Loui Eriksson | #21 | LW/RW

[Sbriggs 1,277]

On 9/3/2019 at 7:35 PM, King Heffy said:

What about if we're down a goal in the third though?  Petey wants to be a 200 foot player.  If he's up for it, I'm all for teaching him, but picking our spots as to when he's utilized.

I have to agree with Alf, we don't need our superstar blocking shots on the PK

Edited September 13, 2019 by Sbriggs

[Mackcanuck 7,695]

 

[Jimmy McGill 39,840]

41 minutes ago, Mackcanuck said:

 

 

thanks i was wondering when waivers would begin. I wonder if Jim does this sooner than later... it does make Loui that little bit more tradable when he clears. 

 

[SilentSam 6,650]

Nothing wrong with a trip to Utica for this player..  there are others who can outperform him offensively and defensively.

All money aside,  Eriksson on this team is stopping the advancement of another players development, or player worthy of his position.

He or the Canucks should not feel any privilege in this situation.

Edited September 20, 2019 by SilentSam

[NUCKER67 9,028]

Luckily, the Canucks don't have to pay Virtanen, Hughes, Pettersson, Goldobin  etc., big dollars yet. Yes, Loui is overpaid, but he could still be a pretty good 4th Line and PK player. Forget how much he's paid, like we try to forget where Jake was drafted.

[PhillipBlunt 47,350]

1 hour ago, Mackcanuck said:

 

I love how the score is stuck to his helmet.

[IBatch 10,473]

On 8/9/2016 at 9:02 PM, Alflives said:

Maybe the plan is on the back end of Errikson's contract he's playing a shutdown- PK role?  Sure he will be over paid, but we should have younger guys in their bridge contracts balancing the cap out.  Boeser? 

Looks like your crystal ball worked out.   Went back and read what people had to say about LEs signing and for the most part people really liked it .... a few queried it like it wasn’t the best thing but even they didn’t say they hated it.   You were right about going to the PK - who would have thought it would be so soon though ha ha ....

[IBatch 10,473]

20 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Nothing wrong with a trip to Utica for this player..  there are others who can outperform him offensively and defensively.

All money aside,  Eriksson on this team is stopping the advancement of another players development, or player worthy of his position.

He or the Canucks should not feel any privilege in this situation.

Exactly who’s development is he stunting?  Both Goldobin and Leivo were gifted juicy assignments last season (PP time and top line roles)...Granlund is gone ... Schaller?  Nope.   Let’s see how things go this year, demote him if we actually have a player that’s ready to play in the NHL (Lind, JG, Madden aren’t ready) until then play him on the PK and the 3rd/ fourth line, against top competition 5 x 5 mostly with d-zone starts,  and be happy he can still score close to 30 doing that as Leivo, Goldobin, Motte haven’t shown they can produce the same doing the same assignments.   I don’t like his contract either, or that he plays a cerebral game and not a physical one.   As soon as we have someone better then yes demote him, even if it’s to Utica.   In the meantime hope he pulls out of his funk and possibly gets to a point where other teams would take him on with some retention.  Either scenario is fine IMO but one is better for the team then the other. 

 

 

[IBatch 10,473]

20 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

Luckily, the Canucks don't have to pay Virtanen, Hughes, Pettersson, Goldobin  etc., big dollars yet. Yes, Loui is overpaid, but he could still be a pretty good 4th Line and PK player. Forget how much he's paid, like we try to forget where Jake was drafted

Yep. It is what it is....LE might have scored 40-50 playing with EP and getting first line PP minutes - instead played 10-12 minutes a game 5 x 5 and the rest on the PK mostly on the fourth line and against a high level of quality of opposition.   He’s insulating the young guys and allowing them to have a chance to develop.   This wouldn’t even be a discussion if he was making 2-3 million.

[Jimmy McGill 39,840]

On 9/4/2019 at 11:55 AM, aGENT said:

Baby. Bath water.

 

They're not wrong.

 

They're not right either.

 

But sure lets blame Loui for everything. He's ruining young player development. He's running the team culture. Some people are certain he's a "cancer". Heck I heard he even makes the team bus wait 10 minutes every night while he picks out what shoes he's going to wear. 

[Alflives 33,529]

13 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

They're not right either.

 

But sure lets blame Loui for everything. He's ruining young player development. He's running the team culture. Some people are certain he's a "cancer". Heck I heard he even makes the team bus wait 10 minutes every night while he picks out what shoes he's going to wear. 

I heard Loui leaves Crispy Cream doughnuts in Jake’s locker!

[Jimmy McGill 39,840]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

I heard Loui leaves Crispy Cream doughnuts in Jake’s locker!

[SilentSam 6,650]

5 hours ago, IBatch said:

Exactly who’s development is he stunting?  Both Goldobin and Leivo were gifted juicy assignments last season (PP time and top line roles)...Granlund is gone ... Schaller?  Nope.   Let’s see how things go this year, demote him if we actually have a player that’s ready to play in the NHL (Lind, JG, Madden aren’t ready) until then play him on the PK and the 3rd/ fourth line, against top competition 5 x 5 mostly with d-zone starts,  and be happy he can still score close to 30 doing that as Leivo, Goldobin, Motte haven’t shown they can produce the same doing the same assignments.   I don’t like his contract either, or that he plays a cerebral game and not a physical one.   As soon as we have someone better then yes demote him, even if it’s to Utica.   In the meantime hope he pulls out of his funk and possibly gets to a point where other teams would take him on with some retention.  Either scenario is fine IMO but one is better for the team then the other. 

 

 

Personally I think 3 years in a “funk” is an understatement.

I think his expiry date has passed,. Anything else Is postponing his inevitable displacement and giving him “privileges”.

I don’t think that’s the culture that Benning is icing this season.

Sure, it was Benning decision to hire this player,. But it’s also his to move this player along to a level of hockey where he can contribute in.

I don’t believe Eriksson is an NHL player anymore.. perhaps a bigger ice surface would help,. But internationally, the rinks are all adopting the smaller North American size.

[Borvat 1,742]

9 hours ago, IBatch said:

Yep. It is what it is....LE might have scored 40-50 playing with EP and getting first line PP minutes - instead played 10-12 minutes a game 5 x 5 and the rest on the PK mostly on the fourth line and against a high level of quality of opposition.   He’s insulating the young guys and allowing them to have a chance to develop.   This wouldn’t even be a discussion if he was making 2-3 million.

I would tend to agree with you except he apparently didnt agree with the coach on his deployment. If that has changed and he is useful fine. If not it doesnt really matter especially if he isnt buying in. It is a problem. He doesnt offer anything of specail value that cant be replaced by someone who does buy in to their role. 

[IBatch 10,473]

11 hours ago, Borvat said:

I would tend to agree with you except he apparently didnt agree with the coach on his deployment. If that has changed and he is useful fine. If not it doesnt really matter especially if he isnt buying in. It is a problem. He doesnt offer anything of specail value that cant be replaced by someone who does buy in to their role. 

Absolutely - I will take LEs and TG comments about what he said in Sweden at face value - as in he’s happy to play where’ve TG wants him to play - and that he thinks he’s a great coach (said that what five times in his interview when he got back), I don’t think he had much clue as to how this story ballooned here either.   He answered an loaded question honestly - a little refreshing what’s he supposed to say? - he loves playing on the fourth line and the PK and then getting criticized for not producing?  Unless it really is a problem (in which case yes 100% he needs to go) - he should stay until another player takes that spot from him.   Based on play so far this pre-season his spot on the fourth line and PK is definitely safe. 

Edited September 22, 2019 by IBatch

[SilentSam 6,650]

No protocol or privilege for this player,

It’s either pasture or euthanasia,  someone call a Veterinarian.

Edited September 27, 2019 by SilentSam

[PhillipBlunt 47,350]

Ship this empty jersey out!

[SilentSam 6,650]

20 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Ship this empty jersey out!

It’s the waste of a good number PB.

[PhillipBlunt 47,350]

46 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

It’s the waste of a good number PB.

Raymond made it a great number. 

[SilentSam 6,650]

20 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Raymond made it a great number. 

Neely left it 3 sizes too big for anyone to wear properly.