[Waivers] David Backes, Luke Schenn

[Tower102]

6 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

It’s not a shake up really,  it’s one player out.. a prospect in , and a top six F on the 4th line that he would get to lead in his natural position.  The rotation into the first line to follow could allow Green the flexibility to keep Boeser on ice if he saw an off hand match up.

This also helps to keep some individuals fresher for specialty teams..

Dont forget, there isn’t one line that has stayed the same on this team from the beginning of the season,  that’s the beauty of the talent we have.

Adjustments are made every game..  I’ve only noted what I would try, and that was at a time where some adjustments were made.

Just not a big Eriksson fan .. sorry.

ps . green did make an adjustment after I quoted that line up.. and Boeser played at C.  
He looked in control, dynamic,.  And less predictable.. which is what is hampering his game right now.

Obviously lines will shift throughout the whole year as you deal with injuries, hot and cold players, trying to figure out where new players fit in best. There has been very little lineup change on this 15 game run. In the future when we start to struggle again, sure we can try and shift things around, but when you find a lineup that is succeeding and running as a well oiled machine together, you play it out and take it as far as you can. Small in game moments are different. There are always different lines post special teams, or if you are down you might stack a line, but we are talking about what lineup should we go with to start a game as our default for the next few games.

 

Boeser on the 3rd line is already a possible waste of his talent, and the only reason he is there is because Virtanen is performing well currently and so it allows them to balance out scoring with him on Gaudette's wing. Give it a rest if you are going to drop him further down to the 4th line and he is a winger so don't put him at center when we have an abundance of centers already. 

[drummer4now]

3 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Meanwhile, our "bad contract" LE is playing a prominent role on our team still. That was a bad UFA year, but it's looking like we got the best of a bad bunch at least.

Lets get real..

 

He was brought in to be a top 6 forward, not a rat whose current role is assisting in scoring empty net goals near the end of each game.

We need to put him on waivers or send him to the minors asap. 

[theo5789]

8 minutes ago, drummer4now said:

Lets get real..

 

He was brought in to be a top 6 forward, not a rat whose current role is assisting in scoring empty net goals near the end of each game.

We need to put him on waivers or send him to the minors asap. 

Let's get real indeed. He's currently playing in a top 6 spot and Bo and Tanner have given him credit as to why they have been able to up their play. The line is getting the job done with the EN because they are trusted defensively and they are finishing games off, something that our previous teams were not capable of as prominently.

 

I don't think he's a long term fixture, but he's providing a role that is successful for our team this year. Something that the other big FA signings from that year are not doing.

[Tower102]

14 minutes ago, drummer4now said:

Lets get real..

 

He was brought in to be a top 6 forward, not a rat whose current role is assisting in scoring empty net goals near the end of each game.

We need to put him on waivers or send him to the minors asap. 

He is not living up to his role we brought him in for and paid him $6 mill for. If a trade is open without giving up too much we take it. Other than that, we have to ignore what he was paid for and what he was brought in for and look at who does what for our team. We are better with him on Horvat and Pearson's line right now than not. We are winning games. Horvat and Pearson are producing, and are speaking highly of Loui. It is TERRIBLE logic to put him in the minors just because his contract is too high or he is not living up to what we hoped even though he is a better option than anyone else for that spot on the roster. 

 

Now... if we start losing, things start to change and Horvat and Pearson start to lose their ability to produce with Loui, then Loui is on the shortest rope and gets bumped. But why fix what is not broken. I don't give a flying hoot what people think of individual players stats, if we are on a run of 13-3-0 in our last 16, status quo is the BEST option. 

[The Lock]

7 hours ago, drummer4now said:

Lets get real..

 

He was brought in to be a top 6 forward, not a rat whose current role is assisting in scoring empty net goals near the end of each game.

We need to put him on waivers or send him to the minors asap. 

You need to get over the past.

 

He'll always have a bad contract, but that doesn't mean he's a bad player. Will he ever play to what his contract entails? Of course not. However, that doesn't mean you send they guy to the minors if he's still playing well in a role on the team.

 

You want to send a player who's actually playing decent for once to the minors asap? Unless if he has a proven replacement, I'm glad it's not your call then because that would be the definition of mismanagement. This team is playing well. Are you here demanding to punish someone despite him playing well?

 

Ignore what he was initially brought in to do. Ignore his contract. That's history at this point and everything should be based on what he is doing now. If you can't ignore that stuff then I don't know what to tell you. If this was 3 years ago, I'd agree with you, but this is a guy we can't trade and we'd only get 1mil in cap for sending to the minors. We have no choice but to get what we can out of him, so if you're going to be a pessimist about this, well you'll never be satisfied.

Edited January 31, 2020 by The Lock

[Provost]

5 minutes ago, The Lock said:

You need to get over the past.

 

He'll always have a bad contract, but that doesn't mean he's a bad player. Will he ever play to what his contract entails? Of course not. However, that doesn't mean you send they guy to the minors if he's still playing well in a role on the team.

 

You want to send a player who's actually playing decent for once to the minors asap? Unless if he has a proven replacement, I'm glad it's not your call then because that would be the definition of mismanagement. This team is playing well and you are literally here demanding to punish someone despite him playing well. Think about that before you reply. Like seriously think about what you are actually saying.

Of course with us on a winning streak, he isn’t likely to get waived.. but it is not so simple a calculation as you are suggesting.

 

Eriksson’s contract is likely going to cost us one of Tanev or Markstrom in the offseason.  It will cost us even more depth like Edler the year after.  That has to be taken into account when making decisions.  
 

So, as soon as we lose a game or two, and there is some cover... we should do it.  We should have done it at the start of the season or when he was sitting in the press box.

 

We are probably no worse, or at most only incrementally worse... and possibly much better by having Boeser on that 2nd line and have Beagle and Sutter take the defensive responsibilities instead.  We have a guy like Bailey to try on the roster as well who could give us some success with a 3rd line that is giving nothing right now.

 

We are MUCH worse if you take away Tanev and Edler from our roster over the next couple years (and can’t afford to replace them) because you weren’t willing to play hardball with Eriksson and see if he is really willing to ride the bus for three years with no glimmer of a shot in the NHL.

[The Lock]

14 minutes ago, Provost said:

Of course with us on a winning streak, he isn’t likely to get waived.. but it is not so simple a calculation as you are suggesting.

 

Eriksson’s contract is likely going to cost us one of Tanev or Markstrom in the offseason.  It will cost us even more depth like Edler the year after.  That has to be taken into account when making decisions.  
 

So, as soon as we lose a game or two, and there is some cover... we should do it.  We should have done it at the start of the season or when he was sitting in the press box.

 

We are probably no worse, or at most only incrementally worse... and possibly much better by having Boeser on that 2nd line and have Beagle and Sutter take the defensive responsibilities instead.  We have a guy like Bailey to try on the roster as well who could give us some success with a 3rd line that is giving nothing right now.

 

We are MUCH worse if you take away Tanev and Edler from our roster over the next couple years (and can’t afford to replace them) because you weren’t willing to play hardball with Eriksson and see if he is really willing to ride the bus for three years with no glimmer of a shot in the NHL.

Should do it? I could just as easily say we shouldn't do it. Is that how this works? (I'm kidding of course but that's how I think of any comment like that more or less. Anyway, moving on....)

 

Personally, I don't believe in cutting anyone who's playing well unless if someone better is replacing them. Bailey might be good, and I like the idea of giving our younger players a shot, but Loui's actually playing well for once. If Loui declines again then sure, send Bailey in, but I don't believe in punishing players for playing well. 

 

Also, what kind of message are you then telling everyone else on the team if you send a player who's playing well to the minors? The rest of the team knows Loui's situation. They know his struggles, more than us since they're right there. Do you not think other players on the team are rooting for Loui? Sure, you want to talk about how individual players will affect the team, but let's not mess with how well we're playing right now, nor should we mess with the clear team chemistry that's been happening. A lot of the players that people want gone are actually doing a lot of things that are helping out the team right now, and Eriksson's no exception to this. He is there literally whenever the other team pulls their goalie. He's actually being trusted on out there in important situations.

 

So you're right that it's not a simple calculation. I'd argue it's even more complicated than you think.

Edited January 31, 2020 by The Lock

[SilentSam]

7 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Let's get real indeed. He's currently playing in a top 6 spot and Bo and Tanner have given him credit as to why they have been able to up their play. The line is getting the job done with the EN because they are trusted defensively and they are finishing games off, something that our previous teams were not capable of as prominently.

 

I don't think he's a long term fixture, but he's providing a role that is successful for our team this year. Something that the other big FA signings from that year are not doing.

Let’s get really real..

Almost Anybody in this league would look good in LE ‘s position on this team.

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

You need to get over the past.

 

He'll always have a bad contract, but that doesn't mean he's a bad player. Will he ever play to what his contract entails? Of course not. However, that doesn't mean you send they guy to the minors if he's still playing well in a role on the team.

 

You want to send a player who's actually playing decent for once to the minors asap? Unless if he has a proven replacement, I'm glad it's not your call then because that would be the definition of mismanagement. This team is playing well. Are you here demanding to punish someone despite him playing well?

 

Ignore what he was initially brought in to do. Ignore his contract. That's history at this point and everything should be based on what he is doing now. If you can't ignore that stuff then I don't know what to tell you. If this was 3 years ago, I'd agree with you, but this is a guy we can't trade and we'd only get 1mil in cap for sending to the minors. We have no choice but to get what we can out of him, so if you're going to be a pessimist about this, well you'll never be satisfied.

Him playing like he has in the past has stymied what our future should be..

anybody in this league in LE’s position with this team could look good..

and considering he has ZERO hits and most of his points are goals or helpers on empty nets..   someone might even look better.. 

I said it earlier this month... it’s not Erikssons play on that line that looks good,. It’s Pearson and Horvat upping there game since a Christmas.

 

[The Lock]

Just now, SilentSam said:

Him playing like he has in the past has stymied what our future should be..

anybody in this league in LE’s position with this team could look good..

and considering he has ZERO hits and most of his points are goals or helpers on empty nets..   someone might even look better.. 

I said it earlier this month... it’s not Erikssons play on that line that looks good,. It’s Pearson and Horvat upping there game since a Christmas.

I'm just going to go through each of your sentences here:

 

1) This goes in line with what I was saying earlier with people are living in the past. They have hatred balled up on the guy and can't think logically about him anymore. I get it. He has a bad contract, but he's playing well right now.

2) Anybody in this league? Already that's going to be a statement that's easily false based on the word "anybody". I get what you're saying, but this is an overexaggeration.

3) I don't care about the points he's getting. I'm looking at his play and it's been better than I've seen in a long time. He actually looks like he has a purpose out there.

4) The whole team is player well: Pearson, Horvat, Eriksson... probably even the water boy. Kind of being rough on a player saying his good play is ONLY because of other people. Sure. It contributes, but if he was truly a dummy, he'd still be playing bad despite the rest of the team playing well.

 

Credit needs to be given where credit is due and unfortunately, people are too angry with the past to just be... happy for once. I came back to this forum hoping to see people happy since we're actually playing well and I still see posts likes these. Makes me realise why I don't post on here anymore. (Not directed at you by the way, just in general).

[SilentSam]

9 hours ago, Tower102 said:

Obviously lines will shift throughout the whole year as you deal with injuries, hot and cold players, trying to figure out where new players fit in best. There has been very little lineup change on this 15 game run. In the future when we start to struggle again, sure we can try and shift things around, but when you find a lineup that is succeeding and running as a well oiled machine together, you play it out and take it as far as you can. Small in game moments are different. There are always different lines post special teams, or if you are down you might stack a line, but we are talking about what lineup should we go with to start a game as our default for the next few games.

 

Boeser on the 3rd line is already a possible waste of his talent, and the only reason he is there is because Virtanen is performing well currently and so it allows them to balance out scoring with him on Gaudette's wing. Give it a rest if you are going to drop him further down to the 4th line and he is a winger so don't put him at center when we have an abundance of centers already. 

Now your trying to argue with me lol.

... so, Since we have so many, perhaps we trade him as an abundant center.. for a high draft pick if his game doesn’t come up.
 

Something will have to give when those contracts line up..  its a business, 

 

lines shift, performances waiver, players move.

its hockey,  anything can happen.
 

I tweak a line or 2 and you’ve lost your snow shoes and your touque..

 

I trust Green, he’s got a grasp on who’s hot and who’s not..  it would be more of a waste to keep Boeser struggling on the top six at this moment. 
... but like I said,  lines shift , performances waiver, players move..  there’s opportunity in that.

 

 

[SilentSam]

17 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I'm just going to go through each of your sentences here:

 

1) This goes in line with what I was saying earlier with people are living in the past. They have hatred balled up on the guy and can't think logically about him anymore. I get it. He has a bad contract, but he's playing well right now.

2) Anybody in this league? Already that's going to be a statement that's easily false based on the word "anybody". I get what you're saying, but this is an overexaggeration.

3) I don't care about the points he's getting. I'm looking at his play and it's been better than I've seen in a long time. He actually looks like he has a purpose out there.

4) The whole team is player well: Pearson, Horvat, Eriksson... probably even the water boy. Kind of being rough on a player saying his good play is ONLY because of other people. Sure. It contributes, but if he was truly a dummy, he'd still be playing bad despite the rest of the team playing well.

 

Credit needs to be given where credit is due and unfortunately, people are too angry with the past to just be... happy for once. I came back to this forum hoping to see people happy since we're actually playing well and I still see posts likes these. Makes me realise why I don't post on here anymore. (Not directed at you by the way, just in general).

Maybe you “nit pick” in life too much and it all gets overwhelming,.  I’m rather charmed that your that literate..  but I think your trying too hard to be “right “..   and that’s just wrong

We’re all hoping for this team to get even better, evolve..   hanging on to a player like Eriksson, is just regressive. . That’s not hate,. It’s fact.

  Like I said before, I’d personally rather see Z MacEwan get that ice time to develop..  just as we have given Jake the same opportunity.

it moves us forward.. it takes us to next season before it begins.. its progressive.

To hell with player empathy, and mediocrity.

Edited January 31, 2020 by SilentSam

[The Lock]

17 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Maybe you “nit pick” in life too much and it all gets overwhelming,.  I’m rather charmed that your that literate..  but I think your trying too hard to be “right “..   and that’s just wrong

We’re all hoping for this team to get even better, evolve..   hanging on to a player like Eriksson, is just regressive. .  Like I said before, I’d personally rather see Z MacEwan get that ice time to develop..  just as we have given Jake the same opportunity.

it moves us forward.. it takes us to next season before it begins.. its progressive.

To hell with player empathy, and mediocrity.

Okay, well I'm going to ignore your insults of the first line for the most part, but I will say that I've had some great discussions with people in the past who have different opinions than me. I'm not "trying to be right". I don't even care if I'm right or wrong but too many people here do. (and remember dude, we're all equals in the end, unless if you're really that "charmed" with literacy. I'm taken already though )

 

The problem I see with Eriksson is we can't just let him go. He only sheds 1mil cap space if in the minors. He's not exactly tradable unless if we give up picks or something else. He's literally stuck on our team. Of course getting rid of his contract moves us forward, but how do we do that? People talk like this is some easy task to do. Don't you think it would have already been done if it were the case? lol

 

So then my thought process if why not at least cheer for the guy since he's actually playing well. It's not hard to do.

Edited January 31, 2020 by The Lock

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

Okay, well I'm going to ignore your insults of the first line for the most part, but I will say that I've had some great discussions with people in the past who have different opinions than me. I'm not "trying to be right". I don't even care if I'm right or wrong but too many people here do. (and remember dude, we're all equals in the end, unless if you're really that "charmed" with literacy. I'm taken already though )

 

The problem I see with Eriksson is we can't just let him go. He only sheds 1mil cap space if in the minors. He's not exactly tradable unless if we give up picks or something else. He's literally stuck on our team. Of course getting rid of his contract moves us forward, but how do we do that? People talk like this is some easy task to do. Don't you think it would have already been done if it were the case? lol

 

So then my thought process if why not at least cheer for the guy since he's actually playing well. It's not hard to do.

...  I beleive this thread is actually about David Backes getting waived.

kind of a same/same if we compare it to Eriksson,.  Which is how this conversation started in the first place.

Seems it was an easy task to waive DB.. who personally I think would do better than Eriksson if he were to be teamed up with Pearson and Horvat.

So since Backes was waived,.  I’m happy to use him as an example of “any player” playing with Bo or Pearson. 

 

As I stated, I’m past the empathy and compassion for Eriksson,. I don5 beleive I ever said I “hated” him..   and I never was insulted by that comment. .  But others might be.

[theo5789]

7 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Let’s get really real..

Almost Anybody in this league would look good in LE ‘s position on this team.

I think there may be players that could fill his spot and succeed indeed. But I disagree that almost anybody could. The line hasn't had as much success as it does now compared to earlier in the year. LE is finding a role that is beyond pressbox/waiver fodder and is contributing to the success of the team. Might as well start supporting him as long as he's helping our team because he currently isn't an anchor.

[Tower102]

12 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Now your trying to argue with me lol.

... so, Since we have so many, perhaps we trade him as an abundant center.. for a high draft pick if his game doesn’t come up.
 

Something will have to give when those contracts line up..  its a business, 

 

lines shift, performances waiver, players move.

its hockey,  anything can happen.
 

I tweak a line or 2 and you’ve lost your snow shoes and your touque..

 

I trust Green, he’s got a grasp on who’s hot and who’s not..  it would be more of a waste to keep Boeser struggling on the top six at this moment. 
... but like I said,  lines shift , performances waiver, players move..  there’s opportunity in that.

 

 

I am not trying to argue with you, but you can't spew nonsense and not have it disputed. Boeser is not a center. He is a winger. He is not under performing, I never said he was. It would be stupid to trade him as well. Also, he isn't currently in the top 6 so your wrong their too. I have not freaked out at all, just continue to calmly point out where you are wrong or have a nonsense idea (the whole point of these boards). 

 

You are waivering a lot on your timeline as well. Why bring up future contracts... has nothing to do with this year in terms of lines. There are really 2 points I am trying to lay out against what you said and you have yet to say a single thing that remotely makes me reconsider.

 

1. Boeser is not a center, and playing him on the fourth line is stupid. We have plenty of other centers so no need to force a winger in to center (Petterson, Miller, Horvat, Gaudette, Sutter, Beagle are all centers). 

 

2. Why shake up the lineup when it has won 13 of the last 16 games. Eriksson included. I understand a desire to trade him although we have to understand how unlikely that is. But wanting to send him to the minors solely because he is overpaid is bad logic. If he was making 2 mil a year or less, we would be happy with him in our lineup making that much and people would not ask for him to be sent down. Since he is making 6 mil a year, we can understandably want to get rid of his overpaid contract... but it does not change the fact the team is better with him in the lineup. 

 

If you choose to respond to this again. please address one of those with facts about how your opinion of what the Canucks should do will make us better and why we should do that despite winning 13 of our last 16. 

[Tortorella's Rant]

Backes is getting old and Schenn sucks. I wonder if Brian regrets not trading him for those ten hypothetical first rounders. 

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, Tower102 said:

I am not trying to argue with you, but you can't spew nonsense and not have it disputed. Boeser is not a center. He is a winger. He is not under performing, I never said he was. It would be stupid to trade him as well. Also, he isn't currently in the top 6 so your wrong their too. I have not freaked out at all, just continue to calmly point out where you are wrong or have a nonsense idea (the whole point of these boards). 

 

You are waivering a lot on your timeline as well. Why bring up future contracts... has nothing to do with this year in terms of lines. There are really 2 points I am trying to lay out against what you said and you have yet to say a single thing that remotely makes me reconsider.

 

1. Boeser is not a center, and playing him on the fourth line is stupid. We have plenty of other centers so no need to force a winger in to center (Petterson, Miller, Horvat, Gaudette, Sutter, Beagle are all centers). 

 

2. Why shake up the lineup when it has won 13 of the last 16 games. Eriksson included. I understand a desire to trade him although we have to understand how unlikely that is. But wanting to send him to the minors solely because he is overpaid is bad logic. If he was making 2 mil a year or less, we would be happy with him in our lineup making that much and people would not ask for him to be sent down. Since he is making 6 mil a year, we can understandably want to get rid of his overpaid contract... but it does not change the fact the team is better with him in the lineup. 

 

If you choose to respond to this again. please address one of those with facts about how your opinion of what the Canucks should do will make us better and why we should do that despite winning 13 of our last 16. 

I’m not waivering,  but you are making a mountain out of a molehill here.

Im sure Boeser will turn things around , but for now,.  And perhaps what’s left in this season, Jake’s uphill curve is the one to ride for many reasons..

you do realize this dibocal your creating came from me hypothetically proposing we waive LE, like what the Bruins have done with Backes.

i was sure Boeser lined up as centre in College or international play.. I stand corrected, but the game today has positions roving , apart from being a face off specialist in that position.

Im not concerned about Boeser, you are, cause I placed him on a 3rd or 4th line in a hypothetical lineup..

look where he is now.

like I say..  I’d rather see MacEwan get the opportunity that he deserves over the privilege pony show we have granted Eriksson..

I see Mac and Bailey have joined the team..

I would love either of those boys to push Eriksson into the chronicles of “do you remember when”..

No, I don’t care how much Eriksson is making..

he is stopping the natural progress of minor players bumping and earning their way to place and or develop with this team.
its a privilege he has had for 3.5 years .

Personally I’m just done with this player.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by SilentSam

[Rob_Zepp]

On 1/17/2020 at 10:02 AM, PhillipBlunt said:

I would, without even blinking. He's a tank.

A tank skates faster.

[Tower102]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

I’m not waivering,  but you are making a mountain out of a molehill here.

Im sure Boeser will turn things around , but for now,.  And perhaps what’s left in this season, Jake’s uphill curve is the one to ride for many reasons..

you do realize this dibocal your creating came from me hypothetically proposing we waive LE, like what the Bruins have done with Backes.

i was sure Boeser lined up as centre in College or international play.. I stand corrected, but the game today has positions roving , apart from being a face off specialist in that position.

Im not concerned about Boeser, you are, cause I placed him on a 3rd or 4th line in a hypothetical lineup..

look where he is now.

like I say..  I’d rather see MacEwan get the opportunity that he deserves over the privilege pony show we have granted Eriksson..

I see Mac and Bailey have joined the team..

I would love either of those boys to push Eriksson into the chronicles of “do you remember when”..

No, I don’t care how much Eriksson is making..

he is stopping the natural progress of minor players bumping and earning their way to place and or develop with this team.
its a privilege he has had for 3.5 years .

Personally I’m just done with this player.

 

 

Ok so it sounds like we are done hashing out Boeser. I am not concerned with him in real life, just had the issue with him at Center on a fourth line.

 

For Eriksson, can you clarify that for next game you would like him removed from the lineup in favour of an AHL callup? If so, why would you change a winning formula? 

 

I understand that if we cool off then feel free to pull him and try other things. My main issue is that this is the best hockey the team has been playing in a VERY long time. 13 wins in 16 games is unreal. Lets run this winning streak as long as we can with what we are doing then when we inevitably cool off start talking about making changes.

 

PS. I assume the callups are for Motte...looked like a bad hit. Probably will see one on the fourth line.