If Loui Eriksson stays what can make you come to terms with it?

[Googlie]

9 hours ago, the grinder said:

you prolly contributed  500 post of why you are in love with the guy  

Eleven, actually (which is pretty hard to be understood, if said by a Scot) ...........

 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2019 by Googlie

[teepain]

The dumb thing is we dont need Loui for the “other little thing” we need this guy to make plays and score.  Sad but its all in Loui’s hands now

[Angry Goose]

So I thought Loui found some chemistry when he had Roussel and Gaudette on his line.  Their speed and tenacity helped him a lot although it wasnt a line for all that long.  I could see Eriksson on a third line with Gaudette and Leivo, but Sutter?  A 4th line of Virtanen Beagle Sutter looks good to me.

 

The bottom 6 is a freaking headache when it comes to who is in the line up/line combos.

[khay]

On 8/10/2019 at 7:37 PM, Jimmy McGill said:

Is there anything that can make you fine with Loui staying? 

20+ goal season.

 

I think he is still capable of doing it if he goes to the net more often like he used to. From what I remember, he never had a lethal shot, it was all garbage goal that he picked up in the past; somehow he is very good at getting to the net and being at the right place. It's a hard job because you are sacrificing your body but he's gotta get back to that if he wants to win the fans back (if that is possible at all).

 

[JM_]

3 hours ago, khay said:

20+ goal season.

 

I think he is still capable of doing it if he goes to the net more often like he used to. From what I remember, he never had a lethal shot, it was all garbage goal that he picked up in the past; somehow he is very good at getting to the net and being at the right place. It's a hard job because you are sacrificing your body but he's gotta get back to that if he wants to win the fans back (if that is possible at all).

 

he needs to be with a line mate that can generate rebound chances. If you put him with one-and-done type of shot generators it doesn't matter if he's standing 5 feet from the goal. I think you can make somewhat of an argument for quality of line mates for him, certainly not for all of his performance but some piece for sure. I think this year he'll have better quality line mates and the 2nd unit PP will be a lot better than its been in 5 years I'd say, so he should get his chances again.

[stawns]

4 hours ago, khay said:

20+ goal season.

 

I think he is still capable of doing it if he goes to the net more often like he used to. From what I remember, he never had a lethal shot, it was all garbage goal that he picked up in the past; somehow he is very good at getting to the net and being at the right place. It's a hard job because you are sacrificing your body but he's gotta get back to that if he wants to win the fans back (if that is possible at all).

 

He won't be doing much scoring playing a defensive role and his 30-ish% o-zone starts.  I'm not saying he should get offensive mins, just that expecting him to score in the role he will be playing is unreasonable.

[smithers joe]

25 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

he needs to be with a line mate that can generate rebound chances. If you put him with one-and-done type of shot generators it doesn't matter if he's standing 5 feet from the goal. I think you can make somewhat of an argument for quality of line mates for him, certainly not for all of his performance but some piece for sure. I think this year he'll have better quality line mates and the 2nd unit PP will be a lot better than its been in 5 years I'd say, so he should get his chances again.

great points, jimmy and khay. i think that is why he didn’t click with the sedins. in boston, the big guns shot a lot and he would screen, or knock in rebounds. with the sedins  they cycled the puck a lot, so he’ld have to join the cycle and be out of position in front of the net. burrows had it down to a tee, because  his job was to get in and get the puck, pass to them and stay close to the net. on the 3rd and 4th lines, there wasn’t really anyone that played that way. it is hard to get garbage goals when your going up against the other team’s best players and your job is to keep them from scoring. 

i know he is kind of toxic right now, but i believe he doesn’t deserve the hate he is getting. 

[aGENT]

On 8/10/2019 at 10:37 AM, Jimmy McGill said:

Is there anything that can make you fine with Loui staying? 

I think the better question is:

 

Who do you see Loui bumping from the starting 13?

 

Miller, Pettersson, Boeser

Baer, Horvat, Pearson/Ferland

Ferland/Pearson, Sutter, Virtanen/Leivo

Motte, Beagle, Leivo/Virtanen

 

That leaves one of Goldobin/Schaller/Eriksson as 13th (at least until Roussel returns, at which point it's likely Motte as 13). And that's without a guy like MacEwan, Gaudette or say Jasek forcing their way on to the team.

 

I could see us trying to sneak Goldobin down during preseason when everybody else tries to sneak guys down (though I could also see us keeping him up as our only currently available top 6 capable 'prospect' as well and we might not want to risk losing him, especially should Baer get hurt again).

 

Schaller frankly outplayed Loui at the end of the year and if he can start this season how he ended the last one, he'd likely make a better (and less pouty) 13th F (likely THRILLED to be in the NHL vs Utica). He'd also likely be little worry (claimed or cleared) about waiving when Roussel gets healthy.

 

And again, when Roussel gets healthy, one of those guys is STILL getting waived. Leaving his best case scenario at a slim hope of 13th F until Roussel gets healthy (and/or other guys need to be injured).

 

As I said yesterday:

Quote

Right now I'd put him at around our 14 or 15th best forward with most of the guys around him being younger, cheaper and more important to our future. If he hasn't been traded, that spells Utica IMO.

 

Now, by all means, if he comes in like he's shot out of a cannon and plays his arse off and actually out plays those guys... By all means. Then we should have the 40-50 point, middle 6 Loui we actually signed. Anybody want to put odds on that happening...?

 

[Shift-4]

he just needs to play well enough to be attractive for a trade

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

he just needs to play well enough to be attractive for a trade

That should be the goal of all involved

[aqua59]

23 hours ago, fanfor42 said:

You have been saying this for weeks now. I'm starting to believe you might be right. Green coming out and saying salary doesn't matter when deciding who plays...that was right out of your playbook

He's right alright. 

[the grinder]

9 hours ago, Googlie said:

Eleven, actually (which is pretty hard to be understood, if said by a Scot) ...........

 

 

 

well I certainly haven't posted more than a few times ,  about loui   

[JM_]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

I think the better question is:

 

Who do you see Loui bumping from the starting 13?

 

Miller, Pettersson, Boeser

Baer, Horvat, Pearson/Ferland

Ferland/Pearson, Sutter, Virtanen/Leivo

Motte, Beagle, Leivo/Virtanen

 

That leaves one of Goldobin/Schaller/Eriksson as 13th (at least until Roussel returns, at which point it's likely Motte as 13). And that's without a guy like MacEwan, Gaudette or say Jasek forcing their way on to the team.

 

I could see us trying to sneak Goldobin down during preseason when everybody else tries to sneak guys down (though I could also see us keeping him up as our only currently available top 6 capable 'prospect' as well and we might not want to risk losing him, especially should Baer get hurt again).

 

Schaller frankly outplayed Loui at the end of the year and if he can start this season how he ended the last one, he'd likely make a better (and less pouty) 13th F (likely THRILLED to be in the NHL vs Utica). He'd also likely be little worry (claimed or cleared) about waiving when Roussel gets healthy.

 

And again, when Roussel gets healthy, one of those guys is STILL getting waived. Leaving his best case scenario at a slim hope of 13th F until Roussel gets healthy (and/or other guys need to be injured).

 

As I said yesterday:

 

excellent question, 'gent.

 

Loui won't get a top 6 job with that group - its now too skilled, too young, too hungry for Loui to get a spot with Bo e.g. (the only place he fits in the top 6 imo).

 

As you show he's got a log jam of competition for the bottom 6. Where Loui does edge out Leivo and Schaller tho is in his potential to be a good piece on the 2nd unit PP. I think he brings more skill to that job than Leivo does, Schaller of course. 

 

I can see Loui taking Schaller's spot because Schaller is redundant now thanks to the addition of a lot more grit, and we've got MacEwan coming up too so there's a Utica replacement for him if e.g., someone takes Schaller off waivers which I could see happening. 

 

I think you'll see Loui used for 10-12 mins per night mostly on on the PK and PP2. 

 

[oldnews]

I think instead of beaking about it being best for LE to move on - his agent should have focused less on ill-advised public commentary and more on doing his job - finding a viable alternative - while reading the writing on the wall - that the Canucks don't really need LE's cap space - or presence - to fill out a competitive roster.

 

So for me - it would begin with being realistic - which I'm not sure his camp has been.

 

'Realistic' imo would be recognizing two realities - 1) that LE is actually in tough to earn a spot on the present roster, and 2) that it is not necessarily in the best interest of the team to be wasting assets to move him or accommodate him.

 

I think his agent miscalculated signficantly on both those factors.

 

What would make LE's return amenable after the comments about it being best if he moved on?  I think LE's agen'ts comments were actually more damaging than the unclear context and statements of LE himself (regarding Green).

JP Barry's comments are harder to walk back imo.   Eriksson - if he earns a spot - I have no problem with water under the bridge - but I also don't think it served either party - and it does not appear Barry has managed to find a taker - at a reasonable price - yet.

 

I'm still skeptical - doubtful that LE will play another game here.   I have nothing against him - but his agent went too 'all-in' imo - if anything, it would appear that it's LE and his camp that would need to come to terms.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Where Loui does edge out Leivo and Schaller tho is in his potential to be a good piece on the 2nd unit PP. I think he brings more skill to that job than Leivo does, Schaller of course. 

I think that's pretty debatable at this point. Loui has 29 points in 82 games last year. Josh had 18 points in 49 games with the Canucks.

 

Do you really think we'd waive the younger, cheaper Leivo who's putting up more PPG and is arguably more versatile (if a slight downgrade defensively), to keep Eriksson up?

 

I sure don't.

 

I don't see a spot for him in the starting 12 given those realities.

 

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I can see Loui taking Schaller's spot because Schaller is redundant now thanks to the addition of a lot more grit, and we've got MacEwan coming up too so there's a Utica replacement for him if e.g., someone takes Schaller off waivers which I could see happening. 

Sure... But again, we're talking the 13th F role at that point. Does Eriksson make a better 13th F than Schaller? I'm not so sure that he does. And again, barring injuries, that's a short term position until Roussel gets back and then he's still getting waived to Utica.

 

Fact of the matter is, that given his current abilities, age etc...he falls at about 14-15th F, at best, on this roster. 

 

On top of that, he/his agent have all but said they'd rather he move on. And it's pretty clear his play style doesn't mesh with how the coach would prefer to play... all this seems to pretty obviously add up to him being done here as much as you guys try to tip toe around those things.

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

I'm fine with Loui being here if we use him properly to his strengths. I'd like to see what he can do for us in a more specific role in front of the net, playing to his timing and positioning down low and off the rebound. This is where he was most successful.

 

I've said it a number of times on here that I feel we misread his 30 goal season to be more offensively diverse than what it really was. And because we weren't playing a net presence type of game, plus had more holes in our Top 9, I think there's some legitimacy to why he struggled offensively in how he was used. 

 

Like Jimmy M said above, he needs to be with linemates that can generate rebounds. If we're relying on Loui to be an offensive weapon from the rush, perimeter or from the corners, it's not happening.

 

[JM_]

23 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I think that's pretty debatable at this point. Loui has 29 points in 82 games last year. Josh had 18 points in 49 games with the Canucks.

 

Do you really think we'd waive the younger, cheaper Leivo who's putting up more PPG and is arguably more versatile (if a slight downgrade defensively), to keep Eriksson up?

 

I sure don't.

 

I don't see a spot for him in the starting 12 given those realities.

 

Sure... But again, we're talking the 13th F role at that point. Does Eriksson make a better 13th F than Schaller? I'm not so sure that he does. And again, barring injuries, that's a short term position until Roussel gets back and then he's still getting waived to Utica.

 

Fact of the matter is, that given his current abilities, age etc...he falls at about 14-15th F, at best, on this roster. 

 

On top of that, he/his agent have all but said they'd rather he move on. And it's pretty clear his play style doesn't mesh with how the coach would prefer to play... all this seems to pretty obviously add up to him being done here as much as you guys try to tip toe around those things.

 

I think there's little question that Loui is a far more experienced player for PP2 if you had to chose between them. Leivo has had one breakout-ish year last year and Loui's been at it for over a decade.

 

And yeah I do think Loui is far more valuable than Schaller, in any role (except hits)

 

But thats a different issue from losing an asset to keep Loui. I don't want to lose Leivo or Goldy just to keep Loui. Schaller being lost on waivers would be a nice bonus to Loui sticking around imo  Schaller was an unnecessary contract in the 1st place.

 

What maybe could happen is to start the year Loui goes to Utica so we don't have to lose Goldy e.g., and give him a 10 game look to see if he's going to make the jump. If not, send Goldy down and bring back Loui. If the cost of that is losing Schaller I'll celebrate tbh. 

 

Edited August 12, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[aGENT]

27 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I think there's little question that Loui is a far more experienced player for PP2 if you had to chose between them. Leivo has had one breakout-ish year last year and Loui's been at it for over a decade.

Yeah but he's also not getting younger/better and hasn't remotely produced at a level the last three years that would grant him PP2 time. And that's if he's even in the starting 12, which as I illustrated above, isn't likely. Experience only matters if it's still actually productive.

 

29 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

And yeah I do think Loui is far more valuable than Schaller, in any role (except hits)

That's not what I said though. Does Loui suit the role of an expendable, soon to be waived, short term 13th F, sitting in the press box better than Schaller? Not really IMO. And not playing certainly won't help us trade him if that's still a hope. Do we see him sitting in the press box as 13th F and not getting impatient to play/be moved...?

 

31 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

But thats a different issue from losing an asset to keep Loui. I don't want to lose Leivo or Goldy just to keep Loui. Schaller being lost on waivers would be a nice bonus to Loui sticking around imo  Schaller was an unnecessary contract in the 1st place.

But they're not really separate issues. To play PK/PP (or any minutes for that matter), he needs to actually be one of the 12 best, starting forwards. Best both at his current play level, as well as value to the organization as an asset moving forward. Like you said, even if he's on par with Leivo or Motte, we're unlikely to waive/trade one of those guys to make room for Loui.

 

41 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

What maybe could happen is to start the year Loui goes to Utica so we don't have to lose Goldy e.g., and give him a 10 game look to see if he's going to make the jump. If not, send Goldy down and bring back Loui. If the cost of that is losing Schaller I'll celebrate tbh. 

 

 

If anything, I'd imagine we'd attempt to sneak Goldy through in the preseason (assuming he hasn't beat anyone out) as that's our best chance of him clearing. Ten games in (or any other point) and he's FAR higher risk to be claimed.

 

Nobody's worried about losing Schaller or Eriksson on Waivers.

[Hairy Kneel]

All these fake stats for Loui is the Leipsic on the pig

 

[The_Rocket]

Loui eriksson, do we really need him?

 

realistically I can’t think of a single spot in the line up where I would put LE over someone else. Not even the 13th or 14th spot. For example:

 

ferland pettersson boeser

beartschi horvat miller

pearson Sutter virtanen

leivo beagle motte

roussell (ir)

goldobin

 

 

where do you put LE? Can’t see any spot in there to put him that would make the team better. No use for the guy at all so really I don’t see why he should even get another chance

Edited August 12, 2019 by The_Rocket