Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Eriksson “NOT” likely to be moved on


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

It will be 3 years without being able to utilize that cap space because once they do that no one will take him.

Can easily be traded with sweetener for one year.  Ottawa will still need to reach the floor.  Easier to move one year of cap dump than three.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

Can easily be traded with sweetener for one year.  Ottawa will still need to reach the floor.  Easier to move one year of cap dump than three.

Could easily be traded with a sweetener right now too. Just have to hold your nose and swallow the bad medicine and accept the sweetener will ve a good one, now or in the future.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

Could easily be traded with a sweetener right now too. Just have to hold your nose and swallow the bad medicine and accept the sweetener will ve a good one, now or in the future.

Lower sweetener for one year over three though.  I'd rather wait and hope he just retires.  Cull can make his life pretty miserable if he needs to.

Edited by King Heffy
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

Easy for you to spend Aquilini's money on a player in Utica. Plus it doesn't save us much cap and obliterates any potential value another team would see in order to take him offour hands even with a sweetener attached.

 

i often post on here about fans finding it easy to spend aquaman's money

 

but i don't agree with your assessment here

sending loui down does not change how much aquaman is paying

he'll need to pay him no matter what

 

if you look at last season and gagner

he was sent down

and was still tradeable

the spooner trade was not a disaster.. just a lateral move

i doubt loui's value can fall much more then it has

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

 

i often post on here about fans finding it easy to spend aquaman's money

 

but i don't agree with your assessment here

sending loui down does not change how much aquaman is paying

he'll need to pay him no matter what

 

if you look at last season and gagner

he was sent down

and was still tradeable

the spooner trade was not a disaster.. just a lateral move

i doubt loui's value can fall much more then it has

Not vs trading him with a sweetener it doesn't. That saves Aquilini a boatload of cash. 

 

Gagner was also half the cap hit. And from my understanding was traded in a lateral move at least partly because Aquilini was pissed off at paying that much to a guy in the minors. Benning basically said A was pissed off.

Edited by Silver Ghost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

Not vs trading him with a sweetener it doesn't. That saves Aquilini a boatload of cash. 

 

Gagner was also half the cap hit. And from my understanding was traded in a lateral move at least partly because Aquilini was pissed off at paying that much to a guy in the minors. Benning basically said A was pissed off.

what boatload of cash?

loui has been largely paid

he's owned 9 million for the next 3 seasons

replacing his spot on the roster costs a player contract, that spot is not filled for free

the sweetener might not be worth the cost to move loui

since the team has no cap pressure at present that requires he be moved and a sweetener spent

 

moving gagner from the minors back to the nhl via a trade

saved aquaman no money really

he paid spooner after the trade.. he would have had to pay gagner without the trade

and spooner was bought out, gagner could have been bought out

 

i really see no financial advantage anywhere here for aquaman

both gagner and loui's contracts were/are bad

and aquaman is going to eat almost all of the financial costs of them

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Silver Ghost said:

Would you be ok if Benning had to pay a reasonably significant sweetener though to move him?

 

I would tbh. Just get the cap space and roster spot back to help us down the road.

That's pretty subjective.

 

I've already stated I'd be ok taking back a contract (Boedker), retaining $2m and adding Goldobin or equivalent. 

 

All of those things together are 'reasonably significant' IMO. I'm ok with a deal in that ballpark. If we're not retaining or taking back a contract, I'd be willing to give up a bit more but I'd need specific examples in that case.

 

I'm fine with them waiving him if it means saving something truly significant though. Unfortunately that would likely drag on and hence be a distraction in camp though, so preferably, a trade gets worked out.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, coastal.view said:

what boatload of cash?

loui has been largely paid

he's owned 9 million for the next 3 seasons

replacing his spot on the roster costs a player contract, that spot is not filled for free

the sweetener might not be worth the cost to move loui

since the team has no cap pressure at present that requires he be moved and a sweetener spent

 

moving gagner from the minors back to the nhl via a trade

saved aquaman no money really

he paid spooner after the trade.. he would have had to pay gagner without the trade

and spooner was bought out, gagner could have been bought out

 

i really see no financial advantage anywhere here for aquaman

both gagner and loui's contracts were/are bad

and aquaman is going to eat almost all of the financial costs of them

 

 

Rich people understand ROI.

 

Paying a player in the minors obviously pissed him off. So he paid a player in the NHL via a trade. I bet he was pissed about the buyout too lol.

 

I am glad that 9 mil is not a boatload of cash in your world. Since you are rich, want to spot me a mil or two?

 

If Benning can move 9 mil of salary that is going to be dead, Aqua will be thrilled. Spending it on another player is irrelevant in how he would look at that analysis imo.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Lower sweetener for one year over three though.  I'd rather wait and hope he just retires.  Cull can make his life pretty miserable if he needs to.

Why would Cull jeapardize his own coaching future by getting labeled as that kind of coach?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Silver Ghost said:

Why would Cull jeapardize his own coaching future by getting labeled as that kind of coach?

Because management doesn't want LE to play, and because his attitude doesn't warrant him playing.  Make an example of him for the kids to see what happens when you float around like a lazy piece of garbage.  Why would you waste ice time on someone who could actually turn into a legit NHLer on this worthless plug?

Edited by King Heffy
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

1985 called, they want their hockey exec and coach mentality back. 

 

I know several current and former professional hockey coaches and management, including from some NHL teams. 

 

I can tell you with zero doubt that not one of them that I know would do this to any player to the degree you are suggesting, especially without reason or without having ever ciached the player. It would be coachibg suicide. All athletes are an investment to them. They don't act like disgruntled fans. 

The reason is LE's interview, coupled with his refusal to put in an acceptable effort.  Why reward that kind of garbage with icetime?

Edited by King Heffy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The reason is LE's interview, coupled with his refusal to put in an acceptable effort.  Why reward that kind of garbage with icetime?

Didn't Benning say he didn't see a big deal with the comments by Eriksson? Is he lying? Seems to pretty much straight shoot so why would you not believe him?

 

The severity of Eriksson's comments is so overblown by some that its laughable. I know people need to hate on him but seriously its ridiculous.

 

 

  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, KariyaSakicAnderson said:

Here is a little read from The Hockey News and who they have as their top 10 untradeable contracts now that Lucic was traded.. ... Spoiler LE isn't on it :o

So maybe LE does have some value ^_^

 

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/after-the-lucic-trade-here-are-the-nhls-top-10-untradeable-contracts

Shocking that Loui is not on there...yet a good sign for JB to try to trade this lump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

1985 called, they want their hockey exec and coach mentality back. 

 

I know several current and former professional hockey coaches and management, including from some NHL teams. 

 

I can tell you with zero doubt that not one of them that I know would do this to any player to the degree you are suggesting, especially without reason or without having ever ciached the player. It would be coachibg suicide. All athletes are an investment to them. They don't act like disgruntled fans. 

 

BTW: you have no idea what management does or doesnt want. I havd never seen them say they dont want him to play nor have i seen them call him lazy or worthless or a piece of garbage.

Go easy on him....it all makes sense in his basement!  :bigblush:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KariyaSakicAnderson said:

Here is a little read from The Hockey News and who they have as their top 10 untradeable contracts now that Lucic was traded.. ... Spoiler LE isn't on it :o

So maybe LE does have some value ^_^

 

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/after-the-lucic-trade-here-are-the-nhls-top-10-untradeable-contracts

That's actually a little bit encouraging.

I couldn't find one contract on there I would rather have than Lou's 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...