CANUCK-EXPRESS Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I would've been happy with what Calgary got for Russell and I'm sure Benning would be happy as well. Without reading what Botch had to say I've always believed that whatever this team does on trades, signings etc ownership has the final words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckinEdm Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 this is the biggest horsepoop I have ever heard Hamhuis is owed 1mil for for the rest of the season essentially. There is no way the owner said no you can get more then that for hammer when he has no clue what the market is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Soldier Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Alright, here's the question I have. We have journalists and panelists across the country who are all alluding to the idea that ownership meddles. But why does it seem like none of them are actually talking to the people who have been been through this process? Surely Nonis would be detached enough from the organization to sit down with a reporter and talk about his experience with a probable Brad Richards deal. Gillis alluded to it (granted in a way that made me think that he was trying to pass blame for years of questionable decisions) but no one really seems keen to approach him to discuss it candidly. What of Gilman? Henning? Two management teams have supposedly been through the ringer but none of them want to talk about it? No one has a copy of an email that says 'plz no traderino -aquaman'? The sticky point for me is that it feels like we're sitting around and blowing raspberries 'til the revelation comes, but the people who stir the pot on this seem so unwilling to, y'know, actually be journalists about it. You can hem and haw on social media until the cows come home but we all know that something like this would be the expose of a lifetime. Someone like Botchford would go from zero to hero overnight if he could break this story. So why is it that no one is digging into this? It's just so weird. The premise of the saying 'where there's smoke there's fire' is that something eventually decides to verify that. If all these journalists have probable reason to suspect meddling, what are they waiting for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillooet_Hillbilly Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 36 minutes ago, Nuck4Nuck said: my question is if ownership is really evolved as the report they say it is, then why would any GM want to work for the Canucks? Basically beside a nice contract that earns you money, you will always be stuck in a tough situation. why do you think they hire GM's that were never a GM before. It's a foot in the door that hell awaits on the other side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 ...If Linden said he talked to ownership before pulling the trigger on the Shinkaruk trade, what makes anyone think in their right minds that they didn't go to them this time around in regards to Hamhuis, and especially to a team in Dallas who's owners have a bad relationship with the aquamen who hold a grudge against them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JV77 Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Linden clarified it and said owners weren't involved and didn't nix anything. We weren't gonna give them Hamhuis for free just to help them out while we get nothing. We would get pieces to help us too and if anything we would have screwed them over by getting their pieces now and then resigning Hamhuis in the summer. Aquilini isn't that dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Make all the excuses & theories you want..it's rather simple, in my opinion. IF Hamhuis is in a KEY US MARKET, the league will ENSURE THAT team will receive a beauty return. It's in this manner, the deck will always be rigged, folks. Look at the Ducks..10 mill below cap(a few days back, at least), & likely a better prospect pool. It's in the league's financial interest to have about ten~twelve key markets, perpetually strong(include one or two Cdn ones, eg:TML & Mtl). Now that they have a CBA amenable to both parties, this is the pattern that will play out. The game now(for them) is to maximize profits. This is how they'll accomplish that. If you can't bear to see Van not competitive..take up a new hobby. Seriously-don't invest your heart/hopes in this assuming this big biz hasn't been tilted/corrupted. I'm still interested in ice hockey, but they haven't gotten a red FreekenCENT from me since the 90's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I WON'T give a dime to something I don't trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 44 minutes ago, Shiftynifty said: Benning looked completely defeated today. I can see some credibility to the article. However, if rumour of Chicago offering a 1st and Dano is true, I am not letting Benning off the hook. Benning in the post deadline presser all but admitted he got the Dallas offer which they eventually agreed to with Russell. JB: had received a "parallel offer" to the Russell deal, but Dallas chose Russell in the end over Hamhuis. ...so again, fits the notion Dallas went to Calgary after ownership demanded more and the Canucks did in fact get a quote on quote "parallel offer" to that of Russell for Hamhuis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 10 minutes ago, JV77 said: Linden clarified it and said owners weren't involved and didn't nix anything. We weren't gonna give them Hamhuis for free just to help them out while we get nothing. We would get pieces to help us too and if anything we would have screwed them over by getting their pieces now and then resigning Hamhuis in the summer. Aquilini isn't that dumb. 12 minutes ago, TheRussianRocket. said: ...If Linden said he talked to ownership before pulling the trigger on the Shinkaruk trade, what makes anyone think in their right minds that they didn't go to them this time around in regards to Hamhuis, and especially to a team in Dallas who's owners have a bad relationship with the aquamen who hold a grudge against them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 16 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said: Alright, here's the question I have. We have journalists and panelists across the country who are all alluding to the idea that ownership meddles. But why does it seem like none of them are actually talking to the people who have been been through this process? Surely Nonis would be detached enough from the organization to sit down with a reporter and talk about his experience with a probable Brad Richards deal. Gillis alluded to it (granted in a way that made me think that he was trying to pass blame for years of questionable decisions) but no one really seems keen to approach him to discuss it candidly. What of Gilman? Henning? Two management teams have supposedly been through the ringer but none of them want to talk about it? No one has a copy of an email that says 'plz no traderino -aquaman'? The sticky point for me is that it feels like we're sitting around and blowing raspberries 'til the revelation comes, but the people who stir the pot on this seem so unwilling to, y'know, actually be journalists about it. You can hem and haw on social media until the cows come home but we all know that something like this would be the expose of a lifetime. Someone like Botchford would go from zero to hero overnight if he could break this story. So why is it that no one is digging into this? It's just so weird. The premise of the saying 'where there's smoke there's fire' is that something eventually decides to verify that. If all these journalists have probable reason to suspect meddling, what are they waiting for? Didnt gillis say something during a interveiw with 1040 after he got fired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSecretIsMe Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I wouldn't doubt that the ownership was involved in some way. I wonder if the plan is to re-sign Hamhuis in the off-season and move him next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Soldier Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 1 minute ago, Squamfan said: Didnt gillis say something during a interveiw with 1040 after he got fired I don't remember Gillis saying anything after he was fired, he kind of just quietly vanished from the public eye. I could be remembering that wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 28 minutes ago, The 5th Line said: Who cares? If the owner really was a part of this epic failure, what do you plan on doing about it? Nothing! It is what it is and we are going to have to get over it what the hell are you talking about ????? we dont have to get over it !!! we won't buy tickets ! we won't renew seasons tickets !! they will have to get over the embarrassment of empty seats and losing money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 1 minute ago, Winter Soldier said: I don't remember Gillis saying anything after he was fired, he kind of just quietly vanished from the public eye. I could be remembering that wrong. Because i remember he did have a interview not sure after he got fired or during the summer. Plus hes a prof now in uvic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 5 minutes ago, Squamfan said: Didnt gillis say something during a interveiw with 1040 after he got fired Before he got fired he said he wanted to rebuild and go back to skilled players , then got canned after the fans chanted Fire Gillis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desiboynux4lifee******* Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 3 minutes ago, Lulover88 said: what the hell are you talking about ????? we dont have to get over it !!! we won't buy tickets ! we won't renew seasons tickets !! they will have to get over the embarrassment of empty seats and losing money we go through the suffering, they count there cheques, im waiting until more truth comes out but yes we will fight back! Does anyone realize how much its going to hurt seeing Shinkurak score on us in the future, like ugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 21 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said: Alright, here's the question I have. We have journalists and panelists across the country who are all alluding to the idea that ownership meddles. But why does it seem like none of them are actually talking to the people who have been been through this process? Surely Nonis would be detached enough from the organization to sit down with a reporter and talk about his experience with a probable Brad Richards deal. Gillis alluded to it (granted in a way that made me think that he was trying to pass blame for years of questionable decisions) but no one really seems keen to approach him to discuss it candidly. What of Gilman? Henning? Two management teams have supposedly been through the ringer but none of them want to talk about it? No one has a copy of an email that says 'plz no traderino -aquaman'? The sticky point for me is that it feels like we're sitting around and blowing raspberries 'til the revelation comes, but the people who stir the pot on this seem so unwilling to, y'know, actually be journalists about it. You can hem and haw on social media until the cows come home but we all know that something like this would be the expose of a lifetime. Someone like Botchford would go from zero to hero overnight if he could break this story. So why is it that no one is digging into this? It's just so weird. The premise of the saying 'where there's smoke there's fire' is that something eventually decides to verify that. If all these journalists have probable reason to suspect meddling, what are they waiting for? No GM or other hockey executive (or anyone who hopes to be a hockey executive again) is going to rat out ownership. No owner will ever hire a guy who has a record of revealing the dirty laundry. I am surprised that Gillis has revealed as much he has (which still isn't much). The most we are likely to get is "off the record" hints filtered though a few trusted media types. And that is precisely what we have about the Aquillini meddling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 2 minutes ago, desiboynux4lifee******* said: we go through the suffering, they count there cheques, im waiting until more truth comes out but yes we will fight back! Does anyone realize how much its going to hurt seeing Shinkurak score on us in the future, like ugh! You need to get laid bro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desiboynux4lifee******* Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Just now, messier's_elbow said: You need to get laid bro. okay dude lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.