Silver Ghost

When have you ever seen me say Eriksson should not be moved? I fully believe he shoukd be, even if it costs Benning a good asset to accomplish. All I have said is IF Eriksson is still a Canuck come training camp, he deserves every opportunity to earn a role, just like every other player does. Punishing him without giving him that opportunity is a bad look for the Canucks imo. If he gets beaten for a spot, so be it. Move on whatever way they can.

Washington is looking to move Hamhuis and will add a pick to get it done. PM me if interested.

I have never said we don't or that Eriksson's spot could not be filled by a young player. But he, at this point, is a far more accomplished goal scorer than all 3 of those guys you mention. They have not done much to suggest they would easily produce the same goals at this point.

Those players have a combined 9 NHL career goals. Do I think Gaudette can replace them? Probably eventually. MacEwan? Who knows. Significantly overrated imo. Biega? Maybe combined in the next 5 years.

They actually should lol

This is what warms my heart.

I don't think the Leafs take this risk unless they have already been assured or feel they know Marner would not sign any offer sheet. It sure sounds like he won't even entertain the idea. They would have to make a move quickly if he did sign one. But they seem to have an agreement to dump their $&!# on Ottawa so it would be fine for them i think.

It seems there has been a huge discussion by people who know better than i do how thecba works.

I think we can all agree that the Canucks simply need to win the Stanley Cup this year beating Boston in the finals while the Leafs flame out against Boston in the first round and then watch all their UFA walk away next summer. Then all will be the way it should be. Our leafs hate should unite us, not divide us.

Analytics are far from perfect and still have a ways to go. Just because they dont support someone's theory doesnt mean they are useless. Plus minus is a truly useless individual stat. Now the argument has changed from he has no value to "well, if he didnt have pk value he would have no value". The reality he is not as bad a player asbpeople are suggesting. Still paid too much and needs to be traded. But those numbers are actually pretty useful to at least paint a bit of a different picture.

Please play hardball Marner. Dont accept less than Matthews got.

Why are there PTO contracts then? And if the player gets injured in camp they have absolutely no recourse at all. Huge risk for Marner.

That is correct. But Clarkson and Horton cannot be placed on LTIR until the first day of the season so they could not sign Marner before then and be over when the season starts. Thats why they will probably wait to file the contract until those two are able to be put on ltir. I was under the impression that players had to be under contract to attend training camp but could be wrong.

Lets hope for everyone's sake that he gets moved. And then lets all hope beyond hope that he doesnt find his game elsewhere because that would make a lot of people here look bad. I am not saying it will happen. But it could. I mean, sometimes players just dont fit with a team or a coach. Maybe thats the case, maybe its not. Maybe he has declined to the point he is done in the NHL. Or maybe he just needs a better fit. Either way, it will be interesting to find out going forward.

Strawman in spades. I have not argued this partucular point at all and have consistently attempted to separate his contract from his value as a player in expressing my opinion. I have agreed that he has not lived up to his contract many times.

I am not trying to put anyone on the defensive. Everyone has the right to their opinion. I just disagree with opinions that attempt to lump all these different things as one to attempt to justify those opinions. The reality is Eriksson is in the NHL and we are not. So I think any opinion that suggests he has no value, brings nothing to a team, etc is pretty much a joke. Thats just my opinion though.

Have you seen some of the comments about him? No one knows what his motivation is or what the organization thinks of him or wants for him at this point. Presenting as fact he is lazy, or disinterested, or garbage and a cancer as both as a player and as a person (for his pretty tame comments), is really just trying to justify hating the guy. No one except the Canucks and Eriksson really know their opinion or Erikssons motivation etc.

My only point though is that anyone who sees zero value in any player is not realisticor objective about that player. You guys can feel free to disagree with that opinion though.

Thats a completely different argument though imo. Eriksson is and has been a pretty good defensive forward, with a the other fluff taken out of that argument. His style is fine if that statement remains true, which I would say it is. Like I said, I can agree to disagree regarding Eriksson. I am not naive enough to think i will change your opinion (or others on here), nor do I really care to tbh. And you arent going to change mine if this is your argument.

They are creating artificial cap room though. Because if they are at the cap, they get that 10 mil more than other teams without having that player count against the roster. Its a seriously damaging loophole as bad or worse than the Luongo type contracts were. We all know because its the Leafs it will work out fine for them. The NHL knows where its bread is buttered. If the Canucks did this it would create an instant significant penalty for cap circumvention.

Whats the bet the Leafs would get an exception from the league to exceed the 10%.

Maybe thats what they want so the blame can be on Marner. They likely know he wont sign one if they are making this move now. I kind of hope some crazy ass GM convinces him to sign one though.

Exactly, that was my point. Comparing different styles of players is not a real or reasonable comparison.

Ewww no way. I respect your guys opinions, i just dont happen to agree with some of them. It does actually confuse me how people dont actually understand that you can do both.

Comparing Eriksson as a player to Roussel is BS as they are not remotely close to the same type of player. Where they play has no bearing on it as they play a different type of game. I have coached for many years too, played competitively until my early 20's, and also know and talk to a lot of current and former NHL players, coaches, and executives. Not that it really matters since no one really needs to "prove" they know hockey tohave an opinion. But i am pretty comfortable with my understanding of hockey as a sport. EDIT: and before the inevitable suggestion that I must play like Eriksson, I was actually really into hitting and agitating. So I love that style of hockey too. Far more Roussel than Eriksson. But i also played with a lot of different types of players and could appreciate their style of play and the advantages it could bring to a team.