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

#211 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 01:44 PM

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
Posted Image

#212 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,794 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 29 September 2012 - 01:47 PM

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.


Loyalty is for dreamers and 5 yr olds.
  • 1
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#213 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,794 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 29 September 2012 - 01:54 PM

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!


You would be the worst lawyer in history.
  • 4
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#214 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,794 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:17 PM

: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.


You remind me of my idiot brother. Whenever he starts losing an argument he also starts arguing semantics to the point you're not even talking about the point anymore. I will give you props for understanding English but to those of us that actually think about concrete ideas it's not that impressive.

Yes, if you break down the words you can make it say Gillis let Salo walk. You can make the bible say whatever you want to. We are obviously presuming a little intuition on your part that comes with everyday conversation but ... no you win my brother's logic of the year award. THE I'M GOING PRETEND I DON"T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AWARD. Oh, did I use the word "Award" wrong perhaps? :sadno:

Edited by Dogbyte, 29 September 2012 - 02:31 PM.

  • 0
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#215 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,710 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:40 PM

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.


And is it not also up to the player to chose to accept what is offered or not? Salo chose not.
  • 0
Posted Image

#216 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,710 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 29 September 2012 - 03:00 PM

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.


Gillis offered to sign Salo to ONE YEAR DEALS AS LONG AS HE WANTED TO PLAY and Salo CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT THAT.

Salo would have had what he wanted two years or more. Gillis didn't want a two year deal based on Salo's age and lengthy injury history. One major injury and Salo could potentially retire leaving the final years cap hit on the books. Gillis did what was best for the team while offering to let Sami play out his career here. He did his job. What is best for the team supercedes loyalty to a player. MG's offer contained what was best for the team and showed loyalty. Sami chose to leave.
  • 0
Posted Image

#217 kesler'sselke

kesler'sselke

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • Joined: 17-July 11

Posted 29 September 2012 - 03:55 PM

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

#218 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 04:17 PM

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.

This is good reasoning and optimism. Refreshing.
  • 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??"

#219 eretz canucks

eretz canucks

    Comets Star

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 04:53 PM

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.

Edited by eretz canucks, 29 September 2012 - 04:59 PM.

  • 0

#220 Gerbera

Gerbera

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 10

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:03 PM

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.


Even we as fans know that Ballard is playing at a level below his pay check, and you think other GMs will take this player without giving us some salary dump or low balling us?

Before Ballard is traded over, he is playing as a Top 4 D in Florida. Nobody would've guessed that he will turn out playing horrible in Vancouver. I believe his trade is to make sure that we have some Top 4 defenseman in case we didn't get Hamhuis through free agency.

Imagine without Ballard trade and we didn't sign Hamhuis, our D will be like:

Edler - Bieksa
Erhoff - Salo
Alberts - Rome

Is this really the D pairing you are comfortable with night in night out?
  • 0

#221 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,193 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:18 PM

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.

Oh, so you're projecting Garrison to have the same career trajectory as Salo. OK. We'll see.


What I'm saying is that like Garrison, Salo was an excellent calculated risk - he broke into the NHL at 27 years of age, and had a "breakout" at 28 - in other words, if we were to go back in time, and you were whining about why we acquired Salo (as you are with Garrison, ie) - this guy is 28 and only has a couple seasons under his belt - your whining would have been premature wouldn't it? And in the end, beyond premature - just plain negative expectations that in hindsight were unnecessarily whiny.
As for Ballard, if you didn't complain at the time, spare us.

Edited by oldnews, 29 September 2012 - 05:21 PM.

  • 1

#222 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,193 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:27 PM

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."


Edited by oldnews, 29 September 2012 - 05:32 PM.

  • 0

#223 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,193 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:27 PM

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."


Christian Ehrhoff:
August 17, 2011.
"For me, the No. 1 criteria is that I want to play for a championship"

History, uh nope, a truckload of money, will be made.

Edited by oldnews, 30 September 2012 - 08:57 AM.

  • 0

#224 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,975 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:45 PM

As posted earlier, I agree (strongly) that $40 mill for Erhoff would have been a mistake. I also agree Garrison appears a great signing; time will tell?

I disagree regarding Bitz and Torres. More so with Torres. You may have noticed that Phoenix's 3rd line, with raffi, had a strong ability to battle and outduel top line match up's as a defensive stopper line. And he took a suspension again, but his team with that identity had the right stuff. And having a 215 to 220 lb body with big speed and a wrecking ball mentality has its place. On face value Higgins is a better player. But we did not have that same ability to compete physically this year and it certainly had it's contribution to our demise. Bitz? His suspension was waaay lower in the scope of things. There were two real problems at play there; Kassian was really not yet fit for that spot, and Bitz was rusty coming back into a lineup from the minors to a role that should have been his in the first place. Exuberance probably played its part as (admittedly) he took a dumb penalty trying to play a physical role to show the spot was really his.

Bitz should still be around as depth (even though Kassian will surpass him right away) and we should never have given up Torres! Bernier, for example, was a bum here if u consider what we were paying him, but was very serviceable this year for Jersey at the correct rate. And did you see where his team ended up, or Pyatt? All these guys played on the edge, an edge that created winners. Boston has these guys? These sort of big guys, with enough skill to play are gold depth players at their contract value!



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.


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 29 September 2012 - 07:19 PM.

  • 1

#225 samurai

samurai

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 06

Posted 29 September 2012 - 06:28 PM

wow people talking hockey despite the lock out and slim chance in the near future for it to be solved.
  • 0

#226 Gerbera

Gerbera

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 10

Posted 29 September 2012 - 06:55 PM

wow people talking hockey despite the lock out and slim chance in the near future for it to be solved.


Your point is? Many people talk about hockey even though it is the offseason too.
  • 0

#227 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,515 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 29 September 2012 - 07:42 PM

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.


We lost Mitchell because LA took a gamble and overpaid. It just so happens that gamble paid off.

Clearly MG is a more conservative GM than his reputation would say.

If Hoff really wanted a championship, why didn't he take less money and play for say Pittsburgh? Buffalo is a long way off of being a cup favorite.
  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#228 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:24 PM

Christian Ehrhoff:
August 17, 2011.
"For me, the No. 1 criteria is that I want to play for a championship"

We lost Mitchell because LA took a gamble and overpaid. It just so happens that gamble paid off.

Clearly MG is a more conservative GM than his reputation would say.

If Hoff really wanted a championship, why didn't he take less money and play for say Pittsburgh? Buffalo is a long way off of being a cup favorite.

exactly.
  • 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??"

#229 Tangerines

Tangerines

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,940 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:35 PM

exactly.

Erhoff is full of s**t. He did it for the cash..
  • 0

#230 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:37 PM

wow people talking hockey despite the lock out and slim chance in the near future for it to be solved.

weve been talking hockey all summer long bud

some of us just love talking about it and debating , thats how much we love the sport

suck a dank
  • 1
Posted Image

#231 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 10:49 PM

Erhoff is full of s**t. He did it for the cash..

the posts i quoted point out his contradiction.....
  • 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??"

#232 WolfxHaley

WolfxHaley

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 940 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 10

Posted 30 September 2012 - 04:08 AM

Time to go to the doctors and get those Ehrhoff erections checked out, I mean come on ' nuck nit ' and ' king of ES ' it's time to shut your mouthes and get off your knees and actually read the nonsense that you are typing.
  • 0

Posted Image


#233 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,205 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 30 September 2012 - 10:28 AM

All the attention to the Wolve prospects could be because the new CBA will most likely include a drastically reduced cap. In order to ice a team within the cap, we might see a few more prospects on the team out of necessity.
I hope that all the attention results in a few prospects being a lot better at training camp when the new CBA gets signed.
  • 0

#234 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,794 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 30 September 2012 - 11:19 AM

Erhoff is full of s**t. He did it for the cash..


Yeah, he went to play for a championship team is not a slight on the Canucks but this is such a lame point I keep seeing. This is what hockey players say when they go to new teams. It's posturing and happens all the time. In no way, shape, or form, was he really suggesting that he left Van to go to a better team so just drop it guys.

He is of German decent, doesn't speak great English, it's a just a press bite.

Edited by Dogbyte, 30 September 2012 - 12:28 PM.

  • 0
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#235 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 30 September 2012 - 02:01 PM

Yeah, he went to play for a championship team is not a slight on the Canucks but this is such a lame point I keep seeing. This is what hockey players say when they go to new teams. It's posturing and happens all the time. In no way, shape, or form, was he really suggesting that he left Van to go to a better team so just drop it guys.

He is of German decent, doesn't speak great English, it's a just a press bite.

oh come on people argued this long before erhoff speaks real good english have you met him?

he obviously was saying it for the fans/organization

doesnt mean it wasnt stupid
  • 0
Posted Image

#236 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,975 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 30 September 2012 - 05:23 PM

The Kings took a gamble cuz Willie was coming off a concussion.

But his salary was $3.6 mill, hardly overpaying! Turned good value if we're being fair?

We lost Mitchell because LA took a gamble and overpaid. It just so happens that gamble paid off.

Clearly MG is a more conservative GM than his reputation would say.

If Hoff really wanted a championship, why didn't he take less money and play for say Pittsburgh? Buffalo is a long way off of being a cup favorite.


  • 0

#237 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,794 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 30 September 2012 - 05:51 PM

oh come on people argued this long before erhoff speaks real good english have you met him?

he obviously was saying it for the fans/organization

doesnt mean it wasnt stupid


I've seen enough footage to form a solid opinion. He's not that dumb but his English is thought out in his interviews, and he does not have a lot of them. So if you think he was trying to make a statement it means you have a low opinion of him, to think he is that dumb.

Edited by Dogbyte, 30 September 2012 - 05:51 PM.

  • 0
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#238 Gerbera

Gerbera

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 10

Posted 30 September 2012 - 08:04 PM

The Kings took a gamble cuz Willie was coming off a concussion.

But his salary was $3.6 mill, hardly overpaying! Turned good value if we're being fair?


If he sits the rest of the season like Pronger... you think 3.6mil cap hit will be good? You can't just look at the best outcome and then ignore all the possibilities that the worst could've happened.
  • 0

#239 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,983 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 30 September 2012 - 10:55 PM

If he sits the rest of the season like Pronger... you think 3.6mil cap hit will be good? You can't just look at the best outcome and then ignore all the possibilities that the worst could've happened.

If he sat the rest of the season like Pronger I believe his cap hit would have been $0.0 mil. LA took a risk and it paid off for them so good on them for doing it.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#240 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,975 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 01 October 2012 - 03:49 AM

He signed a month and half or so after July 1, because he was cleared to play at that time by my memory. So the risk was future injury which does occur with head injuries.

But while your on the IR the cap hit is $0.

At our end, the risk was missing out on Hamhuis or (gulp) Ballard July 1 long before he was cleared to play. Ultimately we lost that risk, but I probably would have done the same as Gillis did at the time had opportunities been the same.



If he sits the rest of the season like Pronger... you think 3.6mil cap hit will be good? You can't just look at the best outcome and then ignore all the possibilities that the worst could've happened.


  • 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.