Louie Eriksson and Jake Virtanen and Jim Benning

[erkayloomeh]

19 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

You completely missed the point.  its not that those other players wouldve or could have signed.  Its that no matter whom was signed there would have been pitch forks screaming about how bad of a deal it is.  All those same UFAs that year have not lived up to their contract not even close.

So the message is, as far as I'm concerned, is no matter which of those he would have signed he still would have made a mistake. It's not as though he had to get one so no matter what he was forced to sign one. Signing aging vets(especially on a team you know you will be rebuilding) for big bucks and long term is most often a bad overall move.  If that contract was done with the belief that he was going to light it up with the sedins then you would have to believe the sedins would be around for six more years right? 

I remember whincing when I heard about that signing.  There was no question as far as I was concerned that would end up bad.  

What I didn't know was he was going to be bad (in relation to his pay) right off the bat.

The thing is I believe LE is a lazy player. Of coarse players decline but he declined as soon as he started here. Also have you noticed he has another gear when we play Boston?

I will be glad when he is gone. I'm a JB fan but that was a bad contract from the day it was signed . 

As far as Jake is concerned we will just need to continue to wait and see if he improves or not 

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by erkayloomeh

[CaptainLinden16]

Just now, Hairy Kneel said:

Backes was hitting GREAT last game and they won.

Yeah all too expensive , but 21 is useless for us going forward. Time to get rid of him or bury him in the minors. He's not a bottom 6 player. 

I am sure he was hitting great.  He is slow, old, and massively overpaid for what he brings.  You would not be happy if he signed here for the deal that he is on.

 

Its not that he is better or worse than Louie.  That is missing it.  Jim made in hindsight a bad choice from a pool of bad options with no alternative option as the fanbase would've been furious had he just said pass to the entire free agent class.

 

And no Backes wasn't going to sign in Vancouver for 3 years at 3 million.  They all got the money they deserved at that point in time.  In hindsight they all laughed their way to the bank.

[Hairy Kneel]

Louie can laugh his way to Utica.

[CaptainLinden16]

Just now, erkayloomeh said:

So the message is, as far as I'm concerned, is no matter which of those he would have signed he still would have made a mistake. It's not as though he had to get one so no matter what he was forced to sign one. Signing aging vets(especially on a team you know you will be rebuilding) for big bucks and long term is most often a bad overall move.  If that contract was done with the belief that he was going to light it up with the sedins then you would have to believe the sedins would be around for six more years right? 

I remember whincing when I heard about that signing.  There was no question as far as I was concerned that would end up bad.  

What I didn't know was he was going to be bad (in relation to his pay) right off the bat.

The thing is I believe LE is a lazy player. Of coarse players decline but he declined as soon as he started here. Also have you noticed he has another gear when we play Boston?

I will be glad when he is gone. I'm a JB fan but that was a bad contract from the day it was signed . 

 

You honestly think that a team with a lot of cap space in a hockey market Canadian city like Vancouver would have been like hey Jim you had 7 forward options in free agency and you just said pass.  OK thats fine Jim...keep on keeping on....Not a chance.  He would have been absolutely roasted.

 

This isn't a video game.  This is a professional sport franchise with humans playing for the team.  You cant just tell the entire team hey guys we are going to be 20 mil under the cap for the next 5 years because we are going to accumulate draft picks and "give young guys a look see."  I am sure the squad would be like hey that sounds great.  The average NHL career is something like 5 years.  I will dedicate the next 5 years of my life being bottom 5 in the standings and just to make sure we TANK for the top picks.

 

Are you for real?  

 

I would never ever want a player that would be ok with that kind of situation.  That player is not a winner and will never be one.  You can't build a winner by establishing a culture of loosing.  You just wake up in 2022 on a beautiful July 1st and say hey time to flip the switch.  We are going to be a winner now.  Everyone lets play to win now!

Edited April 15, 2019 by CaptainLinden16

[CaptainLinden16]

Just now, Hairy Kneel said:

Louie can laugh his way to Utica.

You are taking the discussion in your own direction of just bashing Louie as a player.  That's fine in its own right as you are entitled to say whatever you want.  It seem like this is a personal issue for you.  Louie seems like a nice person, but you never know.

[Hairy Kneel]

3 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

You are taking the discussion in your own direction of just bashing Louie as a player.  That's fine in its own right as you are entitled to say whatever you want.  It seem like this is a personal issue for you.  Louie seems like a nice person, but you never know.

Being a nice person is besides the point, the nature of the sport demand a high compete level and Lou doesn't really have that, but it seems you like him on our roster. I don't.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Hairy Kneel

[CaptainLinden16]

Just now, Hairy Kneel said:

Being a nice person is besides the point, the nature of the sport demand a high compete level and Lou doesn't really have that, but it seems you like him on our roster. I don't.

That wasn't the point of my post.  I started this discussion because a lot of people fail to see that alternative options weren't and aren't very attractive.  Eriksson versus Backes is inconsequential in my mind.  They are both at this point contract anchors for their teams.  They both would require a draft pick or prospect added in order for them to be removed off their respective rosters.  Backes can hardly skate at this point.  He will be done very very shortly here.  

 

I think arguing the merits of Louie's ice time irrespective of contract is a separate conversation altogether.  In my mind at 1-3 million he is fine.  He is a great fore checker, very solid in his own end and he can still skate and pass well.  He cant shoot the puck to save his life and he never takes the body.  He isn't soft as he is digging for pucks in the boards on every shift and comes out with the puck almost every time.  Horvat is a shooting center who plays best off the rush, so he is a much better fit for Louie.  Green also seems to think he is good defensively as he has been on the shutdown line for much of his 3 years here.  The Sedin's weren't a good fit for Louie because Louie cant shoot well at all.  The best 3rd Sedin was always a shooter Vrbata, Carter, Samuelson, Hansen, even Granlund has a very nice shot.  Burrows wasn't a great shooter, but he was certainly underrated in that aspect and underrated overall.  He was loved for his style of play, but I think a lot of people really misunderstood how good he was overall as a player.  

 

Again none of this matters.  He is on an Albatross contract, but so are all the other free agent signings that were alternative options at that time.  Assuming that they would even come to Vancouver.

Edited April 15, 2019 by CaptainLinden16

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

But Loui is so great defensively who cares about the rest of his game....

 

The never ending argument on CDC for the ones who defend this guy and turn a blind eye to the rest of his game to help their pointless arguments.

[CaptainLinden16]

Just now, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

But Loui is so great defensively who cares about the rest of his game....

 

The never ending argument on CDC for the ones who defend this guy and turn a blind eye to the rest of his game to help their pointless arguments.

No Chuck that's not what this conversation is about.  He is on a bad contract but so are all the other possible alternatives Chuck.  So you can complain about Louie Chuck but you would also be complaining about Ladd and Lucic and Okposo and Nielsen and Backes.  And guess what Chuck?  You would also be complaining about not having signed anyone.  

 

Aren't you happy that you at least get to complain about Louie Chuck?  I mean maybe you actually liked Lucic before his contract and now you wouldn't be able to like a player that you liked before.  That would make you sad wouldn't it Chuck?  

Edited April 15, 2019 by CaptainLinden16

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

6 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

No Chuck that's not what this conversation is about.  He is on a bad contract but so are all the other possible alternatives Chuck.  So you can complain about Louie Chuck but you would also be complaining about Ladd and Lucic and Okposo and Nielsen and Backes.  And guess what Chuck?  You would also be complaining about not having signed anyone.  

 

Aren't you happy that you at least get to complain about Louie Chuck?  I mean maybe you actually liked Lucic before his contract and now you wouldn't be able to like a player that you liked before.  That would make you sad wouldn't it Chuck?  

My post wasn't a direct message to you only, but just to the general public here and what has been the argument over the years in defending him to make it like it was a good signing when clearly 2 years ago you could see his decline but majority of people couldn't see it or accept it, and tried to counter it by saying his Defense is so good, just calling them out that's all. Unless you're one of them who defend him for his Defensive play and turn a blind eye to the rest of his game and act like he's a good fit here still....

 

I get the point you're trying to make on how they're declining, but I still at the time would of taken someone who can play more physical over the other one who doesn't have that in their game. At least if they're not scoring they're hitting and being physical and they're doing something.

[CaptainLinden16]

Just now, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

My post wasn't a direct message to you only, but just to the general public here and what has been the argument over the years in defending him to make it like it was a good signing when clearly 2 years ago you could see his decline but majority of people couldn't see it or accept it, and tried to counter it by saying his Defense is so good, just calling them out that's all. Unless you're one of them who defend him for his Defensive play and turn a blind eye to the rest of his game and act like he's a good fit here still....

 

I get the point you're trying to make on how they're declining, but I still at the time would of taken someone who can play more physical over the other one who doesn't have that in their game. At least if they're not scoring they're hitting and being physical and they're doing something.

I get what you are saying about physicality.  That is a point of preference.  Again, Gudbranson was one of the least liked players on this team.  He is as physical as it comes when he wants to be.  I know some people will disagree or agree about his performance defensively and overall.  From an eye test standpoint, he treated the puck like a hand grande and looked like he wanted to disappear in games.  Defensively he ran around a lot and got pinned because he couldn't get the puck out.  

 

Louie is very good at getting the puck out.  Both in his own end and on the fore check.  But he never lays the body.  Because he doesn't lay the body and is always trying to block a passing lane by being in front of his man it looks like he isn't skating that hard.  Its an optics thing.  He is trying and working hard.  He is effective but he doesn't hit and doesn't shoot and he isn't worth anything close to 6 million dollars per year.

 

He plays a bottom 6 role which to a lot of fans means you have to take the body.  I get that.  He doesn't do that.  He won't do that.  These are the same guys who like Gaunce who is the softest big bodied defensive forward I have ever seen.  I mean he makes more hits, but my 3 year old daughter wouldn't feel them.

 

To me its not really a big deal either way.  If you prefer a physical bottom 6 then Louie isn't a fit for that team.  I guarantee you Louie would find an NHL job (1-3 million) in a 3rd line shutdown role on a team in the NHL.  Some teams already have the physicality and don't need another player like that.  Other teams see the game changing to a speed game and unlike Lucic, Backes and Ladd; Louie can still skate quite well.

 

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by CaptainLinden16

[coastal.view]

good post

and hindsight is 20/20

 

but the real issue is that your post is too moderate

for the tenor of this site and most internet chat sites

people gravitate to more extreme - or startling views

those are notorious

throw in some tribalism or over the top fanaticism

and many will appreciate such an approach a lot more

 

everyone now seems to be an almost expert online

jb's experience means nothing as we all know equal or more

respect for experience and expertise is evaporating

and many demand instant solutions.. no process or patience

the orange one down south knows all and better then any expert

so unless posting is in that vein

it is too quiet and is overlooked and under appreciated

 

i think jb has done a good job

we have a deep prospect grouping

team is improving

ooldes of cap space

 

people want to suggest he is running this team to nearly like the oilers were run

this is so far from reality as to be laughable

this is nothing like the oiler rebuild

jb added veteran assets and was heavily criticized for doing so

yet his approach appears to be astute

he has a solid plan that will take some time to be fully realized

team is in good hands presently

[Tomatoes11]

5 hours ago, ohmy said:

Yeah your right we suck! Definetly don't have one of the most exciting up and coming teams nor do we have a top 5 farm system at the moment despite not picking in the top 3 of the draft. Should have stayed with Dave Nonis, he was a keeper. Time to fire Benning and blow up the team again. Trade Petey, Boes, Bo, and Quinn before we ruin there value. Sad times for Canuck fans. 

Anyone can build the farm sucking for that many years. In reality, we should be much much better off right now if he was even half way competent.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Tomatoes11

[Monteeun]

2 minutes ago, Tomatoes11 said:

Anyone can build the farm ducking for that many years. In reality, we should me much much better off right now if he was even half way competent.

That's your reality...and only yours

[IBatch]

4 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

If LE was as physical as most of those compareables, you’d probably have more discussion. 

 

Geenious Jim, because he somehow thought Gagme and Delzaster were going to fix the PP, etc and for his age-gap replacathon Plan. 

Remember this genius picked EP, and if we got a guy that could make a difference that wouldn’t have happened as we’d be picking a lot later.  Genius by abstraction.  Everything worked out ok.

[Noble 6]

1 hour ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

You honestly think that a team with a lot of cap space in a hockey market Canadian city like Vancouver would have been like hey Jim you had 7 forward options in free agency and you just said pass.  OK thats fine Jim...keep on keeping on....Not a chance.  He would have been absolutely roasted.

 

This isn't a video game.  This is a professional sport franchise with humans playing for the team.  You cant just tell the entire team hey guys we are going to be 20 mil under the cap for the next 5 years because we are going to accumulate draft picks and "give young guys a look see."  I am sure the squad would be like hey that sounds great.  The average NHL career is something like 5 years.  I will dedicate the next 5 years of my life being bottom 5 in the standings and just to make sure we TANK for the top picks.

 

Are you for real?  

 

I would never ever want a player that would be ok with that kind of situation.  That player is not a winner and will never be one.  You can't build a winner by establishing a culture of loosing.  You just wake up in 2022 on a beautiful July 1st and say hey time to flip the switch.  We are going to be a winner now.  Everyone lets play to win now!

 

I didn't want him to sign any big contracts that summer. Have you noticed that since then he hasn't signed a UFA for more than like 3 years? It's like he (and the owners) learned from their stupid mistake. 

 

The Rangers sent out a letter to their fanbase last year saying that they were going to start rebuilding. Fans are capable of understanding if you communicate. I'm not sayin business would be booming, but you should be able to take a short term (3-5 years if done properly) hit for long term (~10 years) gain. 

 

It's also becoming more and more common to see teams rebound in a big way after a losing season. Look at Colorado; they had an embarrassing year, traded one of their few key pieces (Duchene) for nothing of significance on the roster and made the Playoffs the next year. Toronto did it after accumulating talent properly over 3-4 years. The Blues did it midseason. Islanders and Canadiens both took jumps from last season. Once we have enough talent in place to actually start winning, it'll slowly start to turn around. We've already climbed out of the bottom 3 to the bottom third, we just have to be patient. 

 

The two prime examples of losing culture, Edmonton and Buffalo, got stuck in a rut due to poor management. Toronto deliberately tanked hard in 2016 but were able to turn it around quickly because they had/have competent management. If Edmonton specifically had any decent GM, they'd be in a much better position now. 

 

Regarding Virtanen, I think there was a lot happening behind the scenes at the time. Benning had just been hired like a month before the draft and the owners likely pushed for the home town kid. I didn't follow the draft so I didn't have any preferences. 

[coolboarder]

2 hours ago, erkayloomeh said:

So the message is, as far as I'm concerned, is no matter which of those he would have signed he still would have made a mistake. It's not as though he had to get one so no matter what he was forced to sign one. Signing aging vets(especially on a team you know you will be rebuilding) for big bucks and long term is most often a bad overall move.  If that contract was done with the belief that he was going to light it up with the sedins then you would have to believe the sedins would be around for six more years right? 

I remember whincing when I heard about that signing.  There was no question as far as I was concerned that would end up bad.  

What I didn't know was he was going to be bad (in relation to his pay) right off the bat.

The thing is I believe LE is a lazy player. Of coarse players decline but he declined as soon as he started here. Also have you noticed he has another gear when we play Boston?

I will be glad when he is gone. I'm a JB fan but that was a bad contract from the day it was signed . 

As far as Jake is concerned we will just need to continue to wait and see if he improves or not 

 

If I am rebuilding and I do not want to throw my prized prospects into the wolves, I wouldn't sign him 6x6 but rather, 8x2, two years deal for 8 million per, that will entice a undeserved UFA to a high money but as a placeholder for a very short term, I would if it takes to entice to play for us short-term for players like Eriksson.   If you offer him something, he will take a risk, play hard for his next contract and if he doesn't perform, I would not bring him back.  Simple like that.  If a players wants security, take that security somewhere else.   I do not want to risk an underperforming player for too long.  I am more interested in players for a short-term for high salary for aging veterans who have been proven before to protect our players that is not ready for the spotlight.  High salary for short term is the way to go, including signing bonus.  That way, if I do not want him back, the cap will come off the book.  

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

38 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I get what you are saying about physicality.  That is a point of preference.  Again, Gudbranson was one of the least liked players on this team.  He is as physical as it comes when he wants to be.  I know some people will disagree or agree about his performance defensively and overall.  From an eye test standpoint, he treated the puck like a hand grande and looked like he wanted to disappear in games.  Defensively he ran around a lot and got pinned because he couldn't get the puck out.  

 

Louie is very good at getting the puck out.  Both in his own end and on the fore check.  But he never lays the body.  Because he doesn't lay the body and is always trying to block a passing lane by being in front of his man it looks like he isn't skating that hard.  Its an optics thing.  He is trying and working hard.  He is effective but he doesn't hit and doesn't shoot and he isn't worth anything close to 6 million dollars per year.

 

He plays a bottom 6 role which to a lot of fans means you have to take the body.  I get that.  He doesn't do that.  He won't do that.  These are the same guys who like Gaunce who is the softest big bodied defensive forward I have ever seen.  I mean he makes more hits, but my 3 year old daughter wouldn't feel them.

 

To me its not really a big deal either way.  If you prefer a physical bottom 6 then Louie isn't a fit for that team.  I guarantee you Louie would find an NHL job (1-3 million) in a 3rd line shutdown role on a team in the NHL.  Some teams already have the physicality and don't need another player like that.  Other teams see the game changing to a speed game and unlike Lucic, Backes and Ladd; Louie can still skate quite well.

 

 

Right there I can agree on, as I have said many times if Loui was making $3M this wouldn't even be a discussion. Obviously at the time and his production from the past it said he was a little more than that, but he was also starting to decline the problem was committing to him that long and banking on that he will still produce like he had in the past at that value was a big risk that failed, and Benning was also hoping for the chemistry with the Sedins with him. 

 

With all that said, Eriksson and his agent signed that contract because they felt he was worth that much, well maybe play like it and if you can't which clearly is the case better get used to being held accountable for your poor play if you think you're worth that much, rather sign a defenseman at that value instead of Loui if all he's going to be good is for defense at that value.

[stawns]

4 hours ago, Mr.53 said:

Good post. I think people a lot of times get lost in the result and forget about the context. Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

Your point about if we didn't sign anyone people would have called for JBs head is 100 percent accurate. And it turns out, all those free agents weren't so good.

 

I remember I was a Virtanen or Ehlers and Nylander guy. I can admit that both those 2 are better players, but, Jake brings something to this young core that we need. Size and speed. He'll never be the offensive players they are, but I like Jakes game, and i can see him becoming a solid winger for Horvat or Gaudette whose extremely hard to play against and can pot a good number of goals.

 

Virtanen's problem isn't his game, it's where he was drafted. If Virtanen was drafted 23rd overall and Boeser at 6, things would be a lot more in line, so I give JB a pass for that. Boeser pick cancels out Virtanen pick.

I don't think Nylander and/or Ehlers are any better, they just have different skill sets.  I will say this, when Nylander and Ehlkers aren't scoring, I never notice them, at all.  I notice Jake almost every shift he is out there.........Jake is a play driver in a way the other two aren't, imo.

[Tystick]

Virtanen is still the best choice vs Ehlers and Nylander.

He will be a game changer in the playoffs and will not cost as much as those two.

His production will come in time.