The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Canuck Veterans

[Bad_BOI_pete]

I was looking at Edler's stats and noticed his raw stats were very good. so i decided i would compare him with other veterans over the age of 33 along with beagle and LE. Edlers stats were so impressive i decided to compare him with the entire league.

 

 

 

The Good: Alex Edler

Edler was 1st among the defenceman over the age 33 with 1.441 ESP/60 First in in PPP/60 with 5.967, 1st in blocked shots, 5th in hits, 6th in SH TOI and 10th in PP TOI and 1st in PIM

 

Ranking against the entire league with at least a minute of PP TOI he was 10th in the league for PPP/60 (quinn Hughes was 12th and schmidt was 5th) and for players that played over 14 minutes a game he was 13th in ESP/60 (quinn hughes was 16th schmidt was 31st) 3rd in BS, 39th in hits and third in minor PIM. I Wonder if he's working on his his zone exit's this offseason  and not being such a dirty player lol.

 

 

The Bad. Jay Beagle

i decided to compare Beagle with the other 4th liner Veterans brad richardson and nate thompson.

his puck possesion metrics are terrible, but its the way hes utilized and not only because of his puck prowess. .of the 4th liners he is the worst of the bunch offensively and defensively, who both signed for less than a million this year. his point totals are slipping every year and he is far from his selke nominated 2016-2017 season. on top of that his PIM went up 150% when eveyrone else on the teams went down, thats another sign the game may be getting away from him.I wished he would retire because there were much better options in free agency. 2 more year's 

 

 

 

The Ugly: Loui erikkson

ranks 34th out of the 40 veteran forwards in ESP/60 once you factor out empty net points. without empty net points he is the lowest scoring winger who played over 22 games. he has the third lowest blocked shots and the lowest in hits if you factor in games played. the only positive is his shorthanded time is ranked third among the 40. with schaller gone i sure hope louie eriksson doesn't makes the team because of his usefullness while shorthanded. Hoglander anyone?

 

Between Schmidt, Hughes, Edler and Myers we will have some awesome options on the powerplay and Edler and Schmidt will be great on the PK. Maybe Edler can teach LE and Beagle how turn around thier game

[Kevin Biestra]

WTF six guys ranked lower than Loui?

[Bad_BOI_pete]

3 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

WTF six guys ranked lower than Loui?

 

Brad Richardson

Jay Beagle

Troy Brouwer

Micheal Haley

Frans Nielsen

Mark Letestu

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by Petey_BOI

[Kevin Biestra]

2 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

 

Brad Richardson

Jay Beagle

Troy Brouwer

Micheal Haley

Frans Nielsen

Mark Letestu

 

 

Damn maybe I can still make the NHL.

[Fred65]

Edler for some reason seems to irritate many fans, And yet you could move that player to any team in the league. They'd all want him. We don't appreciate what he brings. I know Green does, and put him out as often  and against the top players game in game out. It wasn't that long ago fans were asking to trade him, yeah right a good move ( not ) As  a defenseman he's pretty high up on the list of quality, similar in a number of ways to Ohlund. On top of that he seems to be a foundational player amongst his team mates. I hope we can resign him after the expansion. That sort of experience is extremely hard to replace

Edited December 2, 2020 by Fred65

[FaninMex]

1 hour ago, Petey_BOI said:

 

Brad Richardson

Jay Beagle

Troy Brouwer

Micheal Haley

Frans Nielsen

Mark Letestu

 

You know your stats are wrong when Beagle is worse than LE,

 

You win with Beagle in your bottom 4.

[canucklehead44]

Eriksson lacks offensive skill and doesn't show up on the score sheet for other box stats like hits, blocked shots etc. There is a reason why however Green, Horvat etc says he does the "little things well", sparking his nickname little things or little thinger. 

First - Pearson and Horvat performed much better with Eriksson on their line - this has been talked about and reported on several times. He is also a good penalty killer. This article from the hockey writers goes into great detail into his game: https://thehockeywriters.com/canucks-loui-eriksson-black-ace/

From an entertainment value he is terrible to watch and is a dead fish with the puck on his stick. That said he is a very useful defensive player and penalty killer. Pearson and Horvat are fantastic offensively but are awful defensively. Eriksson can take some of that defensive heavy lifting off their plate and allow Pearson & Horvat to drive offence. 

 

Jay Beagle is well loved on these boards because he is a hardworking vet who wins faceoffs and kills penalties but unfortunately he terrible. If Sutter moved into the 4C role I would much rather have Eriksson in the lineup over Beagle. 

 

[Where's Wellwood]

1 hour ago, canucklehead44 said:

Eriksson lacks offensive skill and doesn't show up on the score sheet for other box stats like hits, blocked shots etc. There is a reason why however Green, Horvat etc says he does the "little things well", sparking his nickname little things or little thinger. 

First - Pearson and Horvat performed much better with Eriksson on their line - this has been talked about and reported on several times. He is also a good penalty killer. This article from the hockey writers goes into great detail into his game: https://thehockeywriters.com/canucks-loui-eriksson-black-ace/

From an entertainment value he is terrible to watch and is a dead fish with the puck on his stick. That said he is a very useful defensive player and penalty killer. Pearson and Horvat are fantastic offensively but are awful defensively. Eriksson can take some of that defensive heavy lifting off their plate and allow Pearson & Horvat to drive offence. 

 

Jay Beagle is well loved on these boards because he is a hardworking vet who wins faceoffs and kills penalties but unfortunately he terrible. If Sutter moved into the 4C role I would much rather have Eriksson in the lineup over Beagle. 

 

Wasn't Beagle like top 5 in face off percentage? Replace that with Gaudette or something and we'd be hemmed in our zone even more than we were.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

3 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:

Eriksson lacks offensive skill and doesn't show up on the score sheet for other box stats like hits, blocked shots etc. There is a reason why however Green, Horvat etc says he does the "little things well", sparking his nickname little things or little thinger. 

First - Pearson and Horvat performed much better with Eriksson on their line - this has been talked about and reported on several times. He is also a good penalty killer. This article from the hockey writers goes into great detail into his game: https://thehockeywriters.com/canucks-loui-eriksson-black-ace/

From an entertainment value he is terrible to watch and is a dead fish with the puck on his stick. That said he is a very useful defensive player and penalty killer. Pearson and Horvat are fantastic offensively but are awful defensively. Eriksson can take some of that defensive heavy lifting off their plate and allow Pearson & Horvat to drive offence. 

 

Jay Beagle is well loved on these boards because he is a hardworking vet who wins faceoffs and kills penalties but unfortunately he terrible. If Sutter moved into the 4C role I would much rather have Eriksson in the lineup over Beagle. 

 

the article you provided is a joke, either the author doesnt understand advanced stats or hes LE relative. here are advanced stats that show how bad LE is, Beagle is bad too but at least he can take faceoffs,hits and blocks shots. which le does none of

 

I think your the only person on this forum and maybe the world who thinks LE is a better defender than either horvat or pearson. LE was  our worst player in the playoffs and was a healthy scratch for 7 games. here is a article that highlights how bad he was there is also a clip of game 5 that highlights LE. he made one good play all game with the puck and much more bad plays. away from the puck he made zero turnovers and played well postionally but was pretty much a non factor.  https://canucksarmy.com/2020/09/22/loui-eriksson/

 

this article shows how bad LE is without horvat and how good horvat is without him yes it also shows that erikksson plays well with horvat. but the bigger factor is how well horvat plays with pearson, and how much worse they play without each other.

Team	Players	Comp	TOI	CF	CA	CF%RC	DFF	DFA	DFF%RC
VAN	Loui Eriksson without Bo Horvat	Elite	42.33	38	47	-2.56	28.3	36.4	-5.09
VAN	Bo Horvat without Loui Eriksson	Elite	139.98	116	134	-0.86	93	98.8	0.08
VAN	Bo Horvat with Loui Eriksson	Elite	154.43	144	133	6.3	103.8	91.5	5.94
VAN	Bo Horvat and Loui Eriksson both off	Elite	322.18	292	349	-3.09	219	246.1	-2.72
VAN	Loui Eriksson without Bo Horvat	Middle	92.6	79	79	2.11	59	52.5	4.54
VAN	Bo Horvat without Loui Eriksson	Middle	140.93	145	142	2.92	107	113.1	-0.2
VAN	Bo Horvat with Loui Eriksson	Middle	97.97	104	113	-0.22	79.5	81	0.85
VAN	Bo Horvat and Loui Eriksson both off	Middle	534.05	467	524	-2.45	370.3	400.4	-1.89
VAN	Loui Eriksson without Bo Horvat	Gritensity	75.23	59	72	-6.68	29.8	43.5	-10.21
VAN	Bo Horvat without Loui Eriksson	Gritensity	113.25	116	92	5.42	85.2	75.7	3.28
VAN	Bo Horvat with Loui Eriksson	Gritensity	57.52	62	48	5.7	54	40.6	7.56
VAN	Bo Horvat and Loui Eriksson both off	Gritensity	573.77	546	537	-2.38	366.7	371.5	-1.7

 

this article shows how LE is not a PK god and Pearson and motte are best PK'ERS beagle truly does suck at generating an offense, but he takes faceoffs hits and will block shots too

 

	TOI	HDCF	HDCA	HDCF/60	HDCA/60	HDCF%/60
MOTTE	68.97	2	18	1.74	15.66	11.11%
PEARSON	74.4	3	28	2.42	22.58	10.71%
SUTTER	103.75	3	31	1.73	17.93	9.68%
MYERS	112.17	3	42	1.60	22.47	7.14%
LE	69.65	1	25	0.86	21.54	4.00%
BENN	104.47	1	26	0.57	14.93	3.85%
EDLER	184.5	2	70	0.65	22.76	2.86%
TANEV	235.72	2	85	0.51	21.64	2.35%
SCHALLER	143.17	1	56	0.42	23.47	1.79%
BEAGLE	167.17	0	62	0.00	22.25	0.00%

Player	SHP	SH S%	SHP/60	SH S/60	PP GA/60	SH TOI	SH TOI/GP	SH TOI%
Alexander Edler	0	0	0	3	7.92	181:49	3:05	58.6
Tanner Pearson	3	28.5	2.46	5.7	7.38	73:10	1:04	20.5
Christopher Tanev	1	0	0.26	0.5	7.14	235:13	3:25	65.8
Brandon Sutter	0	0	0	3.5	6.91	104:16	2:22	47
Loui Eriksson	0	0	0	1.7	6.86	69:58	1:26	28.5
Jay Beagle	2	25	0.72	1.4	6.83	166:50	3:02	56.9
Tim Schaller	1	100	0.42	0.4	6.71	143:04	2:48	51.8
Tyler Myers	1	25	0.55	2.2	6	109:55	1:37	31.2
Jordie Benn	0	0	0	2.9	5.79	103:38	2:21	42.8
Tyler Motte	0	0	0	4.4	3.53	68:05	2:00	41.2

 

just because LE played better with pearson and horvat, than boeser and virtanen doesnt mean there isnt better options. in thier limited time playing together sutter and pearson were on fire. sutter barely played with horvat but thier was promising stats too. if gaudette is allowed to fly on his own sutter pearson and horvat is the best option. sutter has even better chemistry with peason and horvat. 

 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

8 hours ago, FaninMex said:

You know your stats are wrong when Beagle is worse than LE,

 

You win with Beagle in your bottom 4, in 2016.

i never compared the two, and in fact i implied that LE was worse. the whole the good the bad and the ugly was a ranking. 

i fixed the last sentence for you.

[FaninMex]

Ranking 2 players would mean that there is a comparison. So, yes you did.

If you implied that LE was worse, it was way past my bed time and I missed it. I understood that your numbers put Beagle as worse which is not what I believe. Also, Beagle was vital to helping the Canucks do what they did. Beagle and Motte have amazing chemistry and when I is missing from the line up it seems like they don't have the same jump.

Beagle also adds grit on the fourth line that the Canucks need. So changing my sentence  to "You win with Beagle in your bottom 4, in 2016." is wrong again.

[smithers joe]

it would be nice to know what all the headings are and what they mean. 

beagle also brings leadership to the team and sets an example in self discipline. always comes to camp in great shape. they just need beag’s to play until they have someone to take over that role. maybe hawrluk going forward. beag’s wasn’t brought in to score goals but to show younger players what it takes to be competitive.

[IBatch]

58 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

it would be nice to know what all the headings are and what they mean. 

beagle also brings leadership to the team and sets an example in self discipline. always comes to camp in great shape. they just need beag’s to play until they have someone to take over that role. maybe hawrluk going forward. beag’s wasn’t brought in to score goals but to show younger players what it takes to be competitive.

Absolutely.   Both him and Sutter did their part in the playoffs - winning face offs, and Motte and Beagle formed one of the most affective shut down lines in the playoffs right until the end.   Motte was fantastic really, and aside from Myers, you can always expect Beagle to add grit and face wash guys, be involved after whistles etc.    Sure he doesn’t add much of any offense, neither is that his role.    If he was only signed for one more year I’d suggest we consider re-signing Sutter to fill that role...we won’t have to worry about it for two more seasons. 

[canucklehead44]

10 hours ago, Petey_BOI said:

the article you provided is a joke, either the author doesnt understand advanced stats or hes LE relative. here are advanced stats that show how bad LE is, Beagle is bad too but at least he can take faceoffs,hits and blocks shots. which le does none of

 

I think your the only person on this forum and maybe the world who thinks LE is a better defender than either horvat or pearson. LE was  our worst player in the playoffs and was a healthy scratch for 7 games. here is a article that highlights how bad he was there is also a clip of game 5 that highlights LE. he made one good play all game with the puck and much more bad plays. away from the puck he made zero turnovers and played well postionally but was pretty much a non factor.  https://canucksarmy.com/2020/09/22/loui-eriksson/

 

this article shows how bad LE is without horvat and how good horvat is without him yes it also shows that erikksson plays well with horvat. but the bigger factor is how well horvat plays with pearson, and how much worse they play without each other.

 

Team	Players	Comp	TOI	CF	CA	CF%RC	DFF	DFA	DFF%RC
VAN	Loui Eriksson without Bo Horvat	Elite	42.33	38	47	-2.56	28.3	36.4	-5.09
VAN	Bo Horvat without Loui Eriksson	Elite	139.98	116	134	-0.86	93	98.8	0.08
VAN	Bo Horvat with Loui Eriksson	Elite	154.43	144	133	6.3	103.8	91.5	5.94
VAN	Bo Horvat and Loui Eriksson both off	Elite	322.18	292	349	-3.09	219	246.1	-2.72
VAN	Loui Eriksson without Bo Horvat	Middle	92.6	79	79	2.11	59	52.5	4.54
VAN	Bo Horvat without Loui Eriksson	Middle	140.93	145	142	2.92	107	113.1	-0.2
VAN	Bo Horvat with Loui Eriksson	Middle	97.97	104	113	-0.22	79.5	81	0.85
VAN	Bo Horvat and Loui Eriksson both off	Middle	534.05	467	524	-2.45	370.3	400.4	-1.89
VAN	Loui Eriksson without Bo Horvat	Gritensity	75.23	59	72	-6.68	29.8	43.5	-10.21
VAN	Bo Horvat without Loui Eriksson	Gritensity	113.25	116	92	5.42	85.2	75.7	3.28
VAN	Bo Horvat with Loui Eriksson	Gritensity	57.52	62	48	5.7	54	40.6	7.56
VAN	Bo Horvat and Loui Eriksson both off	Gritensity	573.77	546	537	-2.38	366.7	371.5	-1.7

 

this article shows how LE is not a PK god and Pearson and motte are best PK'ERS beagle truly does suck at generating an offense, but he takes faceoffs hits and will block shots too

 

 

	TOI	HDCF	HDCA	HDCF/60	HDCA/60	HDCF%/60
MOTTE	68.97	2	18	1.74	15.66	11.11%
PEARSON	74.4	3	28	2.42	22.58	10.71%
SUTTER	103.75	3	31	1.73	17.93	9.68%
MYERS	112.17	3	42	1.60	22.47	7.14%
LE	69.65	1	25	0.86	21.54	4.00%
BENN	104.47	1	26	0.57	14.93	3.85%
EDLER	184.5	2	70	0.65	22.76	2.86%
TANEV	235.72	2	85	0.51	21.64	2.35%
SCHALLER	143.17	1	56	0.42	23.47	1.79%
BEAGLE	167.17	0	62	0.00	22.25	0.00%

 

Player	SHP	SH S%	SHP/60	SH S/60	PP GA/60	SH TOI	SH TOI/GP	SH TOI%
Alexander Edler	0	0	0	3	7.92	181:49	3:05	58.6
Tanner Pearson	3	28.5	2.46	5.7	7.38	73:10	1:04	20.5
Christopher Tanev	1	0	0.26	0.5	7.14	235:13	3:25	65.8
Brandon Sutter	0	0	0	3.5	6.91	104:16	2:22	47
Loui Eriksson	0	0	0	1.7	6.86	69:58	1:26	28.5
Jay Beagle	2	25	0.72	1.4	6.83	166:50	3:02	56.9
Tim Schaller	1	100	0.42	0.4	6.71	143:04	2:48	51.8
Tyler Myers	1	25	0.55	2.2	6	109:55	1:37	31.2
Jordie Benn	0	0	0	2.9	5.79	103:38	2:21	42.8
Tyler Motte	0	0	0	4.4	3.53	68:05	2:00	41.2

 

just because LE played better with pearson and horvat, than boeser and virtanen doesnt mean there isnt better options. in thier limited time playing together sutter and pearson were on fire. sutter barely played with horvat but thier was promising stats too. if gaudette is allowed to fly on his own sutter pearson and horvat is the best option. sutter has even better chemistry with peason and horvat. 

 

It was pulled specifically for regular season - playoffs are a very different beast due to a smaller sample size both in games and variety of opponents. Although as a vet he should step up in the playoffs so that is disappointing. 

 

Also it is not my opinion, I thought Horvat was a beast defensively. Just going by the numbers and what I read in the Athletic  https://theathletic.com/1477901/2019/12/21/how-bo-horvats-defensive-issues-are-costing-the-canucks-at-even-strength/

 

Pass it to Bulis: https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/loui-eriksson-could-be-the-winger-bo-horvat-has-been-waiting-for-all-this-time-1.24049245

 

Again not my opinion. I hate Loui Eriksson and am so angry he is eating up 6 million of cap space when we are finally ready to compete. However, if there is any sliver of positivity since we are stuck with him it may make me go less insane. 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

4 hours ago, smithers joe said:

it would be nice to know what all the headings are and what they mean. 

beagle also brings leadership to the team and sets an example in self discipline. always comes to camp in great shape. they just need beag’s to play until they have someone to take over that role. maybe hawrluk going forward. beag’s wasn’t brought in to score goals but to show younger players what it takes to be competitive.

Corsi	All shots at the net (Includes missed shots, blocked shots and all shots on net)
CA	Corsi Against (raw count)
CA/60	Corsis against per 60 minutes of time on ice (TOI)
CA60RC	Relative Corsi against per 60 minutes of TOI releative to team mates for specific level of competition
CF	Corsi For (raw count)
CF%	Corsi For/Against ratio (CF/(CF+CA))
CF%RC	Corsi ratio relative to team mates for specific level of competition
CF/60	Corsi for per 60 minutes of TOI
CF60RC	Relative Corsi for per 60 minutes of TOI releative to team mates for specific level of competition
CTOI%	Competition TOI percentage (percentage of player's total TOI spent vs specific compeition level)
Dangerous Fenwick	Weighted shot metric using shot distance location and type of shot to give each shot a "danger" value.
DFA	Dangerous Fenwick against (raw count)
DFA/60	Dangerous Fenwick against per 60 minutes of TOI
DFA60RC	Relative Dangerous Fenwick against per 60 minutes of TOI releative to team mates for specific level of competition
DFF	Dangerous Fenwick For (raw count)
DFF%	Dangerous Fenwick For/Against ratio (DFF/(DFF+DFA))
DFF%RC	Dangerous Fenwick ratio relative to team mates for specific level of competition
DFF/60	Dangerous Fenwick for per 60 minutes of TOI
DFF60RC	Relative Dangerous Fenwick for per 60 minutes of TOI releative to team mates for specific level of competition

 

Fenwick means all shots missed and on net not including blocked shots.

HDCF (Highly Dangerous Corsi For) 

HDCA (Highly Dangerous Corsi Against) 

SH Short Handed

SHP short handed points

SH S% Short handed shooting percentage

PP GA/60 Powerplay goals againt per 60 minutes played

SH TOI Short handed time on ice totals

SH TOI/GP Short Handed Time on Ice divided by Games Played

SH TOI% this shows the percentage of time the player was deployed while the team was short handed. this is a real excellent stat. 

i would rather not use corsi when comparing LE  to other defenders, but i chose in this situation, because it was from the article that showed LE was our second best penalty killer. the author in the article did not consider TOI into his equation and based thier opinion on LE's performance on his total HDCA (Highly Dangerous Corsi Against) 

 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

5 hours ago, IBatch said:

Absolutely.   Both him and Sutter did their part in the playoffs - winning face offs, and Motte and Beagle formed one of the most affective shut down lines in the playoffs right until the end.   Motte was fantastic really, and aside from Myers, you can always expect Beagle to add grit and face wash guys, be involved after whistles etc.    Sure he doesn’t add much of any offense, neither is that his role.    If he was only signed for one more year I’d suggest we consider re-signing Sutter to fill that role...we won’t have to worry about it for two more seasons. 

 

1 hour ago, canucklehead44 said:

It was pulled specifically for regular season - playoffs are a very different beast due to a smaller sample size both in games and variety of opponents. Although as a vet he should step up in the playoffs so that is disappointing. 

 

Also it is not my opinion, I thought Horvat was a beast defensively. Just going by the numbers and what I read in the Athletic  https://theathletic.com/1477901/2019/12/21/how-bo-horvats-defensive-issues-are-costing-the-canucks-at-even-strength/

 

Pass it to Bulis: https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/loui-eriksson-could-be-the-winger-bo-horvat-has-been-waiting-for-all-this-time-1.24049245

 

Again not my opinion. I hate Loui Eriksson and am so angry he is eating up 6 million of cap space when we are finally ready to compete. However, if there is any sliver of positivity since we are stuck with him it may make me go less insane. 

can you explain GAR to me, how  it is calculated? bonus points if can use 10000 or less words.

and can you also explain how this GAR is showing that a replaclement level player would perform better than horvat? better  than myers, better than pearson?

 

i already agreed horvat and pearson played better with LE than boeser and virtanen. but that was in the regular season, and not in the playoffs. he was a scratch game 1 and only reason he played was because i think boeser was injured? as soon as boeser got back he was benched.

 

Players	WMTier	EVTOI	CF/60	CA/60	CF%	CF%RC	DFF/60	DFA/60	DFF%RC	GF/60	GA/60	GF%	ONSH%	ONSV%	PDO	SF/60	SA/60	SF%
Tanner Pearson without Bo Horvat	Elite	77.12	52.13	72.36	41.90	-4.70	35.63	62.32	-12.57	2.33	3.89	37.50	6.82	91.53	983.00	34.23	45.9	42.7
Bo Horvat without Tanner Pearson	Elite	107.10	45.38	75.63	37.50	-9.83	33.22	58.88	-13.31	2.24	1.12	66.70	9.52	97.06	1,066.00	23.53	38.1	38.2
Bo Horvat with Tanner Pearson	Elite	293.22	54.43	54.02	50.20	5.57	42.77	38.33	6.83	2.05	1.43	58.80	6.49	94.93	1,014.00	31.51	28.24	52.7
Bo Horvat and Tanner Pearson both off	Elite	493.15	55.36	63.27	46.70	1.00	42.57	42.79	4.15	2.80	1.95	59.00	9.66	93.98	1,036.00	28.96	32.36	47.2
Tanner Pearson without Bo Horvat	Middle	100.38	47.82	65.75	42.10	-6.39	34.37	53.97	-9.36	1.79	1.79	50.00	7.69	95.83	1,035.00	23.31	43.04	35.1
Bo Horvat without Tanner Pearson	Middle	114.45	62.91	59.24	51.50	3.93	40.31	43.62	0.59	1.57	3.67	30.00	4.76	88.33	931.00	33.03	31.45	51.2
Bo Horvat with Tanner Pearson	Middle	233.58	57.02	66.01	46.30	-2.09	42.56	49.70	-1.71	2.05	3.60	36.40	6.78	90.00	968.00	30.31	35.96	45.7
Bo Horvat and Tanner Pearson both off	Middle	781.38	52.75	55.52	48.70	1.92	40.52	42.17	4.01	3.07	2.99	50.60	10.42	90.42	1,008.00	29.49	31.25	48.5
Tanner Pearson without Bo Horvat	Gritensity	53.47	56.11	69.58	44.60	-7.15	26.93	52.63	-16.46	0.00	4.49	0.00	0.00	88.89	889.00	23.57	40.4	36.8
Bo Horvat without Tanner Pearson	Gritensity	80.67	52.07	61.74	45.80	-6.02	40.39	49.31	-4.97	3.72	2.98	55.60	15.15	91.11	1,063.00	24.55	33.47	42.3
Bo Horvat with Tanner Pearson	Gritensity	157.20	69.47	43.51	61.50	11.88	51.26	36.03	10.87	1.91	4.58	29.40	5.32	83.10	884.00	35.88	27.1	57
Bo Horvat and Tanner Pearson both off	Gritensity	784.25	56.39	55.47	50.40	-3.43	38.55	39.92	-1.49	2.75	2.22	55.40	9.30	92.51	1,018.00	29.61	29.61	50

these 2 have the ultimate chemistry

 

[The Lock]

On 12/2/2020 at 1:10 PM, Petey_BOI said:

 

Brad Richardson

Jay Beagle

Troy Brouwer

Micheal Haley

Frans Nielsen

Mark Letestu

 

I was going to say I'd much much MUCH rather have Brad Richardson on the team, and I still kind of would, but I did have to stop and think about it. Eriksson's not bad to the point where he shouldn't have an NHL gig still. In fact, if he had a 3rd/4th line salary, I bet the tune people would have here would be completely different. He's quite good in his own end and really can help with 3rd/4th line duties. It's only his contract that makes him look bad because he's grossly overpaid of what he delivers on.

 

Basically, at least he's not.... Wade Redden or something... lol

Edited December 4, 2020 by The Lock

[Kevin Biestra]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

I was going to say I'd much much MUCH rather have Brad Richardson on the team, and I still kind of would, but I did have to stop and think about it. Eriksson's not bad to the point where he shouldn't have an NHL gig still. In fact, if he had a 3rd/4th line salary, I bet the tune people would have here would be completely different. He's quite good in his own end and really can help with 3rd/4th line duties. It's only his contract that makes him look bad because he's grossly overpaid of what he delivers on.

 

Basically, at least he's not.... Wade Redden or something... lol

 

Is he better than Wade Redden?  I imagine he would have been buried in the minors if his contract allowed his cap hit or salary to go away like Redden's did if I remember right.  I don't think Redden was worse.  Redden was probably a 6/7 D or something and Loui is basically a 13th forward.  His cap made no difference in the playoffs and he got scratched.  Would anybody really be that thrilled to have Loui on the roster at a lower salary if he was a 13th forward getting dressed for half the games?  Not really...they'd be like, yeah sure he's not hurting anything for the league minimum to $1M range.

 

 

 

 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

55 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I was going to say I'd much much MUCH rather have Brad Richardson on the team, and I still kind of would, but I did have to stop and think about it. Eriksson's not bad to the point where he shouldn't have an NHL gig still. In fact, if he had a 3rd/4th line salary, I bet the tune people would have here would be completely different. He's quite good in his own end and really can help with 3rd/4th line duties. It's only his contract that makes him look bad because he's grossly overpaid of what he delivers on.

 

Basically, at least he's not.... Wade Redden or something... lol

richardson had 19 goals in 2018/2019 plays rw and center, would have been some excellent depth. i like the hawryluk signing too.

[The Lock]

14 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Is he better than Wade Redden?  I imagine he would have been buried in the minors if his contract allowed his cap hit or salary to go away like Redden's did if I remember right.  I don't think Redden was worse.  Redden was probably a 6/7 D or something and Loui is basically a 13th forward.  His cap made no difference in the playoffs and he got scratched.  Would anybody really be that thrilled to have Loui on the roster at a lower salary if he was a 13th forward getting dressed for half the games?  Not really...they'd be like, yeah sure he's not hurting anything for the league minimum to $1M range.

I think perhaps you're underestimating both Redden and Eriksson. Just because they are overpaid does not mean they aren't good enough for the NHL. Eriksson (at times) has proven he's more than a 13th forward. He has his moments of good. He's defensively responsible and good on the pk.

 

Your post, to me, proves my point in that, right now, his wage makes people dislike him, perhaps to the point where they can't see anything positive with him because he's cost us so much, and I get that. But I do believe that people would have a different tune if that were not the case. It's just people have a hard time seeing the good at the moment when there's so much bad associated with it.