Rumor: Farhan Lalji: "Internal Belief" Canucks can do something with Sutter and/or Eriksson
- Thread starter caley
- Start date
archangel2
Registered User
- May 19, 2019
- 2,135
- 1,276
Key word being internal. Internal I think greatest person in the world. Rest of the world disagrees
Bourne Endeavor
Registered User
I'd probably do the Schneider swap, though if we could attach Virtanen to dump Eriksson entirely. That's also worth considering.
And? Vancouver isn't a cash strapped team. Buying out Schneider only costs us 2M against the cap. If we did a one for one swap, it means we're not giving up assets just for someone to take Eriksson.
Bettman Returnz
Why so serious?
You’re not wrong... would have to involve a team who is a) rebuilding/ won’t be up against cap next 2 seasons and b) the sweetner is something enticing enough.
Otherwise can see it being a swap of “duds”, where as Canucks maybe save $1-2M/yr. Which it’s also worth noting to Canucks may have to retain some $.
Ghost of Ethan Hunt
The Official Ghost of Space Ghosts Monkey
The $12M in Cap Space Gold on Loui vs. the real $ owed...it's still $12M cap, which can be weaponized to gain more assets. A team like Ottawa would value the real $ owed more. But for Detroit, it's more about the Cap Space, so the asset(s) attached to get rid of Loui have to offset the difference b/w the asset(s) Detroit can get for $12M Cap from other teams.
Canucks brass was shocked at last years combine when they approached teams about their veterans like Sven B, Eriksson, Beagle, etc down the line. No interest in taking on their full cap hit.
This Canucks management group over values the players that they targeted over the years.
With covid it becomes a money issue.
senators are only about $20 mill from the cap floor with 14 players to sign to fill out a 23 man roster.
detroit will hit the door once they extend Bertuzzi and Mantha.
$5 mill is still money. and the Canucks don’t have extra assets to give up after their moves for Miller and Toffoli. Plus they never grabbed a lot of assets during their bad years. Only Motte and Karlsson to show for tdl moves.
If Vancouver is on Martin Jones' list and the Sharks are on Loui Eriksson and Brandon Sutter's list, I think there's a swap to be made where the Canucks unload Eriksson, Sutter, and Baertschi for Jones and Sorensen. This is also assuming that either Markstrom walks or Demko is traded. I get that it's hard to carry that sort of cap hit for a goalie that may end up as a backup but that's a lot of savings for the Canucks to utilize elsewhere. It's about 5.5 mil saved to be used in more effective ways to maximize the Canucks' window in the short term. And honestly, if Vancouver thinks it can dump Sutter in a separate deal then throwing in someone like Beagle in his place would still work. Just depends on what options are there for them and how much they feel they need to dump to make it worth it to take on Jones.
Peter Griffin
Registered User
If you expect to trade someone like Eriksson or Baertschi then you have to drop some of that non-starter rhetoric. Saving a significant amount of cap space in the process of such a deal makes it a starter. Does Vancouver want to win? Then they need to be creative in ways to save cap space to add players that will contribute to their competitiveness that guys like Eriksson, Baertschi, and Beagle don't.
Peter Griffin
Registered User
Vancouver needs to open up cap space for when EP and Hughes become RFA, not add a longer term, $6M contract. Just by hanging onto Sutter/Baertschi for one more season they open up $6M+ when they need it most. They can also deal those two with retention or buy them out if they want and not have to carry a longer term contract such as Jones.
I’d rather buy Eriksson out this off-season than swap him for Jones.
Except the time before that occurs is the time to actually load up to win a Cup...not after. Besides, if Jay Beagle was in the deal instead of Sutter, Vancouver would be clearing 3.25 million towards re-signing those players at that time so you're still saving significant amounts of cap space to do that. Also, if retention was truly an option, I think they would've done it by now rather than waste 2 mil in the minors and hang on to players that aren't helping them to the extent needed to justify their cap figure.
Peter Griffin
Registered User
The Canucks only need the extra cap space if they plan to re-sign Markstrom and if they do that and acquire Jones they’ll have $12M or more tied up long term on over 30 year old goalies, no thanks. I’d rather deal with the Sutter/Baertschi contracts separately and buy out LE than take on Jones’ contract. It doesn’t make sense for the Canucks that need to open up more capspace in two years than they do for next season alone.
Not really that big of a deal considering the circumstances for the Canucks but again next year is Vancouver's best shot at the Cup. You either get creative to allocate more resources in helping them do that or you don't and after their new big contracts come in, you're severely limited in how you can provide the depth needed to actually make a run of it. Even if Jones and Markstrom were both there, the Canucks have plenty of cap space to afford Hughes and Pettersson.
Peter Griffin
Registered User
I disagree that next season is their best chance to win, besides they’re more than a $5M player for next season away from competing for the cup. I’d rather burn off the bad contracts next season and have as much cap space possible in a couple years.
That's why you also have 17 million to use towards that. I think 22 mil can get you some pretty good players to fill the spots you need especially when you're improving your depth by subtraction.
Peter Griffin
Registered User
Or they could trade Sutter and Baertschi at 50% retention and still have $21M to spend this off-season while not absorbing Jones’ contract longterm? Then if they want they can get creative with Eriksson’s contract and dump him with assets somewhere, or buy him out, or bury him. But extending that $6M cap hit another two seasons is simply not something they’re going to do. This isn’t a team that has their window closing next season, complete opposite actually.
SJS taking back Eriksson and Sutter in return? I would take a flyer on Jones and him working with Ian Clark. Expose him to Seattle next off season
They haven't retained more than 800k in the 6 years that retaining has been an option. I sincerely doubt that they will do so on either Sutter or Baertschi. If that was actually on the table, they certainly would've done it by now in the case of Baertschi instead of wasting all of it for him to be in the minors. I think chances are that the Canucks will either hang on to them because they're either too stubborn to take a contract back or too stubborn to retain the amount needed to entice someone into taking their bad deals. This is a flat cap league for the next couple seasons so cap space is coming at a premium.
With Eriksson, we'll see. His NTC opens up so that there are more options for the team to deal with but buying him out doesn't seem very beneficial for them to have to hang on to a 5.6 mil cap hit for next season or if they bought him out after next season, hang on to a 4 mil cap hit for an off-season you're looking to make room for Hughes and Pettersson.
It's very difficult to see given Vancouver's history to see them trading with 50% retention on anyone.
I also didn't say that their window was closing next season. I said it was their best shot at it. Don't bring out straw men for this convo please.
I'd easily do that if all parties were willing. There are numerous players on Vancouver that I would take on in order to move Jones' contract. It's a matter of making it enticing enough for Vancouver to want to do it and other things happening. Like chances are Markstrom would have to walk for that to be even a remote option but cap space is cap space. Some combination of Eriksson, Myers, Ferland, Roussel, Beagle, Sutter, Baertschi, and Benn would be doable to me as long as the cap side of it works on the Sharks' end obviously since that's a lot of players and a lot of money. lol
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,589
- 21,127
Peter Griffin
Registered User
They also haven’t had a need to dump salary until potentially this off-season depending on what moves they’re going to make. Maybe they don’t want to re-sign injury prone players in Markstrom and Tanev to big, long term deals?
Well swapping it out for an even longer contract in Jones’ doesn’t seem beneficial to me. The cap savings for one season don’t offset the added cap hit for two down the line IMO.
Well if their best chance to win is next season by your estimation that would lead one to believe that after that the window would be getting smaller and not larger, right? IE, closing.
Last edited:
This thread has to do with a report that Vancouver is looking to move our cap dumps, not take on your teams cap dumps. So yes, taking on 4 years of Jones is a non-starter for a team looking to create cap space now, and in the future. We are happy dumping one (1) short term contract, placing Ferland on the LTIR and all the sudden we're good to go this year. Moving Eriksson, Sutter, Baertschi and who ever else to take back 4 years of Jones isn't being creative, it's creating a massive, massive problem for us down the road when our key pieces (Pettersson, Hughes, Boeser, Horvat, Miller) all need a new contract.
