Sign in to follow this  
StealthNuck

Loui Eriksson | #21 | LW/RW

Recommended Posts

Incredible how all 4 lines have better chemistry with Eriksson. 

 

JB's got to look at something like a 2nd + LE for a 5th round pick or AHL player. A 1st would be too much to dump the 6M but I would consider LE + prospect in a heartbeat. Jett Woo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Biasbieksa said:

Doesn't it make sense to keep Eriksson and not trade him away?

 

We won't really be contending for the next two years and when that contract ends (Along with a couple other unfavorable ones) the Canucks can actually start considering contending. 

 

Why throw away quality prospects for years where we won't be contending anyhow? Might as well at getting rid of contracts that are more movable and 

can lower the cap so others can be signed.

 

That said, I'm not fully aware of the cap situation. But just my two cents.

Enough said.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really hope to see Erikssons thread deep down in the dark realms of “Alumni” .. below Frank Corrado.

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More and more talk of a possible compliance buyout or two if the league can’t salvage enough revenue to keep the cap flat or up a little.

 

I guess we would have to use it on Eriksson... but it is a shame we didn’t play hardball with him beforehand and send him to the minors to see if he would actually play there for a stretch or would have chosen to go home.

 

There are a lot of other teams with longer term bad contracts who would benefit as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Provost said:

More and more talk of a possible compliance buyout or two if the league can’t salvage enough revenue to keep the cap flat or up a little.

 

I guess we would have to use it on Eriksson... but it is a shame we didn’t play hardball with him beforehand and send him to the minors to see if he would actually play there for a stretch or would have chosen to go home.

 

There are a lot of other teams with longer term bad contracts who would benefit as well.

After Loui’s July bonus isn’t he owed about 5 million total for the last two years?  I’d say Aquilini would compliance buyout Loui.  If we have two of these buyouts though, which other player would we use that on?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

After Loui’s July bonus isn’t he owed about 5 million total for the last two years?  I’d say Aquilini would compliance buyout Loui.  If we have two of these buyouts though, which other player would we use that on?  

Ferland? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Ferland? 

Unless we can put his cap on LTI, I’d agree.  Combined that’s 9.5 million off the cap.  Heard on the radio the league will lose 1 billion if they cancel this season.  Cap might actually go down? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Unless we can put his cap on LTI, I’d agree.  Combined that’s 9.5 million off the cap.  Heard on the radio the league will lose 1 billion if they cancel this season.  Cap might actually go down? 

I was just thinking about erasing the longest contract terms with problems. Sutter's a big number but he's gone after 1 season so I wouldn't waste the buyout on that.

 

The cap going down would create an awful lot of problems for every team. I can see it staying level, and Bettman adding a single compliance buyout to help teams manage things that way. It is a special write down, so maybe the teams just eat the loss and use it against next years revenue. Sports teams might be able to ask for and get some special tax relief from the US and Canadian gov'ts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

I was just thinking about erasing the longest contract terms with problems. Sutter's a big number but he's gone after 1 season so I wouldn't waste the buyout on that.

 

The cap going down would create an awful lot of problems for every team. I can see it staying level, and Bettman adding a single compliance buyout to help teams manage things that way. It is a special write down, so maybe the teams just eat the loss and use it against next years revenue. Sports teams might be able to ask for and get some special tax relief from the US and Canadian gov'ts. 

Escrow is going to be 50%.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alflives said:

Escrow is going to be 50%.  

ugh, then its a guaranteed lockout situation. Not good with a new team coming on board in Seattle. I'm guessing Gary is on the phone with other league brass and they will be seeking special tax relief for all leagues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Unless we can put his cap on LTI, I’d agree.  Combined that’s 9.5 million off the cap.  Heard on the radio the league will lose 1 billion if they cancel this season.  Cap might actually go down? 

They won’t let the cap go down Even with a compliance buyout... it is a one time scenario, so I am sure they will figure a way to keep it flat and recoup the money eventually.

 

Once Seattle comes on-board it is going to give league-wide cap relief as the same amount of committed contract dollars get spread a little thinner.  It will help self correct things with teams up against the cap and also having money to pay free agents.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Provost said:

More and more talk of a possible compliance buyout or two if the league can’t salvage enough revenue to keep the cap flat or up a little.

 

I guess we would have to use it on Eriksson... but it is a shame we didn’t play hardball with him beforehand and send him to the minors to see if he would actually play there for a stretch or would have chosen to go home.

 

There are a lot of other teams with longer term bad contracts who would benefit as well.

Still think we should have gone a step further and sent him to Utica while instructing Cull to make his life a living hell, without any possibility of ever wasting another second of ice-time in an actual game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, with the Expansion draft supposedly being held at the end of next season, and the Corona virus happening now, I could see them allowing 1 compulsory buyout

this year, and another next, instead of 2 next year, as like in the Vegas Expansion draft.

 

Teams, will have to be careful, not to spend too much this year, and not have enough next year...….

 

It solves this years problem, and keeps control of the process. I do not see the Cap going up...…...maybe not even next year, and if we go into recession, we may not even see that TV contract, that is supposedly enroute.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Well, with the Expansion draft supposedly being held at the end of next season, and the Corona virus happening now, I could see them allowing 1 compulsory buyout

this year, and another next, instead of 2 next year, as like in the Vegas Expansion draft.

 

Teams, will have to be careful, not to spend too much this year, and not have enough next year...….

 

It solves this years problem, and keeps control of the process. I do not see the Cap going up...…...maybe not even next year, and if we go into recession, we may not even see that TV contract, that is supposedly enroute.

The RFAs this summer are really going to get chopped I think.  With the season likely not going to finish, that’s a lot of lost revenue.  Cap will stay the same, but escrow will be crazy high.  I can see lots of RFAs signing one year deals in hopes of getting better dollars next summer.  Maybe we could sign Tanev and Tofu to one year deals?  I think Marky is just too good to nay get a one year deal.  Someone will give him term and top dollar.  Hoping it’s us though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Alflives said:

The RFAs this summer are really going to get chopped I think.  With the season likely not going to finish, that’s a lot of lost revenue.  Cap will stay the same, but escrow will be crazy high.  I can see lots of RFAs signing one year deals in hopes of getting better dollars next summer.  Maybe we could sign Tanev and Tofu to one year deals?  I think Marky is just too good to nay get a one year deal.  Someone will give him term and top dollar.  Hoping it’s us though.  

Well, I would think a lot of Owners with new money, will have taken a bath on the stock exchange and if there is a recession, guys like Aqualini will take a bath in realestate......

 

So, there might not be a lot of money around for a few years. It will definitely have an impact on RFA's and UFA's

 

But in the end, greed will win out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Provost said:

They won’t let the cap go down Even with a compliance buyout... it is a one time scenario, so I am sure they will figure a way to keep it flat and recoup the money eventually.

 

Once Seattle comes on-board it is going to give league-wide cap relief as the same amount of committed contract dollars get spread a little thinner.  It will help self correct things with teams up against the cap and also having money to pay free agents.

 

 

I think Seattle will help some teams and not others

they will take some MA Fleurys but also some Fantenburgs

not too likely they take Ericksson, Baer, Rooster or Sutter

more likely a MacEwen which would hurt and not save us any money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NHL stays on pause longer than expected Eriksson might just decide to call it a career. This would work out well for the Canucks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

If the NHL stays on pause longer than expected Eriksson might just decide to call it a career. This would work out well for the Canucks 

How so?  Loui is still owed 8 million dollars. Why would extra time off make him retire? Makes zero sense.

 

image.png.1575f0e4107cfae131c18e628bc3c982.png

 

Much better chance the NHL has to give teams a buy out and the Canucks kick him to the curb that way.

 

Many teams will be screwed by the cap otherwise and the NHL will want to make money...so they will help teams out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

How so?  Loui is still owed 8 million dollars. Why would extra time off make him retire? Makes zero sense.

 

image.png.1575f0e4107cfae131c18e628bc3c982.png

 

Much better chance the NHL has to give teams a buy out and the Canucks kick him to the curb that way.

 

Many teams will be screwed by the cap otherwise and the NHL will want to make money...so they will help teams out.

The only way a compliance buyout will be on the table is if the cap drops significantly. If it’s flat there’s no way the owners will pony up huge buyout dollars so GM’s can temporarily fix their screwups. I’m not sure what imagined correlation between teams in cap trouble and the NHL making money is.  
 

This years losses will be split 50/50 by the players and the owners. (As per the CBA). Buyouts compound the losses for the owners.  If the cap stays flat I’d imagine the direction from the board of governors to the GM’s will be to “make it work”. Teams with cap space will be in a great position to get some quality players.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.