Silver Ghost

Lucic has 1 more year on his contract Lucic has a NMC that, unless specifically voided, would preclude us from sending him to Utica or exposing him in the expansion draft.

I think the argument against Lucic is more about the fact that his style of game and advantages as a player does not really fit with how Green wants the Canucks to play. He struggles keeping up with the speedier forwards on Edmonton in terms of being an off the rush, maintaining puck control type of team. He can still bang and crash but at 6 mil per year its not enough of an advantage over what Eriksson brings, which is different but arguably more valuable to the team's style of play. Plus/minus is not a great stat for comparative value of the two players imo. Lucic has never been a great defensive player and in Edmonton his offensive skill to justify that has also been destroyed. If we could trade Eriksson for Lucic with 50% retained and full waiving of his nmc going forward, then a strong argument could be made of an advantage to the Canucks. As a contract for contract trade though, anything but a 1st round unprotected pick or top prospect would be a bad idea. Eriksson, for all his faults, actually has a far better chance of rekindling his offense based on the style of play the Canucks will employ. St Louis physically punished opponents for sure, and Benning obviously took notes with his signings and trades. But they also had a 4 line team that could play and a bottom 6 that was built around a heavy dump and hit style. The Canucks bottom6 isnt being built the same way.

And probably the best fit for Eriksson himself as a player.

I have watched him play a lot. He is not fast by any stretch of the imagination and struggles to keep up with speedier forwards. He was never really fast and is slowing relative to the game around him.

Lucic's biggest struggle with the Oilers - imho - has been his inability to play at the pace of speedier forwards. They anticipated he would be a good fit with McDavid and Draisaitl but the main reason he isnt is that they dont play a dump and chase style that plays to Lucic style, they play a speedy, off the rush style to gain the zone. That has never been where Lucic has fit. Look at the Canucks roster now with the offseason additions. It is CLEAR that Green wants his top 6 especially to maintain control of the puck to generate offensive time, but arguably wants a 4 line team that can play an uptempo style. That is not Lucic's game at all. He would get his hits as a bottom 6 guy but is not going to recapture his offensive ability in that environment. He is still a decent player that can addto a team i think. Just not at all a fit for the way Green and Benning want to play. His contract is even worse than Eriksson's too so unless its a 1st round pick unprotected as a sweetener, I would say no. Unless they retain 50% and he waives any nmc going forward. At 3 mil and with Eriksson gone I would say yes. But expect him to be the 13th forward a lot.

I am sure teams are asking high right now. The decision for Benning is not the same as it was for the Leafs with Marleau - YET. So for Benning the decision on how much he would be comfortable adding will really come down to what he can do with that cap space and when he feels he needs to do it. If Benning can add an NHL quality player that will be able to replace the sweetener in terms of overall depth for the next several years with that cap space, he should explore that possibility. Lets say Eriksson and Woo are the package for arguments sake. If Benning can then trade a surplus forward for a prospect that could reasonably replace Woo in the organizational depth, even if he has to take back a 1 year crap contract, thats an overall win. Dealing Eriksson will need to be evaluated with a wider lens than just that deal itself. It will need to also factor in if the net positives to the organization when all moves are made puts the Canucks in a better spot overall. There are a lot of moving parts here.

They would only do it if they feel Eriksson's issues are more to do with his use and deployment here in Van rather than a deterioration of his skillset. Its likely a bit of both. Taking back two shorter term crap contracts for one costlier longer term one is a good deal for the Canucks. Even if both are waived and sent to Utica it doubles the max cap savings. And i dont know the details of Cogliano or Comeau contracts but they may be more amenable to buyouts.

To even consider a Lucic for Eriksson swap, I would want Edmonton to retain 25% to 50% on Lucic and add a sweetener to the deal. And Lucic would need to waive any NMC/NTC in its entirety. Eriksson can at least still skate and provide a decent PK option. Its also arguable that Eriksson could be a good fit in their top 6 and recover some of his offensive game as a net front tip in/garbage goal type guy like he was in Boston. I think some of Eriksson's issues have been due to not finding a good fit with any of our top 6 in his time here and a very short leash to do so by coaches. Could he fit well in a Tippett style team? I think thats a possibility.

Thats a pretty high price to dump less than half of Erikssons cap hit.

I would do that trade all day every day. Dallas probably wouldnt though and is close to the cap i believe. I bet they would consider: Eriksson and Goldobin for Cogliano and Comeau. Possibly a later pick and Honka added on either side. Lots of parts but could make sense for both teams.

Really depends on the structure of those deals. What do buyouts on them look like? Are those contracts then potentially easier to trade away if taken for Eriksson? They are a year less and even if we took on both and buried them in Utica it would double the cap savings as each would get about a mil instead of the 1mil Loui would save if demoted. On the surface, Eriksson for one of them would be great. For both would even be palatable worst case.

You are right that we can agree to disagree. We have several other prospects that other teams would definitely be interested in. Plus we have picks that could be used to move him out. Even if the Canucks take back a 1 year contract dump to reduce the sweetener needed, the sooner they get rid of Eriksson the better. They dont HAVE to move him. But they definitely should even if it costs something. Just a cost of doing business.

The Canucks have plenty of assets that they could afford to lose to get 6 mil in cap space. CDC just gets too attached to every prospect. Reality is most will amount to only ever being valuable for their trade value before they bust out or do not reach their expected potential.

I highly doubt it would take any of those players to move Eriksson tbh. But giving up a pick would not be a bad idea imo. Then trade another excess forward to recoup a pick or two back.

The Canucks wont need to retain 3 mil and give up a premium asset. It would be one or the other most likely. If what Benning can use that cap space is an improvement on Eriksson, then the sweetener is simply acost of doing business imo.

They can bury him. But it would be better just to get rid of him. The Canucks have built up good organizational depth. Using one piece to get out from that contract is not a bad idea just to be done with it.

If Lucic was bought out and we could sign him for 1 year at 1 mil, then sure why not? But to swap Eriksson for him and a small sweetener? F that. I would rather Benning just give an asset to get rid of that contract forever.

Breaking News! Loui Eriksson declines to be traded to Edmonton for Lucic. Experts say it is the first valuable thing he has done for the Canucks since signing there. Film at 11.

Top end of this years UFA crop. Which clearly shows other players do not care what the Canucks do with Eriksson. Every player and agent understands its a business. There are a finite number of full time nhl jobs for players and even less top jobs. So perform or get out of the way is sonething they are very used to.

I never said he was a $&!#ty player. I just said he is not a 7 mil core player to most teams. Point production is not the only thing I was talking about though. He disappears to the perimeter when the going gets rough. He may still get points but is not a guy that brings anything else to the team when he isn't producing offense. Eriksson's contract is apples to oranges because he was a UFA signing. To get the privilage of overpaying Nylander another team would also have to trade something significant to get him.

Exactly. Players make decisions based on their own set of circumstances.

They would start saying how overrated Marner is.

Look how the Maple Leafs and Rangers have treated players for decades. Players still sign there because they like the city, the team, etc. The Canucks just signed 2 top end UFA and to good deals. Seems like how the Canucks have treated Loui meant SFA to them.

Thats one of the things I am most excited about really. The new identity of our team around hard work, speed, and a heavy take-no-prisoners game sounds like the perfect scene after a generation of the Sedin era.

Lets hope she doesnt like anyone on the Flames, Oilers, or Leafs.