higgyfan Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 15 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said: Hahaha, oh man, his cap hit nor his game is hurting this team? $6 million dollars isn't hurting this team? A guy who was meant to be a top line player playing on the fourth line isn't hurting this team? You are delusional. What I mean is that the team doesn't need the $ right now. It's doubtful that the team is going to play any SC games this year, so using the $ to get better players goes against the grain. Adding anymore vets (in the next 2 years) would be pointless for a team in the middle of a rebuild. Eriksson wouldn't be the first guy traded to the Canucks that started off with a bad season. He's had a great career so far, so I prefer to wait and see how this year pans out for him. Calling people 'delusional' around here is an overused comment and is usually used to offend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where'd Luongo? Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 39 minutes ago, higgyfan said: What I mean is that the team doesn't need the $ right now. It's doubtful that the team is going to play any SC games this year, so using the $ to get better players goes against the grain. Adding anymore vets (in the next 2 years) would be pointless for a team in the middle of a rebuild. Eriksson wouldn't be the first guy traded to the Canucks that started off with a bad season. He's had a great career so far, so I prefer to wait and see how this year pans out for him. Calling people 'delusional' around here is an overused comment and is usually used to offend. Eriksson hasn't had a great career. I bet you wouldn't find one Boston fan that misses his non-clutch goals. Dallas is also much more satisfied with their side of the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 When are we off the hook for the retained salary on Hansen? After this season? We are on the hook for like 800k on Lu for like 100 years. I was under the impression we can only retain money on like 2 contracts at a time. I can't imagine we can move Eriksson without retaining some cap. I was a bit upset he got more than 5 mil per considering the length of the contract. I wonder if management wants to keep him cause the Sedins are retiring soon, I know Eriksson is no where near their level but still. Having capable vets in the system at all times isn't too bad. Contact is a year or two too long sadly, we are retaining cap and giving up a decent young guy/pick for someone to be willing to take him at this point imo. I guess the one brightside is we have no bank breaking young guys we have to worry about. Our best young guy signed for 6 years at 5.5. Can't imagine anyone except maybe Boeser making more than that from our youngins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 buy him out is the only option or trade off season to a team trying to make minimum salary cap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Best case scenario would be for Eriksson to go on a tear right before Trade Deadline. Then wait for a contender, who couldn't get their top 6 target, to panik and trade for Eriksson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 14 hours ago, Where'd Luongo? said: Eriksson hasn't had a great career. I bet you wouldn't find one Boston fan that misses his non-clutch goals. Dallas is also much more satisfied with their side of the deal. Eriksson averaged 30 goals and 70 points in his last 4 seasons in Dallas. He's had 5 seasons in total that would be considered great, a couple average ones and a couple bad ones. As for the Seguin trade, of course they are happy with their side of the deal. Most teams that trade for an upcoming Boston prospect (Kessel, Thornton, Hamilton, Seguin, Wheeler) made out like bandits in their deals. Loui's contract is bad. That being said it wouldn't be surprising to see him out up a couple decent seasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 18 minutes ago, timberz21 said: Best case scenario would be for Eriksson to go on a tear right before Trade Deadline. Then wait for a contender, who couldn't get their top 6 target, to panik and trade for Eriksson. No one is going to panic and take on that term at the deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 23 hours ago, ice orca said: No one is going to panic and take on that term at the deadline. Yeah he's not a panic acquisition. A one year rental you overpay for is a panic deadline move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRick Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 I wonder if Montreal would be interested in taking on Eriksson's contract? With Julien as the head coach and having coached Eriksson in Boston and helping him score 30 goals, maybe Julien Thinks he can rekindle Loui's scoring touch and convince MB to trade for him. Don't know what we can get back in return but in any case I am all for getting his contract off the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 1 hour ago, TheRick said: I wonder if Montreal would be interested in taking on Eriksson's contract? With Julien as the head coach and having coached Eriksson in Boston and helping him score 30 goals, maybe Julien Thinks he can rekindle Loui's scoring touch and convince MB to trade for him. Don't know what we can get back in return but in any case I am all for getting his contract off the books. Until he returns from his knee injury and shows some kind of bounce back from last season I doubt he holds much attraction to anyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Not sure what JB saw in him, he looks done like dinner. His contract and underperforming is toxic to the dressing room. Our new and improved PP looks like it doesn't need him anymore. and enough with the hard sell on the pk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 58 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said: Not sure what JB saw in him Seriously? Chemistry on the international stage with the Sedins. Coming off a VERY solid season. Didn't have to pay anything because he was a UFA. Positive possession virtually his entire career. There are four excellent reasons right there. Honestly, if I was Benning I would have done the same. No, it hasn't worked out as hoped but you can hardly fault Benning for that, and he still has a few years of what should be decent hockeyin him and has a chance to come back still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 I didn't read all the posts but, I don't believe signing bonuses can be retained as they are cash up front and he has just about all his salary as signing bonuses. Anyone can be traded, it is a matter of how much is given to take him. I don't think he can be traded at all, maybe a buyout in another 2 years though. Maybe just send him to the farm and maybe he asks for a contract termination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Arizona have 16M in cap space and could use a veteran two-way forward up front and now's the time they should be looking for change. Too many kids on that team, not enough veteran presences up front who can defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTramFan Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 11 hours ago, kloubek said: Seriously? Chemistry on the international stage with the Sedins. Coming off a VERY solid season. Didn't have to pay anything because he was a UFA. Positive possession virtually his entire career. There are four excellent reasons right there. Honestly, if I was Benning I would have done the same. No, it hasn't worked out as hoped but you can hardly fault Benning for that, and he still has a few years of what should be decent hockeyin him and has a chance to come back still. 100% agree with this. If you look at the locked prediction thread for the 2016-17 season you will see that 95% of CDC were expecting GREAT things of Eriksson when he was acquired by the Canucks. It is unfair to burn Benning now with the benefit of hindsight. I am sure JB is even less happy with the result than people on CDC but the deal was done, and as kloubek says, there were plenty of reasons why it looked like a good move at the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.