Proposal: Creative ways to shed Loui Eriksson contract

[Djp]

Give him a mysterious allergy to hockey equipment.

Claim a broken nail....

 

[Johnsie19]

It’s clear to anyone, anywhere on earth exactly what the Canucks and Luongo’s intentions were when the contract was signed. If there’s anything I’ve learned from watching Sports Leagues throughout my life it’s this; the quickest way to find yourself in purgatory is to find a loophole in a CBA and immediately try to drive a Strombone through it.

The Canucks got exactly what was coming. Aren’t the Islanders still paying Yashin AND Dipietro? (J/K, that’s for the LOLs). It was only that much more delicious when Luongo actually retired, incurring the Recapture Penalty to a team that treated him like dogshit. Sorry boys, sometimes you get what you deserve.

What was the loophole? Signing long contracts? I think it's pretty standard to look for every advantage within the rules. The thing is it seems the Canucks were the only team to actually pay for doing it. Every team would have done it with a player like Lu. Not every team had a player worth a long term deal is all.

 

[Johnsie19]

It's not the savings of $3m you think it is b/c...

It only saves $500k in real cash as both teams have already paid the signing bonus for this season. Even if both players were bought out after the trade, the Wings still only save $500k more.

Ya you are right actually. I misread that. Makes that trade not really worth it then. Unless we needed that 750 k so bad we were willing to give up a prospect. Prob rather pursue a different player though.

 

[robertocarlos]

You no go there. Illegal!

 

[mouser]

Maybe Arizona ? Here's an exemple, but even in this deal I feel like they are on the wrong side of the deal.


Louis Eriksson (2 years left, Cap 6M, real $ 4 Millions)
+
Olli Juoelivi
+
3rd 2021

vs

Alex Goligoski (1 year left at 5 475 000, 4 Millions in real $)

Imo, Juoelivi’s value is a a 2nd/3rd. Gologoski’s value is similarly a 2nd/3rd (even if that doesn’t come till after the season starts.

That leaves Eriksson plus a 3rd. Not very compelling for AZ.

 

[T_Cage]

I think the premise could work, but you’ll either need to retain a bit in Loui or improve your sweeteners over a dime-a-dozen lower draft pick

you’re trying to trade a useless player for an overpaid but useful one, the ‘real money’ savings alone won’t do it

 

[LTIR]

Consult with Chicago Blackhawks.

 

[bandwagonesque]

But you're not even using that cap space! You're seriously going to be like that?

 

[Canuck Luck]

The GMs of the opposing teams would beg to differ.

Since when do GMs own teams? The poster clearly said it would be enticing to the owner, which it would be.

 

[Cogburn]

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.

I'm not opposed to this. Yes, it extends the situation, but 3.5 for 4 years isn't so bad.

Buying him out is only worth 1.2 million for double the length from the looks of it. Burying him is 2.425 million too. Reducing Eriksson's cap hit next year is what caught my eye.

The immediate savings more then justify this to me, and who knows, maybe Zaitsev won't totally suck as a bottom pairing RHD? He can't be worse then Gudbranson, can he?

 

[JAK]

You want creative? You got it.

Loui Eriksson retires on LITR after being diagnosed with YIPS. Sources indicate that the first game as a Canucks scoring on the team's own net was the reason of the YIPS.

It was undiagnosed for four years because Loui refuses to discuss about it, but the team finally forced him to see a sports mental health doctor for diagnoses.

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

Allergic reaction to his fabric softener is the only logical solution

 

[voxel]

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.

They problem is if Loui is worse they might bench him and then this requires a replacement level player too. Who you should be trading for is somebody on LTIR..

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

It has been costing around a first to dump a bad contract (even with retention).

Money is also tighter this year.

I can't imagine a scenario unless a worse contract is brought back without giving up a pick or prospect Vancouver would rather not.

 

[Johnsie19]

They problem is if Loui is worse they might bench him and then this requires a replacement level player too. Who you should be trading for is somebody on LTIR..

It's kinda why it makes sense more on a rebuilding team. Loui can play in the bottom 6.

 

[voxel]

It's kinda why it makes sense more on a rebuilding team. Loui can play in the bottom 6.

So many cheap free agents. Loui needs a giant sweetener attached or the Canucks take on a worse/longer contract but smaller hit.

 

[ETTHAKING67]

Imo, Juoelivi’s value is a a 2nd/3rd. Gologoski’s value is similarly a 2nd/3rd (even if that doesn’t come till after the season starts.

That leaves Eriksson plus a 3rd. Not very compelling for AZ.

Honestly, you are probably right but I feel like Arizona would do it, maybe a 2nd instead of a third but they need picks more than any other team in the league, their prospect pool is innexistent.

 

[TkachukNorris79]

I'm not opposed to this. Yes, it extends the situation, but 3.5 for 4 years isn't so bad.

Buying him out is only worth 1.2 million for double the length from the looks of it. Burying him is 2.425 million too. Reducing Eriksson's cap hit next year is what caught my eye.

The immediate savings more then justify this to me, and who knows, maybe Zaitsev won't totally suck as a bottom pairing RHD? He can't be worse then Gudbranson, can he?

He definitely isn't, but it looks like us sens fans are about to find out in a few months.

 

[DomBarr]

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.

In a normal cap world it might work...but the cap is flat...and Vancouver needs space so there are no small adds to get rid of Eriksson

 

[Paperbagofglory]

Claim a broken nail....

Has that worked yet?

 

[Cogburn]

He definitely isn't, but it looks like us sens fans are about to find out in a few months.

Yeah, that was an odd trade. I thought our acquisition was ok, if expensive, at the time, when he had potential to improve and looked good with Florida. Then we somehow got a top-9, now top-6, forward in Pearson, which was unbelievable to me. Then Anaheim paid to take him on. And now Ottawa.

Well I hope the Senators staff can help him put it together, for his sake and the fans sake.

All that being said, I'd take a chance of Zaitsev over Gudbranson, gun to my head. It's just a shame he has such a long contract.

 

[Lupuls Grit]

Only two more years. Bury him in Utica, hope he retires (unlikely) and just suck it up and wait it out. The asset cost of moving that cap hit is simply not worth it. A buy out (this year or next) simply prolongs the pain.

 

[Johnsie19]

In a normal cap world it might work...but the cap is flat...and Vancouver needs space so there are no small adds to get rid of Eriksson

It won't be just getting rid of him. It would be taking on a slightly better but still bad contract. The sweetener could maybe then not be Podkolzin/Hoglander level.

 

[Johnsie19]

Only two more years. Bury him in Utica, hope he retires (unlikely) and just suck it up and wait it out. The asset cost of moving that cap hit is simply not worth it. A buy out (this year or next) simply prolongs the pain.

For sure buyout just seems like a bad idea. Take our lumps if we can't move him and don't prolong the pain.

 

[Djp]

Vancouver retains $2M

Trade to team A with 2 2nds

Team B retains $2M then trades him to team B with one of those 2nds.

Team B buries him in the AHL