[Trade] Canucks trade Jay Beagle, Loui Eriksson, Antoine Roussel, 2021 1st-round pick, 2022 2nd-round pick, 2023 7th-round pick to Coyotes for Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Conor Garland

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, knucklehead91 said:

Then by that opening statement, most of Vancouver should have been sent to the minors. No one was scoring. If you think 52 and 55 points are acceptable numbers for top line minutes in an 82 game season, then you might want to look around the league lol.

 

Like I said.. Josh Anderson… or Even Pettersson this year. Chance after chance after chance and not producing. BUT. They were getting chances and EVENTUALLY, they began to capitalize.

 

As for LE’s linemates and his icetime

2016-17 18.68mins per game 48%dZS

2017-18 16.27mins per game 56.2%dZS

2018-19 14.06 mins per game 58.8%dZS

2019-20 12.36 mins per game 65.8%dZS

2020-21 9.58 mins per game   72.7%dZS

 

2016-17 line combos at even strength

31.7% with the Sedins

18.8% with Granlund and Sutter

10.2% with Chaput and Granlund

6.8% with Megna and Sutter

5% with Baertschi and Horvat

the rest is a mix of all sorts of combos. 30% of his time on ice was with 3rd line players 1/3 with the Sedins 1/3. Sure you could argue and say the reason he dropped down the lineup was because he wasnt producing. But why were all other non-producers staying put? Our team sucked period. It had the ugliest depth, hardly any primary scoring, and wee bit of secondary scoring and no scoring beyond that.

Eriksson was on the PP with the Sedins 40% of the time in his first season, if he is getting more chances than everyone else on the team, why would you change that? Why would you take a scoring chance away from a team that is already struggling to score. It makes no sense to demote someone because he is 1/23 guys that isnt capitalizing on every play. Our team leading scorer had 52 bloody points man. Eriksson had half of that with 65 games played. Most players on the team missed 15+ games that season. We had 36 players suit up for a game that season. 
Baertschi missed 14 games

Granlund missed 13 games

Eriksson missed 17

Dorsett missed 68 games

Burrows played 55 games and was dealt

Hansen played 28 games and was dealt

Skille, Chaput, Megna, Gaunce played 55+ games. Boucher had 27GP…

Defence was an absolute nightmare, we had bigger injuries on the back end and couldnt stop the bleeding.

Edler out for 14 games

Tanev out for 29 games

Gudbranson out for 52games

Larson out for 56

Stetcher and Hutton missed 11

 

and incase you were wondering where Vancouver sat in terms of man games lost in 2016-17… The highest in the league by a large margin. 295MGL on forward 139MGL on D and 25MGL in net. 3rd highest salary chips lost

 

 

The Sedins dzone starts compared to their “linemate” Loui was 33.2dZS% despite Eriksson playing 31% of his ice time 5v5 with the Sedins, he had nearly 50% dZS. Meaning he wasnt being utilized the same way with the Sedins when they hopped over the boards. That was just in his first season. There is a huge discrepancy between him and his primary linemates. 

 

2017-18 line combos at even strength

26.7% with the Sedins

13.1% with Archibald and Sutter

8.1% with Dowd and Granlund

 

LE was on the PP 32.3% with Baertschi, Vanek and Gagner and only 3.4% of the time he was with the twins

So LE lost PP time and that can also be attributed to the injuries and amount of time he missed in 2017-18 which was. 32 games he was out with injury. In the 50 games he played he spent 58.8dZS% even though his most frequent linemates were the twins which was only 26.7% of the time, Eriksson was more often utilized in his own zone. So the coach is using him primarily in the dzone but also getting him out with the Sedins as much as possible. 

The twins do not play in the dzone, we had a lot of unstable characters on the roster and we had plenty of injuries to guys like Sutter who were supposed to be that stabilizing guy in the dzone. Green utilized LE in his own zone because he is a responsible player. He consistently was in the top for takeaways on the team

 

Heres how Horvats icetime with LE is broken down in 2019-20

56.2% of the time Loui was playing with Horvat and Pearson. 

Eriksson had a 65.8% dZS

Horvat had a 49.4% dZS

Pearson had a 51% dZS

Which just to remind you, Eriksson was getting 12mins a game

 

So even though Eriksson “played a bunch with Horvat” his icetime was largely paired with Horvat in the Dzone rather than the Ozone. Horvat split his time evenly between both ends. Eriksson was used largely in his own zone. So no its not that Eriksson blew his chances when playing with Horvat, its that Eriksson was used with Horvat and Pearson to stop opposition.

 

Its not an excuse, its a valid reason with facts and stats to back it up. Eriksson was used for defensive zone duties over offensive zone opportunity. 
 

His corsi was nearly 50% while spending most of his time being used in his own zone during his time in Vancouver. To top that off he had the fewest giveaways each season and was in the top for takeaways.
 

Look at Erikssons numbers in Dallas and Boston and look at how he was utilized. 60%oZS compared to the sub 45%oZS in Vancouver.

 

Its a blindly biased hatred towards Loui in span of some of the darkest days in the last 20 years. We werent contenders with or without him. We were bottom feeders. Case closed, meeting adjourned 

Based on what you said, Green didn't utilize Eriksson to be a scorer, at least not primarily. I don't really understand why Green decided to use a butter knife to cut a steak. I think Eriksson has been a little slow for this team, and I think part of his decline has been the massive financial losses he has been suffering in Sweden's restaurant business.

 

Eriksson should've been pretty damn good.

[AB72]

Are we seriously living in a world where people are defending Loui freaking Eriksson and blaming anyone else but him for his piss poor play?

[knucklehead91]

42 minutes ago, mcchorvirt said:

Are we seriously living in a world where people are defending Loui freaking Eriksson and blaming anyone else but him for his piss poor play?

Are you seriously on a second account? Lol bud you are a Virtanen jock sniffer, who are you to talk about defending people.

[BigTramFan]

12 hours ago, Maddogy said:

Recently I watched 3 of the Arizona - Nashville playoff games. I assume that he was very motivated during the playoffs and it was the best hockey left in him. OEL is definitely not an agile skater anymore. His game was fine however he sometimes had trouble clearing the front of the net. He is not very good at tying up the forward's stick. The forward can often sidestep OEL to get positioning in front of the goalie. His D positioning in front of his net was sometimes puzzling. I don't know why he was out of position and puck-watching. 

 

Again, do not get your hopes high. What he brought in those 3 playoff games was competent. However, he is a #4 D on a good team. 

 

I do think that OEL should play a more physical style akin to Alex Edler. He would be much more effective in the D zone. 

Cheers for the observations. I don't have overly high hopes that OEL is some amazing defender. My personal opinion is that he has never really been a strong defender. But he does put up decent points. What I don't like is this false rhetoric that OEL has somehow regressed in the last few years. There is no real evidence of this.

[iinatcc]

9 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Based on what you said, Green didn't utilize Eriksson to be a scorer, at least not primarily. I don't really understand why Green decided to use a butter knife to cut a steak. I think Eriksson has been a little slow for this team, and I think part of his decline has been the massive financial losses he has been suffering in Sweden's restaurant business.

 

Eriksson should've been pretty damn good.

So wait ... You are telling me if we all just booked a flight to Sweden and went to his restaurant every day for the regular season Eriksson would have been a Top 6 scorer. 

 

We should have done that to begin with 

[knucklehead91]

11 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Based on what you said, Green didn't utilize Eriksson to be a scorer, at least not primarily. I don't really understand why Green decided to use a butter knife to cut a steak. I think Eriksson has been a little slow for this team, and I think part of his decline has been the massive financial losses he has been suffering in Sweden's restaurant business.

 

Eriksson should've been pretty damn good.

I would say that the massive amounts of injuries to forwards and defence is what led to Eriksson being utilized defensively. Vancouver had the most man games lost in 2016-17 and Defence had the biggest injuries, plus our bottom 6 was nearly wiped off the planet and was a revolving door. Loui is a responsible player who works hard, each season he has the fewest giveaways and was top 3 for takeaways. Thats the kinda guy you need in your own zone, steals pucks, doesnt throw it away and helps safely exit the zone. Tanev, Edler, Larsen and Gudbranson all missed a fair chunk of time that season, Stetcher and Hutton also missed some time. 
 

If you looked at our options for defensive zone duties… it was pretty ugly. Chaput? Megna? Skille? Boucher? Gaunce?? These guys, minus Boucher all played 55+ games. Yikes..

[iinatcc]

Anyways what is the name of Loui Eriksson's restaurant?

[knucklehead91]

1 minute ago, iinatcc said:

Anyways what is the name of Loui Eriksson's restaurant?

The 6 million dollar cut

[Vanisleryan]

11 hours ago, mcchorvirt said:

Are we seriously living in a world where people are defending Loui freaking Eriksson and blaming anyone else but him for his piss poor play?

Welcome to CDC in August.

[NHL97OneTimer]

14 hours ago, knucklehead91 said:

Its a blindly biased hatred towards Loui in span of some of the darkest days in the last 20 years. We werent contenders with or without him. We were bottom feeders. Case closed, meeting adjourned 

Of all the research and writing you put on this post, and despite you saying case closed, meeting adjourned like a Supreme Court judge on this board, it really doesn't change the fact that LE was paid $6 million per year to contribute.  Someone paid this amount should be able to lead the way with whatever line he plays on.  The coaches thought that his best contribution was in a defensive role which does not merit $6 million per year.  The seeing eye test over 5 years doesn't lie unless you are blinding yourself.  Like I say, I love stats......but deep diving into stats that take you into the weeds instead of the seeing the forest is deluding oneself in cases like these.

 

Oh, and I don't think anyone hates LE as much as his contract.  If he were paid $3 million per year x 3-4 years, nobody would have been that focused on him.  But of course his pre-Vancouver days suggested he was a much better player than that.

[knucklehead91]

22 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

Of all the research and writing you put on this post, and despite you saying case closed, meeting adjourned like a Supreme Court judge on this board, it really doesn't change the fact that LE was paid $6 million per year to contribute.  Someone paid this amount should be able to lead the way with whatever line he plays on.  The coaches thought that his best contribution was in a defensive role which does not merit $6 million per year.  The seeing eye test over 5 years doesn't lie unless you are blinding yourself.  Like I say, I love stats......but deep diving into stats that take you into the weeds instead of the seeing the forest is deluding oneself in cases like these.

 

Oh, and I don't think anyone hates LE as much as his contract.  If he were paid $3 million per year x 3-4 years, nobody would have been that focused on him.  But of course his pre-Vancouver days suggested he was a much better player than that.

Okay.. so what would happen if the Sedins were used in their own zone? If they went from a 65% ozone start to a 65% dzone start? Their production would drop significantly. 
 

He was a career 60% ozone starter

He came to Vancouver and was a 50/50 ozone to dzone starter the following season it dropped to 40% ozone start and he continued to get more and more time in his own zone. 
 

Travis Green was given a 30 goal scorer and his choice to use him as a dzone player instead of riding him with the Sedins is not Erikssons choice. He was not used to produce he was utilized as a shutdown player. Shut down guys do not produce points. 
 

If you look at the amount of injuries we had in Erikssons 1st season on forward and on D we had zero stability. Eriksson was the best player to put in the dzone. He retrieved pucks better than pretty much everyone else on the team, he also coughed the puck up the least. When you have as many injuries to top 4 D as well as your bottom 6 and your bottom 6 is full of ECHL and AHL calibre players, you need to stabilize that. Hence the Sutter, Eriksson and Granlund line. Veterans who suppressed shots (something we were bleeding profusely) LE also spent time with Megna and Chaput because those guys couldnt be trusted on a line without Sutter/Granlund/Eriksson

Baertschi, Horvat, Sedins are not your dzone guys. Baer and Bo were having good chemistry and helping provide 2nd line contribution, you cant split that up and move Bo into a defensive zone role. You’ll kill the entire offense as no one on the team was producing at a 1st line rate. Our offence was attrocious as well as our D. We were missing top 4 D for loooong periods. Gudbranson and Tanev missed like 85 games combined. Edler was hurt for like 15. Eriksson was getting chances but not capitalizing, but we really had no better choice as to who to put in a bottom 6 role when we had a revolving door of injuries in the bottom 6 and guys like Skille, Chaput, Megna and Gaunce are soaking up 55+ games.

 

You cant ask a guy to play 18 mins with a 50/50 zone distribution and score and defend at a 1st line rate. The Sedins had 1st line minutes and 1st line deployment and they could only muster up 50 points. The problem was well beyond Eriksson, the team sucked and couldnt stay healthy. Our NHLers were sustaining all the injuries while our AHLers stayed healthy and filled the roster.

[Putgolzin]

14 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Based on what you said, Green didn't utilize Eriksson to be a scorer, at least not primarily. I don't really understand why Green decided to use a butter knife to cut a steak. I think Eriksson has been a little slow for this team, and I think part of his decline has been the massive financial losses he has been suffering in Sweden's restaurant business.

 

Eriksson should've been pretty damn good.

Remember when he scored on us in his first game?

Did he ever do anything more notable than that? 

Green tried to pump up his little things quotient - but that’s about all the value that was there.

[J-P]

I like the current discussion in this thread. LE definitely did not deliver up to his contract but the fact that he didn't produce I think is partly up to the organization although most of the blame falls on him. To say he didn't compete or didn't care is just false though. 

 

He was always in great shape and his contributions in the bubble defensively had a major impact IMO on our success. Don't believe me? Watch the games again and compare the number of board battles etc LE won compared to Horvat and the other top 9 forwards. 

 

Again - his contract is really bad in hindsight along with most of the 2016 FA class. But don't blame the player.

[Alflives]

47 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Okay.. so what would happen if the Sedins were used in their own zone? If they went from a 65% ozone start to a 65% dzone start? Their production would drop significantly. 
 

He was a career 60% ozone starter

He came to Vancouver and was a 50/50 ozone to dzone starter the following season it dropped to 40% ozone start and he continued to get more and more time in his own zone. 
 

Travis Green was given a 30 goal scorer and his choice to use him as a dzone player instead of riding him with the Sedins is not Erikssons choice. He was not used to produce he was utilized as a shutdown player. Shut down guys do not produce points. 
 

If you look at the amount of injuries we had in Erikssons 1st season on forward and on D we had zero stability. Eriksson was the best player to put in the dzone. He retrieved pucks better than pretty much everyone else on the team, he also coughed the puck up the least. When you have as many injuries to top 4 D as well as your bottom 6 and your bottom 6 is full of ECHL and AHL calibre players, you need to stabilize that. Hence the Sutter, Eriksson and Granlund line. Veterans who suppressed shots (something we were bleeding profusely) LE also spent time with Megna and Chaput because those guys couldnt be trusted on a line without Sutter/Granlund/Eriksson

Baertschi, Horvat, Sedins are not your dzone guys. Baer and Bo were having good chemistry and helping provide 2nd line contribution, you cant split that up and move Bo into a defensive zone role. You’ll kill the entire offense as no one on the team was producing at a 1st line rate. Our offence was attrocious as well as our D. We were missing top 4 D for loooong periods. Gudbranson and Tanev missed like 85 games combined. Edler was hurt for like 15. Eriksson was getting chances but not capitalizing, but we really had no better choice as to who to put in a bottom 6 role when we had a revolving door of injuries in the bottom 6 and guys like Skille, Chaput, Megna and Gaunce are soaking up 55+ games.

 

You cant ask a guy to play 18 mins with a 50/50 zone distribution and score and defend at a 1st line rate. The Sedins had 1st line minutes and 1st line deployment and they could only muster up 50 points. The problem was well beyond Eriksson, the team sucked and couldnt stay healthy. Our NHLers were sustaining all the injuries while our AHLers stayed healthy and filled the roster.

Wasn’t Willie D still coach Loui’s first year with us?  Two coaches saw Loui had lost his hands, so tried to use him in a more defensive role.  

[ilduce39]

21 hours ago, Maddogy said:

Recently I watched 3 of the Arizona - Nashville playoff games. I assume that he was very motivated during the playoffs and it was the best hockey left in him. OEL is definitely not an agile skater anymore. His game was fine however he sometimes had trouble clearing the front of the net. He is not very good at tying up the forward's stick. The forward can often sidestep OEL to get positioning in front of the goalie. His D positioning in front of his net was sometimes puzzling. I don't know why he was out of position and puck-watching. 

 

Again, do not get your hopes high. What he brought in those 3 playoff games was competent. However, he is a #4 D on a good team. 

 

I do think that OEL should play a more physical style akin to Alex Edler. He would be much more effective in the D zone. 

I’m personally not expecting OEL to be a 1A dominant two way player this season.  I’m hoping he’s adequate in his own zone and still able to bring that 40-ish point pop. I’d hope he’s playing like more of a #2-3 than a 4 but I guess we’ll see!  All of our righties are big boys who can hopefully help clear the crease - hoping his partner helps in his own end and frees him up to attack.
 

That kinda goes for the whole defence group. I’m really hoping we have the equivalent of 3 solid 2nd pairings that can all bring some points even if they have some adventures in their own zone against the opposition’s top line.

 

With Shaw’s help, some good support from the forwards and a solid year from Demko we could look a lot better on the back end than people are predicting.  
 

Might be one of those situations where after the year we look at the roster kind of shake our heads at doubting the group.  OEL, Hughes, Hamonic, Myers… and two rookies with upside in Juolevi/Rathbone… and a legitimate NHL “4th pair.”  Even after last year’s colossal disappointment I remain optimistic!

[knucklehead91]

1 hour ago, J-P said:

I like the current discussion in this thread. LE definitely did not deliver up to his contract but the fact that he didn't produce I think is partly up to the organization although most of the blame falls on him. To say he didn't compete or didn't care is just false though. 

 

He was always in great shape and his contributions in the bubble defensively had a major impact IMO on our success. Don't believe me? Watch the games again and compare the number of board battles etc LE won compared to Horvat and the other top 9 forwards. 

 

Again - his contract is really bad in hindsight along with most of the 2016 FA class. But don't blame the player.

Hey but you know what, you could pay McDavid 12mil to come in and produce and still be part of a losing season, the contract means absolutely f***ing nothing in a losing season. Finishing 28th and 29th overall and a guy paid 6 mil not scoring or a guy paid 10+ mil and scoring when you are finishing at the bottom means absolutely jack all. Erikssons lack of production was during rebuilding years. Who cares? You think we would be a contender if we had the 30 goal scorer Eriksson? Or would we finish a few spots higher than the bottom?

 

No one on the team was producing point period. 52 and 55 point team leaders in 16-17 and 17-18 is pitiful.

 

It would be different if the team was winning and players were producing and LE was like tits on a bull. Honestly who cares what me made and what did did or didnt do when we were a basement dweller for years

[knucklehead91]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Wasn’t Willie D still coach Loui’s first year with us?  Two coaches saw Loui had lost his hands, so tried to use him in a more defensive role.  

Sorry yes big Willie D was the coach

[Dazzle]

24 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Sorry yes big Willie D was the coach

Some people do have a hard on for some people.

[J-P]

48 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Hey but you know what, you could pay McDavid 12mil to come in and produce and still be part of a losing season, the contract means absolutely f***ing nothing in a losing season. Finishing 28th and 29th overall and a guy paid 6 mil not scoring or a guy paid 10+ mil and scoring when you are finishing at the bottom means absolutely jack all. Erikssons lack of production was during rebuilding years. Who cares? You think we would be a contender if we had the 30 goal scorer Eriksson? Or would we finish a few spots higher than the bottom?

 

No one on the team was producing point period. 52 and 55 point team leaders in 16-17 and 17-18 is pitiful.

 

It would be different if the team was winning and players were producing and LE was like tits on a bull. Honestly who cares what me made and what did did or didnt do when we were a basement dweller for years

Yes, good point. He was signed to enable one or two more playoff runs for the twins. That didn't work out and no matter who you blame for that (unrealistic to begin with? Maybe WD wasn't the perfect coach least of all in the playoffs?) what he did the years after that are irrelevant in the big picture. 

Edited August 23, 2021 by J-P

[flat land fish]

OEL is replacing Edler and will be an upgrade.  Will likely run PP2 and be a big upgrade there.  We will see on the pk what they do their maybe OJ gets more minutes there.