DownUndaCanuck Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Say what you want, we're stuck with Edler and Eriksson and have to make the most of their 10M smartly. For Edler it's simple, he needs a calming partner, Tanev is perfect really and they formed a fantastic top pairing duo but without Tanev we're seeing the real cracks on defence and it's not entirely Edler's fault, he's still one of our best D-men sadly. Take out Stecher too and we're quite thin on the right side. I wouldn't mind seeing what Wiercioch or Holm could bring to this defence if they can be a bit more flexible. Who knows, even Chatfield? As for Eriksson, he had a fair few shots against the Sharks and I think the best way to play him is with a 2-way center and skilled fast winger. Eriksson has had PLENTY of good chemsitry with Granlund in the last 2 years so I say that's the best bet - Granlund + Eriksson on the wing of either Sutter if we want to defend or try Burmistrov if we want more offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Lol thry are solid NHL players, but we don’t need them to rebuild. They should be expendable I the pursuit of the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 A small sample size I know, but I've noticed Edler is playing more physical this season. As much as we want some young pieces for Edler, he's still a top 4 D and if he doesn't want to waive, I respect his right. As for Loui, obviously a big bust. He's immovable at this point. Let's see how he does for the rest of the year. I think he'll do better playing with some quicker players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 3 hours ago, shazzam said: A small sample size I know, but I've noticed Edler is playing more physical this season. As much as we want some young pieces for Edler, he's still a top 4 D and if he doesn't want to waive, I respect his right. He was playing that way early last year too until Gudbranson got hurt and then other injuries piled up, his minutes increased out of necessity etc. Gudbranson in the lineup taking some of the physicality burden, the addition of MDZ, Hutton, Pouliot etc able to play more minutes and taking some of that weight off his shoulders and keeping his minutes in the low 20's. Same as always, Edler is a good #2d (trending to #3d with age) who excels in that role with capable depth around him. When that depth isn't there and he gets over extended... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt kilgore Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Meh, I've made my peace with Edler and Eriksson's contracts. Have to. Edler is a bigger veteran D man who knows how to play in the league. Knows how to plod along through such a grinding schedule playing a lot of minutes. I don't think we overpay him either, as he'd get a similar contract anywhere else. He's just not the elite player we had hoped for. He makes mistakes, really bad ones at times, mostly due to overplaying him for what he brings. Eriksson is a different case. He is drastically underperforming offensively for the money he is getting. But he at least is still very good defensively. He should be paid half of what he's getting and half the term, and be used as a defensive shut down player who has the ability to get a goal here and there. But at least he is useful in some regard. Playing on the 3rd or 4th line would be perfect. (Maybe he should exchange places with Dorsett, and I'm only half kidding). One just has to take his salary out of the equation. But my thoughts are that who cares if you burn that cap money on him. What else are we going to do with that cap money? Another veteran taking away a spot for developing rookies? Who might score us out of the lottery? Tease us with a first round exit and another middling draft pick? We don't really even need to spend to the cap on a rebuilding team. Other than the option of taking on a bad contract by also getting a prospect or top draft pick to go along with it. (Eriksson ironically would be the poster boy for such a situation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 The more I think about Eriksson's contract, the more I see the term as JB's timeline for the transition to be over. It's the only thing that makes sense to me. With so much youth on the way, he sured up Eriksson that long to maintain a veteran presence knowing our current vets will be gone. To me, the length of Eriksson's contract is the window of development to the new era. At the time, Eriksson represented the best of both worlds - the top UFA coming off 30 goals to keep us competitive but also a player evolving into a veteran presence throughout his contract. It's two different forms of value. What throws a wrench into it is Eriksson's lack of production. The longer he doesn't provide offense, the harder it is to justify $6 mill per as veteran value. We haven't seen the best of Eriksson yet, and I hope we do. He's still highly capable. I'm rooting for the guy. I was concerned from the initial press conference when both Willie and JB alluded that Eriksson was a guy who could go up and down the lineup. I took that to indicate he may have problems finding chemistry with a new team in a new city. So then after his first year, suddenly we have a new coach, new deployments, new system, and new dynamics. And the pressure of the contract is now - I'm guessing - is more of a weight than last season. And then he's injured early. I really think Green and Co. need to put him in the best position to succeed. I think Willie was much more desperate but Green needs to play to Eriksson's strengths. I'd like to believe in the off hours Green (or one of the coaches) is studying video of Loui rather than just going off their ego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyStrecher Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 Edler looked great paired up with Derrick Pouliot. Once Tanev and Stecher get back, I'd like to see the Canucks try these pairings and scratch (or hopefully trade) Gudbranson. Hutton - Tanev Edler - Pouliot Del Zotto - Stecher Eriksson was probably the Canucks best player against San Jose. Though his contract is ridiculous, he is a solid middle six player and I`d much rather have him in the lineup than any of Burmistrov, Gagner, Vanek or Gaunce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sxqhfeh Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 leave them along, without Sedins, Eriksson, Edler, Canucks is pretty much a AHL team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 On 11/12/2017 at 7:07 AM, PunjabiCanucks said: Sedins retire, buy out Ericksson, trade Edler - 25 million in space . Canucks win 1st OA 2018 and draft Dahlin Sign Tavares at 11.5, Bailey at 5, Kane at 6. Canucks win the cup 2019 (insert sarcasm) . Benning becomes a god that would be unreal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 17 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said: Say what you want, we're stuck with Edler and Eriksson and have to make the most of their 10M smartly. For Edler it's simple, he needs a calming partner, Tanev is perfect really and they formed a fantastic top pairing duo but without Tanev we're seeing the real cracks on defence and it's not entirely Edler's fault, he's still one of our best D-men sadly. Take out Stecher too and we're quite thin on the right side. I wouldn't mind seeing what Wiercioch or Holm could bring to this defence if they can be a bit more flexible. Who knows, even Chatfield? As for Eriksson, he had a fair few shots against the Sharks and I think the best way to play him is with a 2-way center and skilled fast winger. Eriksson has had PLENTY of good chemsitry with Granlund in the last 2 years so I say that's the best bet - Granlund + Eriksson on the wing of either Sutter if we want to defend or try Burmistrov if we want more offence. Granlund - Burmistrov - Eriksson might actually be a good option Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 I thought Edler and Stech looked great. Play Tanev with Hutton, he needs a bit of help if the coach is not going to give him a rest for 2 or 3 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 No, we don't need them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
867-five-309 Posted November 14, 2017 Share Posted November 14, 2017 I desperately want Edler gone. I can't stand watching him screw up time and time again. Eriksson I think needs more of a chance. Right now the Sedins are really hurting this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dank.sinatra Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 Eriksson has actually looked alright since coming back, well reliable at least. Not $6 million good but just alright. He does deserve to be in the lineup, which I didn't think he did before his return. With him back I'd run the lines as this: Baertschi - Horvat - Boeser Eriksson - Sutter - Dorsett Sedin - Sedin - Granlund Virtanen - Gagner - Vanek Periodically cycling in Gaunce and Burmi for Virt and Gags and anyone else who could benefit from a scratch. As for Edler, no. No we do not need him. With Tanev out we do need him right now but we do not need him moving forward. I've been a fan of Edler for a long time but it's time for him to move on and accept a trade. Hoping Edler gets traded at the deadline or in the offseason and we keep Tanev for the long haul. Edit: Long-term we absolutely do not need Eriksson either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 Edler has looked the best he has in the last 3 years. If you forget how much Eriksson's contract screws the cap, then he is a decent 3rd line checker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerMainLander18 Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 Edler, Yes Eriksson, Not at that price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 We don't need them, but the coach need them. Fans easily blame them if Canucks loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 On 11/12/2017 at 8:22 AM, gobi said: I can't imagine what possessed Benning to give Erickson such a contract. Oh I don't know... maybe try to add a bigger skilled player with the sedins to get the most out of them and see how it goes? There's my thing... only one type of player would have done what was always needed for them. Bertuzzi style... d moves puck up ice.. waits and shoots the puck on Bert's side... he RUNS OVER the defender not far off Tryamkin style and feeds a Sedin for a red light shot... It has not happened... they got beat on... taken right out of the playoffs and poof another year gone... No one there to police for them plus skilled... however Loui doesn't have that nature to him... he's not small but... he's not a big skilled nasty power forward... SIGH! Nothing new.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vladimirpuck Posted January 8, 2018 Author Share Posted January 8, 2018 I guess tank nation needs Eriksson and Edler so we can get this guy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 Edler yes, Eriksson no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.