Sign in to follow this  
Dr. J.

Eriksson's 'friction'

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

With Boston, keep in mind those 2nd and 3rd rounders were drafted over a period of 15+ years. Bergeron was drafted way back in 2003, the freak year where almost everyone practically became a superstar. Since then, Boston's had some other good picks in the 2nd and 3rd round but, if you look at their draft history after 2006, there are not a lot of hits in the 2nd and 3rd round. Maybe Carlo or Spooner among a couple of others? Nothing nearly as lucky as before.

 

So, while I see what you're saying.... I think perhaps you have a little too much focus on their drafting from 13+ years ago.

 

Here's a good link actually with Boston. Shows their draft history. They've had some ups and some downs interestingly enough. 2007, 2009 and 2013 among other years look terrible lol.: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00004919.html

I am well aware of their draft history.

 

Donato, Lindgren, Carlo, Forsbacka-Karlsson, Grezlyk, Cehlarik, Khochalev(not sure why he never got a shot), Spooner, Hutchinson are all fairly recent.  Sure it's been a long time to acquire the elite talents like Marchand, Krejci, Bergeron, Lucic and Chara but you gotta start somewhere.  And just cause it took them a long time to find them, doesn't mean it will take us that long.  

 

 

The last 10 years the Bruins have made

 

12 2nd round picks

7  3rd round picks

 

The Canucks

 

7 2nd round picks

9 3rd round picks

 

Last 5 years(since Benning took over)

 

Bruins 

7 2nd round picks

3 3rd round picks

 

Canucks 

4 2nd round picks

5 3rd round picks

 

In the last 10 years they have missed the playoffs twice, we have missed it six times, and they are still out drafting the hell out of us.  When are we going to learn from our mistakes?  Seriously 

 

Sorry I didn't even realize we are in the Eriksson thread.  This can go in the "next 5 years and prospects thread". I'll post it there.

Edited by The 5th Line
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

What in God's green earth are you going on about?  

 

I don't know why you are bringing up 2009 and the 7th round, the only takeaway i get from this is that you are saying it's a bad idea to trade for a second rounder?  So why do teams do it all the time?  Why did Benning trade Bieksa for a second?  Was that a bad trade on Bennings part?  Think about what you are saying here

 

We don't need NHL players we need good NHL players

 

Boston, the team Benning was a part of, the team that is off to the conference finals AGAIN is filled with 2nd and 3rd rounders.. Marchand and Bergeron are at the top of that list.

 

 

2nd rounders are absolute garbage and we are better off trading them for hack nhlers. You just have to ignore the facts that we can get these hack NHLers off waivers or the khl or free agency or literally anywhere instead of wasting picks on them. All hail Benning! :bigblush:

Edited by Tomatoes11
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Tomatoes11 said:

2nd rounders are absolute garbage and we are better off trading them for hack nhlers. You just have to ignore the facts that we can get these hack NHLers off waivers or the khl or free agency or literally anywhere instead of wasting picks on then. All hail Benning! :bigblush:

I agree with you for sure, but in defense of JB our owner was demanding a "retool" around the old Sedin core.  JB used the second rounders (and thirds too) to bring in players more along in their development (and guys like Sutter and Guddy) in hopes to squeeze more out of that old group.  That whole foolishness stopped when we traded Burr and Hanson at the 2017 TDL.  

I would like to have seen us rebuild sooner, but that's old news now. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tomatoes11 said:

2nd rounders are absolute garbage and we are better off trading them for hack nhlers. You just have to ignore the facts that we can get these hack NHLers off waivers or the khl or free agency or literally anywhere instead of wasting picks on then. All hail Benning! :bigblush:

you're entitled to your opinion, but you speak like Benning was working alone in a vacuum. As Alf pointed out there was a mandate to do things on the fly. You seem to wilfully ignore the task he was given. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

you're entitled to your opinion, but you speak like Benning was working alone in a vacuum. As Alf pointed out there was a mandate to do things on the fly. You seem to wilfully ignore the task he was given. 

Don't you know that when your boss tells you what he wants you to do, you can just ignore him, right?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How bad was the Eriksson signing?  In this thread the hatred of that signing has pitted CDC users against each other.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

you're entitled to your opinion, but you speak like Benning was working alone in a vacuum. As Alf pointed out there was a mandate to do things on the fly. You seem to wilfully ignore the task he was given. 

Obtuse trolls troll obtusely. The other poster is firmly entrenched in his position about all things JB.

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it could result in Eriksson being more agreeable to waiving sooner rather than in 2020 when his full NTC clause goes away.

 

This being said, there is still the cost of his contract ($6 million on the cap and $7 million salary this year) as opposed to the final three years ($6 million cap hit in each year, $5 million salary next year, and $4 million in each of the final two years). Perhaps a team looking for help reaching the cap floor and saving on salary would be interested?

 

                                                                             regards,  G.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

I am well aware of their draft history.

 

Donato, Lindgren, Carlo, Forsbacka-Karlsson, Grezlyk, Cehlarik, Khochalev(not sure why he never got a shot), Spooner, Hutchinson are all fairly recent.  Sure it's been a long time to acquire the elite talents like Marchand, Krejci, Bergeron, Lucic and Chara but you gotta start somewhere.  And just cause it took them a long time to find them, doesn't mean it will take us that long.  

 

 

The last 10 years the Bruins have made

 

12 2nd round picks

7  3rd round picks

 

The Canucks

 

7 2nd round picks

9 3rd round picks

 

Last 5 years(since Benning took over)

 

Bruins 

7 2nd round picks

3 3rd round picks

 

Canucks 

4 2nd round picks

5 3rd round picks

 

In the last 10 years they have missed the playoffs twice, we have missed it six times, and they are still out drafting the hell out of us.  When are we going to learn from our mistakes?  Seriously 

 

Sorry I didn't even realize we are in the Eriksson thread.  This can go in the "next 5 years and prospects thread". I'll post it there.

Something to check out is some of the trades made by the Bruins in that period of time: http://www.nhltradetracker.com/user/team_list

 

The Bruins traded away several young players and some high picks, some of them very high draft picks (Seguin, Hamilton, 2018 1st, and so on).

 

                                                       regards,  G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tre Mac said:

How bad was the Eriksson signing?  In this thread the hatred of that signing has pitted CDC users against each other.

Could have been worse.... like Lucic for example. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Could have been worse.... like Lucic for example. 

I wonder if JB would trade a smelly Loui contract for a smelly Lucic contract, and get the Coil to add Pool Party to even it out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I wonder if JB would trade a smelly Loui contract for a smelly Lucic contract, and get the Coil to add Pool Party to even it out?

I was thinking about that today.

 

something like: 

lucic

Pullijarvi

8

for

Erikson

Jasek

10

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alflives said:

I wonder if JB would trade a smelly Loui contract for a smelly Lucic contract, and get the Coil to add Pool Party to even it out?

Not anymore, Holland is going to fleece Benning so badly, it’s not going to be pretty. And no, it’s not because of FA and the Canucks ownership this would happen.

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tre Mac said:

How bad was the Eriksson signing?  In this thread the hatred of that signing has pitted CDC users against each other.

Everything has pitted CDC users against each other.

 

For all we know, the next thing they'll argue about is about Horvat's wedding date and how that will impact his summer training.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BabychStache said:

I was thinking about that today.

 

something like: 

lucic

Pullijarvi

8

for

Erikson

Jasek

10

This is much more realistic, but I don't think Edmonton would need to swap pics as well. Jasek is an ok prospect but I think his ceiling is Jannik Hansen. Puljujarvi just turned 21 today and has 1st line potential. Edmonton can't just let Puljujarvi go for nothing but getting out of a contract. That's a PR nightmare, so they'd need another decent piece coming back their way. 

 

So I'd do Lucic + Puljujarvi for Eriksson and Jasek, hell I'd even throw in a 6th round pick since JB seems to have a tree of them growing in his back yard. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe some are still figuring we should take on Lucic in exchange.  He is even less useful than Eriksson and has a longer contract to boot - plus as far as I know, his contract doesn't come with the advantage of paying out reduced real money like Eriksson's does.  Yeah I am fine with Poolparty but let's face it - he looks like a strong bust candidate.

 

To me, we are best off ridding ourselves of Eriksson via a cap floor team and just be done with it instead of trying to salvage a return.

 

 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, kloubek said:

I can't believe some are still figuring we should take on Lucic in exchange.  He is even less useful than Eriksson and has a longer contract to boot - plus as far as I know, his contract doesn't come with the advantage of paying out reduced real money like Eriksson's does.  Yeah I am fine with Poolparty but let's face it - he looks like a strong bust candidate.

 

To me, we are best off ridding ourselves of Eriksson via a cap floor team and just be done with it instead of trying to salvage a return.

 

 

If Poolparty looks like a bust then Juolevi and JV are even farther along the bust train but apparently JV is some kind of playoff monster and Juolevi is still being cooked. :bigblush:

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tomatoes11 said:

If Poolparty looks like a bust then Juolevi and JV are even farther along the bust train but apparently JV is some kind of playoff monster and Juolevi is still being cooked. :bigblush:

Not sure how you figure that, but I will bite.

 

It is unfair to place bets on Juolevi at this point imo.  Between injury and not having NHL experience it is hard to say where he will end up - though I am less confident than some that he will amount to a even a solid 2nd pairing guy.  Remains to be seen, but even if he hits that ceiling many will consider him a relative bust anyway given his draft position.

 

As for Jake, I think the vast majority of us would agree he IS a bust compared to his draft position.  The thing about Jake is that he can play a heavy game and that translates well to remaining in the league at least as a bottom 6 player.

 

Puljujarvi has scored at a pace of a point every 4 games (A bit less than JV), and has been lucky to have been tried out with some rather talented players. While he has some size, he isn't nearly as imposing.  So in my mind, Jake has done more with less even if neither have impressed. Jake was also drafted at 6th as opposed to 4th which at least lessens the blow a little there too. Finally, Jake slowly appears to be improving whereas Puljujarvi has really not developed at all and actually noticeably regressed last season.

 

So I would say given stats and facts that neither player appears to be shaping up to be a bigger bust than Puljujarvi yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puljarvi is a year younger than JV, that makes a huge difference in judging their development.

 

plus pool party was a strong enough prospect to be a bonafide number 3 well ahead of the other prospects. He was scouted that high for a reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.