Me_ Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said: That is even worse - Eriksson at 50% retained still has negative value to a team near the cap. Dunno about that; he’s a Tippet player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Me_ said: Dunno about that; he’s a Tippet player. I really wish you were right. The only Loui Eriksson trade that makes sense is for Victor Rask. VANCOUVER CANUCKS Operating Income: 37 Million (League Average 25 million) Cap Space: $6 million Remaining RFAs: Brock Boeser, Nikolay Goldobin MINNESOTA WILD Operating Income: $4.5 Million Cap Space: $11.3 Million Remaining RFAs: Kevin Fiala, Eriksson EK LOUI ERIKSSON Goals: 11 Points 29 Cap Hit: 6 Milllion $ Amount Remaining on Contract: 9 Million VICTOR RASK Goals: 3 Points: 9 Cap Hit: 4 Million $ Amount Remaining on Contract: 12 Million Friends with Jake Virtanen Edited July 12, 2019 by canucklehead44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 40 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said: I really wish you were right. The only Loui Eriksson trade that makes sense is for Victor Rask. VANCOUVER CANUCKS Operating Income: 37 Million (League Average 25 million) Cap Space: $6 million Remaining RFAs: Brock Boeser, Nikolay Goldobin MINNESOTA WILD Operating Income: $4.5 Million Cap Space: $11.3 Million Remaining RFAs: Kevin Fiala, Eriksson EK LOUI ERIKSSON Goals: 11 Points 29 Cap Hit: 6 Milllion $ Amount Remaining on Contract: 9 Million VICTOR RASK Goals: 3 Points: 9 Cap Hit: 4 Million $ Amount Remaining on Contract: 12 Million I don't know how Rask is the "only" trade that makes sense. But it's an interesting proposal. If Minnesota did that, it's sure an ugly next chapter in the Neidereiter for Rask....for Eriksson progression. That would be a hard sell imo. And on the other hand, Rask might actually be harder to dump than LE. Rask has no signing bonuses - whoever takes that on is getting a 4 million cap hit, for 4 million salary. LE on the other hand has only 9 million (of his 36 million deal) still payable - so for cap floor teams, a better contract than Rask. For the Canucks, the 2 million cap savings at 12 million as opposed to 9 million salary might be worth it. For Minnesota - who knows what makes sense - I can't make sense of what they've done this calendar year - overall it looks pretty ugly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, oldnews said: I don't know how Rask is the "only" trade that makes sense. But it's an interesting proposal. If Minnesota did that, it's sure an ugly next chapter in the Neidereiter for Rask....for Eriksson progression. That would be a hard sell imo. And on the other hand, Rask might actually be harder to dump than LE. Rask has no signing bonuses - whoever takes that on is getting a 4 million cap hit, for 4 million salary. LE on the other hand has only 9 million (of his 36 million deal) still payable - so for cap floor teams, a better contract than Rask. For the Canucks, the 2 million cap savings at 12 million as opposed to 9 million salary might be worth it. For Minnesota - who knows what makes sense - I can't make sense of what they've done this calendar year - overall it looks pretty ugly. The risk for Minnesota is if they do become close to the cap ceiling within the next three years the Eriksson contract is much worse. But given the structure of the two teams (Canucks being financially risk and cap poor, Minnesota the opposite) and the players (Rask with the lower cap hit but owed less money) it is a huge win-win. Eriksson appears to be the better player, and any sort of bounce back (say 40 points) would look great for the Wild. Its a fairly low risk / low reward trade for both teams but the fit/upside seems to be worth it. Edited July 12, 2019 by canucklehead44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babalu Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 47 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said: The risk for Minnesota is if they do become close to the cap ceiling within the next three years the Eriksson contract is much worse. But given the structure of the two teams (Canucks being financially risk and cap poor, Minnesota the opposite) and the players (Rask with the lower cap hit but owed less money) it is a huge win-win. Eriksson appears to be the better player, and any sort of bounce back (say 40 points) would look great for the Wild. Its a fairly low risk / low reward trade for both teams but the fit/upside seems to be worth it. I would do it if the wild were willing. Rask could also be bought out next year if he doesn't bounce back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 3 hours ago, babalu said: I would do it if the wild were willing. Rask could also be bought out next year if he doesn't bounce back. I'd do it as well just to get rid of Eriksson. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 Soooo. Puljujärvi for a 3rd round pick? I don't think Holland's going to get anything more than that. Puljujärvi is basically a project at this point. He hasn't progressed as well as he should have. What team is going to offer Edmonton more than what they can get him for cheap? Holland at a disadvantage here. Just sell at a loss, get rid of him, and move on. If the Canucks could acquire him, and rehabilitate his game, that'd be a huge win for us. But I doubt Edmonton would trade him to a divisional rival. There's risk that he could bounce back, and haunt them for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 4 hours ago, N4ZZY said: Soooo. Puljujärvi for a 3rd round pick? I don't think Holland's going to get anything more than that. Puljujärvi is basically a project at this point. He hasn't progressed as well as he should have. What team is going to offer Edmonton more than what they can get him for cheap? Holland at a disadvantage here. Just sell at a loss, get rid of him, and move on. If the Canucks could acquire him, and rehabilitate his game, that'd be a huge win for us. But I doubt Edmonton would trade him to a divisional rival. There's risk that he could bounce back, and haunt them for years. We paid a second for Baertschi. The timing would be the equivalent of trading Pulijujarvi this season at the deadline after scoring 0 goals in 15 games and spending most of his time in the AHL. So I would expect the asking price is at least a 2nd. 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