- May 15, 2014
- 7,896
- 348
Who would you rather at 6Yrs, 6M?
- Thread starter DitClapper
- Start date
- Status
774EVER
& Now 374EVER
Just curious to get everyone's thoughts.
*Neither* can't be an option!
Lucic will get more than 6.
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 41,115
- 23,074
Yep, I have no idea how you can sign Lucic for just 6 years without giving him a raise.
talkinaway
Registered User
Loui, all day, every day - and at night, too.
The skills that Lucic has - being aggressive, battling for pucks, hard-hitting - are exactly the ones that are going to decline in about 2-3 years.
Eriksson's a few years older. But he's high IQ, a little bit more agile, good stick handling - these aren't things that get worse with age. I'd trade the 2-3 years Lucic has on Eriksson.
That said, I'm probably not going to throw a hissy fit if/when Eriksson gets traded. Well, OK....I probably will because I won't think it's enough return. But I can see the rationale if both sides can't come to a contract and Sweeney sees a good trade out there. So far, I can't think of much that Don's done that I've really hated...but he's only had a year. We're still in Chiarelli's shadow right now.
The skills that Lucic has - being aggressive, battling for pucks, hard-hitting - are exactly the ones that are going to decline in about 2-3 years.
Eriksson's a few years older. But he's high IQ, a little bit more agile, good stick handling - these aren't things that get worse with age. I'd trade the 2-3 years Lucic has on Eriksson.
That said, I'm probably not going to throw a hissy fit if/when Eriksson gets traded. Well, OK....I probably will because I won't think it's enough return. But I can see the rationale if both sides can't come to a contract and Sweeney sees a good trade out there. So far, I can't think of much that Don's done that I've really hated...but he's only had a year. We're still in Chiarelli's shadow right now.
zaYG
Nerevarine
Eriksson. He won't check out the instant he gets a contract and become a 4th liner in three seasons.
JOKER 192
Blow it up
Love Lucic but I gotta go with Loui on this one. When Loui is not scoring he's doing other things when Lucic is not scoring he's doing nothing. if neither isn't an option how about both.
BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 24,936
- 28,694
Lucic, every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
I like Loui but it's easier to find wingers who can do what he does.
Lucic, like him or not, is still a unique force at the NHL level.
The fact that they are 2-3 difference in age also makes the choice easier. It's Lucic without question.
I like Loui but it's easier to find wingers who can do what he does.
Lucic, like him or not, is still a unique force at the NHL level.
The fact that they are 2-3 difference in age also makes the choice easier. It's Lucic without question.
KrejciMVP
Registered User
Lucic, probably... Both are excellent but Lucic is worth more than 6. Not much of an injury history, still young, loves the city, loved by the team... If it came down to it I would probably take Looch. Loui might be the better overall player, he's better offensively and obviously defensively, but Lucic brings an element that's so rare, we obviously miss it.
LSCII
Cup driven
LSCII
Cup driven
Exactly, but Lucic isn't signing for bottom of his market. He's going to be looking for a lot more.
LSCII
Cup driven
Trap Jesus
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2012
- 28,686
- 13,459
I think Lucic was a better fit here, but signing him to a long term deal scares me. He's way too inconsistent and he's the type of player that could all of a sudden just stop being effective in his early 30s. At least with Eriksson you have a higher floor.
Like we said in the trade thread, proposals and now polls have to be somewhat realistic.
The contract for Lucic is not even a raise.
*click*
The contract for Lucic is not even a raise.
*click*
- Status
