Oh, I see what you're saying. You thought that I literally thought Gillis wrote up a contract and sat it in front of Luongo for him to sign because I used the words "laid in front of him". I am aware that there were two parties who negotiated the final draft, but I assumed the term, the captaincy and the NTC were things that Gillis either offered or conceded on, since Luongo was traded here and was being wooed to stay. You see, I was being ffigurative. For example, the term burry the hatched does not mean that the two parties take a hatchet to a lot somewhere to dig a hole and drop a hatchet in it. Rather, it means to let bygones be bygones and not HOLD ON NEEDLESSLY to s childish grudge.
But I could see where one may inadvertantly take such a term as "laid out for him" to mean precidely and exactly that.
Yes why don't we blame Gillis for trying to find a way to hold on to the Canucks most valuable piece at the time. Most people were wondering how the Canucks were going to afford to keep Luongo and he found a way. Now the only reason it had to come to that length and the inclusion of a NTC is because those are things ROBERTO LUONGO WANTED not because Gillis offered them. At that time he could not lose Luongo and I bet he had the full support of ownership, who most likely had to sign off on a contract of that magnitude.
So saying poor Luongo the poor victim of having to sign the contract that Gillis dropped in his lap is utterly asinine. He wanted it.. he should have been able to back that up with his play.
Btw I completely support Luongo and my honest thought was to trade Schneider (even if he was playing better, for sure there was a better return) But after these comments and sulking, I don't care if Luongo warms the bench or rides the bus in the Minors. He talks about how hes all about the Canucks and a team guy but at the end of the day, with this attitude, he is only looking out for #1.
Edited by Aladeen, 03 April 2013 - 04:23 PM.