[Buyout] Oliver Ekman-Larsson

[spook007]

5 hours ago, dougieL said:

It's always a long summer when thinking about the course that the Sedin's have been partially responsible for setting this team on.

Sorry dougie, but are you blaming the Sedins for the mess the team has gone through?

 

[dougieL]

10 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Sorry dougie, but are you blaming the Sedins for the mess the team has gone through?

 

Well Linden refused to rebuild out of respect for the Sedin's (https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1173594), which led to us signing Eriksson to play with them, which led us to dumping Eriksson as part of a trade that forced us to take on OEL, the latter of whom was recommended by none other than the Sedin's. 

 

[Hairy Kneel]

7 hours ago, dougieL said:

 

You can thank the Sedin's for convincing Benning to include the 2nd that Arizona asked for.

Physically the Sedin's were done. It was foolish to try and buy a way to help them into the playoffs one last time.  We should have traded them to NYRs or something for a shot. It cost us a lot and set our rebuild back 5 years.

[iinatcc]

26 minutes ago, dougieL said:

Well Linden refused to rebuild out of respect for the Sedin's (https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1173594), which led to us signing Eriksson to play with them, which led us to dumping Eriksson as part of a trade that forced us to take on OEL, the latter of whom was recommended by none other than the Sedin's. 

 

Eriksson had a year left in his contract. Most of us would have not problem having him hang around for another season. 

 

As for the Sedins' Involvement in the OEL, we mentioned this so many times now, these two were staring their first year in the front office (meaning no experience). I could see them endorsing OEL as a peer they respect but it's a GM's job to get a wide range of opinions within the organization. So Benning would have been really dumb if his decision to trade for OEL relied soley on the Sedins.

 

I said this before I will say it again. If I was the CEO and decided to make my decision solely on the opinion of an intern and it falls flat on my face, all the blame should go to me and I deserve to get fired.   

 

[dougieL]

2 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Eriksson had a year left in his contract. Most of us would have not problem having him hang around for another season. 

 

As for the Sedins' Involvement in the OEL, we mentioned this so many times now, these two were staring their first year in the front office (meaning no experience). I could see them endorsing OEL as a peer they respect but it's a GM's job to get a wide range of opinions within the organization. So Benning would have been really dumb if his decision to trade for OEL relied soley on the Sedins.

 

I said this before I will say it again. If I was the CEO and decided to make my decision solely on the opinion of an intern and it falls flat on my face, all the blame should go to me and I deserve to get fired.   

 

You can say what you want, but Benning himself stated that the Sedin's were so high on OEL that they were the ones who convinced him to add in the second round pick that Arizona asked for. I mean, to convince Benning to add the second - at that point, they were no longer simply " endorsing OEL as a peer they respect" - they were actively part of the front office people orchestrating the deal.

 

Edited August 26, 2023 by dougieL

[spook007]

3 hours ago, dougieL said:

Well Linden refused to rebuild out of respect for the Sedin's (https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1173594), which led to us signing Eriksson to play with them, which led us to dumping Eriksson as part of a trade that forced us to take on OEL, the latter of whom was recommended by none other than the Sedin's. 

 

Can we just quickly agree, that Sedins aren't owner, GMs, Ass. GM's, or coaches...

 

If you are unhappy that the club didn't rebuild out of respect for the Sedins, then you ought to vent your anger towards the folks in charge. 

whether it be Benning, Gillis, Linden or Aquilinis... to blame playing staff about team building is nonsense. 
 

We would likely have had a better team, had we done a proper clear out, while the asedins were playing, but that has f all to do with them. 

[spook007]

3 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Physically the Sedin's were done. It was foolish to try and buy a way to help them into the playoffs one last time.  We should have traded them to NYRs or something for a shot. It cost us a lot and set our rebuild back 5 years.

Even if the Sedins wouldn't want to be traded, there were no reason, to build a team around them. The rest of them should have been traded out and the rebuild started earlier. 

[iinatcc]

2 hours ago, dougieL said:

You can say what you want, but Benning himself stated that the Sedin's were so high on OEL that they were the ones who convinced him to add in the second round pick that Arizona asked for. I mean, to convince Benning to add the second - at that point, they were no longer simply " endorsing OEL as a peer they respect" - they were actively part of the front office people orchestrating the deal.

 

That is my key point why would someone with almost 30 of hockey executive experience at the time (8 as a general manager) make such key decisions based on the opinions people with no front office hockey experience?

 

This is 99.9% all on Benning and 00.1% on the Sedins.

 

This is Homer Simpson level judgment on the part of Benning if what you said is true.

Edited August 26, 2023 by iinatcc

[dougieL]

36 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

That is my key point why would someone with almost 30 of hockey executive experience at the time (8 as a general manager) make such key decisions based on the opinions people with no front office hockey experience?

 

This is 99.9% all on Benning and 00.1% on the Sedins.

 

This is Homer Simpson level judgment on the part of Benning if what you said is true.

Well Benning literally said it, so either he's lying or it's true.

 

So at least we agree there is a nonzero level of blame that goes to the Sedin's. Now, if you ask why someone with Benning's experience as an executive would take advice from people with no front office hockey experience, I'd ask why those people with no front office hockey experience would have the audacity to weigh in so heavily - to the point where they were able to successfully convince Benning to add the second round pick in order to complete the trade.

 

I fully acknowledge that the final call falls on Benning, and of course he shares the majority of the blame, but come on, don't try to pretend that the Sedin's were so innocent in all of this. Again, they pushed so hard for OEL to the point where they were advising on pieces in the deal to include. That goes pretty far beyond just endorsing OEL as a peer.

 

 

[dougieL]

3 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Eriksson had a year left in his contract. Most of us would have not problem having him hang around for another season. 

 

As for the Sedins' Involvement in the OEL, we mentioned this so many times now, these two were staring their first year in the front office (meaning no experience). I could see them endorsing OEL as a peer they respect but it's a GM's job to get a wide range of opinions within the organization. So Benning would have been really dumb if his decision to trade for OEL relied soley on the Sedins.

 

I said this before I will say it again. If I was the CEO and decided to make my decision solely on the opinion of an intern and it falls flat on my face, all the blame should go to me and I deserve to get fired.   

 

 

And yes, fully agree on keeping Eriksson for one more year. The shortsightedness of that trade was stunning.

[canuck73_3]

6 hours ago, dougieL said:

I'm sure you understand that there are varying degrees of "interest" - one end of the "interest" spectrum results in the signing of a player to a long-term big money contract; near the other end, it results in a one-year, nearly risk-free deal. I'll let you take a guess as to on which end of the spectrum was Florida's interest 

 

Cup finalists are typically fairly tight against the cap, and they can't afford to sign UFAs for big money. So they go bargain-bin shopping...

 

I don't understand why you keep trumpeting "interest from a Stanley Cup finalist" - dude...they signed him to a 1y 2.25m deal   

And? Does that not make them a Stanley Cup finalist?

[canuck73_3]

6 hours ago, dougieL said:

How do you know 1/3 of the NHL was interested in signing OEL? If that were true, don't you think he could have gotten a bigger contract than he did?

Generally bought out players sign at a reduced rate because the rest of their salary is paid by another team. Are you new to this? 

[dougieL]

7 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Generally bought out players sign at a reduced rate because the rest of their salary is paid by another team. Are you new to this? 

Uh what? 

 

Bought-out players sign at reduced rates because they are bad. You know how I know they're bad? Because they were bought out 

[Ghostsof1915]

So OEL this season gets 3 paycheques:

$2.25 Million from Florida.

$290,000 From Arizona

$2.127 (rounded up) Million from Vancouver.

 

That will set him up with a nice retirement package.

[canuck73_3]

Just now, dougieL said:

Uh what? 

 

Bought-out players sign at reduced rates because they are bad. You know how I know they're bad? Because they were bought out 

Bad and not worth a superstar contract are 2 entirely different things. 

[Bure2Win]

8 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Have to wonder why there is interest from a Stanley Cup finalist, vs a basement dweller…

Because they have better players to protect them from his crappy plays?

[canuck73_3]

3 minutes ago, Bure2Win said:

Because they have better players to protect them from his crappy plays?

Nope, again not worth a superstar contract =/= awful. 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Bure2Win said:

Because they have better players to protect them from his crappy plays?

Partly. OEL is done. He will very quickly be in the press box watching, either from injury or poor play. Worst trade in our club’s history (Benning ) fixed by a great GM (Allvin) 

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

 

And yes, fully agree on keeping Eriksson for one more year. The shortsightedness of that trade was stunning.

Yep Steve Dangle said Canucks traded Loui Eriksson for 6 years of more expensive defensive Loui Eriksson 

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

Well Benning literally said it, so either he's lying or it's true.

 

So at least we agree there is a nonzero level of blame that goes to the Sedin's. Now, if you ask why someone with Benning's experience as an executive would take advice from people with no front office hockey experience, I'd ask why those people with no front office hockey experience would have the audacity to weigh in so heavily - to the point where they were able to successfully convince Benning to add the second round pick in order to complete the trade.

 

I fully acknowledge that the final call falls on Benning, and of course he shares the majority of the blame, but come on, don't try to pretend that the Sedin's were so innocent in all of this. Again, they pushed so hard for OEL to the point where they were advising on pieces in the deal to include. That goes pretty far beyond just endorsing OEL as a peer.

 

 

I wouldn't say blame I say more like had a hand in the transaction.

 

Even if you are right, if Benning is willing to get pushed to making a move because of the Sedins. Well I don't know what to say. 

But then again who knows really how many people pushed for OEL, the only reason why we know about this is that the Sedins are more visible to the public than, let's say, John Weisbrod.