Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Is Alex Edler Done in Vancouver?

Rate this topic


dpn1

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Obviously there was contract confusion, maybe Edler thought he was going to sign a retirement contract in Vancouver and everything would be fine.  And yes you can push NTC's.  Happened with Hamhuis, it happens all the time actually

What exactly would you say to "push" a player to waive his movement clause and relocate away from his family when he seemingly has little interest in doing so ? Saying pretty please or promising to be his best friend probably won't cut it. Terrible thinking like this is why many fans are out of their depth trying to analyze the business end of the game. You do realize they are human beings and not 2 dimensional video game characters ?  You can't just tap a sequence of buttons and have hime bend to your whim.

Edited by BlastPast
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s what Friedman actually said:

 

“I’ve heard some really interesting things about this whole situation. There is definitely a feeling this has gone off the rails. But one thing that people have always warned me about is the real deadline is coming up. If it’s not July 1 itself or June 23, when you can first start talking to players, this week is a big week for a lot of teams. They want to know where their guys are going, if they’re staying or going. I have heard San Jose if they lose some of their D. I still think there’s a chance that maybe Vancouver and him sort it out, but this is definitely more difficult than anybody expected it would be. And there are people convinced he will not be going back to Vancouver, but again, look, if he really wants to go back and they really want him there’s a path there. I hesitate to say 100 per cent yes or no, but there’s no question this has been a lot harder than everyone thought it would be.

“The issue is 1) Term, and 2) Expansion draft availability. They want him eligible for the expansion draft, he doesn’t want to be.” 

Source: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-podcast-note-10-pending-nhl-ufas/

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Really?  Want me to bring up a group who reluctantly waived their NTC's?  It happens.  Hamhuis and Garrison both waived, despite being B.C boys and wanting to stay close to family.  They were pushed

 

But you know what? Fine, losing Edler for nothing is nobody's fault...you win.  I will always be an Edler fan and have been one of his biggest supporters over the years.

Garrison waived for Tampa, i.e. way more money in his pocket and a cup contending team. So yeah, that would be a "pull" situation that benefitted him. 

 

Edler didn't want to sign with Calgary and live there for 3 years, can't say I blame him. 

 

But keep up the search for "fault" like that has any relevance at all in these negotiations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Here’s what Friedman actually said:

 

“I’ve heard some really interesting things about this whole situation. There is definitely a feeling this has gone off the rails. But one thing that people have always warned me about is the real deadline is coming up. If it’s not July 1 itself or June 23, when you can first start talking to players, this week is a big week for a lot of teams. They want to know where their guys are going, if they’re staying or going. I have heard San Jose if they lose some of their D. I still think there’s a chance that maybe Vancouver and him sort it out, but this is definitely more difficult than anybody expected it would be. And there are people convinced he will not be going back to Vancouver, but again, look, if he really wants to go back and they really want him there’s a path there. I hesitate to say 100 per cent yes or no, but there’s no question this has been a lot harder than everyone thought it would be.

The issue is 1) Term, and 2) Expansion draft availability. They want him eligible for the expansion draft, he doesn’t want to be.” 

Source: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-podcast-note-10-pending-nhl-ufas/

Which is basically what others have been saying the past two months. Lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Really?  Want me to bring up a group who reluctantly waived their NTC's?  It happens.  Hamhuis and Garrison both waived, despite being B.C boys and wanting to stay close to family.  They were pushed

 

But you know what? Fine, losing Edler for nothing is nobody's fault...you win.  I will always be an Edler fan and have been one of his biggest supporters over the years.

Dude, the difference is they had keen interest on re-signing Edler. They wanted to move Garrison and Hamhuis may have waived but he obviously didn't waive it all together. That's an important distinction.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to play hard ball with him and if he wants to walk and uproot his life here then let him. No way can the Canucks afford to use a protection spot on him. Likely the agent just posturing, everyone knows he wants to stay. There is a good opportunity for Benning to bend him over a barrel.   

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this all along. Edler is a great defenceman when he is in the lineup. As of late the injuries are piling up and he's in the line up less and less. This is why in my opinion take the money and find another serviceable defenceman who will actually play more. I wouldn't suggest a Karlsson or Myers but someone along the Lines of Gardiner or Sustr for example. The best way is draft and develop but can find help via free agency when that fails.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

Sorry,  but Elliot is rapidly losing his credibility in terms of reporting on these types of hockey issues.   He has no substantial/credible information over what is common knowledge - Edler and his agent want longer-term with salary/clauses while JB wants shorter term with no clauses.   

 

That's called bargaining Elliot,  both sides have a goal just like your goal is to get clicks sadly. 

We don’t even know if Elliotte actually said this. That site never links any article or audio clip to its “rumours”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...