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

#151 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 04:54 AM

Yet again, Gillis promised to sign him to one year deals as long as he wanted to play. Is that not a sign of loyalty?



These two definitely apply to you....

Posted Image

made this and posted it in the memes thread back in early august. good to see the leopard doesn't change his spots and some things don't change.
Posted Image

since mg is systematically destroying our beloved team with his continuous gaffes and moronic trdes/signings/direction, theres no hope, we should all gather downtown and burn him in effigy i suppose?
hats off to nuck twit and all those who can't see the forest for the trees and seem to look at the present canucks management as a bunch of morons rather than people who do what they believe is correct for the franchise and operate under guidelines laid out for them. wouldn't it be superb to just offer a boatload of money to every player who demanded it? maybe just say screw the negotiating process and sell the farm in both cap hit and term for anyone who asks? trade players on a whim and get back a higher than value return EVERY time! don't bother attempting to reach reasonable contract numbers/years cuz hey, wtf, the market says a player is worth "x" so lets open the vault and let the dollars fly right?
anyone who thinks this is how a general manager of an nhl club should act (**cough..nuck twit...cough**) is on glue.
we get it nick nit, gillis et all suck in your eyes. your anti-mg shtick is old and tired. please, for the sake of this franchise approach FA and tell him how much better a gm you would be and get the bloody job! sign everyone to contracts you deem correct, trade everyone you think is a plug for superstars, throw cap space out the window. be "loyal" to a fault and get us a damn cup!

Edited by MC Fatigue, 29 September 2012 - 05:11 AM.

  • 0
" 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??"

#152 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:02 AM

Salo got 2 million after missing almost 60 games that's pretty loyal to Salo. Now Salo if he wanted a chance to win the cup and play with his friends could of took a discount and been loyal to the club that gave him pretty good money after coming back from a serious injury.Salo chose to find a longer contract and more $$ because he is about to retire, which he has every right to do. Just as Gillis can offer him what's affordable/worth the risk.Salo 3.75 million Garrison 4.6 million Less than 900k difference for someone who is younger, faster, stronger and has a great slapshot like Salo.


...and he's also a lot less proven.

Now for the doubters, which is more likely to happen
1. Garrison struggles taking slapshots on the PP with the Sedins
Or
2. Salo suffers another injury (knock on wood) and chooses to hang them up?Also with bring close to the cap we wouldn't of got both and I can tell you Garrison would be a better 2nd RD than Salo atm


Well, he better be! His contract pays 23% more than Salo's does, and it's three times the length. The pressure is now firmly on Jason Garrison's unproven shoulders to produce like he did last season. You all better hope that he's a much better 2nd-pairing D than Salo is, because that's the bet that Mike Gillis has made. Personally, I think it's going to be a significant failure, not unlike Gillis' other acquisitions from the Panthers organization.

Time will dictate.

Edited by King of the ES, 29 September 2012 - 07:10 AM.

  • 0

#153 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:04 AM

Yes Sami chose to walk.


But did Mike Gillis not also simultaneously choose to let him walk?

Let's hear an answer.
  • 0

#154 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:11 AM

But did Mike Gillis not also simultaneously choose to let him walk?

Let's hear an answer.


No...no he didn't and asserting otherwise knowing that Salo was offered a fair contract is ridiculously stupid.

Just because he got offered a bigger contract elsewhere doesn't mean he's worth it. To Tampa who's defense is questionable at best he's worth it but probably not just for the 40 - 60 games he'll play for them next season; rather for everything else he's going to provide that team.

Unless you're going to say that a player is worth whatever contract they are offered...you're not saying that are you King?

In any case...Gillis did not let Sami walk at all and unfortunately you'll never agree to that because you are incapable of changing your opinion which is that all things Gillis does is wrong. You've been slapped in the face with arguments about this and so many other things but I've yet to ever see you adapt your opinions or actually admit to being wrong. (you were close that one time when you were so obviously shown to be wrong but then you couldn't handle it and withing hours flipped back to your original course.)

Tell me I'm wrong. Please I'd love to be wrong here on either subject I just talked about. Pretty sure I'm right on both counts though.
  • 2
Posted Image
Posted Image

#155 White Goodman

White Goodman

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:17 AM

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

First of al Hamhuis isn't dead weight. Secondly, Ehrhoff wouldn't resign with us because obviously he cares more about cash than a cup. Also, just because we didn't sign one player doesn't mean he sucks and Hodgson was traded for Kassian who hopefully ends up being what we need him to be, a physical, skilful player.
  • 0
Posted Image

#156 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:34 AM

Just because he got offered a bigger contract elsewhere doesn't mean he's worth it.


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

Unless you're going to say that a player is worth whatever contract they are offered...you're not saying that are you King?


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.

In any case...Gillis did not let Sami walk at all and unfortunately you'll never agree to that because you are incapable of changing your opinion which is that all things Gillis does is wrong.


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!
  • 0

#157 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:34 AM

First of al Hamhuis isn't dead weight. Secondly, Ehrhoff wouldn't resign with us because obviously he cares more about cash than a cup. Also, just because we didn't sign one player doesn't mean he sucks and Hodgson was traded for Kassian who hopefully ends up being what we need him to be, a physical, skilful player.


Really?

Remind me how many Cups the Vancouver Canucks have won since 1970.
  • 0

#158 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,527 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:40 AM

eretz canucks, Ehrhoff was a UFA.

Ballard wasn't. Ehrhoff wanted a ridiculously long contract with a stupid caphit.

That's why Ehrhoff was traded and not Ballard.

One was a UFA, one wasn't.
  • 1

2qn360i.jpg

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#159 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,527 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:41 AM

Really?

Remind me how many Cups the Buffalo Sabres have won since 1970.



This works to.
  • 0

2qn360i.jpg

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#160 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:45 AM

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

So you agree now that Garrision is well worth 4.6 million? right?






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!

Incorrect. He gave Salo the choice actually. Gilled offered Salo a contract and TB offered him a contract he couldn't pass up because he wasn't going to get it anywhere else. The only choice Gillis made was to offer Salo a contract. Gillis offered a contract so that Salo would stay.

I'm sorry King but you're wrong here no matter how many moderately out there analogies you make but hey I'm will to play off that analogy. If I'm selling my car (me being Salo and the car being my hockey skill) at this point my car is pretty banged up, high mileage, burns a bit of oil and is pretty much a guarantee to be in the shop a few times a year ( possibly for extended periods of time.) If someone offers me $2000 for it (being the Canucks) and someone offers $4000 (being TB) I'd take the $4000 even though I know that my car isn't worth that anymore. So if you're the Father of the kid offering $2000 would you want him to over pay for a car by at least $1500 or would you rather he looked elsewhere? (I'm sure you can extrapolate those numbers.)

Hey turns out your analogy wasn't that bad at all; just incomplete.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 29 September 2012 - 07:48 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#161 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:45 AM

Really?

Remind me how many Cups the Vancouver Canucks have won since 1970.


The same amount as Buffalo genius.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#162 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:53 AM

So you agree now that Garrision is well worth 4.6 million? right?


Of course! That's what the market paid him. If you listen to a few of the guys on this forum, he's worth 8 - $8.5M or so, but he just wanted to be a Canuck so badly that he decided to halve his salary for the pleasure of being on this team.

Incorrect. He gave Salo the choice actually. Gilled offered Salo a contract and TB offered him a contract he couldn't pass up because he wasn't going to get it anywhere else. The only choice Gillis made was to offer Salo a contract. Gillis offered a contract so that Salo would stay.


It's not much of a choice, is it? Salo gets 100% more from Tampa Bay. Doesn't make it a very tough decision for Sami, does it? Doesn't sound like a very reasonable offer from our GM, relative to what else Sami had been offered, does it?

And what it screams is that Gillis was perfectly fine letting him go, which, again, is a choice of his.

I'm sorry King but you're wrong here no matter how many moderately out there analogies you make but hey I'm will to play off that analogy. If I'm selling my car (me being Salo and the car being my hockey skill) at this point my car is pretty banged up, high mileage, burns a bit of oil and is pretty much a guarantee to be in the shop a few times a year ( possibly for extended periods of time.) If someone offers me $2000 for it (being the Canucks) and someone offers $4000 (being TB) I'd take the $4000 even though I know that my car isn't worth that anymore. So if you're the Father of the kid offering $2000 would you want him to over pay for a car by at least $1500 or would you rather he looked elsewhere? (I'm sure you can extrapolate those numbers.)


Oh, so now Salo's been overpaid by Tampa? Is that your assertion? I guess the "you're worth what you're paid" example from above only works when it's a case of a Canuck being signed, like Jason Garrison. Is that right?
  • 0

#163 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:55 AM

The same amount as Buffalo genius.


Exactly - which means that his odds of winning a Cup with Buffalo, in theory, should be roughly the same as his odds of winning one with Vancouver.

So why was it such a ridiculous statement for him to say what he did?
  • 0

#164 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,527 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:01 AM

Because:

Buffalo Sabres- 9th in East, miss playoffs.

Vancouver Canucks-

1st in NHL, out in first round to eventual cup champions.



This is why.

  • 1

2qn360i.jpg

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#165 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:01 AM

Of course! That's what the market paid him. If you listen to a few of the guys on this forum, he's worth 8 - $8.5M or so, but he just wanted to be a Canuck so badly that he decided to halve his salary for the pleasure of being on this team.



It's not much of a choice, is it? Salo gets 100% more from Tampa Bay. Doesn't make it a very tough decision for Sami, does it? Doesn't sound like a very reasonable offer from our GM, relative to what else Sami had been offered, does it?

And what it screams is that Gillis was perfectly fine letting him go, which, again, is a choice of his.



Oh, so now Salo's been overpaid by Tampa? Is that your assertion? I guess the "you're worth what you're paid" example from above only works when it's a case of a Canuck being signed, like Jason Garrison. Is that right?


That's always been my assertion. Salo isn't worth 4 million for what he produces on the ice. I also said though that I didn't think Tampa was paying him in total for his on ice product.

As for everything else King...you're wrong.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#166 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:01 AM

Exactly - which means that his odds of winning a Cup with Buffalo, in theory, should be roughly the same as his odds of winning one with Vancouver.

So why was it such a ridiculous statement for him to say what he did?

Seriously?
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#167 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:05 AM

Because:

Buffalo Sabres- 9th in East, miss playoffs.

Vancouver Canucks-

1st in NHL, out in first round to eventual cup champions.

This is why.


Which means what? Ehrhoff's contract is 10 years in length. Who do you think has the better bunch of younger players?

In addition, 1st in the NHL means nothing if you're out in the first round. Vancouver played a whopping 5 more games than Buffalo did this year.
  • 1

#168 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:07 AM

Which means what? Ehrhoff's contract is 10 years in length. Who do you think has the better bunch of younger players?

In addition, 1st in the NHL means nothing if you're out in the first round. Vancouver played a whopping 5 more games than Buffalo did this year.

Yeah but hitting the dartboard gives you a better chance at the trip 20 than missing the board and putting a hole in the drywall.
  • 2
Posted Image
Posted Image

#169 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,527 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:10 AM

Playoffs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..... No Playoffs.


Simple as that.
  • 1

2qn360i.jpg

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#170 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:10 AM

That's always been my assertion. Salo isn't worth 4 million for what he produces on the ice. I also said though that I didn't think Tampa was paying him in total for his on ice product.

As for everything else King...you're wrong.


If that's the case, then how on earth is Jason Garrison worth 6 years @ $4.6M per?

And also, LOL, OK, I'm wrong, Mike Gillis didn't make the decision at all, he really, really wanted Sami Salo back, his offer was so close, and, by a hair, he just lost him to Tampa. Poor Mike! Between the referee's conspiring to take out the Canucks, and between Sami Salo shockingly choosing Tampa's offer over Vancouver, which was worth a modest 100% more, he sure has had a string of bad luck!

Posted Image
  • 0

#171 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:56 AM

If that's the case, then how on earth is Jason Garrison worth 6 years @ $4.6M per?

I'm not the one making an argument he should. My argument has always been that he has shown consistent growth and that all signs point to him proving his worth. You're pretty much the only one making definitive arguments about Garrison. Question for you...of the sentence you put in bold which part do you think is the important part? Bet I don't get an answer.

And also, LOL, OK, I'm wrong, Mike Gillis didn't make the decision at all, he really, really wanted Sami Salo back, his offer was so close, and, by a hair, he just lost him to Tampa. Poor Mike! Between the referee's conspiring to take out the Canucks, and between Sami Salo shockingly choosing Tampa's offer over Vancouver, which was worth a modest 100% more, he sure has had a string of bad luck!

Posted Image


You really misunderstood the argument didn't you? I mean I know you misunderstood it on purpose so you could twist it into this garbage but once again you are unequivocally wrong because you're argument is completely skewed to an opinion rather than fact.

Hint: Your opinion isn't the problem.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 29 September 2012 - 08:57 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#172 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 09:31 AM

I'm not the one making an argument he should. My argument has always been that he has shown consistent growth and that all signs point to him proving his worth. You're pretty much the only one making definitive arguments about Garrison. Question for you...of the sentence you put in bold which part do you think is the important part? Bet I don't get an answer.


About Salo? The $4M? You think TB is paying him $3.75M for his off-ice stuff? Fat chance. The guy can play. And 2 years is not 6. Very reasonable contract.

You really misunderstood the argument didn't you? I mean I know you misunderstood it on purpose so you could twist it into this garbage but once again you are unequivocally wrong because you're argument is completely skewed to an opinion rather than fact.

Hint: Your opinion isn't the problem.


Um, no. You're saying that it wasn't Gillis' choice that Sami left. I'm saying that yes, it probably was. The only way that it wasn't Gillis' choice is if Sami definitively wanted to leave this city/team, which probably wasn't the case. Mike Gillis essentially disrespected Sami Salo by offering him what he did. He's saying that he doesn't believe in him enough to give him 2 years, which is Mike Gillis' decision. I don't know why you refuse to acknowledge this.
  • 0

#173 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 09:45 AM

About Salo? The $4M? You think TB is paying him $3.75M for his off-ice stuff? Fat chance. The guy can play. And 2 years is not 6. Very reasonable contract.

I also never said they were paying him for only off ice stuff but they have a need the Canucks don't have and Salo can fill that need. He's still productive on ice and should probably tap out around 2.5 mil for that but he's not being brought into TB for just his on ice product.


Um, no. You're saying that it wasn't Gillis' choice that Sami left. I'm saying that yes, it probably was. The only way that it wasn't Gillis' choice is if Sami definitively wanted to leave this city/team, which probably wasn't the case. Mike Gillis essentially disrespected Sami Salo by offering him what he did. He's saying that he doesn't believe in him enough to give him 2 years, which is Mike Gillis' decision. I don't know why you refuse to acknowledge this.


Mike GIllis made a respectable offer to Salo. TB made him an offer he's be stupid to refuse. Salo made the choice and quite frankly for himself and his family he made the right choice. The only decision Mike Gillis made was to offer Salo what he's worth for what he provides this team. To TB he's clearly worth more but to think he's only being paid there for his work on the ice would be foolish at best. Mike Gillis made the decision to offer Salo the contract he did which was a fair deal...that doesn't mean he chose to let him walk away. Apples and oranges.

Making multi year offers to a guy over 35 whose often injured is not a wise move. Tampa can afford that risk because they want Salo for much more than playing on the power play.

You're still skewing reality to fit your opinion. You're not totally off but you're still trying to fit a square peg into the round hole of logical rational thought. (AKA...still wrong.) nucksnucksnucks I tell ya

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 29 September 2012 - 09:47 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#174 higgyfan

higgyfan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,579 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:02 AM

made this and posted it in the memes thread back in early august. good to see the leopard doesn't change his spots and some things don't change.
Posted Image

since mg is systematically destroying our beloved team with his continuous gaffes and moronic trdes/signings/direction, theres no hope, we should all gather downtown and burn him in effigy i suppose?
hats off to nuck twit and all those who can't see the forest for the trees and seem to look at the present canucks management as a bunch of morons rather than people who do what they believe is correct for the franchise and operate under guidelines laid out for them. wouldn't it be superb to just offer a boatload of money to every player who demanded it? maybe just say screw the negotiating process and sell the farm in both cap hit and term for anyone who asks? trade players on a whim and get back a higher than value return EVERY time! don't bother attempting to reach reasonable contract numbers/years cuz hey, wtf, the market says a player is worth "x" so lets open the vault and let the dollars fly right?
anyone who thinks this is how a general manager of an nhl club should act (**cough..nuck twit...cough**) is on glue.
we get it nick nit, gillis et all suck in your eyes. your anti-mg shtick is old and tired. please, for the sake of this franchise approach FA and tell him how much better a gm you would be and get the bloody job! sign everyone to contracts you deem correct, trade everyone you think is a plug for superstars, throw cap space out the window. be "loyal" to a fault and get us a damn cup!


Really should have included King of the EStrogen in this post as well, man.
  • 0

#175 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:29 AM

I also never said they were paying him for only off ice stuff but they have a need the Canucks don't have and Salo can fill that need. He's still productive on ice and should probably tap out around 2.5 mil for that but he's not being brought into TB for just his on ice product.


What is that need? You're saying that the Canucks are so stacked on D that Sami Salo's become redundant?!

BTW, we now have a 1st-time starter as our goalie, another action not consistent with a self-proclaimed Cup contender. We should be looking for the most reliable, consistent, big-game guys that we can find, which Sami Salo personifies. Jason Garrison does not. Jason Garrison is an unproven crap-shoot.

Wonder how Schneider feels about the signing.

Mike GIllis made a respectable offer to Salo. TB made him an offer he's be stupid to refuse. Salo made the choice and quite frankly for himself and his family he made the right choice. The only decision Mike Gillis made was to offer Salo what he's worth for what he provides this team. To TB he's clearly worth more but to think he's only being paid there for his work on the ice would be foolish at best. Mike Gillis made the decision to offer Salo the contract he did which was a fair deal...that doesn't mean he chose to let him walk away. Apples and oranges.


Why would he be stupid to refuse TB's offer? I would think that he has no financial concerns for the rest of his life already. It wouldn't surprise me if Salo was pretty turned off by Mike Gillis' "1 year or nothing" antics, and decided to go with TB on principle. Do you really think that TB is the only team in the NHL that'd offer Salo a 2-year deal? I don't. Gillis probably assumed that Salo didn't want to leave, persisted with his lowballing, and got caught blindsided when Salo took the bait.

And BTW, it's pretty hard to call it a "respectable" offer when it was 100% less than what Tampa gave him. THOSE two contracts are really "apples and oranges", as you say.
  • 0

#176 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,627 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:31 AM

You can't just say that "Ehrhoff walked". You're forgetting that MIKE GILLIS TRADED HIM. Mike Gillis made the decision to not sign Christian Ehrhoff. And it was a bad one.


You can make up whatever crap you want. Reality is he did walk for more money, Gillis just got something for nothing. Get a grip dude, it's called reality. I don't like it much either but you got to be there once in a while.

In case you didn't know it's in line with MG's design. It's called a business plan and people make these when there is a group playing with millions of dollars. Jeez!
  • 0
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#177 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:35 AM

You can make up whatever crap you want. Reality is he did walk for more money, Gillis just got something for nothing. Get a grip dude, it's called reality. I don't like it much either but you got to be there once in a while.

In case you didn't know it's in line with MG's design. It's called a business plan and people make these when there is a group playing with millions of dollars. Jeez!


OK, but the other reality is that he was traded.

Mike Gillis chose to not adhere to Ehrhoff's demands.
  • 0

#178 hockeywoot

hockeywoot

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 09

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:36 AM

We gave Salo a fair offer.
TB gave him one he couldn't turn down.

Its quite simple really.
  • 0

#179 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,627 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:36 AM

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!


Your replies are always so long but pretty insightful usually. Gillis needs to actually start penciling people into positions. That's why we have no right wingers and Burrows plays on the first line. It's ridiculous.
  • 0
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#180 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,419 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:48 AM

What is that need? You're saying that the Canucks are so stacked on D that Sami Salo's become redundant?!

BTW, we now have a 1st-time starter as our goalie, another action not consistent with a self-proclaimed Cup contender. We should be looking for the most reliable, consistent, big-game guys that we can find, which Sami Salo personifies. Jason Garrison does not. Jason Garrison is an unproven crap-shoot.

Wonder how Schneider feels about the signing.

No I'm saying Salo provides a service to the canucks worth a certain amount. The Canucks don't have the needs Tampa does especially on defense. Salo can and will provide something for them they need a great deal...veteran leadership from a solid player. Make no mistake he's being paid for his experience as well as his skill and TB is in great need of that experience.

Why do we care what Schneider thinks?


Why would he be stupid to refuse TB's offer? I would think that he has no financial concerns for the rest of his life already. It wouldn't surprise me if Salo was pretty turned off by Mike Gillis' "1 year or nothing" antics, and decided to go with TB on principle. Do you really think that TB is the only team in the NHL that'd offer Salo a 2-year deal? I don't. Gillis probably assumed that Salo didn't want to leave, persisted with his lowballing, and got caught blindsided when Salo took the bait.

And BTW, it's pretty hard to call it a "respectable" offer when it was 100% less than what Tampa gave him. THOSE two contracts are really "apples and oranges", as you say.

Taking a nearly 4 mil deal instead of a 2 mil deal somehow confuses you?

No it was a respectable deal it's just Tampa offered him a much better deal. You're right though that I'm right. Those two offers are apples and oranges but that doesn't mean one is disrespectful. If I offer you $1000 for a car you're selling for $1000 and somebody else offers you $2000 does that make my offer disrespectful all of a sudden? Of course not...to think so would be stupid.

Same song and dance from you...and you're still wrong. (Look I can repeat myself over and over again too)
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image




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.