Moose Nuckle Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 6 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Easy solution then. Send him down to Utica and tell Cull to leave our $6 million sack of $#!& in the pressbox where he belongs. If he wants to actually play hockey, he'd better agree to mutually terminate the contract because he sure as hell shouldn't be playing another shift for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckCup2022 Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, Moose Nuckle said: How dare he want to play hockey. Once again the toxic canuck fans come out with ridiculous expectations. How dare passionate Canuck fans demand these highly paid athletes actually be able to play meaningful NHL hockey. SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! <Loui sucks...especially at 6 million per> PS: I don't pay money to go to live games to see Loui at all. I don't cable fees to see Loui...I actually don't want to see Loui...at all. Edited July 21, 2020 by CanuckCup2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenspear Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 9 hours ago, erkayloomeh said: What Messier did was worse but LE contract itself is worse than the Messier contract. Yeah, but F**K Messier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 2 hours ago, CanuckCup2022 said: How dare passionate Canuck fans demand these highly paid athletes actually be able to play meaningful NHL hockey. Being one of our best defensive forwards and pk'ers would seem to be meaningful NHL hockey, no? Certainly not $6m meaningful, but meaningful nonetheless. If he was making like $2m, nobody would even have an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Nuckle Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 3 hours ago, CanuckCup2022 said: How dare passionate Canuck fans demand these highly paid athletes actually be able to play meaningful NHL hockey. SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! <Loui sucks...especially at 6 million per> PS: I don't pay money to go to live games to see Loui at all. I don't cable fees to see Loui...I actually don't want to see Loui...at all. So we should want all our players to not want to try and for our coaches to demotivate our players. Great logic. You're especially smarterned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted July 21, 2020 Share Posted July 21, 2020 15 hours ago, King Heffy said: Easy solution then. Send him down to Utica and tell Cull to leave our $6 million sack of $#!& in the pressbox where he belongs. If he wants to actually play hockey, he'd better agree to mutually terminate the contract because he sure as hell shouldn't be playing another shift for us. Should have happened at the beginning of 2019/20. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 On 7/20/2020 at 3:05 PM, SilentSam said: Great news ! Rick Dhaliwal (@DhaliwalSports) Tweeted: Been saying this for a long time, he is not walking away from the money left on his contract. But the under the table agreement he’ll retire next season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 32 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: But the under the table agreement he’ll retire next season Speaking of this, I wonder where @Alflives has been. Hope he's doing alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 1 hour ago, theo5789 said: Speaking of this, I wonder where @Alflives has been. Hope he's doing alright. I've heard rumours that he's gone over to the HFBoards instead of CDC, but I'm not certain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 20 hours ago, SilentSam said: Should have happened at the beginning of 2019/20. This is 100% It is one of the biggest mistakes of Benning’s tenure (or of an owner who may not have let him bury that contract). Injuries meant you didn’t HAVE to bury Eriksson, but it also didn’t mean you had to keep him in the lineup. It really puts the player’s resolve to the test if he knows there is three full years of riding the bus without any chance of getting back to the NHL. He has a young family; $50 million in career earnings; and a profitable chain of restaurants in Sweden. There had to be at least an even chance he mutually terminates his contract in that situation. He walks away from $13 million (actually about $9-10million after escrow and agent fees... and $6-7million after taxes), but can probably recover a portion of that by signing $2 million dollar per year contracts as PK specialist on an NHL team or going and playing in Sweden as a superstar. We didn’t put him to that test which is entirely incomprehensible. The team’s leverage decreases every season as it is a lot easier to gut it out a year or two or hope for a buyout. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 32 minutes ago, Provost said: This is 100% It is one of the biggest mistakes of Benning’s tenure (or of an owner who may not have let him bury that contract). Injuries meant you didn’t HAVE to bury Eriksson, but it also didn’t mean you had to keep him in the lineup. It really puts the player’s resolve to the test if he knows there is three full years of riding the bus without any chance of getting back to the NHL. He has a young family; $50 million in career earnings; and a profitable chain of restaurants in Sweden. There had to be at least an even chance he mutually terminates his contract in that situation. He walks away from $13 million (actually about $9-10million after escrow and agent fees... and $6-7million after taxes), but can probably recover a portion of that by signing $2 million dollar per year contracts as PK specialist on an NHL team or going and playing in Sweden as a superstar. We didn’t put him to that test which is entirely incomprehensible. The team’s leverage decreases every season as it is a lot easier to gut it out a year or two or hope for a buyout. Agreed Provost,.. At least in real life. If a worker is not working up to his skills, level of pay, and responsibilities to earn his contract, you can fire him. Termination. The only thing an NHL Team can do with a player like LE in this situation, is try to force the attrition for him to terminate the contract himself. Why have so many thought it to be unfair to force Eriksson into Utica if his set of skills can not keep him on the Canuck roster? He clearly would have no arbitration or reason to defend the move. Forcing the attrition is the only thing and only way Teams can try to protect themselves from turning his Contract into the Cash Cow it has been for Loui. A player clearly not engaged in the physical game of hockey anymore.. should not be in a Canuck uniform. Stalling the progress of players in development out of the farm systems. an average of 10 goals per season over 4 years of hockey for aprx 30 million dollars, for a player who is worried more about his chefs filet minion.. out of his Cash Cow (the Canucks), and making it home without an injury to taste it. This situation has NO reflection on the Canuck franchise if they opted to put this player into the position of playing in the minors,. That was taken on by the player and his lack of attributes to clearly keep a position on the Team. It sends no message to any veterans other than play up to your potential to keep a position on the Team. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 On 7/12/2020 at 2:46 PM, Provost said: There is an interesting story in the daily hive about possible trades for Eriksson. The premise of all of them is that there are teams with bad contracts who are not cap spending teams who could be interested in swapping out their player with a lower cap hit but greater real dollars owed for Eriksson to save money. Creative thinking that we haven’t seen much of... assume that small bits go either way in addition to these two players to even things out a little. 1. Alzner. Actually owed the same in real dollars over the next two years as Erikssom but has a $1.37 million lower cap hit. Montreal could do this because they would actually get a player for their roster (albeit a depth PK guy) in return for a guy that is in the AHL. Julian also has a relationship with Eriksson. 2. Victor Rask. $2 million less cap hit but $3 million more expensive in real dollars than Eriksson over the term of their contracts. 3. Colin Miller. Disappointment in Buffalo, less expensive to cap, but more expensive in real dollars. 4. Frans Neilson. $750k in cap savings but Detroit doesn’t care about adding cap. Detroit saves $500k in real dollars All interesting ideas, I think cap space will be at such a premium that these teams with cap space can extract more value than those swaps. Minnesota is a real possibility. They have the cap space and honestly I think they would be interested in Sutter too, they need a centre. I wouldn't mind something like Eriksson, Sutter, Demko for Rask. Minny needs a goalie and they get one for Eriksson and a year of Sutter (who they need anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK_19 Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 If he wanted to continue playing hockey (like he stated), another way we could get rid of him is to agree to terminate his contract (2.5 mil per year for the next 2) and he signs for that amount with another team. We can have a side trade with that team to give them some pick of value (I don't think it would take more than a 2nd) for future considerations which would be for them to sign Eriksson to that contract. The benefits are: Team Taking Eriksson: team taking him doesn't take as big of a cap hit (2.5 vs. 6), gain a draft pick, gain a pretty good defensive forward for PK, Eriksson: gets a change of scenery, gets to continue to play in the NHL Canucks: more options for teams that can take him, gets rid of his cap hit, don't lose as much trying to get rid of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PunjabiCanucks Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 his goal in scrimmage in yesterday was a beauty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 On 7/22/2020 at 7:45 PM, SilentSam said: Agreed Provost,.. At least in real life. If a worker is not working up to his skills, level of pay, and responsibilities to earn his contract, you can fire him. Termination. The only thing an NHL Team can do with a player like LE in this situation, is try to force the attrition for him to terminate the contract himself. Why have so many thought it to be unfair to force Eriksson into Utica if his set of skills can not keep him on the Canuck roster? He clearly would have no arbitration or reason to defend the move. Forcing the attrition is the only thing and only way Teams can try to protect themselves from turning his Contract into the Cash Cow it has been for Loui. A player clearly not engaged in the physical game of hockey anymore.. should not be in a Canuck uniform. Stalling the progress of players in development out of the farm systems. an average of 10 goals per season over 4 years of hockey for aprx 30 million dollars, for a player who is worried more about his chefs filet minion.. out of his Cash Cow (the Canucks), and making it home without an injury to taste it. This situation has NO reflection on the Canuck franchise if they opted to put this player into the position of playing in the minors,. That was taken on by the player and his lack of attributes to clearly keep a position on the Team. It sends no message to any veterans other than play up to your potential to keep a position on the Team. I definetaly wanted him yesterday in PK... A player like him might be a real difference if we get a lot of penalties. It seems we get a lot of penalties against in playoff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 35 minutes ago, Timråfan said: I definetaly wanted him yesterday in PK... A player like him might be a real difference if we get a lot of penalties. It seems we get a lot of penalties against in playoff. That’s the first game close to a playoff in about 5 years Timra.. the Canucks played well,. They’re getting chances, it’s just finishing.. there will be corrections as the rust and steam blows off.. they finished aggressively. That will help them take the “desire” into the next game. The speed is far too fast for Eriksson anymore, even Sutter looked like a sleeping bag beside a campfire yesterday.. Enter MacEwan and Virtannen, Exit Rousell and Sutter. let the boys play . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 1 hour ago, SilentSam said: That’s the first game close to a playoff in about 5 years Timra.. the Canucks played well,. They’re getting chances, it’s just finishing.. there will be corrections as the rust and steam blows off.. they finished aggressively. That will help them take the “desire” into the next game. The speed is far too fast for Eriksson anymore, even Sutter looked like a sleeping bag beside a campfire yesterday.. Enter MacEwan and Virtannen, Exit Rousell and Sutter. let the boys play . Experiance wise I agree but if you want us to the real play off you want the vets also... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 On 7/22/2020 at 2:14 PM, AK_19 said: If he wanted to continue playing hockey (like he stated), another way we could get rid of him is to agree to terminate his contract (2.5 mil per year for the next 2) and he signs for that amount with another team. We can have a side trade with that team to give them some pick of value (I don't think it would take more than a 2nd) for future considerations which would be for them to sign Eriksson to that contract. The benefits are: Team Taking Eriksson: team taking him doesn't take as big of a cap hit (2.5 vs. 6), gain a draft pick, gain a pretty good defensive forward for PK, Eriksson: gets a change of scenery, gets to continue to play in the NHL Canucks: more options for teams that can take him, gets rid of his cap hit, don't lose as much trying to get rid of him. Can you say “cap circumvention” ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 6 minutes ago, qwijibo said: Can you say “cap circumvention” ? why? nothing wrong with two separate trades, or Loui terminating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 13 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: why? nothing wrong with two separate trades, or Loui terminating. If there is an agreement in place for him to terminate his contract and then sign with a predetermined team that gets compensation from the Canucks to do so, then it’s clear cap circumvention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now