 365 days later Mike Gillis throws a 6-year, $4.6M per deal Jason Garrison's way, an undrafted 28 year-old coming off of his lone decent NHL season. That's wise logic, if I've ever seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 yah hes really worth that giant waste of a contract he has now 40 mill for a guy who produced 30 points without the sedins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Salo CHOSE to go for a two year deal. Ehrhoff CHOSE money. Sometimes you just can't give what a player wants. Oddly it happens to other teams as well. Hence so many UFA's switching teams. You know, players lost for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 What a stupid post. He's not in a shutdown role because he's not a shutdown defenceman. The Sedin's probably wouldn't do much good in a shutdown role either, does that make them less valuable than a guy like Shawn Horcoff, who might be a more well-rounded player, in more facets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayray2112 Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 You can't even distinguish what type of d man Bieksa is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.