[proposal] Assessing the pros and cons of using Rathbone or a 1st as a sweetener to move Eriksson in the off season

[NewbieCanuckFan]

2 hours ago, billabong said:

I am only into trading loui with a significant sweetener if that money is going directly towards an impact move

 

to Detroit: Eriksson, 2022 1st round pick

 

to Van: 7th round pick 2023

 

canucks sign RNH 6m/6yrs

 

then who wouldnt trade eriksson and a 1st for RNH and a 7th? 

 

miller-pettersson-boeser

RNH-horvat-hoglander

pearson-xxxxx-pods

 

 

 

 

Detroit Red Wings already have multiple picks in 2021:

 

Two 1st round picks

Three 2nd round picks

Two 3rd round picks

Two 4th round picks

Two 5th round picks

 

Doubt they`d have any interest in picking up a zero offense $3 million 4th line winger as a consequence.

Edited April 14, 2021 by NewbieCanuckFan

[JustABandwagoner]

9 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

[proposal] Assessing the pros and cons of using Rathbone or a 1st as a sweetener to move Eriksson in the off season

 

Just for the record, I doubt that Benning will explore this option as he seems pretty committed to keeping his farm and prospect pool in tact (which is why I suspect he didn’t go this route this past summer and commit to Toffoli).  On the flip side, clearing Eriksson’s salary would allow the Canucks to not only comfortably re-sign Petey and Hughes, but would also give us the chance of going after another quality UFA.   
 

So, instead of waiting until the 2022-2023 season to be competitive, the Canucks could possibly open up their window a year earlier.   
 

While any five year old can tell you the dangers of moving 1st and/or prospects as sweeteners to get rid of bad contracts, the flip side of this is that there is also a danger in having your core miss the playoffs one too many times while keeping motivation levels high.  Horvat, Pettersson, and Hughes aren’t Boy Scouts, and the Canucks invested a lot of money in bringing in “now” players such as Miller, Myers, and Schmidt.   
 

So - is there a benefit in “biting the bullet” and using a significant sweetener to move Eriksson a year earlier? (If by doing so would allow us to re-sign Petey and Hughes while also bringing in a high quality UFA to help us make a push?)

STOP STOP STOP. THIS IS HORRIBLE. What you are saying is, you are willing to risk a lottery pick to get rid of Eriksson contract for one year.. Thank god you aren't our GM. 

[wildcam]

9 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

[proposal] Assessing the pros and cons of using Rathbone or a 1st as a sweetener to move Eriksson in the off season

 

Just for the record, I doubt that Benning will explore this option as he seems pretty committed to keeping his farm and prospect pool in tact (which is why I suspect he didn’t go this route this past summer and commit to Toffoli).  On the flip side, clearing Eriksson’s salary would allow the Canucks to not only comfortably re-sign Petey and Hughes, but would also give us the chance of going after another quality UFA.   
 

So, instead of waiting until the 2022-2023 season to be competitive, the Canucks could possibly open up their window a year earlier.   
 

While any five year old can tell you the dangers of moving 1st and/or prospects as sweeteners to get rid of bad contracts, the flip side of this is that there is also a danger in having your core miss the playoffs one too many times while keeping motivation levels high.  Horvat, Pettersson, and Hughes aren’t Boy Scouts, and the Canucks invested a lot of money in bringing in “now” players such as Miller, Myers, and Schmidt.   
 

So - is there a benefit in “biting the bullet” and using a significant sweetener to move Eriksson a year earlier? (If by doing so would allow us to re-sign Petey and Hughes while also bringing in a high quality UFA to help us make a push?)

BIG No to giving up a 1st round pick or Rathbone to trade Erickon contract 1 yr left..

Would be a big mistake.... Buy out but no Rathbone 22 or 1st rounder...

[Patel Bure]

28 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:

STOP STOP STOP. THIS IS HORRIBLE. What you are saying is, you are willing to risk a lottery pick to get rid of Eriksson contract for one year.. Thank god you aren't our GM. 

That’s not what I was saying.   I was simply illuminating the other side.   Yes - on the hand, you sacrifice a lottery pick or a very good prospect in Rathbone.    On the other hand, you clear 6 million in cap, comfortably re-sign Petey and Hughes, AND possibly bring in a high quality UFA.....maybe an RNH for example.  
 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser 

Hoglander-Horvat-Podkolzin

Pearson-RNH-Virtanen

 
As your top 3.   Or some other UFA that we bring in with that money.   
 

im not saying that we SHOULD trade a 1st or Rathbone to get rid of one more year of Eriksson.   What I am saying however, is that perhaps the other side has merit.   The Canucks field a competitive team next year instead of 22-23, and lift the spirits of the boys.

[JustABandwagoner]

1 hour ago, DarkIndianRises said:

That’s not what I was saying.   I was simply illuminating the other side.   Yes - on the hand, you sacrifice a lottery pick or a very good prospect in Rathbone.    On the other hand, you clear 6 million in cap, comfortably re-sign Petey and Hughes, AND possibly bring in a high quality UFA.....maybe an RNH for example.  
 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser 

Hoglander-Horvat-Podkolzin

Pearson-RNH-Virtanen

 
As your top 3.   Or some other UFA that we bring in with that money.   
 

im not saying that we SHOULD trade a 1st or Rathbone to get rid of one more year of Eriksson.   What I am saying however, is that perhaps the other side has merit.   The Canucks field a competitive team next year instead of 22-23, and lift the spirits of the boys.

No, the other side has no merit if we are talking about a 1st round pick. Absolutely not worth it. Rathbone on the other hand you can at least "think" about it but our 1st rd pick is un-touchable 

 

Can't believe people already forgot the mistake OTT and SJS made. 

[Simulation]

The time to move Eriksson has come and gone. If there was ever a self imposed time limit being the absolute latest to hold on and eventually deal him, it would've been this past summer.

 

it was a critical off szn with a lot in the balance and the team wasn't able to offload him then (when his real dollars owed was already lower than his cap), indirectly/directly deciding to not build & improve from the past year. 

 

 

so why bother now? the damage has already been done, enough of this one step forward two steps back. heck, we all know JB isn't a capable trader anyways - there is ZERO CHANCE it gets done. not only has that ship sailed but the captain in charge of said ship wouldn't be able to navigate those waters anyways 

[Curmudgeon]

15 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

On the other hand, you clear 6 million in cap, comfortably re-sign Petey and Hughes, AND possibly bring in a high quality UFA.....maybe an RNH for example.  

RNH is going to get paid as no worse than a second line centre, and he currently makes $6mil per year. Do you think he's going to take a pay cut to play on the third line?

[Patel Bure]

1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said:

RNH is going to get paid as no worse than a second line centre, and he currently makes $6mil per year. Do you think he's going to take a pay cut to play on the third line?

Good point about his cap hit as I wasn’t aware of what it was.   I wasn’t slotting RNH to be definitively on our 3rd line per se, but was rather highlighting the fact that the Canucks would have three legit lines that would be able to score.   You could have Pearson and Horvat on that 3rd line in a more traditional match ups/shut down role with RNH playing with Hoglander or whoever.   
 

My ultimate point is this however, and it’s not specifically related to RNH:   By biting the bullet and getting rid of Eriksson’s 6 million dollars of our cap by the start of this summer, the Canucks could use that freed up cap space to comfortably re-sign Petey and Hughes AND bring in a UFA that would move the needle (whether that takes form in the form of RNH or someone else).

[The_Rocket]

Best I’d do is something like 

 

Eriksson + 9OA 2021 (Van)

 

to Detroit for

 

27OA 2021 (WSH)

 

basically trading down in the first round. Even then I’m not sure it’s worth it

[BPA]

No point in spending assets to get rid of LE.  Canucks are not in the position to contend for the cup next year anyways. 

[Elias Pettersson]

Imagine what Benning could do with a top 10 pick.  Then imagine Rathbone as Quinn Hughes light.  Then imagine Benning trading either one of those assets to move Loui's contract for one year.  Just imagine it happening and what would happen to CDC...

 

 

[DownUndaCanuck]

It's so close now that I'd just wait it out to be honest, not worth wasting value now. A buyout would be the smartest way about all of this. Regardless, I think JB can swindle the numbers so that he can get everyone in for next season but we still won't be "competitive" until we shed all this unecessary cap (looking at guys like Roussel too).