Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign RW Loui Eriksson to 6-year, $36m deal ($6m AAV w/ NMC)

Status
Not open for further replies.
MS said:
We're not talking about the Sedins. They've declined considerably but have aged well, like Thornton.

We're talking about Loui Eriksson. Name some similar-level players who flat-lined from age 31-36. So far we have Knuble and Brind'Amour in a 10-year period. It doesn't happen often.
Click to expand...

Andrew Brunette and Mark Recchi come to mind but you're right, it doesn't happen often.
 
SillyRabbit said:
This contract guarantees the Canucks continue to spin their wheels and accomplish nothing of importance (and likely actually slightly get worse) over the next six years.

We will not become a contender, Eriksson is good enough to push us away from a top 5 pick, and we will have valuable salary allocated to an injury prone, over 35 winger for the next six years, preventing it from being used in a more efficient manner.
Click to expand...

I think we're still good for a bottom ~ 7 finish with the defence we have and inevitable injuries that will happen.

The lottery system should benefit us this year giving us 3 cracks for a top 3 pick.
 
This is the most surprising signing since Miller in 2014!!!!

Great signing!


...is what I would have said in, say, 2010. Now I expect it will be an albatross sooner rather than later.
 
A good fit with the Sedins, so good that the points he gets with them will not be unique.

Anyway, having him on the 2nd line makes sense too.
 
Bruins fan.

Eriksson's a good catch. Very good stick, reliable in all situations. I'm sure he will be skating with the Sedins so of course it's a good fit. He will get his points. Awesome net front presence.

But I'm really happy Boston decided not to pay him. His compete level is hardly ever there and he's not really a winning player. Very passive, very bland and soft. He won't put the fannies in the seats but he gets the job done. I'll be following him closely next year, truly hope he succeeds over there.
 
Happy that we choose Eriksson over Lucid, although I'd rather we didn't spend a penny on any. But I like his skill set which should mesh with the twins well. Strong net-front presence and all-round smarts finding ways to get himself open for the pass.

Baertschi-Horvat-Hansen plz next year , if I see Sutter in-between those two I will lose it
 
moltisanti said:
Bruins fan.

Eriksson's a good catch. Very good stick, reliable in all situations. I'm sure he will be skating with the Sedins so of course it's a good fit. He will get his points. Awesome net front presence.

But I'm really happy Boston decided not to pay him. His compete level is hardly ever there and he's not really a winning player. Very passive, very bland and soft. He won't put the fannies in the seats but he gets the job done. I'll be following him closely next year, truly hope he succeeds over there.
Click to expand...

Wait... You sure you're not talking about Backes in the 2nd paragraph? I'm sorry but id take Eriksson and that contract 10/10 times over Backes and his contract.
 
Shareefruck said:
The whole "the purpose of sport is to be competitive at every turn" principle only applies to the athlete. To the general manager, it shouldn't be treated as a sport, it should be a game of strategy.

"You know, the goal of July 1st isn't to come away with a team that you think will finish last overall. If it is, you aren't doing your job as a GM."

I disagree with that sentiment. The purpose of doing your job as a GM should be long term continued success above all else.
Click to expand...

This GM takes his marching orders from the president and ownership. It's the offseason, not the deadline. The GM should be looking at both being competitive now and the future. At the deadline, your 'now' is out of the playoffs so you only look to the future.

If you were hired as GM, and the President and Ownership tells you that if you miss the playoffs too many times, you are getting canned, so what would you do? Tank anyway and hope you keep your job? If you don't keep your job, at least you leave a nice basket of prospects for your successor? If I was the GM, I'd sure look at shoring up that offense and trying to get some production from the D. I'd also be shoring up the farm team to help with player development.
 
McHortton said:
Wait... You sure you're not talking about Backes in the 2nd paragraph? I'm sorry but id take Eriksson and that contract 10/10 times over Backes and his contract.
Click to expand...

Most would.
But Backes brings an identity and swagger to the team on and off the ice. Eriksson isn't a game changing talent, he's just solid. He's not going to be a guy that carries the offense when times are down, he rolls with the flow and tends to disappear in intensity. I'm happy either way, good luck with Loui. He'll put up his points.
 
moltisanti said:
Most would.
But Backes brings an identity and swagger to the team on and off the ice. Eriksson isn't a game changing talent, he's just solid. He's not going to be a guy that carries the offense when times are down, he rolls with the flow and tends to disappear in intensity. I'm happy either way, good luck with Loui. He'll put up his points.
Click to expand...
Dude, your team is paying David Bakes 6m for the next 5 years
 
Why are you guys getting defensive? I told you the pros and cons of Eriksson. Every player has them. :)
He's a positive player for the most part.
Enjoy Loui.
 
BloatedGuppy said:
I only have that content which was helpfully supplied for me in quote windows, and well...I still disagree.

Here, I can criticize the signing in a non-hyperbolic fashion. It's not hard.

"While Eriksson is a good player and a good fit for the top line, trying to squeeze extra production out of the Sedins is just going to prolong the twilight of this core's competitive lifespan. We don't have the defensive or center depth to make meaningful post-season progression, so a best case scenario is probably an unlikely journey to the 2nd round, and the likeliest scenario is a narrow miss of the post season and a slightly degraded draft position."

As opposed to..

"LOLOLOLOLOL HE IS GONNA BE 37 AND PEOPLE LIKE THIS DEAL :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:"
Click to expand...

I've gotten more sarcastic here as well, though. We started off just trying to be clear and polite. We don't like trading Garrison for Linden Vey, and replacing him with Sbisa. We don't like paying Sbisa and Dorsett way more than he's worth. We think signing Miller was a mistake.

The problem is the people we were talking to were just crazy sarcastic, and filled their posts with nonsense and hyperbole. So we responded and now do the same things. They clearly don't want to have an intelligent discussion, they want to say things like "xD yeah man Bonino is a real allstar" or "Look out Shea Weber, Jason Garrison is a top D in this league". So I think it's totally fair to be just as sarcastic back to them. I love sarcasm, I think it's top tier humor, why should they get all of it to themselves? Not only that, but when we go on long rants explaining why we don't like things, carefully taking out parts of their post to refute it, the posts just get deleted for the conversation getting 'derailed'. Might as well have some fun with our suffering, I guess, and bring the sarcasm.

At some point Benning will be gone and the userbase won't be as divided anymore. Things were never this bad before (or great in my opinion, HF is more interesting now) Benning arrived. I'm sure when he's gone things won't be as crazy here. There might be some posts here or there with people arguing how bad he was, but he won't be creating new content for us regularly like he is now. On top of that, surely in retrospect even more people will agree he is/was terrible. We won't have to 'wait and see' anymore.
 
Intangibos said:
I've gotten more sarcastic here as well, though. We started off just trying to be clear and polite. We don't like trading Garrison for Linden Vey, and replacing him with Sbisa. We don't like paying Sbisa and Dorsett way more than he's worth. We think signing Miller was a mistake.
Click to expand...

None of any of that matters if you were apart of tank nation.... were you apart of tank nation?


:popcorn: I'll wait....
 
This signing was a total waste. Basically replaces the Miller contract we were finally going to rid ourselves of next year. Taking a roster spot that we should be moulding a young player to fill. We haven't learned from throwing around no movement clauses apparently. I could understand grabbing a guy like this on a 1 year deal, then using the asset at the deadline to acquire picks. Softest first line by a mile in all of pro hockey....I suspect he will have 1 productive season like Vrbata did, then hit the fart sack and hitch hike through the last five years in this horrible, front loaded contract, signing bonus structured deal that will be nearly impossible to try and buy out.
 
TheBrockBoesMonster said:
The NMC definitely sucks.
Click to expand...

I like the signing bonuses, Jim went full Clarkson - buyout proof.


Ah well I like Eriksson and we should get a few good years of of him. I would be much more comfortable if a signing like this was done after Jim head doing a rebuild not before, they just seem intent on delaying the inevitable and making it uglier went it comes.
 
The decision to sign a high end UFA by Benning is horribly dumb.

But if you were going to sign one of the high end UFA to a bad contract, signing Loui to a 6x6 was as good as it would get.
 
Brock Boeser said:
Happy that we choose Eriksson over Lucid, although I'd rather we didn't spend a penny on any. But I like his skill set which should mesh with the twins well. Strong net-front presence and all-round smarts finding ways to get himself open for the pass.

Baertschi-Horvat-Hansen plz next year , if I see Sutter in-between those two I will lose it
Click to expand...

That was Lucic's choice LOL.
 
Well I mean I'm not happy with a team intentionally tanking. But I'm certainly opposed to making 'win now' moves when this team clearly needs to rebuild. I'm not saying we ice the worst possible team to get a top 2 pick, but I also think now is the time to be moving vets at the deadline to get any assets we can from them, since winning at the end of the regular season isn't really a huge thing. So I see it as a bit of a travesty that Hamhuis wasn't moved at the deadline last year, both because it's a wasted asset, and he made the team better while everyone else around us clearly got worse.
 
Would have preferred Boedker.... But at least its not Ladd?

Seriously strange signing with where the team is.... and a NMC? Don't get it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom