Proposal: Creative ways to shed Loui Eriksson contract

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,417
304
So Loui Eriksson has a cap hit of 6 mil for the next two yrs. He is owed 1 million this yrs and 4 million the season after. So 5 million actual.

My question is can the Canucks find a way to move his contract for a similar contract that has a slightly lower cap hit, or is for a slightly better player and not give up too much to do so? Would teams be interested in saving a few million dollars in real money at the cost of taking on more cap hit.

The idea is to move Eriksson without having to move high picks or top prospects.

Here are some examples I came up with:

Eriksson for:

1. Frans Nielson (2 x 5.25) (actual 8)
Canucks save 750k in cap and Detroit saves 3 million in real dollars. Straight swap?

2. Dustin Brown (2 x 5.87) (actual 8)
Canucks get a better player. LA saves 3 mil. Canucks maybe add a 4th?

3. Jeff Carter (2 x 5.2) (actual 4)
This would cost LA 1 mil and they'd get the worse player so maybe a prospect and lower pick. Gadjovic + 4th?

4. Anton Stralman (2 x 5.5) (actual 10)
Florida saves 5 mil in real dollars. Stralman becomes our 5th dman. He is a better player so maybe add 4th?

5. Viktor Rask (2 x 4) (actual 8)
Minnesota save 3 mil. Players have similar value. Maybe Canucks add a depth prospect.

Anyway those are a few attempts. Before you all poo poo it does the premise make sense? Save in real dollars for slight hit to your cap? Im thinking this could interest smaller market teams.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Crow and byrath

KaprizovEntitlelist

Registered User
Feb 22, 2020
1,740
264
Yeah Minnesota says no. Rask still have value, cheaper, score clutch goals, can actually play him on 4c & cheaper to buyout.

Minnesota laugh and say absolutely not! No team is taking on Louisiana without significant add form Canucks
 

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,417
304
Yeah Minnesota says no. Rask still have value, cheaper, score clutch goals, can actually play him on 4c & cheaper to buyout.

Minnesota laugh and say absolutely not! No team is taking on Louisiana without significant add form Canucks
Are you considering the real money saved when you say "no team"?

Are the other trades not close in your mind?
 

Junohockeyfan

Registered User
Dec 16, 2018
13,669
11,268
The answer is no. You are stuck with Louie unless you are parting with multiple 1st round draft picks.
 

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,417
304
All of these players are better. All of these players have lower cap hits. All of these players are easier to buy out next year. You're underestimating how much this will cost to achieve.

If it were this easy it would already be done.
Teams want to save actual money though right. So yes they move a slightly better player but they save a few million and they add a pick or prospect. If I am an owner of a non cap team I would be looking to save real dollars for cap space, why not.
 

violaswallet

Registered User
Apr 8, 2019
9,173
7,411
Yeah the problem with LE is both what he brings and his contracts As a Florida fan, the idea of moving money up front makes sense but we would want a 2nd line player as Stralman is a second pairing D
 

KaprizovEntitlelist

Registered User
Feb 22, 2020
1,740
264
Are you considering the real money saved when you say "no team"?

Are the other trades not close in your mind?

Mell from Minnesota side, Minnesota says no. Louis Eriksson has a 6 mil cap hit while rask has 4.

Also, task is a very serviceable 4th line c who is always ready, & scored some clutch goals this past year.

Minnesota even though they have 34 mil in cap room from 21-22, c is a need for wild, & task is clearly better then Louis Eriksson
 

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,417
304
Kings say no to dealing Brown. Carter I’m indifferent to. I mean you want us to take the worse player and cost the Kings 1 million. Is a 4th and Gadjovik worth it? I’m not sure.
Ya fair enough. Might take slightly more. But the principal seems possible.
 

Junohockeyfan

Registered User
Dec 16, 2018
13,669
11,268
Teams want to save actual money though right. So yes they move a slightly better player but they save a few million and they add a pick or prospect. If I am an owner of a non cap team I would be looking to save real dollars for cap space, why not.
Teams would much rather have the better player obviously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: barbu and voxel

TkachukNorris79

Registered User
Jan 27, 2018
1,485
1,358
How about:

Eriksson 2 x 6M (5M cash left)
Baertschi 1 x 3.36M (2.4M cash)

For

Zaitsev 4 x @ 4.5M (18M left) 1M retained


Ottawa would also buyout Eriksson next season. Baertschi plays in the minors.

Why Vancouver does it: they get rid of Eriksson and Baertschi without having to give up other assets, and get a serviceable RD for 4 years at a 3.5M cap hit. They gain almost 6M in cap space this year.

Why Ottawa does it: over the next 4 years, it stead of paying Zaitsev 18M, they can pay him 4M (salary retention), Baertschi 2.4M, and Eriksson 3M (1M this year, 2M buyout)for a total of 9.4 million over the next 4 years. That's $9 million cash savings for Eugene. Or Tim Stuetzle's next contract.

That's why Ottawa does it. I'm also a sens fan so I might be biased. The 4 year term on Zaitsev could be a lot. Thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zcaptain

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,417
304
Teams would much rather have the better player obviously.
We're not talking about real difference making players though. And if you save 5 million dollars over two yrs, during a pandemic, I kinda think that would be tempting to an owner of a team that isn't near the cap or overly competitive.
 

JTmillerForA1stLOL

Registered User
Oct 12, 2007
1,272
1,427
Burying Eriksson saves about 1m if I recall correctly. I'd rather bury the bum and save the assets. Most of those trades save less cap plus require additional assets to be punted.
 

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,417
304
How about:

Eriksson 2 x 6M (5M cash left)
Baertschi 1 x 3.36M (2.4M cash)

For

Zaitsev 4 x @ 4.5M (18M left) 1M retained


Ottawa would also buyout Eriksson next season. Baertschi plays in the minors.

Why Vancouver does it: they get rid of Eriksson and Baertschi without having to give up other assets, and get a serviceable RD for 4 years at a 3.5M cap hit. They gain almost 6M in cap space this year.

Why Ottawa does it: over the next 4 years, it stead of paying Zaitsev 18M, they can pay him 4M (salary retention), Baertschi 2.4M, and Eriksson 3M (1M this year, 2M buyout)for a total of 9.4 million over the next 4 years. That's $9 million cash savings for Eugene. Or Tim Stuetzle's next contract.

That's why Ottawa does it. I'm also a sens fan so I might be biased. The 4 year term on Zaitsev could be a lot. Thoughts?
The problem with this is this just extends a bad situation. The Canucks don't want to sell future cap space (which theyll have even less of than we do now) they want to trade real dollars for cap space.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->