Loui Eriksson | #21 | LW/RW

[DownUndaCanuck]

Got a feeling this goal is really going to set Eriksson off, and the confidence will really help. He can still easily hit 20 goals, 30 is a stretch but watch him catch fire now for a little bit at least.

[Beary Sweet]

The way he scored today, it looks like this will get him in a bit of a roll. With this rate, I see him hitting 25-30 goals easily. Not bad for a Loui's first season with the team

[Green Building]

The very day I vocalized my honest lapse in vocalized support of Loui Eriksson... he pops his 1st goal of the year. I know what I have to do...

 

Loui... I still have no faith in you

 

 

[Makaramel MacKhiato]

15 hours ago, 250Integra said:

 

Cut it off yet?

unfortunately yes. Good thing I have 3.

[xRussianrocket]

Easily be a nice chip to move at the deadline?  His contract is horrendous if a team offers us a 5th rounder to take that ball and chain off our books, DO IT!

[terrible.dee]

On 11/2/2016 at 3:51 PM, SabreFan1 said:

 

Also, a big problem for the Sabres with moving a player like Reinhart is Kane's status with the team.  If GMTM isn't already looking to move Kane, the ownership will force GMTM to unload him if he gets in trouble with the law again.  Losing both Kane and Reinhart would cripple the Sabres' scoring.  They have only scored 22 goals in 9 games without Eichel and Kane.  That's not Canucks-level bad, but it is still not good.

 

GMTM will most likely trade Kane for a good D-man instead of Reinhart.  Unfortunately Tyler Myers didn't perform well for the Sabres after his rookie season.  If he had, the Kane trade would never have happened.

 

I still say there is a deal to be made if we take Kane off of their hands, give them something decent like Tannev and hopefully anything but a first rounder.

 

Make no mistake Kane is a negative asset, the Sabers would be thrilled to be rid of him and will give consideration to any team that will help them be rid of him.

 

As great as it is for them to have Reinhart, he is not their #1 essential building block, for the right price we could pluck him, I'm sure of it., and the Kane thing makes them vulnerable.

 

As far as Kane goes for us, buy him out at the earlyest possible date and know that during our early stages of rebuild we won't need to spend to the cap ceiling anyway. Thus the lowered cap[ from the buy out won't kill us

 

Perhaps we wouldn't need to buy him out, it's only a matter of time before he does something stupid again, and there have got to be some conduct provisions in NHL contracts to protect the teams.

 

[terrible.dee]

On 11/8/2016 at 2:29 PM, RogersTowell said:

Eriksson will turn it around eventually.  He'll have at least one good streak of producing points this season and will probably revert to the mean for his production from the last 3 or 4 seasons.  Confidence is shot right now.  He needs to focus on the little things that make goals happen and not worry about the result for a while.  You can see him visibly deflate when he misses a good chance right now, what you want is a renewed vigor every miss until you score.  Never give yourself a chance to feel defeated, just give it 100% and stay focused on what will get you to your goal (literally)

 

I agree,

 

I don't put much stock in his current drought, he'll end up getting his 25 G and 50 PTS

 

problem is it won't make one bit of difference

 

well, it may make one difference, we may draft lower

[Hairy Kneel]

Some Abba might help him break his slump

Abba is good for everything

 

[SabreFan1]

On 11/11/2016 at 3:04 AM, terrible.dee said:

I still say there is a deal to be made if we take Kane off of their hands, give them something decent like Tannev and hopefully anything but a first rounder.

 

Make no mistake Kane is a negative asset, the Sabers would be thrilled to be rid of him and will give consideration to any team that will help them be rid of him.

 

As great as it is for them to have Reinhart, he is not their #1 essential building block, for the right price we could pluck him, I'm sure of it., and the Kane thing makes them vulnerable.

 

As far as Kane goes for us, buy him out at the earlyest possible date and know that during our early stages of rebuild we won't need to spend to the cap ceiling anyway. Thus the lowered cap[ from the buy out won't kill us

 

Perhaps we wouldn't need to buy him out, it's only a matter of time before he does something stupid again, and there have got to be some conduct provisions in NHL contracts to protect the teams.

 

 

If the Sabres wanted him gone, why give away assets when you could just give Kane away by exposing him to the expansion draft?  There's no doubt whatsoever LV would take him for the final year on his relatively cap-friendly contract.

 

Pure and simple, the Canucks cannot afford Reinhart and Tanev doesn't even come close right now.

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

If the Sabres wanted him gone, why give away assets when you could just give Kane away by exposing him to the expansion draft?  There's no doubt whatsoever LV would take him for the final year on his relatively cap-friendly contract.

 

Pure and simple, the Canucks cannot afford Reinhart and Tanev doesn't even come close right now.

Tanev for Kane?  Aren't they about the same age?

[terrible.dee]

2 hours ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

If the Sabres wanted him gone, why give away assets when you could just give Kane away by exposing him to the expansion draft?  There's no doubt whatsoever LV would take him for the final year on his relatively cap-friendly contract.

 

Pure and simple, the Canucks cannot afford Reinhart and Tanev doesn't even come close right now.

 

Think man!!!

just because he's exposed in the draft does that mean vegas will have to take him??

 

NO! They don't have to take him any more than other teams have to trade for him,

 

for your info he WILL be exposed in the draft and he will be passed on, because no team in this league wants the headache he brings

 

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, terrible.dee said:

Think man!!!

just because he's exposed in the draft does that mean vegas will have to take him??

 

NO! They don't have to take him any more than other teams have to trade for him,

 

for your info he WILL be exposed in the draft and he will be passed on, because no team in this league wants the headache he brings

 

I thought he's going to some sensitivity training or something?

[Tre Mac]

I just came in to post how weird he looks and that stache doesn't help.  Oh well, good game last night nonetheless.

[oldnews]

On 2016-11-12 at 6:29 AM, SabreFan1 said:

 

If the Sabres wanted him gone, why give away assets when you could just give Kane away by exposing him to the expansion draft?  There's no doubt whatsoever LV would take him for the final year on his relatively cap-friendly contract.

 

Pure and simple, the Canucks cannot afford Reinhart and Tanev doesn't even come close right now.

LOL.  Someone sounds like he's trying to talk himself out of the nervousness of the reality of the Larsson-Hall deal.

Combine that with who your GM is and I think the nerves are warranted.

[oldnews]

On 2016-11-12 at 8:35 AM, Alflives said:

Tanev for Kane?  Aren't they about the same age?

don't be so desperate Alf.

[Harvey Spector]

On 11/12/2016 at 8:35 AM, Alflives said:

Tanev for Kane?  Aren't they about the same age?

 

If you meant Patrick Kane then yeah that's a no brainer...  

[MattJVD]

I'm so glad Loui is starting to find the net. 2 in the last 3 games has to do wonders for his confidence .

[-AJ-]

I'm hoping Loui catches on fire and starts lighting it up.

[oldnews]

Loui has been the team's best corsi stache thus far.  It was/is only a matter of time before he gets a few breaks and/or bounces.

[stuman491]

On 11/12/2016 at 8:35 AM, Alflives said:

Tanev for Kane?  Aren't they about the same age?

Please not Kane.  He is a locker room nightmare.  Not the kind of player you want to bring in when you are trying to develop young players and teach them to be good pros.