ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, kloubek said: Well in retrospect, yes - it was an unfortunate result. But the *signing* itself made sense at the time. Maybe, but I recall my self and a few others like JR not overly thrilled about it either. Quote It isn't like Loui was a prospect and his potential was misjudged; he is a vet NHL player who has put up good numbers in the past so there was no reason to think this would happen. I'm really not sure why it HAS happened. A contract signing is based on future expectations. You use past history, market value and player evaluation to determine the risks. If the contract turns into a bad signing you don’t simply get pat on the back saying well, logic was there. A portfolio manager will do their due diligence to determine if they are bullish on an investment. If they invest 6 million and the stock crashes, stakeholder don’t care about how much effort was put into the decision. They care about the results. The point I’m making is, every single transaction in the history of the game has some reasoning/ logic behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 28 minutes ago, kloubek said: Well in retrospect, yes - it was an unfortunate result. But the *signing* itself made sense at the time. It isn't like Loui was a prospect and his potential was misjudged; he is a vet NHL player who has put up good numbers in the past so there was no reason to think this would happen. I'm really not sure why it HAS happened. I would say that the signing at the time wasn't as bad as it's now made out to be--even though most fans didn't expect 30 goals, a good number did with the twins and even those who didn't expected at least 20. It was the term and the clauses that really put this one over the edge. Even at the time, I think lowering it to four years would've been a more even deal. Obviously in retrospect, a lot more would have to be changed to make the deal even. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, -AJ- said: I would say that the signing at the time wasn't as bad as it's now made out to be--even though most fans didn't expect 30 goals, a good number did with the twins and even those who didn't expected at least 20. It was the term and the clauses that really put this one over the edge. Even at the time, I think lowering it to four years would've been a more even deal. Obviously in retrospect, a lot more would have to be changed to make the deal even. exactly the bidding for him got a bit stupid at the end - adding that 6th year was just stupid canucks should have pulled out rather then go over the top to get him but they were influenced by how well he and the sedins were playing together for sweden at the time they should have known and factored in the impact of the larger ice surface more Edited February 9, 2018 by coastal.view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 On 11/13/2017 at 8:52 PM, aGENT said: Retain 50%. It becomes a $3m cap hit but only an average of $1.25m actual salary the last 2 years. For a solid 3rd line, 2 way winger (what he's been for us so far), that's not a terrible price. That's in the future - just look at the Sedins at how quickly a player's game can fall off the cliff when they're over 30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) 51 minutes ago, kloubek said: Well in retrospect, yes - it was an unfortunate result. But the *signing* itself made sense at the time. It isn't like Loui was a prospect and his potential was misjudged; he is a vet NHL player who has put up good numbers in the past so there was no reason to think this would happen. I'm really not sure why it HAS happened. IMO: On 1/30/2018 at 7:05 PM, aGENT said: Largely the case IMO. He's a complimentary player who requires a play driver to have success. We presently lack those past Horvat and Boeser. So if we want Eriksson playing further down the lineup... On a good note, that should improve as guys like Pettersson and Gaudette arrive. Edited February 9, 2018 by aGENT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 19 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: That's in the future - just look at the Sedins at how quickly a player's game can fall off the cliff when they're over 30. Eriksson is 5 years younger than the twins FWIW. He'll 'only' be 34, turning 35 when his contract becomes movable. But if you're crustal ball shows something definitive in that time frame, by all means... That said, we may also end up with the option for a conditional buyout after the next (presumed) lockout. Either way, I don't see LE as a huge issue moving forward. Most teams have more than one 'bad' contract. He's ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 hour ago, coastal.view said: exactly adding that 6th year was just stupid canucks should have pulled out rather then go over the top to get him Perhaps, but sometimes that is what it takes to get a UFA and it really did seem like a good fit. At the time, ownership wanted us to win at all costs still and I think the signing reflected that. If we wanted to try to sign Tavares, you better believe we'd have to come up with the best deal with all the interest around the league for him. Then if he faltered inexplicably as well, we'd be in the same boat there too. As bad as his contract is, I still maintain there MUST be a way to get him going. His years as a scorer were no flukes, and I see no reason why he as a player cannot achieve the same levels of success. It isn't like he had a few concussions and is playing scared, or anything. Whatever it is, Green needs to find a way to reignite him because chances are we are stuck with him for a while. The only thing that I can see that would eliminate any chance of him returning to form (besides eventual age) is just not wanting to be here or to play the game as hard as he can. That's something that the coach has limited ability to change. I agree with aGENT; I don't see him as a huge issue right now. We're going to have lots of cap space for 2-3 years and we aren't going to be a playoff contender for the same amount of time. That, plus the fact he does contribute a bit and isn't typically a defensive liability and it's not as dire as some seem to think it is. At least, not for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 The more I look at his stats, the more it seems to me that Eriksson's year is being undersold. His points-per-game is only just a little behind Baertschi, with whom most have few issues. Still not great, but if he improves even more next year, things will look brighter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 hour ago, aGENT said: Eriksson is 5 years younger than the twins FWIW. He'll 'only' be 34, turning 35 when his contract becomes movable. But if you're crustal ball shows something definitive in that time frame, by all means... Sedins were elite players. They had a longer way to go down vs a player who at his peak was at best an above average player. But thanks for the parting shot comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spitfire_Spiky Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, -AJ- said: The more I look at his stats, the more it seems to me that Eriksson's year is being undersold. His points-per-game is only just a little behind Baertschi, with whom most have few issues. Still not great, but if he improves even more next year, things will look brighter. His PPG is on pace with a player making 1.85M/yr(Baertschi), how is that him being undersold. With a price tag of 6M a season he better be blowing players like Baer out of the water and he just isn't. Its not that he's a bad player and can't hack it in the NHL, he just didn't come as advertised and is not earning his 6M a year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 7 minutes ago, Spitfire_Spiky said: His PPG is on pace with a player making 1.85M/yr(Baertschi), how is that him being undersold. With a price tag of 6M a season he better be blowing players like Baer out of the water and he just isn't. Its not that he's a bad player and can't hack it in the NHL, he just didn't come as advertised and is not earning his 6M a year. I think it would be disingenuous to say that Baertsch is still a 1.85M dollar player. At his current production rate, I think most fans would have him at $4-$4.5M. Also, I never said he was worth $6M. Geez, it seems absolutely impossible to say anything about Eriksson without fans clinging to their anger about the $6M number. It's a bad deal, everyone acknowledges that. That aside, he's been better this year, which for some reason, no one wants to acknowledge through their blind hatred. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Just now, -AJ- said: I think it would be disingenuous to say that Baertsch is still at 1.85M dollar player. At his current production rate, I think most fans would have him at $4-$4.5M. Also, I never said he was worth $6M. Geez it seems absolutely impossible to say anything about Eriksson without fans clinging to their anger about the $6M number. It's a bad deal, everyone acknowledges that. That aside, he's been better this year, which for some reason, no one wants to acknowledge through their blind hatred. A lot of people who must be related to Francesco on this board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, -AJ- said: That aside, he's been better this year, which for some reason, no one wants to acknowledge through their blind hatred. Talk about a high bar (re: this season's performance vs last seasons' performance). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spitfire_Spiky Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, -AJ- said: I think it would be disingenuous to say that Baertsch is still a 1.85M dollar player. At his current production rate, I think most fans would have him at $4-$4.5M. Also, I never said he was worth $6M. Geez, it seems absolutely impossible to say anything about Eriksson without fans clinging to their anger about the $6M number. It's a bad deal, everyone acknowledges that. That aside, he's been better this year, which for some reason, no one wants to acknowledge through their blind hatred. Totally agree that Baer is in for a raise as he should be with how much he has improved and the numbers he's putting up. My comment is more about Eriksson and his value not Baer's. While Eriksson has improved on his numbers from last year he's still not producing or contributing to the team in a way that matches his contract, with all the perks included. Basically he signed a max term contract with all the protection he needed to guarantee his job so he can coast by on the Canucks and show up every 3-4 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 6 minutes ago, Spitfire_Spiky said: Totally agree that Baer is in for a raise as he should be with how much he has improved and the numbers he's putting up. My comment is more about Eriksson and his value not Baer's. While Eriksson has improved on his numbers from last year he's still not producing or contributing to the team in a way that matches his contract, with all the perks included. Basically he signed a max term contract with all the protection he needed to guarantee his job so he can coast by on the Canucks and show up every 3-4 games. Thank you for responding graciously, as I got a bit more riled up than usual. I agree that he's not playing up to his contract cost, but I like to look on the bright side of things and see that he's at least doing a bit better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 6 minutes ago, -AJ- said: Thank you for responding graciously, as I got a bit more riled up than usual. I agree that he's not playing up to his contract cost, but I like to look on the bright side of things and see that he's at least doing a bit better. Well I think realistically, even if things had gone to plan with the player - his contract was always going to stink at some point. You take those 'lumps then' because you got a number of good years out of him. That's the nature of long term deals to older players (see the Sedins. Burrows, etc.,). Frustrating thing is, we never got the good/solid years out of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Eriksson should retire and go back to Sweden and play.........like Retirement from the NHL[edit] On July 11, 2013, Kovalchuk chose to quit the NHL at the age of 30. Although Devils General Manager Lou Lamoriello knew that Kovalchuk had been considering retirement since before the 2012–13 shortened season, Kovalchuk's departure came as a surprise to the public. Upon leaving, Kovalchuk had $77 million and 12 years remaining on his contract. Kovalchuk claimed that he desired to return home to Russia along with his family, though it is speculated that money had quite an influence as well, due to the higher total salary Kovalchuk will receive in Russia via the far lower Russian tax rate compared to the U.S. With the crash of the Russian ruble in December 2014, however, that no longer remains the case, and Kovalchuk's tax-effected NHL salary would be greater than his KHL proceeds.[27][28] Kovalchuk tallied 417 goals and 816 points in 816 games in total in the NHL.[29] SKA Saint Petersburg[edit] On July 15, 2013, Kovalchuk signed a four-year contract with SKA Saint Petersburg of the KHL.[30] The contract, signed less than a week after Kovalchuk's retirement from the NHL, is alleged to be comparable to his former contract with the Devils.[31] Loui Are you reading this! Note............New Jersey has not had this put against their cap.............obviously! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 minute ago, janisahockeynut said: Eriksson should retire and go back to Sweden and play.........like Retirement from the NHL[edit] On July 11, 2013, Kovalchuk chose to quit the NHL at the age of 30. Although Devils General Manager Lou Lamoriello knew that Kovalchuk had been considering retirement since before the 2012–13 shortened season, Kovalchuk's departure came as a surprise to the public. Upon leaving, Kovalchuk had $77 million and 12 years remaining on his contract. Kovalchuk claimed that he desired to return home to Russia along with his family, though it is speculated that money had quite an influence as well, due to the higher total salary Kovalchuk will receive in Russia via the far lower Russian tax rate compared to the U.S. With the crash of the Russian ruble in December 2014, however, that no longer remains the case, and Kovalchuk's tax-effected NHL salary would be greater than his KHL proceeds.[27][28] Kovalchuk tallied 417 goals and 816 points in 816 games in total in the NHL.[29] SKA Saint Petersburg[edit] On July 15, 2013, Kovalchuk signed a four-year contract with SKA Saint Petersburg of the KHL.[30] The contract, signed less than a week after Kovalchuk's retirement from the NHL, is alleged to be comparable to his former contract with the Devils.[31] Loui Are you reading this! Note............New Jersey has not had this put against their cap.............obviously! Not a chance in hell does a Euro team, especially in Sweden, give 6 million to Loui. Yes, he needs to go, but I think Green should just sit him in the press box, and hope he chokes on popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 34 minutes ago, Alflives said: Not a chance in hell does a Euro team, especially in Sweden, give 6 million to Loui. Yes, he needs to go, but I think Green should just sit him in the press box, and hope he chokes on popcorn. Wasn't his contract front end loaded? I thought it was...........could also go to the KHL...........just saying! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said: Wasn't his contract front end loaded? I thought it was...........could also go to the KHL...........just saying! Only a bit. He's making $8M now and that drops to $4M for his last two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now