Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Waivers] David Backes, Luke Schenn


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, oldnews said:

 

 

I'm fine with waiving Eriksson - when in fact he represents the 14th best forward option. 

See what I did.. I got rid of the nonsense..   it’s the only single sentence that was needed. . And I manipulated nothing.

 

He is the best 14th player option.. .?  Worth waiving I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, gurn said:

signed in a "tax free" state and probably took home an extra 100 grr. 

 

 

15 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Taking less money to go to a legit contending team is not always a guy who just doesn't want to be somewhere. 

I dunno I think he had a good thing going with Hughes a real chance at proving himself as a top 6 nhl dman after failing with multiple teams And he made a bad decision to leave don’t see why we reward him a spot on our roster over guys that showed they wanted to be here and have been part of this turn around this year 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, LegionOfDoom said:

 

I dunno I think he had a good thing going with Hughes a real chance at proving himself as a top 6 nhl dman after failing with multiple teams And he made a bad decision to leave don’t see why we reward him a spot on our roster over guys that showed they wanted to be here and have been part of this turn around this year 

I'm not for picking up Schenn, but he left to go for a cup run not cause he “didn't want to be here” 

 

I even said in this thread that I'd call up Rafferty before claiming Schenn. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

See what I did.. I got rid of the nonsense..   it’s the only single sentence that was needed. . And I manipulated nothing.

 

He is the best 14th player option.. .?  Worth waiving I think.

Miller Petey Boeser 

Pearson Horvat Leivo 

Ferland Gaudette Virtanen 

Roussel Beagle Sutter 

Motte Schaller Baertschi 

Graovac macewan goldy

Boucher Eriksson 

 

More like the twentieth best:bigblush:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SilentSam said:

So you force him to decide. Waive, minors or retire.  If he’s not going to walk away from the money, he is NOT going to walk away any way..   it’s a moot point.  Same same... but a prospect gets in.

 

 

There was NO opportunity to develop that more because of the position and games taken by Eriksson.

LE waived should have happened at the beginning of 18-19. Schaller has resurrected himself , unlike Eriksson, I value Schaller over Eriksson ... and the MONEY difference is incredible.

 

 

He has a fantastic shot and is a fantastic PKr... that’s a plus above Eriksson s game.

 

 

No, it’s tarnished with Millions (24m? to date) wasted for    n o t h I n g .  stopped player   p r o g g r e s s I o n .

If we had made a point to force the waive/ retirement issue last season. there’s no way he would play 2 full seasons down there.

He would be gone. We would have freedom.

 

 

Your drinking to early before game time Jimmy,. Your not gonna see the 3rd period.

But before you pass out ;)    have a good look at what could have been when you watch E Kane play .

listen - I'm not trying to pick a fight, I like your posts. 

 

Just pointing out how, in my view, we're &^@#ing fortunate that Loui has found a useful home with Pearson and Bo. Going back to last season when they were experimented with we're now taking about 25 games they've been together and producing well. Thats not luck anymore. 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SilentSam said:

So let’s both stop with the nonsense.

how would you feel if we waived Eriksson?

 

 

So how would you feel if they waived Eriksson ?

fine, assuming it was for some sort of upgrade. E.g., lets say Jim somehow gets a guy like Wayne Simmonds in or something at the TDL I would certainly like to see that and that RW spot with Bo would be where I'd like to see a guy like that (I'm assuming Ferland is toast).

 

In the meantime if that line keeps going well, if nothing else it might make Loui more tradable to someone like Ottawa since they can see a top 6 fit with a younger player maybe. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SilentSam said:

See what I did.. I got rid of the nonsense..   it’s the only single sentence that was needed. . And I manipulated nothing.

 

He is the best 14th player option.. .?  Worth waiving I think.

It just seems like the possible upside of having waived Eriksson (him possibly retiring) vastly outweighs the incremental improvement in our lineup by having him available for injury replacement over guys like MacEwan, Goldobin, or Schaller.

 

That freed up money represents a massive difference in our cap situation over the coming three years and the ability to retain depth as well as possibly add players.  That is a big fat hairy deal, especially when we are currently looking at pushing the millions of dollars of Petterson and Hughes ELC bonuses into next season; and then staying well under the cap next season so as not to push their next season bonuses into the year we are also paying them retail price contracts while still trying to carry Eriksson.  Even a 5% chance he did retire would be worth having done it.

There is almost zero harm in doing it either.  So you bump up Virtanen or Sutter to the 2nd line for a stint, or you call up Goldobin for that spot and try to make it a scoring rather than match up line.  The trickle down effect is just putting MacEwan on the 4th line rather than in the press box.  There is nothing to say you can't bring Eriksson up if he didn't decide to retire or the other players were doing terribly.

We may have passed that point now as he might kind of have some hope even if we do waive him, because he has had a short stint of mediocre play rather than his terrible play.  Really you had to convince him that he was being demoted and would never have a sniff at the big league again.  Anyone can handle a few weeks in the AHL, but three years looming ahead of you on the busses away from your family is a long long time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

listen - I'm not trying to pick a fight, I like your posts. 

 

Just pointing out how, in my view, we're &^@#ing fortunate that Loui has found a useful home with Pearson and Bo. Going back to last season when they were experimented with we're now taking about 25 games they've been together and producing well. Thats not luck anymore. 

 

Not fighting Jimmy,  I always appreciate your thoughts, and I’m humbled to know it’s reciprocated..  you know I usually “GO” with the obnoxious a holes that only troll to make themselves feel better by jesting and berating some posters quotes using the words STUIPID, RIDICULOUS, and so on.. never quoting any conclusions of their own.

 

Eriksson is only playing an average Mo’s game..  Pearson’s game has come up , Horvat Game has come up.. but I think the driver on that line is Pearson..  it’s Eriksson who is cashing in on the other 2’s chemistry.

Put Schaller or Leivo with that line the way those 2 are playing now and it’s easily 2 - 3 points a night or better.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Provost said:

It just seems like the possible upside of having waived Eriksson (him possibly retiring) vastly outweighs the incremental improvement in our lineup by having him available for injury replacement over guys like MacEwan, Goldobin, or Schaller.

 

That freed up money represents a massive difference in our cap situation over the coming three years and the ability to retain depth as well as possibly add players.  That is a big fat hairy deal, especially when we are currently looking at pushing the millions of dollars of Petterson and Hughes ELC bonuses into next season; and then staying well under the cap next season so as not to push their next season bonuses into the year we are also paying them retail price contracts while still trying to carry Eriksson.  Even a 5% chance he did retire would be worth having done it.

There is almost zero harm in doing it either.  So you bump up Virtanen or Sutter to the 2nd line for a stint, or you call up Goldobin for that spot and try to make it a scoring rather than match up line.  The trickle down effect is just putting MacEwan on the 4th line rather than in the press box.  There is nothing to say you can't bring Eriksson up if he didn't decide to retire or the other players were doing terribly.

We may have passed that point now as he might kind of have some hope even if we do waive him, because he has had a short stint of mediocre play rather than his terrible play.  Really you had to convince him that he was being demoted and would never have a sniff at the big league again.  Anyone can handle a few weeks in the AHL, but three years looming ahead of you on the busses away from your family is a long long time.

The only perspective that bewilders me is Managements take on this... surely if they see a Heavy player like Backes getting waived, they must be questioning there own decisions in this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Not fighting Jimmy,  I always appreciate your thoughts, and I’m humbled to know it’s reciprocated..  you know I usually “GO” with the obnoxious a holes that only troll to make themselves feel better by jesting and berating some posters quotes using the words STUIPID, RIDICULOUS, and so on.. never quoting any conclusions of their own.

 

Eriksson is only playing an average Mo’s game..  Pearson’s game has come up , Horvat Game has come up.. but I think the driver on that line is Pearson..  it’s Eriksson who is cashing in on the other 2’s chemistry.

Put Schaller or Leivo with that line the way those 2 are playing now and it’s easily 2 - 3 points a night or better.

well, at least we'll always have Tryamkin :lol:

 

Lou's always been the complimentary piece on a good line when he's had success, he did that in Dallas and Boston, is he doing that now? Is he trying harder now that he's back in the top 6? some mix of both? dunno for sure. Or is he being carried? maybe its a mix of all 3? 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SilentSam said:

See what I did.. I got rid of the nonsense..   it’s the only single sentence that was needed. . And I manipulated nothing.

 

He is the best 14th player option.. .?  Worth waiving I think.

you've waived Eriksson.

Now what is your lineup?

Don't give me stories about acquiring an alternative top 6 scoring winger - let's see what you'd do with what this team has.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Loui for Backes is on the table I sure hope J.B. at least looks into it.

 

From a Comets perspective they also had to bring in someone from the Islanders' minor league team because the center depth is so depleted behind Camper.  Graovac is still out too and perhaps they could use another farm hand with NHL experience, hopefully to show the young guns the ropes if he agrees to assignment.  Beagle has also been getting crushed in the 4th line center role, so maybe he could be re-signed for cheaper after his contract expires if he shows well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

well, at least we'll always have Tryamkin :lol:

 

Lou's always been the complimentary piece on a good line when he's had success, he did that in Dallas and Boston, is he doing that now? Is he trying harder now that he's back in the top 6? some mix of both? dunno for sure. Or is he being carried? maybe its a mix of all 3? 

 

LE isn’t offering much more than what a prospect should be in his position... and yes, I’d rather have an extra D with the team ..

something needs to change there to add something of that 6 mil value he is on the toilet with.

cheers Jimmy,.. games on. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

you've waived Eriksson.

Now what is your lineup?

Don't give me stories about acquiring an alternative top 6 scoring winger - let's see what you'd do with what this team has.

 

MacEwan, Bartschi , Schaller, Boucher. Ferland   All options at some point,  and Leivo if his patella heals in the next 3 weeks.

id rather do without LE,  he is NO better than any of those players,. The play of Horvat and Pearson rising right now are the coattails that Eriksson is on.

If Eriksson dosent retire, he will next year.

 Any of the aforementioned deserve the same PRIVILEGE that Eriksson has been given.. and positioning dosent matter any more in today’s game so let’s leave that nonsense out

Edited by SilentSam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

MacEwan, Bartschi , Schaller, Boucher. Ferland   All options at some point,  and Leivo if his patella heals in the next 3 weeks.

id rather do without LE,  he is NO better than any of those players,. The play of Horvat and Pearson rising right now are the coattails that Eriksson is on.

If Eriksson dosent retire, he will next year.

 Any of the aforementioned deserve the same PRIVILEGE that Eriksson has been given.. and positioning dosent matter any more in today’s game so let’s leave that nonsense out

Shall I cut out all the nonsense - to what is needed?

I don't see anything there.  

I asked you what lineup you propose after waiving him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Shall I cut out all the nonsense - to what is needed?

I don't see anything there.  

I asked you what lineup you propose after waiving him.

I’m going to trim around today’s line up.

 

Pearson Horvat Guadette

Miller.   Petey.    Virtannen 

Sutter   Beagle    Motte

Schaller Boeser.  Rooster

 

or.

 

Pearson. Horvat Boeser

Miller   Petey.  Virtannen 

Boeser  Sutter   Rooster

Schaller Beagle  Motte

 

still at some point have access to the likes of  Ferland Leivo. MacEwan Bartschi.

its NOT Eriksson playing better... it’s the rest of the TEAM that is.

Eriksson should be in the same position as Backes, who I regard as a better player.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I’m going to trim around today’s line up.

 

Pearson Horvat Guadette

Miller.   Petey.    Virtannen 

Sutter   Beagle    Motte

Schaller Boeser.  Rooster

 

or.

 

Pearson. Horvat Boeser

Miller   Petey.  Virtannen 

Boeser  Sutter   Rooster

Schaller Beagle  Motte

 

 

I don't necessarily agree with your lineups - nor do I necessarily agree that Schaller is a better option than Eriksson - but I don't really have a problem with removing LE -  once this team has both Sutter and Beagle in the lineup with Sutter healthy enough to play center.   When that's the case, I'd agree with the idea of moving any of Virtanen, Boeser or Gaudette onto that wing, as Horvat's becomes a secondary scoring line and doesn't really need to play matchup   Not going to argue with the preference of Schaller over LE,  but there's nothing 'objective' in their outcomes to suggest Schaller is outperforming him (his production is worse, his shot differential stats are worse, his goal metrics are far worse - Schaller is -12, LE +3, in comparable roles, zone starts....however Schaller has played primarily shutdown with Beagle and Motte....toss a coin, but I would have waived them both at season's start with a healthy lineup - realistically they are both 12/13 still, so waiving them would depend on another player returning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't necessarily agree with your lineups - nor do I necessarily agree that Schaller is a better option than Eriksson - but I don't really have a problem with removing LE -  once this team has both Sutter and Beagle in the lineup with Sutter healthy enough to play center.   When that's the case, I'd agree with the idea of moving any of Virtanen, Boeser or Gaudette onto that wing, as Horvat's becomes a secondary scoring line and doesn't really need to play matchup   Not going to argue with the preference of Schaller over LE,  but there's nothing 'objective' in their outcomes to suggest Schaller is outperforming him (his production is worse, his shot differential stats are worse, his goal metrics are far worse - Schaller is -12, LE +3, in comparable roles, zone starts....however Schaller has played primarily shutdown with Beagle and Motte....toss a coin, but I would have waived them both at season's start with a healthy lineup - realistically they are both 12/13 still, so waiving them would depend on another player returning.

It’s the D that needs depth If were playoff bound ONews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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