aGENT Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 (edited) 55 minutes ago, Provost said: We won’t be buying out Eriksson, we save more cap by burying him in the minors. Buying him out now just saves cap space in the short term but, costs us cap hit when we need it most down the road. If you can’t trade him without giving up a big asset you waive him, make him ride the busses until he refuses to report or retires. He is married with a young family, there is almost no way he wants to leave them for three years... and wouldn’t want to move them to Utica as it may not be a long term thing. ... and no, I don’t feel bad for doing it to him. He and his agent miscalculated by speaking out publicly the way they did. They still seem to think other teams will really want him and bet on that... all they did is give some moral authority for the Canucks to play hardball. Generally agree with this. One caveat being that a buyout may not save cap, but it would save Aqua millions in actual cash... 37 minutes ago, grandmaster said: I wonder if his contract prevents the Canucks from burying him in the minors. This sort of move would generally upset the NHLPA and might cause players to think twice about coming here as free agents in the future (might be good or bad). 35 minutes ago, sonoman said: This is probably the biggest concern for me. I don't share it. Players know that you either perform or you risk losing your NHL gig. He's far from the first, and won't be the last, high paid vet to get demoted to the AHL should it come to that. It hasn't effected our club or any other club with signing free agents. And it's not like LE hasn't been given NUMEROUS opportunities here and had both management and coaches defending him for three years. He's been treated more than well/fairly in that time. HE hasn't performed. HE whined to the media. That's on him, not the organization. Edited June 16, 2019 by aGENT 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 “This is the get it done league” -willie D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salacious Crumb Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 22 minutes ago, aGENT said: Generally agree with this. One caveat being that a buyout may not save cap, but it would save Aqua millions in actual cash... I don't share it. Players know that you either perform or you risk losing your NHL gig. He's far from the first, and won't be the last, high paid vet to get demoted to the AHL should it come to that. It hasn't effected our club or any other club with signing free agents. And it's not like LE hasn't been given NUMEROUS opportunities here and had both management and coaches defending him for the years. He's been treated more than well/fairly in that time. HE hasn't performed. HE whined to the media. That's on him, not the organization. Didn’t Jersey pay Mogilny millions to ride buses for a year or two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 1 minute ago, riffraff said: “This is the get it done league” -willie D Exactly. Players know that better than anyone. If anything they'll be thrilled a job opened up for them. These guys are COMPETITIVE, they're not going to be sitting around, holding hands in a circle, consoling LE about his feelings re: the big, mean Canucks. Ex players were in fact some of the harshest critics when his comments in Sweden came out. This is not something people should be REMOTELY worried about. Besides, do we really want the type of UFA's that would be worried about being demoted for not playing up to their contract? I sure don't. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 16, 2019 Author Share Posted June 16, 2019 36 minutes ago, grandmaster said: This sort of move would generally upset the NHLPA and might cause players to think twice about coming here as free agents in the future (might be good or bad).. I think that is where Loui and his agent going public was a miscalculation on their part. The reaction from ex-players in the media was insanely against Eriksson. I forget which one it was, but an eastern media ex-player called in immediately to local sport radio because he was so livid and needed to spout off about it... even though he wasn’t scheduled for a hit that day. They said the dude is playing terribly, he isn’t putting forth any effort, he is entirely disengaged.... and that he should have shut up and collected his paycheque quietly. Three seasons is a long stretch and he was given lots of chances throughout... no player in the league can say he wasn’t fairly treated. I am not worried about it being a deterrent for UFAs at all. If there are a couple guys it scares off, then it is because those guys are looking to cash in and coast somewhere. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawnAntoski Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Provost said: I think that is where Loui and his agent going public was a miscalculation on their part. The reaction from ex-players in the media was insanely against Eriksson. I forget which one it was, but an eastern media ex-player called in immediately to local sport radio because he was so livid and needed to spout off about it... even though he wasn’t scheduled for a hit that day. They said the dude is playing terribly, he isn’t putting forth any effort, he is entirely disengaged.... and that he should have shut up and collected his paycheque quietly. Three seasons is a long stretch and he was given lots of chances throughout... no player in the league can say he wasn’t fairly treated. I am not worried about it being a deterrent for UFAs at all. If there are a couple guys it scares off, then it is because those guys are looking to cash in and coast somewhere. I would assume his disengaged attitude towards the Canucks is affecting his relationship(s) with other players in the locker room and is having a psychological affect on him ??? Probably a reason why he and his agents are acting in this matter ? One possible bright side from this LE situation - in my opinion - might hopefully give caution to JB and the Aquillini's to not be too enamored with a player during the FA period. Let this, "so called rebuild" run its course...... Edited June 16, 2019 by ShawnAntoski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 1 hour ago, Salacious Crumb said: Didn’t Jersey pay Mogilny millions to ride buses for a year or two? Only 19 games then he retired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 32 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: Only 19 games then he retired Could we be so lucky! If the only way to move him is to take a worse contract back (Lucic), I'm for sending him to Utica. That way, he might wake up and start playing better and find an NHL team that would take him. Or...maybe he retires and returns to Sweden and plays for Timra 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 EDM Eriksson Goldobin VAN Lucic Puljujarvi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MystifyNCrucify Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 14 minutes ago, Me_ said: EDM Eriksson Goldobin VAN Lucic Puljujarvi Not even for poolparty. Terrible idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian42 Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 I don’t like the idea of trading him if we have to bring back Lucic or another bad contract. 1 extra year is a big deal. I like Ike the idea of waiving him and let him rot in minor if he retires great if not he’s 1 player we can expose for Seattle. Just accept it and and ride it out when the contract ends we will have some needed cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 31 minutes ago, MystifyNCrucify said: Not even for poolparty. Terrible idea Most proposals with Eriksson are getting rid of the extra year(s), in this case we are gaining one. Lucic also has a pointless buyout structure. That said, Pulijujarvi would be an awesome gamble to make. To me it seems like the type of trade neither team wants to make. Edmonton would probably want to get a player like Juolevi or Virtanen back instead which doesn't make sense to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickly Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, brian42 said: I don’t like the idea of trading him if we have to bring back Lucic or another bad contract. 1 extra year is a big deal. I like Ike the idea of waiving him and let him rot in minor if he retires great if not he’s 1 player we can expose for Seattle. Just accept it and and ride it out when the contract ends we will have some needed cap space. Can’t just ride it out. Not now after Loui’s comments to the media about his displeasure with Green. The guy clearly wants a change of scenery and it’s in the Canucks best interest to get rid of him before his poor attitude affects the younger players. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 4 hours ago, theo5789 said: No team will be thinking of giving up an asset anyway. They will be thinking about what sweetener they would get. It would only benefit us if someone takes him off our hands at full cap value. Putting him on waivers just puts more pressure on us to make a move to unload him putting us in a worse position to deal him, if it can get any worse. actually it puts us in a better position if he clears. Teams would already have him buried if we have to add in a "sweetener". Someone might take him for free. And finally it puts more pressure on Loui to decide what he wants his future to be. I don't see how it makes it worse at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MystifyNCrucify Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 6 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: actually it puts us in a better position if he clears. Teams would already have him buried if we have to add in a "sweetener". Someone might take him for free. And finally it puts more pressure on Loui to decide what he wants his future to be. I don't see how it makes it worse at all. Gagner treatment. If no team wants to trade for you, doesnt even want to pay your salary, pay him to play for someone elses team to keep him away from the young players. Gagner tried this entitled sheet last year. His career is basically over because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 12 minutes ago, Pickly said: Can’t just ride it out. Not now after Loui’s comments to the media about his displeasure with Green. The guy clearly wants a change of scenery and it’s in the Canucks best interest to get rid of him before his poor attitude affects the younger players. Sure you can; just assign him to the ECHL so he's not around the young prospects in Utica. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, MystifyNCrucify said: Gagner treatment. If no team wants to trade for you, doesnt even want to pay your salary, pay him to play for someone elses team to keep him away from the young players. Gagner tried this entitled sheet last year. His career is basically over because of it. that and he can't play outside of the o zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MystifyNCrucify Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: Sure you can; just assign him to the ECHL so he's not around the young prospects in Utica. Im not sure if that would be possible, but that is ideal if he cant be traded, and passes waivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MystifyNCrucify Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 Just now, Jimmy McGill said: that and he can't play outside of the o zone. Shouldnt you be able to put up points if your strength is o-zone? I dont even wanna bother looking up his canuck stats. I know they were....not good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan since 82 Posted June 16, 2019 Share Posted June 16, 2019 3 hours ago, grandmaster said: I agree that a buy out doesn’t make much sense for the Cap savings. I wonder if his contract prevents the Canucks from burying him in the minors. This sort of move would generally upset the NHLPA and might cause players to think twice about coming here as free agents in the future (might be good or bad). I think the best move here is to trade and retain some salary. He is basically playing like a good 3rd liner but is being paid as a first liner. Why would it upset the NHLPA? It's a business and if someone is not earning their keep other will come in and replace them. We won't be the first team to demote a vet to the minors (if that's what we do) and we won't be the last. If anything I hope it sends the message that we don't want passengers on our team. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts