Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum-specific Rules
Forum Closure

[Report] Eriksson “NOT” likely to be moved on

Provost

By Provost
in Trades, Rumours, Signings

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nave Canucks Regular

Nave

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Alflives said:

have to use one of our protection spots for the Seattle draft for Milan.  We don't have to do that with Loui.  Plus, we can send Loui to the AHL.  Milan, unless injured, must take a roster spot. Those two things are huge.  The second one especially over 82 games, and while we are rebuilding.

I like that Milan brings the face puncher role, but his contract is just too toxic to take.  

That's a good point. Just because we weren't burned for the Golden Knights expansion draft, doesn't mean we won't this time. We need to ensure that doesn't happen. Trading Eriksson for a low draft pick is probably the best solution. 

Edited by NaveJoseph
Link to comment
Share on other sites
theo5789 Canucks Franchise Player

theo5789

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, brownky said:

Schenn is, and always a smart player. He's making up for his deficiency in footspeed by simply remaining in position as a defensive defenceman. Schenn is also not paid $6.5 million to be behind the play for 13 minutes a game.

 

Lucic is a dumb hockey player who, as a winger, has zero hope of regaining form in a league which is only getting faster. He can't keep up.

You're missing the point though. It's about what sweetener we will get. Many are not satisfied with LE here anyway, so really it's just an attempt to shake things up for the players to hopefully regain some form, otherwise we are no different of a situation by having LE. Believe it or not, there aren't teams lining up to take LE on and we would actually have to give up the sweetener to most other teams. We would actually be coming out on top of the situation here since many consider LE useless anyway as well at the same price. If Lucic provides some physical play, regains some offense, then it's just a welcome bonus to whatever else we are getting to the deal.

 

With that said, we can break down his contract further. First of all, he's not paid 6.5 million, his cap hit is 6 million, so no need to over-exaggerate to get your point across. He's actually only owed 6,4,5,4 million in salary for the next 4 years. In the last two years of his deal (the potential cap crunch years for us), the NTC of his deal becomes modified where he submits a list of 10 teams he's okay with being traded to. If any of those 10 teams are looking to take him on as a cap dump or if miraculously he has value at that point, we can unload him. If we have to pay a sweetener, it'll be less than what would we likely get now since we would've taken off 2 more years of his contract and his actual salary will be slightly lower at that point, plus we won't have to deal with the expansion side of things.

 

Like I said, think what you want about him as a player, but with Schenn, a lot of the same concerns about speed and keeping up with the way the game is changing were brought up by everyone which I'll admit I was part of as well. He's proven us all wrong, so I'll keep an open mind for Lucic for the time being. Even if he's a dud, if we gain some decent sweeteners (personally I'd be okay with Puljujarvi and a 2nd, maybe swap our 1sts as well) then we simply replaced one dud for another but gained some valuable assets.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A.V.'s slurp Abbotsford Prospect

A.V.'s slurp

Posted
Posted

For the record, a players NMC or any other clause does not have to be picked up by the acquiring club. It is up to the new team if they want to excercise that clause. Someone asked this on 31 thoughts early on this year, and Friedman explained it as such.

 

Don't want Lucic though!! 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brownky Canucks Second-Line

brownky

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

You're missing the point though. It's about what sweetener we will get. Many are not satisfied with LE here anyway, so really it's just an attempt to shake things up for the players to hopefully regain some form, otherwise we are no different of a situation by having LE. Believe it or not, there aren't teams lining up to take LE on and we would actually have to give up the sweetener to most other teams. We would actually be coming out on top of the situation here since many consider LE useless anyway as well at the same price. If Lucic provides some physical play, regains some offense, then it's just a welcome bonus to whatever else we are getting to the deal.

 

With that said, we can break down his contract further. First of all, he's not paid 6.5 million, his cap hit is 6 million, so no need to over-exaggerate to get your point across. He's actually only owed 6,4,5,4 million in salary for the next 4 years. In the last two years of his deal (the potential cap crunch years for us), the NTC of his deal becomes modified where he submits a list of 10 teams he's okay with being traded to. If any of those 10 teams are looking to take him on as a cap dump or if miraculously he has value at that point, we can unload him. If we have to pay a sweetener, it'll be less than what would we likely get now since we would've taken off 2 more years of his contract and his actual salary will be slightly lower at that point, plus we won't have to deal with the expansion side of things.

 

Like I said, think what you want about him as a player, but with Schenn, a lot of the same concerns about speed and keeping up with the way the game is changing were brought up by everyone which I'll admit I was part of as well. He's proven us all wrong, so I'll keep an open mind for Lucic for the time being. Even if he's a dud, if we gain some decent sweeteners (personally I'd be okay with Puljujarvi and a 2nd, maybe swap our 1sts as well) then we simply replaced one dud for another but gained some valuable assets.

That's the key here.

If the Oilers offer us the 8th to take him, and we keep our 10, that's about the only way I'd be okay with taking that albatross on. And since that ain't happening, I desperately hope that Lucic doesn't happen either.

 

Loui doesn't want to be here, and will be easier to move after that bonus is paid. They aren't lining up now, but teams entering that rebuild are going to be interested in that dollar value contract. Even if it's for nothing. Lucic on the roster is a net loss, now whether the pot can be 'sweetened' enough to justify holding the nose and screwing ourselves over or not, that's the question. I doubt the Oilers can or even want to.

 

Otherwise somebody else would have taken him already. Personally, I'd like to see Lucic stuck there anyway because it screws the Oilers for longer, so that in itself is a sweetener.

 

The issue becomes paying the non-duds on the team, if we're paying Lucic for even longer, that screws us out of other deals. See: Oilers, Leafs, etc.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
theo5789 Canucks Franchise Player

theo5789

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, brownky said:

That's the key here.

If the Oilers offer us the 8th to take him, and we keep our 10, that's about the only way I'd be okay with taking that albatross on. And since that ain't happening, I desperately hope that Lucic doesn't happen either.

 

Loui doesn't want to be here, and will be easier to move after that bonus is paid. They aren't lining up now, but teams entering that rebuild are going to be interested in that dollar value contract. Even if it's for nothing. Lucic on the roster is a net loss, now whether the pot can be 'sweetened' enough to justify holding the nose and screwing ourselves over or not, that's the question. I doubt the Oilers can or even want to.

 

Otherwise somebody else would have taken him already. Personally, I'd like to see Lucic stuck there anyway because it screws the Oilers for longer, so that in itself is a sweetener.

 

The issue becomes paying the non-duds on the team, if we're paying Lucic for even longer, that screws us out of other deals. See: Oilers, Leafs, etc.

LE going to another team means we would have to pay the sweetener to unload him. Otherwise we would simply be taking on another bad contract from another team.

 

The reason why someone else hasn't taken Lucic yet is because he has a NMC and has only expressed interest to go to Vancouver as far as we know. Just as no teams are taking on Lucic is the same reason teams aren't lining up for LE. I get that teams may look for deals that get them to the cap floor, but there are less and less teams with that space now and yet more and more contracts that need to be moved. It's not a seller's market. It's easy to say someone will take LE, but he also has a full NTC which controls where he could possibly go now, so it's not as easy as just finding a trading partner. At least Edmonton has McDavid who is always the selling point to potentially be on a "competitive" team. I've also brought up that after this coming season, Lucic's salary is also lower than his cap should teams be looking for a similar effect to an LE deal. Lucic is younger than LE as well.

 

I agree that I'm perfectly fine with Lucic being stuck on the Oilers, but I'm also fine with LE playing a role here until he came out with his comments. I'm not going to go into my whole breakdown of cap in the next few years that shows we aren't as screwed as it may seem in a couple of years. The Boeser contract is going to set the stage though and if we pay him 8x8 or whatever, then not only are we screwed, but so will the entire league.

 

I just think that the negatives of taking him on are so blown out of proportion. So even if/when makes this deal is made, it's going to be viewed as poor no matter what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MystifyNCrucify Canucks Prospect

MystifyNCrucify

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

LE going to another team means we would have to pay the sweetener to unload him. Otherwise we would simply be taking on another bad contract from another team.

 

The reason why someone else hasn't taken Lucic yet is because he has a NMC and has only expressed interest to go to Vancouver as far as we know. Just as no teams are taking on Lucic is the same reason teams aren't lining up for LE. I get that teams may look for deals that get them to the cap floor, but there are less and less teams with that space now and yet more and more contracts that need to be moved. It's not a seller's market. It's easy to say someone will take LE, but he also has a full NTC which controls where he could possibly go now, so it's not as easy as just finding a trading partner. At least Edmonton has McDavid who is always the selling point to potentially be on a "competitive" team. I've also brought up that after this coming season, Lucic's salary is also lower than his cap should teams be looking for a similar effect to an LE deal. Lucic is younger than LE as well.

 

I agree that I'm perfectly fine with Lucic being stuck on the Oilers, but I'm also fine with LE playing a role here until he came out with his comments. I'm not going to go into my whole breakdown of cap in the next few years that shows we aren't as screwed as it may seem in a couple of years. The Boeser contract is going to set the stage though and if we pay him 8x8 or whatever, then not only are we screwed, but so will the entire league.

 

I just think that the negatives of taking him on are so blown out of proportion. So even if/when makes this deal is made, it's going to be viewed as poor no matter what.

Let little things rot in kalamazoo for all i care. If he wants to enforce his NTC, he can go on waivers and suck bus farts. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mathew Barzal Canucks First-Line

Mathew Barzal

Posted
Posted

What bunch of spiteful losers in this thread. It's not Loui's fault he's not a good player anymore, that's how ageing works. If you had eyes you'd see him putting in the effort to at least be serviceable on the defensive side of things. Blame Benning for that garbage contract, and the future garbage contracts to replace Loui's this offseason.

  • Cheers 1
  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hammertime Canucks Star

hammertime

Posted
Posted
Just now, Mathew Barzal said:

What bunch of spiteful losers in this thread. It's not Loui's fault he's not a good player anymore, that's how ageing works. If you had eyes you'd see him putting in the effort to at least be serviceable on the defensive side of things. Blame Benning for that garbage contract, and the future garbage contracts to replace Loui's this offseason.

Real mature Bradley! 

 

Talk about spiteful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...