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

[King Heffy]

27 minutes ago, erkayloomeh said:

That's actually a little bit encouraging.

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

I'd add Nylander and Shattenkirk somewhere in that mix too.  Still want LE gone though.  Fire him the AHL for 2 years and then, say, flip him going into his final season for Abdelkader at 50% retained or something.  Work with another team who has a cap crunch the following year. 

 

The contract gets more tradeable the closer it is to over.

Edited July 23, 2019 by King Heffy

[18W-40C-6W]

4 hours ago, Silver Ghost said:

No one said he needs coddling. Its oversinplifying what i actually said to even suggest thats what I was talking about. The mental aspect of sports is just as big a part of results as the physical aspect. Assuming a player doesnt try is just stupid. Anyone who has ever known a professional hockey player and the mental and physical work it takes them would understand what I am talking about. Confidence especially is a key driver for players. They talk about it all the time.

 

 

Actually some players do give up. They don’t have the compete left and it’s why many retire. It doesn’t take confidence to compete friend, it takes hunger. You can always outskate your opponent and work harder. That has zero to do with confidence. The issue most have here is despite his lack of point production he doesn’t seem to compete and that’s fully within his control. 

Edited July 23, 2019 by 18W-40C-6W

[zimmy]

1 hour ago, Kanukfanatic said:

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

The list includes only those contracts with at least four years of term left on them so it appears this is nothing more than a reminder that Louie isn’t the only lump of worthless excrement out there. Lots of opportunity to spit out more vitriol if you’re willing to widen your scope a little!  

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Steven Stamkos said:

Boeser. 

What about him? We can afford to re-sign him even with Loui's full $6m on the roster.

[Silver Ghost]

12 minutes ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

Actually some players do give up. They don’t have the compete left and it’s why many retire. It doesn’t take confidence to compete friend, it takes hunger. You can always outskate your opponent and work harder. That has zero to do with confidence. The issue most have here is despite his lack of point production he doesn’t seem to compete and that’s fully within his control. 

You obviously dont understand how confidence, frustration, etc. impacts athletes.

 

I don't think he actually plays much different now in terms of style and compete than he did in Boston. Obviously the results were different but i dont see him not competing the same way many here seem to. I just see him competing the way he always has. He is not a physical, north south type of feet hustling player. Never has been so anyone expecting that to change at 34 is bound to be disappointed. He has always relied more on proper positioning both offensively and defensively. And at least on the defensive side, his impact is still pretty solid.

Edited July 23, 2019 by Silver Ghost

[grandmaster]

I would like to bet that Silver Ghost is Louie Eriksson. 

[Silver Ghost]

1 minute ago, grandmaster said:

I would like to bet that Silver Ghost is Louie Eriksson. 

I wish. I could take the hyperbolic $&!# from you guys for 6 mil a year

[Silver Ghost]

Its funny though. I am not actually a fan of Eriksson at all. I just know its never as simple as you guys suggest it is. And i especially know that nhl coaches and managers do not evaluate players or worry about trivial $&!# the way you guys are suggesting they are with Eriksson. 

[zimmy]

47 minutes ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

Actually some players do give up. They don’t have the compete left and it’s why many retire. It doesn’t take confidence to compete friend, it takes hunger. You can always outskate your opponent and work harder. That has zero to do with confidence. The issue most have here is despite his lack of point production he doesn’t seem to compete and that’s fully within his control. 

This take sounds so ridiculously reasonable that it should satisfy almost everybody on this forum who have had a go at the topic at hand. Please, please, please can this finally be the last word? ( I know, already too late for that but a guy can dream).

[shiznak]

12 hours ago, oldnews said:

Confirmed -  that you don't know what 'sheltered' means.   I'd explain it - again - but I'm pretty sure I already have.

Maybe you have a different definition of sheltered minutes than mine, but I consider shelter minutes as minutes that doesn’t change the outcome of the game or when the game’s outcome is already determined.

Edited July 23, 2019 by shiznak

[canuck73_3]

6 hours ago, King Heffy said:

I'm not assuming he doesn't try.  LE is making it blatantly obvious he is unwilling to put in the effort necessary to remain an NHLer.  The proof is in his floating whining about the coach, implying that his pitiful play warrants a chance in a scoring role.  He's the laziest bum I've seen here since Messier.

Except yet again non of this is true. You don't put up decent defensive efforts by not trying... 

 

Loui has dried up offensively and is nowhere near worth his deal. But he's put up solid defensive numbers all 3 years he has been here. Something that is literally impossible to do without effort...

[VIC_CITY]

3 hours ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

Actually some players do give up. They don’t have the compete left and it’s why many retire. It doesn’t take confidence to compete friend, it takes hunger. You can always outskate your opponent and work harder. That has zero to do with confidence. The issue most have here is despite his lack of point production he doesn’t seem to compete and that’s fully within his control. 

I see Loui on the Chris Higgins path. That's no disrespect towards Chris Higgins, but the game just passes by guys a lot sooner than it used to.

[HorvatToBaertschi]

On 7/22/2019 at 10:13 AM, Silver Ghost said:

You make it sound like he has had 3 years of exclusive top line usage and done nothing with it. Thats not close to the truth at all. He was not really given a lot of top 6 opportunity overall considering what they signed him to do.

 

The coaches certainly share some of the blame. Neither Desjardins nor Green have really attempted to utilize Eriksson in the way Boston did that got the most out of him. He has been largely miscast in Van, which has actually been an ongoing theme in Vancouver back to the Alain Vigneault days. Some players were just square pegs in round holes. Some of that is on Eriksson for not running with the somewhat sporadic opportunities he got for sure. As i have said many times. But really, if you sign a player to a big money deal like that its probably a good idea to understand how he found the success previously that made you want to sign him in the first place and try to get him back to that place.

 

Sometimes players dont fit in even playing with great players. Chemistry is not guaranteed. That seems to be the case with Eriksson in Van unfortunately.

 

Burrows often gets lumped in as a plugger who the Sedins made into a good player but what people miss is that Burrows also made the Sedins more effective by the way he played the game. He gave them space to make plays. He went to the net. He retrieved pucks, forechecked hard, and added a strong defensive conscience to their line. All of these things helped allow the Sedins to play their game. Thats how chemistry works.

 

I thought at the time that, despite international success as a line, Eriksson would not be a good fit with the Sedins on the Canucks. Unfortunately they were pretty much all we had in his first few years in Van. Last year I thought Eriksson looked pretty good with EP actually. Not lights out, but not worthy of the demotion either. So in a sense I can understand his frustration too.

 

Players get sat and demoted for all kinds of reasons, and its not always that the best players play. Coaches are human and have favorites who despite struggling never lose their spot. Its not a negative, its just reality. O'Neill's comment is seriously simplified presumably so it can become a soundbyte for the unwashed masses desperate to hate on a guy who by all accounts hasnt lived up to his contract.

 

Eriksson is up against it now. He has to win any spot he might get. And thats not a bad thing at all. If he can't, he ends up in Utica etc. 

 

But his time in Vancouver has not only been a failure because of him. It was a bad contract to begin with and thats on Benning. It set the expectations sky high. He has struggled to find a steady role and thats on Desjardins and now Green too. Its their job. 

 

I want him gone as much as the next guy. But your argument does not seek out any realistic balance at all. 

Eriksson came to renew or prolonge his decade-long chemistry with the sedins that they developped over countless international tournaments. He was so bad he got demoted off that line since he was bringing the twins down. Since then, he's been placed primarily with Horvat, and has been bringing down that line too. So to you, playing with our two best forwards in franchise history (sorry Bure I know you're better than them but I'm trying to make a point), and our best youngster (at the time, I know Pettersson and Boeser are better than him but when Eriksson was signed neither were on the big club), isn't putting him in a place to succeed? Cry me a fricking 36 million dollar river Loui

Edited July 23, 2019 by HorvatToBaertschi

[73 Percent]

1 hour ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Eriksson came to renew or prolonge his decade-long chemistry with the sedins that they developped over countless international tournaments. He was so bad he got demoted off that line since he was bringing the twins down. Since then, he's been placed primarily with Horvat, and has been bringing down that line too. So to you, playing with our two best forwards in franchise history (sorry Bure I know you're better than them but I'm trying to make a point), and our best youngster (at the time, I know Pettersson and Boeser are better than him but when Eriksson was signed neither were on the big club), and yet we haven't put him in a place to succeed? Cry me a fricking 36 million dollar river Loui

Agreed. I don't know how some people define a chance lol. Hes gotten a hell of a lot better chance than Virtanen.  

[Canuck Surfer]

9 hours ago, aGENT said:

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.

I really like this post, this suggestion.

 

Negative value acknowledged, accepted.

 

Step one, two, three. Three separate strategies to absorb the negative value. No one so onerous, Benning gets fired for making that call to FAQ?

 

I also realize it was more than one kick in the face that saw Gillis fired. But how quickly, after he paid out AV & Luongo was punted? Did Gillis see his noose tightened beyond even what the most erotic freak could handle

 

If one things gets FAQ mad?  It's paying out $10 & $20 mill deals for write off's. That see the team move backwards, away from winning teams that ring play off cash registers!

 

[Boudrias]

9 hours ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

Actually some players do give up. They don’t have the compete left and it’s why many retire. It doesn’t take confidence to compete friend, it takes hunger. You can always outskate your opponent and work harder. That has zero to do with confidence. The issue most have here is despite his lack of point production he doesn’t seem to compete and that’s fully within his control. 

When you are an established NHL vet with multiple million $ seasons under your belt what motivates you? It might not be hockey anymore. That is not necessarily a condemnation of the individual. Priorities change with age. Family often trumps job demands and I don’t have a problem with that. Often that process is not clear. That cannot influence the priorities of the hockey club. 

[Crabcakes]

3 hours ago, 73 Percent said:

Agreed. I don't know how some people define a chance lol. Hes gotten a hell of a lot better chance than Virtanen.  

I suppose once Virtanen scores 30, twice, he'll get a better chance too.  Eriksson's past is impressive so who could have forseen his performance falling off the table at 31?  Nobody frankly but he is what he is  

 

I don't think a fresh start is going to help at age 34.  Rip off the band-aid Jimmy!

[Borvat]

7 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Except yet again non of this is true. You don't put up decent defensive efforts by not trying... 

 

Loui has dried up offensively and is nowhere near worth his deal. But he's put up solid defensive numbers all 3 years he has been here. Something that is literally impossible to do without effort...

I don't disagree he is still a capable defensive "role player" who can chip in offensively.  The issue is he does not want to play that role and is at odds with his Coach about where he is slotted in the lineup - 3rd line minutes that include PK.  The sad part is his contract does not match that role either. 

 

So we have a player who is paid and wants to be played like a player he is no longer.  In any event it is time for him to go - his remarks and his agents have made that very clear.  I wish him all the best - somewhere else.

[SilentSam]

10 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Except yet again non of this is true. You don't put up decent defensive efforts by not trying... 

 

Loui has dried up offensively and is nowhere near worth his deal. But he's put up solid defensive numbers all 3 years he has been here. Something that is literally impossible to do without effort...

“Defensive play” of Eriksson has been fabricated to give him some worth or value.. replace him and we probably have someone of similar value or better.

An example being our recent acquisitions.. 

So let’s just assume that Eriksson has been replaced already, because on paper he has.

A prospect can take up the lose time available and become a better player with us.

As far as “effort” goes,. I personally always like to see a player physically engaged at some level, a sign of “compete”..

after all it is a contact sport.

Pettersen had 42 hits last season.. Eriksson had 3 hits.

That says a lot about “effort”.

It shows your in the play and not periferal.

This team does not need Periferal players.

[BPA]

Trade with Ottawa.

 

LE + Virtanen + Goldobin

for

2020 2nd (OTT has 3 so their choice to give) and a 6th (OTT has 3 so their choice to give).

 

OTT gets some young pieces (to speed up the rebuild) to go with the LE.

VAN gets draft picks to lessen the hurt of losing Virtanen and Goldobin.

Edited July 23, 2019 by BPA