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:

I am not even a fan of LE. I have no need to defend him. I just can't stand hyperbolic BS uninformed opiniond that choose to stretch the narrative to a ridiculous extreme.

 

A couple of things.

 

Eriksson was not really terrible all season long. Even Green said so. He was terribke relative to the expectations that come with his contract i guess but thats hardly the same thing.

 

Your fluff definition of lazy doesnt even make sense. Lazy means not tryjng, taking shortcuts, avoiding putting in the effort, etc. Eriksson performed his role fine in terms oc his effort level.

 

Plus minus is a team strength stat more than an individual stat. Weak teams generally have more minus players than strong teams. And so was the case with the Canucks. 

 

Using hits as a performance benchmark for Eriksson is disengenous. Thats never been his game and no one (at least no one realistic and reasonable) expects it to be. 

 

His job was largely defensive but he did thrive previously as a net front guy and could stand to try to get back to doing that more consistently for sure.

 

No NHL player is at either polar end of the spectrum like many want to suggest Eriksson is. Thats simply hyperbole as is the overstated unrealistic evaluation by people who cannot see any positive at all in him as a player. Its just unrealistic and, quite honestly, shows that some people's evaluation is exceedingly shallow.

1)  Regardless of hitting being part of your game or not, it is integral for all hockey players, even those that don’t “have that as part of their game” as you mention. If your not physically involving your body to check players even just a little bit than you are checked out. Hell, even the Sedins delivered some hits and it was never part of their game either. 

 

2) His job became defensive because he had no offensive production. This was not done by choice but rather necessity. LE was the 3rd worst minus forward on the team. Yes, it includes other factors but this can not be ignored. His “defensive” game that you elude to was a joke.

 

LE was lazy, disinterested and terrible no matter how you cut it. 

 

The only BS I see is your attempt at defending LE :picard:

  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, grandmaster said:

1)  Regardless of hitting being part of your game or not, it is integral for all hockey players, even those that don’t “have that as part of their game” as you mention. If your not physically involving your body to check players even just a little bit than you are checked out. Hell, even the Sedins delivered some hits and it was never part of their game either. 

 

2) His job became defensive because he had no offensive production. This was not done by choice but rather necessity. LE was the 3rd worst minus forward on the team. Yes, it includes other factors but this can not be ignored. His “defensive” game that you elude to was a joke.

 

LE was lazy, disinterested and terrible no matter how you cut it. 

 

The only BS I see is your attempt at defending LE :picard:

The only BS I see is how utterly superficial,  vitriolic, and hyperbolic your views of Eriksson are. 

 

Hitting is not the same as using your body to play physically. Eriksson is actually pretty good at using his body along the boards. Your nitpick about lack of hits just comes across as contrived to fit your hate narrative.

  • Like 2
  • Wat 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

The only BS I see is how utterly superficial,  vitriolic, and hyperbolic your views of Eriksson are. 

 

Hitting is not the same as using your body to play physically. Eriksson is actually pretty good at using his body along the boards. Your nitpick about lack of hits just comes across as contrived to fit your hate narrative.

My views are in line with the majority and are true. The LE contract and player is seen as one of the worst in the NHL by virtually every expert and fan.

 

You are being ridiculous now.

 

I also don’t know why you have to be so pedantic with your vocabulary. See I can do that too. You’re not impressing anyone with the words you are using.

 

You are still wrong. 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, erkayloomeh said:

Seems to me your assuming he can run as fast as he can skate, which isn't a given. 

i think he said if looch is on skates, and alf is on his scooter on the sidewalk . he could get away

 

have you ever tried running on skates?

i don't recommend it

 

Edited by coastal.view
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

They don't say his the worst player in the NHL but I've been a fan since the 90's( I know still a green horn compared to some posters) I can't think of a player that has gotten ripped this hard.....

i can't wait until his gone then maybe we can all get along lol

Lol they ripped him pretty hard. But to be honest, the guy in the middle comes across as simply sensationalizing the situation for the audience and being the loudmouth guy on the panel more than providing any actual analysis or specifics of how Eriksson has played in his opinion. If I was there I would have asked him how many Canucks games he watched start to finish last season. I bet the answer is 0. He reminds me of the typical hater on CDC though that lives in hyperbole land. McLennan at least gives an honest opinion based on apparently watching the games. And there were games where he is absolutely right for sure. But not EVERY game like the other guy suggested. I feel like McLennan is overreacting a lot based on what Eriksson actually said though. 

Edited by Silver Ghost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

Lol they ripped him pretty hard. But to be honest, the guy in the middle comes across as simply sensationalizing the situation for the audience and being the loudmouth guy on the panel more than providing any actual analysis or specifics of how Eriksson has played in his opinion. If I was there I would have asked him how many Canucks games he watched start to finish last season. I bet the answer is 0. He reminds me of the typical hater on CDC though that lives in hyperbole land. McLennan at least gives an honest opinion based on apparently watching the games. And there were games where he is absolutely right for sure. But not EVERY game like the other guy suggested. I feel like McLennan is overreacting a lot based on what Eriksson actually said though. 

Middle guy is Jeff O’Neil, played in Carolina and for the Leafs 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

Lol they ripped him pretty hard. But to be honest, the guy in the middle comes across as simply sensationalizing the situation for the audience and being the loudmouth guy on the panel more than providing any actual analysis or specifics of how Eriksson has played in his opinion. If I was there I would have asked him how many Canucks games he watched start to finish last season. I bet the answer is 0. He reminds me of the typical hater on CDC though that lives in hyperbole land. McLennan at least gives an honest opinion based on apparently watching the games. And there were games where he is absolutely right for sure. But not EVERY game like the other guy suggested. I feel like McLennan is overreacting a lot based on what Eriksson actually said though. 

O'neal is a blow hard ha but McLennan is right though and I was able to catch about 62 games this pasted season and only time Loui showed up is when he played in the top six and then next game he wouldn't show up....people ripe Jake for not showing up or putting up points but he hasn't had anywhere near the chances Loui has gotten.....

loui's interview is what brought everything out....Green stood up for him in the press so people backed off and after that interview it was open season on Loui cause everyone and their dog knew Green or Jim weren't going to defend him... 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 18W-40C-6W said:

Middle guy is Jeff O’Neil, played in Carolina and for the Leaf

Ya, i actually looked to see who he was as I dont listen to Toronto media shows at all. Still doesnt change any of my opinion about what i said about his analysis of Eriksson. It sounds like he checked CDC hate threads and has never watched a Canucks game tbh. I think he got worked up about the comments that werent nearly as bad as either of them suggested.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

O'neal is a blow hard ha but McLennan is right though and I was able to catch about 62 games this pasted season and only time Loui showed up is when he played in the top six and then next game he wouldn't show up....people ripe Jake for not showing up or putting up points but he hasn't had anywhere near the chances Loui has gotten.....

loui's interview is what brought everything out....Green stood up for him in the press so people backed off and after that interview it was open season on Loui cause everyone and their dog knew Green or Jim weren't going to defend him... 

As a frame of reference, I watched almost every game. Might have missed 2 or 3. I also have gone back and chosen random games on pvr to specifically watch Eriksson. 

 

Based on my own eyes, I will say that there are games where he looks disengaged. But there are others where his effort and compete level are good. I dont see the correlation you do that he doesnt try if not in the top 6. In games i looked at, there was no correlation at all that i saw.

 

I am not an ex nhl player or paid expert of course so its just my opinion. 

 

 

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

50 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

They don't say his the worst player in the NHL but I've been a fan since the 90's( I know still a green horn compared to some posters) I can't think of a player that has gotten ripped this hard.....

i can't wait until his gone then maybe we can all get along lol

Erriksson will go down as one of the worst Canucks dollar for dollar of all time . One of the most useless players we have ever signed for what he was expected to bring . I really hope he ends up on a bus this year. Zero respect for him . 

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

Lol they ripped him pretty hard. But to be honest, the guy in the middle comes across as simply sensationalizing the situation for the audience and being the loudmouth guy on the panel more than providing any actual analysis or specifics of how Eriksson has played in his opinion. If I was there I would have asked him how many Canucks games he watched start to finish last season. I bet the answer is 0. He reminds me of the typical hater on CDC though that lives in hyperbole land. McLennan at least gives an honest opinion based on apparently watching the games. And there were games where he is absolutely right for sure. But not EVERY game like the other guy suggested. I feel like McLennan is overreacting a lot based on what Eriksson actually said though. 

In his day , and it was a solid career,.  I’d take O’neil over Eriksson at any given point in time. O’Neil watches the Canucks, knows his hockey,.. and is still getting paid for his attention.  I like McLennan and O’Neil’s show,.  They should be here instead of the plugs we have on radio in Vancouver.  I like the fact they cover the “League”, and aren’t just focused on Toronto.

 

 

 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

In his day , and it was a solid career,.  I’d take O’neil over Eriksson at any given point in time. O’Neil watches the Canucks, knows his hockey,.. and is still getting paid for his attention.  I like McLennan and O’Neil’s show,.  They should be here instead of the plugs we have on radio in Vancouver.  I like the fact they cover the “League”, and aren’t just focused on Toronto.

 

 

 

You do know that in that interview they somehow had to being in that perfect Eriksson comparable, William Nylander, right? I laughed. 

 

O'Neil definitely knows his hockey. But he doesnt come across as having too much non headline news depth of opinion regarding the Canucks tbh. 

 

Mike Milbury and Peter Chiarelli knew their hockey too and were paid to GM teams. Doesnt always mean you are paying for the best. 

Edited by Silver Ghost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

As a frame of reference, I watched almost every game. Might have missed 2 or 3. I also have gone back and chosen random games on pvr to specifically watch Eriksson. 

 

Based on my own eyes, I will say that there are games where he looks disengaged. But there are others where his effort and compete level are good. I dont see the correlation you do that he doesnt try if not in the top 6. In games i looked at, there was no correlation at all that i saw.

 

I am not an ex nhl player or paid expert of course so its just my opinion. 

 

 

I'll give him props ,he usually shows up when it's pk time. I can't wrap my head around how Johnny the smurf hockey had 4x the hits Loui did......

im not a fan of him and his play, I think we will have to agree to disagree on Loui.....

Edited by RowdyCanuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

You do know that in that interview they somehow had to being in that perfect Eriksson comparable, William Nylander, right? I laughed. 

Eriksson should be at least be playing close to Nylander’s game.

The six million per year he signed for 3 years ago, is comparable to 7.5 mil now.

There are no excuses for Eriksson.. and he himself, should stop thinking that there are, a d making crap up.

He is making himself redundant in every aspect of the sport, instead of reassessing and reinventing some part of his training and or game.  

The only reason people might say he is good defensively, is because he was seen on the PK.. he had the freshest legs.

Motte is a better PK’r.. so is Reid Boucher.

 

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

9 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Eriksson should be at least be playing close to Nylander’s game.

The six million per year he signed for 3 years ago, is comparable to 7.5 mil now.

There are no excuses for Eriksson.. and he himself, should stop thinking that there are, a d making crap up.

He is making himself redundant in every aspect of the sport, instead of reassessing and reinventing some part of his training and or game.  

The only reason people might say he is good defensively, is because he was seen on the PK.. he had the freshest legs.

Motte is a better PK’r.. so is Reid Boucher.

 

Bull$&!# about Nylander. They are totally different ends of the age spectrum for one. One is expected to get better, the other worse simply as a function of age. Then there is the fact of their roles on their respective teams. Eriksson 2 years ago had similar ppg production to what Nylander had this past year in a similar number of games. So really he has performed like hkm in the most recent sample lol.

 

He isnt making himself redundant. The game is changing. Younger players are pushing older players out. Part salary cap, part the speed of the game, part the quality of young players now.

 

The Eriksson type contracts are becoming less and less common. This UFA period is a great example of the shift in this regard. And evdn at the time they were signed, the teams knew the last several years of them could be largely dead money. I dont think they anticipated how fast some of these players would decline vs those contracts though.

 

The reality is he has always been a solid defensive player. That hasnt really changed over time. He obviously isnt the offensive player he once was. I think he hasreinvented himself to a certain degree. Didnt Green say he accepted his role and did the job?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RowdyCanuck said:

They don't say his the worst player in the NHL but I've been a fan since the 90's( I know still a green horn compared to some posters) I can't think of a player that has gotten ripped this hard.....

i can't wait until his gone then maybe we can all get along lol

Has McLennan said anything about how Green adapt strategies, play system etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Middle guy is Jeff O’Neil, played in Carolina and for the Leafs 

 

same ass clown that called the Sedins pussies.  Also disagreed with the Mathetheson suspension for his hit on Peterson saying "that's a joke"

 

2 months later he loses his gold medal from the 1995 world juniors which was stolen with his messenger bag   when he was at the Roxy.  what the &^@# is that fatso doing at the Roxy is beyond me.

 

he has a history of hating the Canucks. here's the full story.  we had a thread on it.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
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...