Eriksson's Future (Discussion)

[Hockey God]

Must think outside the box on this one, nothing trade related.  How about ownership gives him concession space at the rink to open one of his restaurants?  In return, Loui retires.  Completely tongue in cheek, but that's about the only way i could see Loui's contract coming off the books.  

[qwijibo]

5 hours ago, Borvat said:

His career earnings are absolutely material - if I have no millions I sit - if I have made $60 USD plus millions I consider what else I would rather do than be a joke for 3 years and sit in a Utica press box.   There are numerous examples of guys retiring with money left on the table in various sports leagues. 

 

After next July (when he get's another $3M bonus) it's $5M remaining.  So he makes $4M for sitting this year only.  He has to sit another 2 full seasons for the remaining $5M.  I would hope he has some pride and can make that in Sweden or wherever if he still wants to play at age 35+.   

Completely disagree. First off. Just because his earning are $60m that doesn’t mean he brought home remotely that much money. Factor in Taxes and agent fees and we’re talking w substantially lower number. Secondly. It doesn’t matter what he’s brought home. We’re talking about $9m over the next 3 years. Are you telling me you wouldn’t take that kind of money to play hockey in Utica? Finally. Look at the salaries in the SEL. They top out at about $250k a year. He can finish off this contract here. Even if it’s in Utica and it’s roughly the equivalent to playing another 12 years in Sweden. 
 

People  seriously need to get over this. Attacking his character because he’s not living up to a contract freely offered by the Canucks is just juvenile. Sometimes players don’t fit with a team. It happens.  It just so happens that in this case the Canucks and his agent structured his deal in a way that makes him hard to move and not worth buying out. 

[the grinder]

20 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Completely disagree. First off. Just because his earning are $60m that doesn’t mean he brought home remotely that much money. Factor in Taxes and agent fees and we’re talking w substantially lower number. Secondly. It doesn’t matter what he’s brought home. We’re talking about $9m over the next 3 years. Are you telling me you wouldn’t take that kind of money to play hockey in Utica? Finally. Look at the salaries in the SEL. They top out at about $250k a year. He can finish off this contract here. Even if it’s in Utica and it’s roughly the equivalent to playing another 12 years in Sweden. 
 

People  seriously need to get over this. Attacking his character because he’s not living up to a contract freely offered by the Canucks is just juvenile. Sometimes players don’t fit with a team. It happens.  It just so happens that in this case the Canucks and his agent structured his deal in a way that makes him hard to move and not worth buying out. 

then he can go to the khl  then after he is bought out  

[Borvat]

2 hours ago, qwijibo said:

Completely disagree. First off. Just because his earning are $60m that doesn’t mean he brought home remotely that much money. Factor in Taxes and agent fees and we’re talking w substantially lower number. Secondly. It doesn’t matter what he’s brought home. We’re talking about $9m over the next 3 years. Are you telling me you wouldn’t take that kind of money to play hockey in Utica? Finally. Look at the salaries in the SEL. They top out at about $250k a year. He can finish off this contract here. Even if it’s in Utica and it’s roughly the equivalent to playing another 12 years in Sweden. 
 

People  seriously need to get over this. Attacking his character because he’s not living up to a contract freely offered by the Canucks is just juvenile. Sometimes players don’t fit with a team. It happens.  It just so happens that in this case the Canucks and his agent structured his deal in a way that makes him hard to move and not worth buying out. 

Completely disagree.  First off just because someone agrees to pay you based on past performance expecting the same performance at a minimum (or better) and you don't perform doesn't mean you have no obligation or responsibility.  You hire me to repair your home like I did for your neighbor and you pay me even more and I in fact perform inferior work are you happy.  Where do I sign. Taxes blah blah blah.   We all pay taxes. 

 

If he will sit in Utica to collect the money he hasn't earned over and above the other money he hasn't earned to this point it reflects on his character nothing I need to say nor did I say - and no I wouldn't sit and collect money I didn't earn apparently that isn't an issue for you. 

 

I don't care about the SEL he has made more money than any of those players ever hope to make in that league - by a large margin.  If he really "loves hockey" and not unearned money he can still play there. 

 

You seriously need to get over defending a player who hasn't earned his contract and is continuing to put himself first over a team that put their faith in him.

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Borvat

[Googlie]

15 minutes ago, Borvat said:

Completely disagree.  First off just because someone agrees to pay you based on past performance expecting the same performance at a minimum (or better) and you don't perform doesn't mean you have no obligation or responsibility.  You hire me to repair your home like I did for your neighbor and you pay me even more and I in fact perform inferior work are you happy.  Where do I sign. Taxes blah blah blah.   We all pay taxes. 

 

If he will sit in Utica to collect the money he hasn't earned over and above the other money he hasn't earned to this point it reflects on his character nothing I need to say nor did I say - and no I wouldn't sit and collect money I didn't earn apparently that isn't an issue for you. 

 

I don't care about the SEL he has made more money than any of those players ever hope to make in that league - by a large margin.  If he really "loves hockey" and not unearned money he can still play there. 

 

You seriously need to get over defending a player who hasn't earned his contract and is continuing to put himself first over a team that put their faith in him.

 

That non sequitur pretty much made the whole of the rest of the post irrelevant 

[Borvat]

11 minutes ago, Googlie said:

That non sequitur pretty much made the whole of the rest of the post irrelevant 

Not really.  He is still here collecting a check, taking up cap space and putting the organization in a difficult position while knowing he isn't earning it.. 

 

Your post has no substance and is a total strawman.  Nice attempt. 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Borvat

[Googlie]

Excuse me??

You said "(Eriksson) continues to put himself first over a team ...."

That comment was just thrown out the end of a post that made some sense, but by injecting that personal bias into it, my point was that it really made the balance of the post irrlevant.  Your point could have been made by just posting that bolded part. It was a non sequitur, in that nothing beforehand led to that conclusion.

 

If I am misrepresenting your stance, (personal bias) then elaborate on exactly how Eriksson is putting himself first .....

[Borvat]

 

18 minutes ago, Googlie said:

Excuse me??

You said "(Eriksson) continues to put himself first over a team ...."

That comment was just thrown out the end of a post that made some sense, but by injecting that personal bias into it, my point was that it really made the balance of the post irrlevant.  Your point could have been made by just posting that bolded part. It was a non sequitur, in that nothing beforehand led to that conclusion.

 

If I am misrepresenting your stance, (personal bias) then elaborate on exactly how Eriksson is putting himself first .....

I did elaborate - He is still here collecting a check, taking up cap space and putting the organization in a difficult position while knowing he isn't earning it.

 

My conclusion was based on the whole commentary -  for you to cherry pick the conclusion appears lazy and a total straw man. 

 

Rather than critique my commentary by cherry picking and sounding superior offer something of substance - like your own opinion. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Borvat

[Googlie]

My opinion doesn't matter, but FWIW I was agreeing with you right up to that bolded part when you interjected the character aspersion.

I liked him on a line with the Sedins at the Worlds,  but not with them as a Canuck.  I liked him in Boston (tbh don't remember much of him in Dallas) but not in Vancouver.

For sure he isn't earning his money - and it is hard to do so from the press box - but he believes he still can play at the NHL level, and so do Benning and Green, or he wouldn't still be here. 

It is a huge leap to say he "continues to put himself first, before team..."  Had that been omitted , I would have plussed, but insert that, and interjecting personal bias pretty much overrides what had gone before.

That was my point.

We are on the same page.

[Borvat]

3 minutes ago, Googlie said:

My opinion doesn't matter, but FWIW I was agreeing with you right up to that bolded part when you interjected the character aspersion.

I liked him on a line with the Sedins at the Worlds,  but not with them as a Canuck.  I liked him in Boston (tbh don't remember much of him in Dallas) but not in Vancouver.

For sure he isn't earning his money - and it is hard to do so from the press box - but he believes he still can play at the NHL level, and so do Benning and Green, or he wouldn't still be here. 

It is a huge leap to say he "continues to put himself first, before team..."  Had that been omitted , I would have plussed, but insert that, and interjecting personal bias pretty much overrides what had gone before.

That was my point.

We are on the same page.

Why would they sit a $6M cap hit player who is apparently a PK specialist, defensively responsible and someone they would hope to build trade value in.  It's not my bias it is what is actually transpiring - he is in the press box and sitting.  The sum of all the parts equals the total. 

 

If Green and Benning thought he could still "play" and help the team he would be playing.  There is more to this or he would be playing.   I would assume Loui is an intelligent person and realize why.  My conclusion is based on this.

I don't dislike Eriksson as a person - I don't even know him. It is purely logic based on what people in these circumstances would understand - Loui, the Canucks and anyone in professional sports. 

[Borvat]

56 minutes ago, Googlie said:

My opinion doesn't matter, but FWIW I was agreeing with you right up to that bolded part when you interjected the character aspersion.

I liked him on a line with the Sedins at the Worlds,  but not with them as a Canuck.  I liked him in Boston (tbh don't remember much of him in Dallas) but not in Vancouver.

For sure he isn't earning his money - and it is hard to do so from the press box - but he believes he still can play at the NHL level, and so do Benning and Green, or he wouldn't still be here. 

It is a huge leap to say he "continues to put himself first, before team..."  Had that been omitted , I would have plussed, but insert that, and interjecting personal bias pretty much overrides what had gone before.

That was my point.

We are on the same page.

Your opinion matters as much as mine does.  If you don't provide yours and yet feel free to critique mine it is an unfair analysis.  Let me analyze yours just like you felt comfortable critiquing mine. 

[qwijibo]

5 hours ago, Borvat said:

Completely disagree.  First off just because someone agrees to pay you based on past performance expecting the same performance at a minimum (or better) and you don't perform doesn't mean you have no obligation or responsibility.  You hire me to repair your home like I did for your neighbor and you pay me even more and I in fact perform inferior work are you happy.  Where do I sign. Taxes blah blah blah.   We all pay taxes. 

 

If he will sit in Utica to collect the money he hasn't earned over and above the other money he hasn't earned to this point it reflects on his character nothing I need to say nor did I say - and no I wouldn't sit and collect money I didn't earn apparently that isn't an issue for you. 

 

I don't care about the SEL he has made more money than any of those players ever hope to make in that league - by a large margin.  If he really "loves hockey" and not unearned money he can still play there. 

 

You seriously need to get over defending a player who hasn't earned his contract and is continuing to put himself first over a team that put their faith in him.

 

Based on his interview over the summer he is if the opinion that he hasn’t been out in a position to  succeed by the coach.  If that’s his thinking (right or wrong ) then why would he do the team a favour and forgo literally millions of dollars.  You’re looking at it from a fans perspective.  Forgetting this is an actual person who has his own views that come from his personal experience with the team.   You can make it black and white if you like, but the world is all shades of grey.  The team signed him to the contract. He has guaranteed employment for the next three years.  (Batting a buy-out). That’s not insignificant in an industry where most people have relatively short careers and have to maximize their earning while they can.  

[Hairy Kneel]

Too many pro contracts in Utica. He needs to go to Kalamazoo instead. Or lent out someplace like Gagner.

[Chris12345]

12 hours ago, Borvat said:

Completely disagree.  First off just because someone agrees to pay you based on past performance expecting the same performance at a minimum (or better) and you don't perform doesn't mean you have no obligation or responsibility.  You hire me to repair your home like I did for your neighbor and you pay me even more and I in fact perform inferior work are you happy.  Where do I sign. Taxes blah blah blah.   We all pay taxes. 

 

If he will sit in Utica to collect the money he hasn't earned over and above the other money he hasn't earned to this point it reflects on his character nothing I need to say nor did I say - and no I wouldn't sit and collect money I didn't earn apparently that isn't an issue for you. 

 

I don't care about the SEL he has made more money than any of those players ever hope to make in that league - by a large margin.  If he really "loves hockey" and not unearned money he can still play there. 

 

You seriously need to get over defending a player who hasn't earned his contract and is continuing to put himself first over a team that put their faith in him.

 

I completely agree.

 

Not many people walk away from that kind of contract unless they are in poor health.

 

Also, from his perspective, he probably thinks things will turn around if he continues to work hard.

[Timråfan]

On 10/18/2019 at 8:55 AM, janisahockeynut said:

4 and 1 without Eriksson in the lineup

 

Well, I can only hope Benning and Green do not fold, after coming this far. They have sat Eriksson's butt in the stands, and have played the Schaller's, Motte's, Gaudette's and Leivo's, over playing Eriksson, and good on them for doing so.  Soon, we will be making another roster move, or 2, to make room for MR. $3,000,000  Roussel, so what will happen?

 

Maybe there will be an injury, maybe a trade, maybe a conditioning stint, but there should not be a reason good enough to play Eriksson, in fact, I would argue, he is not in game shape at this point, and the first indication that he is either coming back into the line-up or being traded, will be a 2 week conditioning stint to Utica.

 

Speaking of Utica, we have 2 players, that in their first games in Utica, made statements that they are NHL players, so do they get rewarded for being good soldiers, and not making a sound. MacEwen is sitting down there waiting for his turn, as well as Lind, who they might bring up for an emergency call up, as well.

 

All are skating hard by all accounts, and are all deserving of Benning's attention. 

 

Eriksson, must see the writing on the wall, and his agent must be talking to Benning. I truly hope Benning is honest and does not sugar coat it. IMO, the frank talk should be between Eriksson and his agent, where the truth is talked about.

 

IMO, Loui, if you want to play regularly, it will either have to be Utica, or retirement and the SHL. I honestly think that is his options, other than siting in the stands. I see too many hungry players, working hard to get to the big show, too many players wanting to stay on the big club.

 

With our team being much bigger and stronger, there is a very real possibility, that injury replacement, could be substantially less. So far the hits are not coming to our players, we are initiating those hits, and when the hits do come, we are big enough to absorb them.

 

This all eventually comes around to Eriksson not playing and what he wants. It comes to his agent being honest, and Benning being honest, and it comes down to Eriksson values, and whether money is more important than happiness.

 

Possibility, there is one other option, and that is the decision has already been made, and that is, Loui has been told he is not playing, and that they will sit him as long as there is not  a need, before making the decision to send him down. For now, that works, but there will be a time, when that decision will have to be made.

 

That will be the time, Loui will have to make his decision. I believe the Canucks have to show good faith here, because there is not immediate need, but when they can show, they have a need, then they will be able to justify.....that will be the start of the end...…...One would hope. 

 

Personally, I do not think Loui gets traded, as I think that comes with cap retention, the need for the Canucks to save as much of Loui's million annual cap hit, and I think Benning would rather pay Loui this year, then have a portion of cap retention of a cap buyout exist on the books, for the next 3 to 6 years. So, pay him now, and hope, or pay him his bonus at the beginning of next season, and say good by, as he either retires or fails to report.

 

My point to this discussion is that, the problem may have already been solved, and if not, I hope that Benning and Green do not play him. Let him sit, let others pass him. He will pack it in sooner than later, if it is not all about money. If it is, well, it is probably the first time in a long time Loui is no really hurting from playing....unless it is hemorrhoids and splinters.

 

I personally, would love to here your opinions of that side of the Loui debate......not really how good he is, or who, or how we can trade him, but more so what do you think is the plan with Loui? Not that we do or don't want him.

Since the top 6 lines produce more with him on it, the problem is at you guys compare him with bottom 6. 

Petey, Pearson, Horvat is players producing better when playing with Loui. Stats can someone fetch if you want to prove me wrong... 

 

[Gurn]

16 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

Since the top 6 lines produce more with him on it,

Care to back this statement up with some kind of proof?

[Timråfan]

56 minutes ago, gurn said:

Care to back this statement up with some kind of proof?

I don't have the tools to show the stats. I only know what I've seen by myself or heard here. 

Loui played with Petey at the start when Petey was flying high and Loui played with Pearson and Horvat at the endof the season when they had a good finish. 

[Hindustan Smyl]

Eriksson and Gaudette for Ladd and Wilde.

[SilentSam]

On 10/19/2019 at 3:53 PM, Timråfan said:

I don't have the tools to show the stats. I only know what I've seen by myself or heard here. 

Loui played with Petey at the start when Petey was flying high and Loui played with Pearson and Horvat at the endof the season when they had a good finish. 

This is why no one takes your wind bag statistics seriously. 
You constantly Dig yourself deep into BS.. why not explore for the truth.

Do the math Timra, show us the numbers.

 

.. but you won’t.. you’ll simply throw it back to someone and say “show me where I’m wrong?”

That lame brain mentality, and the lie that you “don’t have the tools to show the stats”..

well it’s just gutless, and pathetic.

Put up and grow up.

 

how the hell do you access this forum?

Telegraph and morse code?

 

The best play Eriksson ever made with EP40 was over a couple of meatballs at ikea for dinner.

Edited October 22, 2019 by SilentSam

[Timråfan]

2 hours ago, SilentSam said:

This is why no one takes your wind bag statistics seriously. 
You constantly Dig yourself deep into BS.. why not explore for the truth.

Do the math Timra, show us the numbers.

 

.. but you won’t.. you’ll simply throw it back to someone and say “show me where I’m wrong?”

That lame brain mentality, and the lie that you “don’t have the tools to show the stats”..

well it’s just gutless, and pathetic.

Put up and grow up.

 

how the hell do you access this forum?

Telegraph and morse code?

 

The best play Eriksson ever made with EP40 was over a couple of meatballs at ikea for dinner.

You're very good at just insult me without even less substance than me. So grow a few and be an adult in the future... 

 

I really think you should treat the rest of the fans here that say similar things about Loui the same way you treat me. It should be interesting to see the responce. 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Timråfan