Loui Eriksson | #21 | LW/RW

[King Heffy]

5 minutes ago, nux_win said:

What, did he kick your dog or something?  Put a tack in your unicycle tire?  Eriksson is an underperforming very well paid pro hockey player.  Not much sympathy needed but you don't have to hate the guy for aging out of contention either.  We all slow down at various rates.   Though I suppose I was in a way suggesting him for the first line...

 

... in Utica.  That's not exactly singing his praises.  He clearly isn't performing well enough to be part of the Canucks.  We don't have to hate on someone to come to that realization.  I don't even really blame Benning all that much.  Eriksson was the best free agent available at the time and Benning was trying to improve the team.  He paid a little too much perhaps but not terribly out of line with UFAs.  It only really looks bad in hindsight.  It was a mistake.  It happens.  We just have to move on as soon as possible.  Go Canucks Go!

 

 

People wouldn't be so hard on him if he at least put in an honest effort and didn't complain about the coach when Green put him in the press box when he belonged.  LE has brought this on himself with his laziness and simply atrocious play, and it's our responsibility as fans to help make it clear to that useless piece of trash that his continued presence on the Canucks is unacceptable.  LE has been floating so badly here, and has displayed an attitude so poor that he should be contacting Lays about endorsement opportunities.

[Timråfan]

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I only get paid $925,000 and I play on the top line in Vancouver and am being compared to Gretzky. I have no sympathy for Loui whatsoever. 

This shows that you're not Petey. 

[Timråfan]

10 hours ago, Provost said:

Not even remotely.  There are limited roster spots and ice time.  No one wants it to be more merit based than players.

 

You know what stops players from signing with you?  Keeping a player on the roster ahead of you for six years when he has been outplayed by younger and better players for almost all of it.

 

No player or agent would believe anything other than he didn’t live up to his end of the contract.  We even let his agent try to find a landing spot for him and no teams had any interest.

 

When the coach is so important in bringing out the best in your players it is a very important issue how management treat players that don't fit the current system.

 

Players know about favouritism. 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

8 hours ago, nux_win said:

What, did he kick your dog or something?  Put a tack in your unicycle tire?  Eriksson is an underperforming very well paid pro hockey player.  Not much sympathy needed but you don't have to hate the guy for aging out of contention either.  We all slow down at various rates.   Though I suppose I was in a way suggesting him for the first line...

 

... in Utica.  That's not exactly singing his praises.  He clearly isn't performing well enough to be part of the Canucks.  We don't have to hate on someone to come to that realization.  I don't even really blame Benning all that much.  Eriksson was the best free agent available at the time and Benning was trying to improve the team.  He paid a little too much perhaps but not terribly out of line with UFAs.  It only really looks bad in hindsight.  It was a mistake.  It happens.  We just have to move on as soon as possible.  Go Canucks Go!

 

 

Yes he kicked my dog and stole my unicycle.  Loui is a Swedish fraud.  He is not welcome back even in his home in Sweden.  I already talked to his family...  

[VegasCanuck]

18 hours ago, Provost said:

They don’t have to give any “specific” instructions not to play Loui.  Just make it clear that it is a development league so his playing time will likely be really limited as the prospects the ice time... but both teams expect him to be at all the practices and continue to remain in playing shape in case he is ever needed.

 

There are plenty of ways to make it miserable for him.

I would have him show up for the first couple of days of physicals and basic workouts and would assign him to Utica in the first group. Wouldn't even give him a shot at playing exhibition games.

 

Focus on youth making the team and getting the playing time, make sure that Loui understands that he's not going to be competing in the NHL in Vancouver. If he still wants to compete in the NHL, he's going to have to find a way out of his current contract to do it as NO ONE will give him a shot at the current cap hit.

 

[VegasCanuck]

15 hours ago, nux_win said:

What, did he kick your dog or something?  Put a tack in your unicycle tire?  Eriksson is an underperforming very well paid pro hockey player.  Not much sympathy needed but you don't have to hate the guy for aging out of contention either.  We all slow down at various rates.   Though I suppose I was in a way suggesting him for the first line...

 

... in Utica.  That's not exactly singing his praises.  He clearly isn't performing well enough to be part of the Canucks.  We don't have to hate on someone to come to that realization.  I don't even really blame Benning all that much.  Eriksson was the best free agent available at the time and Benning was trying to improve the team.  He paid a little too much perhaps but not terribly out of line with UFAs.  It only really looks bad in hindsight.  It was a mistake.  It happens.  We just have to move on as soon as possible.  Go Canucks Go!

 

 

My only real complaint with the contract they signed Loui to, is the term. He was coming off a 30 goal season, 6 million was in line for what you would pay for that type of production at that time.

 

The structure being something where I think they thought in the final 2 years, they could probably find a team that would willing to take the cap hit because of the low amount of dollars still owed, but COVID really put a hole in that idea.

 

If Lout wants to compete in the NHL, his only option is to refuse to report to Utica, be suspended, contract terminated and then negotiate a new, lower deal with another team. Considering the guys who are still looking for contracts, I don't think that Loui could even get league minimum right now. When you can sign Leivo for 875k, that kind of sets a precedent for what his current league wide value is. 

 

He has said that he still wants to compete, if that is taken away from him with the idea that he will be spending the rest of his career in the minors, he might just take the retirement option.

 

[Googlie]

On 10/26/2020 at 5:54 PM, Elias Pettersson said:

I only get paid $925,000 and I play on the top line in Vancouver and am being compared to Gretzky. I have no sympathy for Loui whatsoever. 

(Playing along)

 

You ungrateful bastard.  Who took you in that first Christmas in Vancouver, welcomed you to his family, even flew in, at his own expense, your buddy JD from Utica, so that you could both enjoy a Swedish Christmas with friends away from home?

Who gave you that exquisite banked pass for your first ever NHL goal?

Who has been your bag-skate buddy, the only one to keep up with you on Green's vomit drills?

Who diagrammed that ricochet end boards pass for Boeser ro score that great goal in your first season (oh, wait, that was Henrik that one day at supper) .... but I supplied the napkin he drew it up on

Me, the Santa who came to your house that winter's eve in 2008.  That's who

 

 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Googlie

[Nucker 67]

Wouldn't that be something if immediately after Loui is sent to Utica, he retires and goes back to play in Sweden. And that's all it took.

[VegasCanuck]

2 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

Wouldn't that be something if immediately after Loui is sent to Utica, he retires and goes back to play in Sweden. And that's all it took.

I can live with this!!!

 

At the end of the day, we need to focus on youth and he's a distraction from that. I don't believe that he could even draw league minimum in this economy.

 

Was interesting to notice that TheHockeyWriters.com don't list him on the projected 2020/21 lineup.

 

[EternalCanuckFan]

51 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

I can live with this!!!

 

At the end of the day, we need to focus on youth and he's a distraction from that. I don't believe that he could even draw league minimum in this economy.

 

Was interesting to notice that TheHockeyWriters.com don't list him on the projected 2020/21 lineup.

 

I suspect everyone assumes that the Canucks will continue to bury Eriksson's contract in the minors for $1.075M in savings until something changes (i.e. retirement, trade, etc.).

 

Eriksson was a solid player for many years and has been a good defensive forward for the Canucks but he has clearly failed to play at the level he was brought in to play at and he's just no longer a significant contributor.  I think Eriksson can still contribute - Bo continued to speak well of him during the playoffs - but his days of being able to not only use his smarts to play good D but to also get on the scoresheet seem long gone barring an unlikely resurgence.  Eriksson seems well liked on the team so I don't think he's a bad "fit" in that sense, but the Canucks really need more of an impact on the scoresheet for that $.

 

We can all speculate about what Eriksson might do.  If Eriksson has really lost the fire but refuses to report when demoted, then my recollection is that's grounds for termination of the contract for breach of contract.  I can't recall if there are any cap issues if the contract gets terminated however.  Not saying that's likely since Eriksson would presumably be walking away from a large sum of money by not reporting and having his contract terminated, but there are various scenarios that we could see unfold.  Things will remain interesting in Canuck land.

Edited October 28, 2020 by EternalCanuckFan

[JM_]

52 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

I suspect everyone assumes that the Canucks will continue to bury Eriksson's contract in the minors for $1.075M in savings until something changes (i.e. retirement, trade, etc.).

 

Eriksson was a solid player for many years and has been a good defensive forward for the Canucks but he has clearly failed to play at the level he was brought in to play at and he's just no longer a significant contributor.  I think Eriksson can still contribute - Bo continued to speak well of him during the playoffs - but his days of being able to not only use his smarts to play good D but to also get on the scoresheet seem long gone barring an unlikely resurgence.  Eriksson seems well liked on the team so I don't think he's a bad "fit" in that sense, but the Canucks really need more of an impact on the scoresheet for that $.

 

We can all speculate about what Eriksson might do.  If Eriksson has really lost the fire but refuses to report when demoted, then my recollection is that's grounds for termination of the contract for breach of contract.  I can't recall if there are any cap issues if the contract gets terminated however.  Not saying that's likely since Eriksson would presumably be walking away from a large sum of money by not reporting and having his contract terminated, but there are various scenarios that we could see unfold.  Things will remain interesting in Canuck land.

the skills Loui has won't go away if he's put in the AHL and he's needed for injury call ups, which is the right spot for him now from a player development and cap pov. 

 

Whether he goes or not is up to him. If he doesn't go when assigned yes that is grounds to terminate since he doesn't have a NMC. No cap issues if he does that, he's just gone, there's no recapture or anything like that if he refuses to show up for work.

 

The one thing that might keep him employed is if players are allowed to refuse to play due to covid again, not sure thats been negotiated yet or not between the NHL and the PA. 

 

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

The one thing that might keep him employed is if players are allowed to refuse to play due to covid again, not sure thats been negotiated yet or not between the NHL and the PA. 

 

That would be interesting... Not sure how that works on getting paid... If you don't show up, that's your call but getting paid...? Does the team still need to pay them?

 

Can't imagine those players caps would count either.

[JM_]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

That would be interesting... Not sure how that works on getting paid... If you don't show up, that's your call but getting paid...? Does the team still need to pay them?

 

Can't imagine those players caps would count either.

yeah it was easy for the playoffs, not sure what it would mean for the regular season and if that meant any effect on his AAV cap hit? whatever screws us the most is what Bettman picks I'm sure. 

[Fanuck]

24 minutes ago, aGENT said:

That would be interesting... Not sure how that works on getting paid... If you don't show up, that's your call but getting paid...? Does the team still need to pay them?

 

Can't imagine those players caps would count either.

For comparison, this is from MLB this season:

Quote

 

In its COVID-19 return-to-play safety plan, the league states that any players who are considered high-risk - those with pre-existing conditions, compromised immune systems, etc. - can decide not to play in the shortened season and still receive their full salary and service time.

The MLB's protocol also included an opt-out option for players who have high-risk family members. The decision on whether or not those players should receive their full salaries and service time is left up to the teams.

 

It doesn't  mention salary cap (to my knowledge MLB doesn't have a cap), but that is an interesting question for the NHL - if a player 'opts-out' of the season does their salary therefore come off the books so to speak for the entirety of the 'opt-out'? 

[JM_]

40 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

For comparison, this is from MLB this season:

It doesn't  mention salary cap (to my knowledge MLB doesn't have a cap), but that is an interesting question for the NHL - if a player 'opts-out' of the season does their salary therefore come off the books so to speak for the entirety of the 'opt-out'? 

much easier decision when you don't have a salary cap. I think its fair if you have a personal or family related risk to be able to opt out (Hamonic, e..g.). But if not... dunno, not sure you should still be paid. Out the in rest of the real world we don't have that option to get paid for staying home to avoid covid. 

[kloubek]

Is there any job where you can simply decide the risk is too much and fail to report to work, yet still get paid?  Not that I can think of. The NHL will be responsible for putting all realistic measures in place, and the players should probably be allowed to sit out the season if they deem the personal risk too great, but imo they should NOT get paid, and the cap should be available to sign another player. 

 

Just my 2 cents.

[Baggins]

4 hours ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

I suspect everyone assumes that the Canucks will continue to bury Eriksson's contract in the minors for $1.075M in savings until something changes (i.e. retirement, trade, etc.).

 

Eriksson was a solid player for many years and has been a good defensive forward for the Canucks but he has clearly failed to play at the level he was brought in to play at and he's just no longer a significant contributor.  I think Eriksson can still contribute - Bo continued to speak well of him during the playoffs - but his days of being able to not only use his smarts to play good D but to also get on the scoresheet seem long gone barring an unlikely resurgence.  Eriksson seems well liked on the team so I don't think he's a bad "fit" in that sense, but the Canucks really need more of an impact on the scoresheet for that $.

 

We can all speculate about what Eriksson might do.  If Eriksson has really lost the fire but refuses to report when demoted, then my recollection is that's grounds for termination of the contract for breach of contract.  I can't recall if there are any cap issues if the contract gets terminated however.  Not saying that's likely since Eriksson would presumably be walking away from a large sum of money by not reporting and having his contract terminated, but there are various scenarios that we could see unfold.  Things will remain interesting in Canuck land.

If a player refuses to report to the AHL he is typically suspended without pay first although it would be a breach of contract that justifies termination. A suspended player remains the property of the team, meaning he can't sign with another NHL club. As far as I know a player suspended under this circumstance doesn't count towards the cap. Basically if he's going to refuse to report he may as well just retire from the NHL and return to Sweden to play, or ask to have the contract terminated if he hopes to sign with another team.

[Provost]

16 hours ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

 Bo continued to speak well of him during the playoffs - but his days of being able to not only use his smarts to play good D but to also get on the scoresheet seem long gone barring an unlikely resurgence.  Eriksson seems well liked on the team so I don't think he's a bad "fit" in that sense, b

I haven’t heard any player volunteer his name when talking about veterans who have helped them.
 

When asked directly, players aren’t going to publicly sewer their teammates.  That is just PR101 generic media answers.

 

If you really want to get inside what they are thinking, you have to just listen to who they prop up unsolicited.  I have heard the younger players pump the tires of guys like Tanev, Sutter, Miller, and Schaller in terms of guys  who have helped them and shown them how to be pro’s etc.

 

I have never once heard one of them talk about Eriksson unprompted by a direct question.  They know who the most overpaid guy in the room is.  They know who is costing them chances to win.  This year especially, they will know the good players and friends they lost off the roster because of carrying that anchor contract.
 

I can’t even imagine walking into that dressing room as Eriksson this year, hopefully he doesn’t.

[RU SERIOUS]

On 10/26/2020 at 6:16 PM, King Heffy said:

People wouldn't be so hard on him if he at least put in an honest effort and didn't complain about the coach when Green put him in the press box when he belonged.  LE has brought this on himself with his laziness and simply atrocious play, and it's our responsibility as fans to help make it clear to that useless piece of trash that his continued presence on the Canucks is unacceptable.  LE has been floating so badly here, and has displayed an attitude so poor that he should be contacting Lays about endorsement opportunities.

POST OF THE MONTH !

 

BTW, I admire your restraint on not painting an uglier picture RE: L.E. than what it truly is because if it was me I'd put him on barge and push him off to sea!

[SilentSam]