[Proposal] Loui Eriksson off-season

[Bure_Pavel]

2 hours ago, ZH96 said:

Do you have a better idea for Eriksson?

Send him to Utica and hope he retires.

[coastal.view]

4 hours ago, ZH96 said:

Because Saad is kind of like a younger version of Eriksson and actually has some value. He will be 28 in October and Eriksson will be 35 in July. Saad put 47 points up only a year ago and even this season on a down year on a poor team he has 19 goals and is on pace for 40 points. Where as Eriksson has 12 points even with a top six role and nearly half those points are empty net plays. Eriksson is a 15 to 20 points $6 million dollar 34 year old penalty killer who only gets worse. Saad is a 40 to 50 points $6 million dollar 27 year old penalty killer who needs a change of scenery.

these are all half measures

why bother

 

i say keep on the present path

pay nothing to get rid of loui

his contract can be bought out for the last season

when we will need the money to sign our elite younger duo

[Borvat]

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

these are all half measures

why bother

 

i say keep on the present path

pay nothing to get rid of loui

his contract can be bought out for the last season

when we will need the money to sign our elite younger duo

Are you suggesting another year of Loui in the lineup taking a spot from a more deserving/better player then save only $2 Million in cap to buy him out in 2021 - according to capfriendly?  They only actually save $1 Million total based on the 2 year cap hit $4 Million 2021 and $1 Million in 2022. Why?

 

I say give him his bonus this July and tell him the rest of his games will be played in Utica as long as he remains under contract with the Canucks.  I imagine he makes a different decision - like mutual termination or retirement.

 

 

[NMHockey]

5 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Brutal idea in my opinion.

 

The Canucks shouldn’t be giving up any more first rounders.   Hawks ain’t giving the Canucks Saad for a cap dump.

 

Either Eriksson retires, or he’ll be packaged with Demko to Ottawa or Detroit for a mid level prospect.

It's a draft pick over two years away. Plus Benning is going to try and re-acquire the current ones we lost anyway and will get some back. We have assets. Packaging a 24 year old future star goaltender with Eriksson to Ottawa or Detroit, is no different value or better than packaging a D-man prospect and a 2022 1st (which will likely be a very low one anyway) to Chicago. And also they wouldn't be giving us Saad for a cap dump. They'd be taking back an identical $6 million dollar cap hit as Saads. And gaining a young two-way sizeable D-man and a 1st.

[NMHockey]

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

these are all half measures

why bother

 

i say keep on the present path

pay nothing to get rid of loui

his contract can be bought out for the last season

when we will need the money to sign our elite younger duo

Loui does indeed do unnoticed 200 foot plays that create energy for the team and he backs the opposing team up. But he's not the 2012 Loui Eriksson anymore and more often than not he is just holding back our top players with his lack of finish and foot speed compared to theirs. And is being a liability. We will go from a playoff team to a serious playoff threat once Boeser and Leivo are back and Loui isn't playing with Horvat/Pearson and taking shifts with Miller and Toffoli. Waiting until the last season with Loui holds back Podkolzin, Hoglander, Lind, Gadjovich, Jasek, etc. And it holds back a spot for a potential UFA or trade. It ruined us getting Simmonds or Barrie. There will be money set aside for the elite younger duo to sign them. In fact extensions very well may come before they become RFAs.

[rawkdrummer]

At some point Loui will be riding a bus then we'll see.

[qwijibo]

5 hours ago, rawkdrummer said:

At some point Loui will be riding a bus then we'll see.

That’s what alf said all last summer. Yet to happen. 

[qwijibo]

19 hours ago, Borvat said:

Are you suggesting another year of Loui in the lineup taking a spot from a more deserving/better player then save only $2 Million in cap to buy him out in 2021 - according to capfriendly?  They only actually save $1 Million total based on the 2 year cap hit $4 Million 2021 and $1 Million in 2022. Why?

 

I say give him his bonus this July and tell him the rest of his games will be played in Utica as long as he remains under contract with the Canucks.  I imagine he makes a different decision - like mutual termination or retirement.

 

 

All the tough talk regarding Eriksson is fine in theory. But in reality it’s not so simple. You have to factor  in the fact that Ericksson’s agent is J.P. Barry.  So it’s not just the team’s relationship with Eriksson you have to consider.  It’s the teams reputation with other players.  Barry also reps Myers and Woo. And it’s likely he’ll represent other future Canucks.  Is it really worth playing hardball with Eriksson and trying to force him to terminate when his powerful agent could walk away with a very bad opinion of Canucks management? 

[wildcam]

On February 27, 2020 at 3:42 PM, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Short of Loui retirement on his own accord, there is no other way of removing Loui's contract from the Canucks.  At least not until the offseason of 2021.

Big money is already paid out and Jim will not trade a 1st rounder to take Erickson off payroll...This will not happen as Jim and group will keep him or package in trade. No 1st rounder going out unless its for another Miller type inpact player under 26...

[NewbieCanuckFan]

13 minutes ago, wildcam said:

Big money is already paid out and Jim will not trade a 1st rounder to take Erickson off payroll...This will not happen as Jim and group will keep him or package in trade. No 1st rounder going out unless its for another Miller type inpact player under 26...

You'll have to package him with assets equivalent to a 1st round pick.  His cap hit is way out of line relative to performance.  Team won't be able to take the next step up without freeing up that cap space.

[Borvat]

3 hours ago, qwijibo said:

All the tough talk regarding Eriksson is fine in theory. But in reality it’s not so simple. You have to factor  in the fact that Ericksson’s agent is J.P. Barry.  So it’s not just the team’s relationship with Eriksson you have to consider.  It’s the teams reputation with other players.  Barry also reps Myers and Woo. And it’s likely he’ll represent other future Canucks.  Is it really worth playing hardball with Eriksson and trying to force him to terminate when his powerful agent could walk away with a very bad opinion of Canucks management? 

All players have agents.  Baertschi, Goldobin, Gagner, Dahlen the list goes on. Barry was Dahlen's agent in fact.  These guys understand it is a business.  Barry has seen it all and if he can't separate one player from another he isn't a very good agent.  If Eriksson is not performing at some point you can't let one player hold your team hostage look at what he has been paid for what he has provided.  Tough talk?  Benning has made made tough decisions with players already.  Team comes before one under performing overpaid player past his prime.  

Edited February 29, 2020 by Borvat

[Toews]

1 hour ago, Borvat said:

All players have agents.  Baertschi, Goldobin, Gagner, Dahlen the list goes on. Barry was Dahlen's agent in fact.  These guys understand it is a business.  Barry has seen it all and if he can't separate one player from another he isn't a very good agent.  If Eriksson is not performing at some point you can't let one player hold your team hostage look at what he has been paid for what he has provided.  Tough talk?  Benning has made made tough decisions with players already.  Team comes before one under performing overpaid player past his prime.  

The job of an agent is to get the most money for his client. Barry will be advocating that the Canucks either buyout Eriksson or trade him. If we are forced to add assets we are probably looking at the Backes deal, which wasn't terrible for Boston and it would hardly be terrible for Vancouver. Boston getting rid of Backes will give them flexibility to keep more of their talent going forward. If trading a 1st means we can retain Virtanen, Toffoli and Tanev while subtracting Eriksson without getting a cap dump in return, that has to be considered a win. While the optics won't look great, it might be the move that allows us to bring back the deepest roster we have had in quite some time.

[qwijibo]

1 hour ago, Borvat said:

All players have agents.  Baertschi, Goldobin, Gagner, Dahlen the list goes on. Barry was Dahlen's agent in fact.  These guys understand it is a business.  Barry has seen it all and if he can't separate one player from another he isn't a very good agent.  If Eriksson is not performing at some point you can't let one player hold your team hostage look at what he has been paid for what he has provided.  Tough talk?  Benning has made made tough decisions with players already.  Team comes before one under performing overpaid player past his prime.  

The agents job is to act as an advocate for clients.  If A team is trying to strong arm a client using questionable tactics you can be sure the agent is going to have something to say about it. And Barry isnt any agent. He’s pretty much the 2nd most powerful agent behind Newport sports.  

[Borvat]

10 hours ago, qwijibo said:

The agents job is to act as an advocate for clients.  If A team is trying to strong arm a client using questionable tactics you can be sure the agent is going to have something to say about it. And Barry isnt any agent. He’s pretty much the 2nd most powerful agent behind Newport sports.  

The GM's job is to advocate for the team and the team's owner by improving the on ice product to create a better financial return.  If a player is causing the team to miss out on potential upgrades in players, a player is not helping the team become better or the team is unable to sign/retain players they actually want to keep because of this player then in some cases tactics that may seem "strong" need to be used.  Agents and players strong arm teams all the time do teams stop dealing with those agents or their clients?.  Was there outrage over the Bogosian deal?  Benning has sent Baertschi and Gagner to the AHL.  This is a business.

 

86 points / 29 hits over 4 seasons (to date) for a whopping USD $31 Million after his bonus this summer.  (CAD $40 Million +) Who came out well ahead on this deal so far?   I would say LE and Barry - like bandits. 

 

[73 Percent]

10 minutes ago, Borvat said:

The GM's job is to advocate for the team and the team's owner by improving the on ice product to create a better financial return.  If a player is causing the team to miss out on potential upgrades in players, a player is not helping the team become better or the team is unable to sign/retain players they actually want to keep because of this player then in some cases tactics that may seem "strong" need to be used.  Agents and players strong arm teams all the time do teams stop dealing with those agents or their clients?.  Was there outrage over the Bogosian deal?  Benning has sent Baertschi and Gagner to the AHL.  This is a business.

 

86 points / 29 hits over 4 seasons (to date) for a whopping USD $31 Million after his bonus this summer.  (CAD $40 Million +) Who came out well ahead on this deal so far?   I would say LE and Barry - like bandits. 

 

3 hits last year. Wtf.

[skolozsy2]

On 2/27/2020 at 4:48 PM, ZH96 said:

Because Saad is kind of like a younger version of Eriksson and actually has some value. He will be 28 in October and Eriksson will be 35 in July. Saad put 47 points up only a year ago and even this season on a down year on a poor team he has 19 goals and is on pace for 40 points. Where as Eriksson has 12 points even with a top six role and nearly half those points are empty net plays. Eriksson is a 15 to 20 points $6 million dollar 34 year old penalty killer who only gets worse. Saad is a 40 to 50 points $6 million dollar 27 year old penalty killer who needs a change of scenery.

Saad's production would be even higher this year if he didn't miss a month with an ankle injury. He also puts up all his points 5v5, as he gets virtually zero PP time.  And after Toews, he's the Hawks best two-way forward and PK'er.

 

Saad was only on the block because he would've brought the biggest return. 

[skolozsy2]

On 2/27/2020 at 5:41 PM, wildcam said:

I disagree you will not see Jim give up another first rounder to remove Erickson from roster..

There are other ways but this kind of trade will not happen....Never

Nor will you see the Hawks taking on more dead salary when they already have Seabrook on the roster. Loui and Seabs on the same payroll....holy mother of god!

[NewbieCanuckFan]

On 2/28/2020 at 10:48 AM, rawkdrummer said:

At some point Loui will be riding a bus then we'll see.

Lol guy is still getting the odd shift in the top six.  I’ll believe it when I see it (being demoted to the Comets).

[canucklehead44]

One idea I had is to flip Eriksson for a cap dump centre and then drop Sutter off to a team like Ottawa or LA who could probably get a decent return for him at the deadline. 

The list :
Kyle Turris - 6 Million with four years remaining (28 million in salary)
Victor Rask - 4 million with two years remaining (8 million in salary)
Alex Wennberg - 4.9 million with three years remaining (16 million in salary)

After his bonus is paid Eriksson is owed only 5 million cash. When you account for the term length and total salary to be paid remaining on the contract it might be worthwhile for Nashville or CBJ to bounce from those contracts to save money and open up cap space sooner. Both teams are in good shape from a cap perspective.

[mll]

On 3/11/2020 at 11:46 PM, canucklehead44 said:

One idea I had is to flip Eriksson for a cap dump centre and then drop Sutter off to a team like Ottawa or LA who could probably get a decent return for him at the deadline. 

The list :
Kyle Turris - 6 Million with four years remaining (28 million in salary)
Victor Rask - 4 million with two years remaining (8 million in salary)
Alex Wennberg - 4.9 million with three years remaining (16 million in salary)

After his bonus is paid Eriksson is owed only 5 million cash. When you account for the term length and total salary to be paid remaining on the contract it might be worthwhile for Nashville or CBJ to bounce from those contracts to save money and open up cap space sooner. Both teams are in good shape from a cap perspective.

 

Turris has been Hynes 2nd most used F after Granlund.  Don't think they consider him as a cap dump anymore now that they've changed coaches.  

Rask is likely to get bought out - it's only 1.3M agains the cap which is manageable.  Eriksson would just block a player on their team and his buyout cap hit is prohibitive when it's so much more convenient for them to just buy out Rask at a far lesser cap hit.

 

Tortorella talked of how much they are going to miss Wennberg when he got injured.  Not sure they are interested in moving on for a player that fits them less.