EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Really? Remind me how many Cups the Vancouver Canucks have won since 1970. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 So you agree now that Garrision is well worth 4.6 million? right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 The same amount as Buffalo genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaches Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Because: Buffalo Sabres- 9th in East, miss playoffs. Vancouver Canucks- 1st in NHL, out in first round to eventual cup champions. This is why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Because: Buffalo Sabres- 9th in East, miss playoffs. Vancouver Canucks- 1st in NHL, out in first round to eventual cup champions. This is why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaches Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Playoffs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..... No Playoffs. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 If that's the case, then how on earth is Jason Garrison worth 6 years @ $4.6M per? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeywoot Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 We gave Salo a fair offer. TB gave him one he couldn't turn down. Its quite simple really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.