D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 The wheels are coming off of the Vancouver Canucks quite quickly. The Sedins are showing their age, to the point where even the expectations of them being quality 2nd liners for 2-3 more years seem unrealistic. Their prized free agent signing, Loui Eriksson, is not only having difficulties fitting in with his new team, but you gotta think he's having serious doubts about playing out the next 6 years with this mess. One bright spot has been Ryan Miller, who is showing he's still a solid starter - but probably needs his back-up to play more games than most #1's in this league. In Dallas, it's another story. They are playing well, and Seguin/Benn/Klingberg seem to be heating up. But they have two major problems: goaltending (obviously), and injuries to their top-6 wingers. Hemsky and Janmark are out for the season. Sharp is out with post-concussion symptoms, and their doesn't seem to be an immediate timeline for his return. And their winger depth was already in question with Nichuskin heading back to Russia (although they filled the hole by signing Hudler). So, everything seems to be aligning for something like this: To Dallas - Loui Eriksson + Ryan Miller (with necessary salary retained) To Vancouver - Kari Lehtonen or Antti Niemi (doesn't matter) + Julius Honka + 2017 DAL 1st This addresses Dallas's need to "win now" with solid goaltending and an additional offensive weapon. Eriksson can step into the I.R. spot created by Hemsky, so most of his cap hit will be covered. Both Sharp and Hemsky's contracts are up at the end of the year, and they gain additional space next year by shedding one of their underperforming goaltenders. For Vancouver, Honka is the key. He is a fantastic young RH offensive defenseman, who can actually run a PP. He has 9 points in 9 AHL games this year. However, his defensive game needs work, and Dallas already has the best PP QB D-men in the league in Klingberg. But the switch of goaltenders actually helps them in a way too. For one, Lehtonen/Niemi is less likely to get the team points, thereby improving their draft position. And they need another goaltender for next year too, since Demko is struggling to adapt to the pro game, and looks like he'll need to be groomed in Utica for a couple of years. Not having Eriksson also helps the team secure lottery picks for the next 2 years. The cap for next year is virtually unaffected, since Lehtonen's salary is only $100K less than Eriksson - if it's Niemi, it is $1.5 mil less. On top of all of this, this helps Vancouver avoid a problem 3-4 years from now, when the rebuild should be starting to bear fruit, but a likely declining Eriksson is still weighing down the cap with his $6 mil cap hit. This also makes a trade of Chris Tanev more palatable for more picks/prospects, as the team can go forward with Gudbranson-Honka-Stetcher on the right side. Lastly, all 3 of the veteran players in this deal have reasons to waive their clauses. Eriksson gets to jump off this sinking ship and head back to the city where he was drafted and spent most of his career. Not only that, but he'll have a real opportunity to play on the top line with Seguin/Benn. Miller will get the chance to play for a Stanley Cup, and prove he is worth a decent contract going forward. And even Lehtonen/Niemi have a reason - in Dallas, stuck behind Miller, they aren't going to get many games. And with only one year left on their deals, they probably want to play as many games as they can to prove they are still relevant in this league, at least as a 1B/back-up. And despite Vancouver being a basement team, they actually play a very good defensive game, which gives their goaltenders every opportunity to put up good stats (notable exception: wins). I don't often make proposals like this, but this one just seems to be a perfect fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 Sorry, posted in wrong forum. Hopefully some moderator with a good-looking kid will move it for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drsofthands Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 loui eriksson has 0 trade value, if dallas wanted him at 6x6, they would have gotten him for free at free agency. Espescially now that he has 0 goals in the first 11, hes worth negative Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Makes sense on a lot of fronts. The biggest negative is trading a recently signed free agent so quickly after him signing long term. However, any negativity that could come from such a move may be negated, considering Eriksson played a good portion of his career in Dallas, and had a considerable amount of success there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 I actually like this trade, good work D. However, I do believe Loui has a limited NMC in his contract. Too bad because Dallas could use an elite goalie like Miller. I would take Honka and a 1st in heartbeat if this worked out for us. Unfortunately, we are the Nucks, and we do not make deals which benefit our team for a cup. Instead we are stuck in hockey purgatory watching the Twins pass it back and forth until time runs out. They were never the reason why we made the Cup finals, it was all a healthy Kesler and great coaching coupled with an above average D corps. The twins combined do not equal one Bure even at their best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Dallas would be wanting Markstrom. They might take Miller, but think they pass on Eriksson (due to long term on contract). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowtieCanuck Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 I lol'd.....literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 28 minutes ago, Monty said: Makes sense on a lot of fronts. The biggest negative is trading a recently signed free agent so quickly after him signing long term. However, any negativity that could come from such a move may be negated, considering Eriksson played a good portion of his career in Dallas, and had a considerable amount of success there. If Eriksson says he wants to go, and makes public comments that he was happy with the move, then I don't think it would have a negative impact. If I were a player, and saw that ownership found a perfect fit for him that he was happy with, I wouldn't see that as a detriment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 36 minutes ago, drsofthands said: loui eriksson has 0 trade value, if dallas wanted him at 6x6, they would have gotten him for free at free agency. Espescially now that he has 0 goals in the first 11, hes worth negative Dallas did not have the room for Eriksson in free agency, because of large contracts to Sharp and Hemsky. They simply didn't have the money to offer, whether they wanted him or not. But now Hemsky is done for the year (giving them LTIR space to absorb most of Eriksson's contract this season), and both guys are gone at the end of the season (giving them cap space in the future). And they'll have extra money next year with one of their expensive goalies gone. Long-term, they probably planned to have Nichuskin in a top-6 winger role. That doesn't look likely now either. Eriksson's value is low now, but it's far from negative. He scored 30 goals last year, and has been one of the most consistent scorers of the last 8 years. He's on a new team, which is in the biggest mess of the NHL, and on pace to obliterate the record for being shutout most times in a season. I'm certain most GM's with a team that wants to win now would gladly make space for Eriksson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 19 minutes ago, BowtieCanuck said: I lol'd.....literally. Are your other 255 posts as helpful and informative as this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny in Vancouver Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 I'd ask Dallas to include the rights to Nichuskin as I'm curious to see how all the "anti-Nichuskin" posters in the "Bo Horvat" thread would react. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 57 minutes ago, higgyfan said: Dallas would be wanting Markstrom. They might take Miller, but think they pass on Eriksson (due to long term on contract). I think Dallas would take anyone better than what they have, if they could get rid of one of them. Taking one of their goalies is one of the most valuable pieces of this deal to them. Add in Miller and Eriksson, which fit their current needs exactly, and I could see Nill being very interested. Dallas is in "win now" mode. If they fix the goaltending and back-fill for the injuries up front, they are a definite cup contender this year. And Eriksson's deal is good value for the first few years, while he should still be very effective, and is right in their wheelhouse to compete. The last few years will be questionable, but they have lots of time to figure that out. And if they win a cup in the meantime, it will definitely have been worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 10 minutes ago, D-Money said: I think Dallas would take anyone better than what they have, if they could get rid of one of them. Taking one of their goalies is one of the most valuable pieces of this deal to them. Add in Miller and Eriksson, which fit their current needs exactly, and I could see Nill being very interested. Dallas is in "win now" mode. If they fix the goaltending and back-fill for the injuries up front, they are a definite cup contender this year. And Eriksson's deal is good value for the first few years, while he should still be very effective, and is right in their wheelhouse to compete. The last few years will be questionable, but they have lots of time to figure that out. And if they win a cup in the meantime, it will definitely have been worth it. Dallas only has 2m in cap space. The Miller/Lehtonen exchange is a wash, bit that still leaves them 2m for Eriksson. Where do they find the extra 4m? I know they have a boat load of players on IR (don't know the details). They definately have to dump a contract to fit LE in. And if they do, they will have to protect NMC Eriksson at the expansion draft. Will they have to leave one of their better players unprotected? A lot to consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 14 minutes ago, higgyfan said: Dallas only has 2m in cap space. The Miller/Lehtonen exchange is a wash, bit that still leaves them 2m for Eriksson. Where do they find the extra 4m? I know they have a boat load of players on IR (don't know the details). They definately have to dump a contract to fit LE in. And if they do, they will have to protect NMC Eriksson at the expansion draft. Will they have to leave one of their better players unprotected? A lot to consider. Hemsky is done for the season, so there is $4 million relief available right there. That's the reason Dallas suddenly has room for him. Add in the season-ending injury to Janmark, Nichuskin walking, and questions over Sharp's post-concussion recovery, and suddenly Dallas not only has room for Eriksson, but desperately needs a player just like him. And Vancouver can retain a bit on Miller, if necessary, to make the cap work. As for players to protect, they actually don't have a ton of guys that need protecting. Six guys are impending UFAs, most of which will not be re-signed. The guys with some value that need protecting are: Benn, Seguin, Spezza, Eakin, Janmark, Roussel, Faksa, Ritchie (if he plays 30 more games). Having to expose Roussel (2018 UFA) and Faksa to facilitate protecting Eriksson isn't that big of a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickels Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 hour ago, BowtieCanuck said: I lol'd.....literally. Love the posters who bring such deep insight and intelligence to these board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickels Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Think this trade would have great merit...but honestly believe getting Honka or the 1st would be a win. No way get both Taking Eriksson contract IMO is doing us a favor(although helping them in the short term). Paying him 6m for 6 more years is no bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 minute ago, D-Money said: Hemsky is done for the season, so there is $4 million relief available right there. That's the reason Dallas suddenly has room for him. And Vancouver can retain a bit on Miller, if necessary to make the whole deal work. As for players to protect, they actually don't have a ton of guys that need protecting. Six guys are impending UFAs, most of which will not be re-signed. The guys with some value that may need protecting are: Benn, Seguin, Spezza, Eakin, Janmark, Roussel, Faksa, Ritchie (if he plays 30 more games). Having to expose Roussel (2018 UFA) and Faksa to facilitate protecting Eriksson isn't that big of a deal. You appear to have done your homework, which is great, considering most of the other proposals around here. Just one question: Wouldn't Hemsky still be under contract? Can they add LE in his place? If so, I'd say you've made a good proposal (although I'm not sure JB would want to let go of LE so soon into the season). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocksterh8 Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 If you think any GM is going to take Eriksson and his contract, you're all nuts. No one in their right mind is going to pay that for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 31 minutes ago, Rocksterh8 said: If you think any GM is going to take Eriksson and his contract, you're all nuts. No one in their right mind is going to pay that for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 52 minutes ago, Rocksterh8 said: If you think any GM is going to take Eriksson and his contract, you're all nuts. No one in their right mind is going to pay that for him. $6 million is market value for a player of his calibre. Would have preferred 4-5 years, but then he would have probably been $6.5-7 mil per. The extra year or two lessens his value, as does his poor start. But if you think 11 games in on a new team in disarray is going to obliterate the value of Loui Eriksson, then you're the one who is nuts. Not only that, but exactly how poor has Loui's start been? He has assisted on 1/4 of the team's goals. On the Rangers that same rate puts him at a PPG. Is it his fault the team cannot score more, beyond the few he should have had by now if it weren't for dumb luck? I honestly think if Dallas had the room, they would have made a pitch for Eriksson in free agency. He was a fantastic player for them for years, that they didn't want to trade in the first place, but they got a steal of a deal they simply couldn't say 'no' to. But the Hemsky/Sharp contracts were 1 year too long for when he ended up going UFA. And expectations were still there for Nichuskin. So when he hit the market, it didn't quite fit. But circumstances have changed - a lot - since July 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.