[Proposal] Loui Erickson trade

[IBatch]

I know that we all would like LE and his cap to go away, but the reality is it just won’t happen.   And that’s ok.  He’s still a decent third liner or middle six player, durable (his aversion to contact helps no doubt) and up until now hasn’t complained despite being used as a defensive forward, after years of top or second line play.    It’s not his or the coaches fault he’s declined and that’s the best way to play him.   Maybe the effort hasn’t been 100% and this will change things.  If he really wants out his best move is to play himself out, as in make himself desirable to other teams.  

 

Maybe he ends up in Utica but that doesn’t really send a good message unless his play dictates he should and so far it definitely hasn’t, he’s way better then an AHLer still.  Or maybe one of our top six guys is out for a while and he plays great in their absence...wins back a spot.  I’m sure TG wants him back as he’s a way better option then a half dozen or so of our forwards...until I see Benning sign a guy another top six guy I have serious doubts LE is going anywhere and even then, Sutter seems more likely...better cap hit, less term etc.   Might be a palatable cap dump, and previous interest. 

[smithers joe]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

If my personal success or failure was influenced by that fellow employee you bet I’d be pissed.  Show up, shut up, and do your friggin’ job.  If you’re being a whiner, and causing us to lose money, then it’s out the door.  

If you were in battle, and the guy beside you starts whining about the Sargent not using him properly, and how he’d be better with a different unit, would you want that guy watching your back?  Chemistry (trusting your mates) is huge Rob; you know that. 

i agree with rob. imo, when asked why his numbers were down, he said the coach has him playing a more defensive role. the part that got people upset, was him saying that he didn’t really agree with the coaches philosophy of how he was being used. you call it whining, i call it stating a fact in your own language as to why your numbers are down. 

certainly, he is entitled to say that. i think this is a bum rap and people are using it to justify moving him out. i think he was just being honest. i’ve done that before. 

[IBatch]

2 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

i agree with rob. imo, when asked why his numbers were down, he said the coach has him playing a more defensive role. the part that got people upset, was him saying that he didn’t really agree with the coaches philosophy of how he was being used. you call it whining, i call it stating a fact in your own language as to why your numbers are down. 

certainly, he is entitled to say that. i think this is a bum rap and people are using it to justify moving him out. i think he was just being honest. i’ve done that before. 

This is almost exactly what I’m thinking too.  Especially the using it as an excuse to get out of contract bit.  Good post.

[Alflives]

23 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

i agree with rob. imo, when asked why his numbers were down, he said the coach has him playing a more defensive role. the part that got people upset, was him saying that he didn’t really agree with the coaches philosophy of how he was being used. you call it whining, i call it stating a fact in your own language as to why your numbers are down. 

certainly, he is entitled to say that. i think this is a bum rap and people are using it to justify moving him out. i think he was just being honest. i’ve done that before. 

That’s all good Joe, but that Canuck’s guy, when asked if he was aware of Loui’s comments, said he was.  He added this was not unexpected, as the team had been aware of Loui’s concerns all season.  If Loui could still play, I would be accepting of his “whining”.  However, he’s not an NHL player anymore.  

[Sbriggs]

2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You seem to feel strongly about this but all he did is say he and the coach were not on the same page.    Again, I ask you - have you ever not been on the same page as your boss?    Did he allow you to come back to work the next day?   Did your co-workers consider you a "cancer" because you thought the boss was using you the wrong way?

Well I would have to go back 30 years to answer that question but its probably why I own my own company and not work for someone else.  Maybe its not what he said by how he did it, you cannot question the coaches decision via  any kind of media, those are discussion to have behind close doors. and someone of LE experience and age should know that which leads me to believe he did on purpose to force a move. If my staff spoke ill of me and my decisions I make publicly they would be fired.Period.

[Rob_Zepp]

3 minutes ago, Sbriggs said:

Well I would have to go back 30 years to answer that question but its probably why I own my own company and not work for someone else.  Maybe its not what he said by how he did it, you cannot question the coaches decision via  any kind of media, those are discussion to have behind close doors. and someone of LE experience and age should know that which leads me to believe he did on purpose to force a move. If my staff spoke ill of me and my decisions I make publicly they would be fired.Period.

If one of your staff said they were not sure you they saw eye to eye with you, then that would lead to them being fired.   

 

Wow. 

[Sbriggs]

16 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

If one of your staff said they were not sure you they saw eye to eye with you, then that would lead to them being fired.   

 

Wow. 

Can you read? I said if they did it VIA MEDIA OR PUBLICLY, that they were conversations to have BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. You want to have a conversation, fine, but if you cannot get the facts straight then your waisting my time and yours and maybe its time for you to move on

Edited July 5, 2019 by Sbriggs

[Rob_Zepp]

Just now, Sbriggs said:

Can you read? I said if they did it VIA MEDIA OR PUBLICLY, that they were conversations to have BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. You want to have a conversation, fine, but if you cannot get the facts straight then your waisting my time and yours and maybe its time for you to move on

They say it at your company BBQ.   Her name is Quinn.   Quinn has been with you three years.   She is heard by the BBQ saying "I don't think Sbriggs is using me the right way at work".   That gets back to you.   You fire her for it.

 

If those are how facts work in your world.

 

Wow.

 

 

[Sbriggs]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

They say it at your company BBQ.   Her name is Quinn.   Quinn has been with you three years.   She is heard by the BBQ saying "I don't think Sbriggs is using me the right way at work".   That gets back to you.   You fire her for it.

 

If those are how facts work in your world.

 

Wow.

 

 

LE wasn't at a BBQ? He was doing an interview with a Swedish Elite Media company "HockeySveige" You think thats appropriate for a professional veteran hockey player being paid millions of dollars from the Vancouver Canucks. Let me tell ya, if my employee did that at my company BBQ , and it got back to me, I'd be pissed and would let him or her know that in an appropriate manner, not firing them but punished for sure ie demotion, suspension etc. But if they had went to the media and did that.....Immediately Dismissed

Are we done here?

[lmm]

wow, glad I don't work for Spriggs.

but then I too am self-employed for a reason

[Rob_Zepp]

1 hour ago, Sbriggs said:

LE wasn't at a BBQ? He was doing an interview with a Swedish Elite Media company "HockeySveige" You think thats appropriate for a professional veteran hockey player being paid millions of dollars from the Vancouver Canucks. Let me tell ya, if my employee did that at my company BBQ , and it got back to me, I'd be pissed and would let him or her know that in an appropriate manner, not firing them but punished for sure ie demotion, suspension etc. But if they had went to the media and did that.....Immediately Dismissed

Are we done here?

You are I guess - you fired Quinn and I quite liked her.

 

As far as Loui, players gets asked questions all the time and something as innocuous as what he said is a nothingburger.   No question there is underlying tension and no question a change of scenery is a good idea for both parties in all likelihood but in terms of actual impact on the team (other players) and the room, it is almost less than nothing.   At most a ribbing at practice.   Ask anyone who has played.   ANYONE.    

 

Oh, Quinn has a new job already.  Says new boss much nicer.   Swedish too boot. 

[theo5789]

9 hours ago, canuckistani said:

I had another interesting idea, that may work. Demolition is still waiver exempt. A like for like trade, in terms of bad contracts, may be the only way out. As such.... would New Jersey be open to taking a 1 for 1 exchange involving Loui and Schneider ?? They are roughly the same value IIRC. 

 

in in this scenario, we send Demko to the Ahl for a few months, opening with Markstrom and Schneider duo, Then we turn around and trade Marky for picks( and they’d be second round or better if he continues his form of the last 1.5 seasons), promote Demko and go with Demko- Schneider combo. It has the added benefit of giving us a disposable goalie ( Schneider) to expose to the expansion draft. 

Schneider had a tough stretch, but they still seem to be committed to him. At worst he's a veteran backup which they would need to replace if they moved him. They may want to keep him for the same expansion reason.

[Hindustan Smyl]

 

Eriksson + Baertschi for Lucic + Puljiujarvi

[mll]

22 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:

This makes a lot of sense. 

Also factor in all three players deserved their contracts when they signed them - there is low risk, high reward as none of them can get much worse but could bounce back with a change of scenery. Also it is actually $10.5 in actual dollars going to the Senators and $20.5 going to the Canucks in your proposal. Need to account for the signing bonus. 

So the Senators save 10 million dollars and inch up closer to the cap floor. Not a bad idea for either side. I would have Ottawa retain 1.5 million per year. This gives us an extra 2.1 this year and evens out the cap hits moving forward. Ottawa still saves $5.5 million in cash while getting closer to the cap floor. 

 

Ottawa is 640K under the floor with 3 players to add including Colin White.  League minimum is 700K so they are for sure above.

 

[Thraxious]

 

I think the issue is how Jim is marketing Loui to the other GM's.  Jim needs to contact Tampa and have a discussion:

 

Loui Erickson:

 

One of our more relied upon players (Top 8 in minutes played / Team : Top 5 / Forwards).  Loui was Top 6 in scoring, Loui was relied upon heavily is a short-handed specialist @ number 4 in TOI of all our forwards.  Tied for 5th on the team in even-strength goals, Loui showed that he can also help the team with secondary scoring.

 

J.T.

It is obvious that J.T. wasn’t trusted as much in his ice time being 14th in Ice time for your team (8th among forwards).  Similar in scoring J.T. was Top 7 in scoring. Being 24th in TOI short-handed, it is obvious that J.T. wasn’t seen as a short-handed specialist, however, we note that J.T was given plenty of opportunity on the power play which seemed to help his overall numbers.  Being 11th on your team in even-strength goals, J.T. showed that comparatively he struggled at even-strength.

 

While your team excelled during the regular season short-handed, the 50% shown in the play-offs suggests that a change is needed in that role.  As you were so gracious to offer us J.T. for the cost of a First and a Third round pick @ a cap hit of 5.25m for the next 4 years. We would suggest that with your need, a veteran short-hand specialist would Loui would be somewhat comparable @ 6m and of benefit.

 

Realizing one of the reasons your team needed to trade J.T was due to being close to the CAP, so to assist, we would consider the following:

 

Tampa: Erickson (3 million cap hit)

 

Vancouver: 1st (Vancouver), 3rd (Vancouver), 1st (Tampa)

 

Vancouver would retain 3m of Erickson for 3 years (in exchange for the 1st).

 

As per the above, there is a difference in the players being that J.T was used in more of a power-play role and Loui was focused on the short-handed role.  Otherwise, Loui’s player/team statistics show him to be an upgrade while helping to address your play-off deficiencies.  

 

Of course, Loui would have to agree to this trade.  With your team’s success in the regular season he may be interested, however, with your play-off showing, you may be lucky to have him return your calls.  Lord knows he doesn’t return mine *cough*

 

 

 

--------------------------------

(Two things… 1) Yes, joking (While the stats are true, they are crap).... 2) Its shows the sad state of affairs when everyone is trying to get rid of our #6 in scoring (not saying it isn’t warranted - just that it says A LOT about our secondary scoring).

[teepain]

Eriksson 50% retain

goldobin

3rd round pick

 

dallas

 

janmark

 

[Monteeun]

On 7/4/2019 at 5:57 PM, Sbriggs said:

Can you read? I said if they did it VIA MEDIA OR PUBLICLY, that they were conversations to have BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. You want to have a conversation, fine, but if you cannot get the facts straight then your waisting my time and yours and maybe its time for you to move on

It seems like u just have a problem with ppl questioning your authority.

 

If all someone said was they disagreed with how they are being used and you throw hissy fit? That's your problem.

 

As far as we know, we don't really know what the tone really was...it may not be that big of a deal. Hockey players get asked questions all the time and they simply answer them. It may be as simple as that.

 

In the hockey environment, there are always going to be interviews, questions and answers. If you're going to throw a fit just because a player answered a question in a way that u don't like then the problem is with you.

Edited July 9, 2019 by Monteeun

[Monteeun]

On 7/4/2019 at 3:30 PM, Alflives said:

If my personal success or failure was influenced by that fellow employee you bet I’d be pissed.  Show up, shut up, and do your friggin’ job.  If you’re being a whiner, and causing us to lose money, then it’s out the door.  

If you were in battle, and the guy beside you starts whining about the Sargent not using him properly, and how he’d be better with a different unit, would you want that guy watching your back?  Chemistry (trusting your mates) is huge Rob; you know that. 

You're just using some over the top comparison.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Monteeun said:

You're just using some over the top comparison.

Chemistry is one of virally important parts to a winning team, but it can’t be measured.  Elite athletes know who the players are that are hurting their chances to win.  Clearly Loui hurts the team’s chances.  

[Sbriggs]

3 hours ago, Monteeun said:

It seems like u just have a problem with ppl questioning your authority.

 

If all someone said was they disagreed with how they are being used and you throw hissy fit? That's your problem.

 

As far as we know, we don't really know what the tone really was...it may not be that big of a deal. Hockey players get asked questions all the time and they simply answer them. It may be as simple as that.

 

In the hockey environment, there are always going to be interviews, questions and answers. If you're going to throw a fit just because a player answered a question in a way that u don't like then the problem is with you.

Well when it comes to my company I take input from all who matters but ultimately I make all final decisions because its me who reeps the benefit of success or the humiliation of failure. It really doesn't matter what his tone was, its not the point, the point is he not only took his grievance public, probably out of frustration of his own play. No one here is throwing a hissy fit, as a matter of fact I'm quite calm and from other peoples response, I think I'm correctly assessing this issue. You know there's a problem with LE when he wants to blame others instead of himself for his poor play and not living up to his contract.