Speculation: Friedman: Canucks to chase high end UFA's?

[lush]

If Eriksson was worth his contract, we wouldn't have finished as low in the standings the past few years and we wouldn't have any new core players.

And yet the point was made earlier in this thread that it's good the owners are spending to the cap and I agree.

 

[timw33]

He wasn’t? In Dallas he was considered one of the best contracts of all of Hockey.

I recall 4 million 60pt defensive winger with 30 goals annual

Come on, this isn't even good trolling.

You’re right! You wanted Lucic

Ok, let's devolve into throwing baseless claims around again.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Yeah, Eriksson signing was a bust from day 1. Not absolving Benning but I lay that one more on Aquilini and his desire to give the Sedins a boost.

Exactly that is was a last push for some playoff revenue at the time.

Guy caved!

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Come on, this isn't even good trolling.



Ok, let's devolve into throwing baseless claims around again.

You wanted a rebuild off of an aging core that Benning inherited but ownership wanted revenue?

Com on everyone even people bought Erikson Jerseys locally

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

You’re right! You wanted Lucic

He also wanted Brouwer

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Trolling aside a 30 goal 30 assist net front presence that ideally played off the twins game was not a gamble!

What he became is a whole different story and a top 5 worst contract in the league.

Nobody had that foresight regardless of age.
Guy was in the front of the net/tip pucks, pick up garbage goals presence in his FA year and even better than Carter on paper.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

He also wanted Brouwer

Lol hindsight is impossible

 

[4Twenty]

Come on, this isn't even good trolling.

Eriksson's last season in Boston looks like a massive outlier.

Last year in Dallas: 0.6ppg
First year in Boston: 0.6ppg
2nd year in Boston: 0.58ppg
Contract yr in Boston: 0.76ppg ******

That was the trend, you would hope GM's track trends.

First yr in Van: 0.37ppg
2nd yr in Van: 0.046ppg
This yr in Van: 0.37ppg

Boston didn't want to keep him at $5m.

The interesting part of the analysis is that the Bruins were a playoff team perennially until those two final two seasons with LE.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Eriksson's last season in Boston looks like a massive outlier.

Last year in Dallas: 0.6ppg
First year in Boston: 0.6ppg
2nd year in Boston: 0.58ppg
Contract yr in Boston: 0.76ppg ******

That was the trend, you would hope GM's track trends.

First yr in Van: 0.37ppg
2nd yr in Van: 0.046ppg
This yr in Van: 0.37ppg

Boston didn't want to keep him at $5m.

The interesting part of the analysis is that the Bruins were a playoff team perennially until those two final two seasons with LE.

True but name a team that doesn’t crave what he brings to the table during the years prior?

It’s a crapshoot and we lost!

Haven’t you ever gambled red at the roulette table?

Exactly what free agency is a crap shoot

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Eriksson's last season in Boston looks like a massive outlier.

Last year in Dallas: 0.6ppg
First year in Boston: 0.6ppg
2nd year in Boston: 0.58ppg
Contract yr in Boston: 0.76ppg ******

That was the trend, you would hope GM's track trends.

First yr in Van: 0.37ppg
2nd yr in Van: 0.046ppg
This yr in Van: 0.37ppg

Boston didn't want to keep him at $5m.

The interesting part of the analysis is that the Bruins were a playoff team perennially until those two final two seasons with LE.

30 goal scoring second line minutes guy.

You’ll learn to follow through with your punches if the time ever takes place.

Ownership signed off on it not the Gm

 

[4Twenty]

True but name a team that doesn’t crave what he brings to the table during the years prior?

It’s a crapshoot and we lost!

Haven’t you ever gambled red at the roulette table?

Exactly what free agency is a crap shoot

At 31? I don't think many. You expect even the best guys in the league to lose a step, Loui didn't really have a step to lose. So no,

 

[4Twenty]

30 goal scoring second line minutes guy.

You’ll learn to follow through with your punches if the time ever takes place.

Ownership signed off on it not the Gm

Bro, I used PPG so I didn't totally dismantle your arguement:

Last year in Dallas: 12 goals
First year in Boston: 10 goals
2nd year in Boston: 22 goals
Contract yr in Boston: 30 goals ******

That was the trend, you would hope GM's track trends.

First yr in Van: 11 goals
2nd yr in Van: 10 goals
This yr in Van: 9 goals


Last year in Boston sticks out like a massive sore thumb, the only other year in his career he surpassed 30 goals was 2008/2009.

Ownership signed off on a Benning target. If you're actually suggesting Aquilini suggests who to target, I'm out.

 

[MarkMM]

Trolling aside a 30 goal 30 assist net front presence that ideally played off the twins game was not a gamble!

What he became is a whole different story and a top 5 worst contract in the league.

Nobody had that foresight regardless of age.
Guy was in the front of the net/tip pucks, pick up garbage goals presence in his FA year and even better than Carter on paper.

True but name a team that doesn’t crave what he brings to the table during the years prior?

It’s a crapshoot and we lost!

Haven’t you ever gambled red at the roulette table?

Exactly what free agency is a crap shoot

Er, no.

You can't say "nobody" had the foresight that Eriksson was a bad signing when if you go back to the day of his signing many on this site were beside themselves about the stupidity of the contract, predicting this would turn out exactly as it has.

And it's not what he brings to the table in isolation, it's at what cost. If other teams weren't willing to sign him for that kind of term and length and only the Canucks did, then no, it's not a crap shoot, it was a gamble that Benning thought he knew better than other teams and ended up being another crappy decision.

 

[Hit the post]

True but name a team that doesn’t crave what he brings to the table during the years prior?

It’s a crapshoot and we lost!

Haven’t you ever gambled red at the roulette table?

Exactly what free agency is a crap shoot

Figures Elmer would gamble at roulette. Suckers do that (given the house edge). Forget "card counting", just using basic strategy in blackjack would shave the house advantage by half that in roulette (less than half if playing roulette in Europe which doesn't have the "00").

And craps offers better chance for the bettor as well vs roulette (provided you play properly of course - for example do NOT bet on the sucker proposition bets).

 

[MS]

Trolling aside a 30 goal 30 assist net front presence that ideally played off the twins game was not a gamble!

What he became is a whole different story and a top 5 worst contract in the league.

Nobody had that foresight regardless of age.
Guy was in the front of the net/tip pucks, pick up garbage goals presence in his FA year and even better than Carter on paper.

Uh, basically everyone you’re arguing with said at the time that :

1) this was a terrible contract for where the team was at.

2) Eriksson had been declining for several years and was talked about as a cap dump in the summer of 2015, and his 30-goal season was probably a fluke.

3) at age 31, he was at the point where almost all 2nd line types fall off a cliff.

And we were right on every count!

Just because you drank the Kool-Aid and didn’t see this coming doesn’t mean that everyone didn’t.

 

[vancityluongo]

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

Luckily we don't need to speculate about what people thought at the time lol.

On the topic at hand, we're definitely gonna give a similar contract to Simmonds or Ferland on July 1st.

 

[4Twenty]

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

Luckily we don't need to speculate about what people thought at the time lol.

On the topic at hand, we're definitely gonna give a similar contract to Simmonds or Ferland on July 1st.

Reading that thread there is a poster with a * next to his name who posts really similarly to Pastor of Muppetz.

 

[elitepete]

Trolling aside a 30 goal 30 assist net front presence that ideally played off the twins game was not a gamble!

What he became is a whole different story and a top 5 worst contract in the league.

Nobody had that foresight regardless of age.
Guy was in the front of the net/tip pucks, pick up garbage goals presence in his FA year and even better than Carter on paper.

What is this garbage? It was an awful signing by the moron Benning from the beginning.

 

[TruGr1t]

Wanna try that one again? You know it takes like 3 minutes to do a bit of research:

Haha thanks for that. Funny how it works out when you look at things objectively and don't go full-blown homer.

The fact some armchair cowboy/fan can see how bad the signing is from day one and the organization couldn't is really the crux of the entire criticism of Benning.

 

[me2]

And yet the point was made earlier in this thread that it's good the owners are spending to the cap and I agree.

Context.

Spending to the cap during the competing for the cup phase is good.

Spending to the cap during the tank/rebuild phase means you have signed a lot of really bad contracts. You can be terrible and $15m under the cap, keep that cap space open for later. The only time it is ok to spend to the cap and be bad is when you are using that free capspace to acquire bad contracts from other teams in exchange for bribes like their best picks and prospects.

 

[xtra]

Lol I think the majority of posters were happy it wasn’t lucic cause we expected him to fall off faster.

Everyone here knew it was a bad contract which is just another thing that “couch gms” got right over benning.

 

[WTG]

Man, if only some posters held Benning to the standards they hold other posters.

 

[timw33]

Lol I think the majority of posters were happy it wasn’t lucic cause we expected him to fall off faster.

Everyone here knew it was a bad contract which is just another thing that “couch gms” got right over benning.

Yep we were mostly happy that Benning didn't finally get Lucic after trying to trade the Boeser pick on two separate occasions to get him and clearly signalling that he wanted to get bigger and create a "safe work environment".

 

[tyhee]

Trolling aside a 30 goal 30 assist net front presence that ideally played off the twins game was not a gamble!

What he became is a whole different story and a top 5 worst contract in the league.

Nobody had that foresight regardless of age.
...

I'll agree that nobody had the foresight to argue that the contract would be terrible in the first year, but there were a lot of posters on this board who said it was a bad signing and would be bad before it was over.

Hats off to y2k who was the most blunt about how terrible it was.

Anyway, I got a kick out of your saying "a 30 goal 30 assist ... was not a gamble" and compared it to someone who wrote on July 1, 2016 "Our fanbase in a nutshell right now: We sign a 30goal, 60 pt forward for 6m and are freaking out."

Yes, we had posters saying similar foolish things back then as well. My response (with thanks to @vancityluongo for posting the link to the old thread) was:

"How many points do you think he'll average during the last three years of his contract?

Really?

Were you happy with the way Bieksa, Higgins, Burrows, Hamhuis, good Canucks all, have aged?

I'm not arguing this is a bad contract for 2016-17. It isn't. I'd be happy to see Eriksson get $6 mill from the Canucks in 2016-17.

I hope it works out and Eriksson ages way better than most do. OTOH, I consider the contract ridiculously short-sighted and a huge risk.

But then, Free Agent Frenzy is the time for desperate GMs and their fans to ignore the distant (as in more than a season or two away) future and overpay ridiculously. "

Ok, the contract turned bad quicker than I expected. On the other hand, my saying on the day it was announced that the contract was ridiculously short-sighted and a huge risk was pretty much the opposite of you saying now that "nobody had that foresight." You say nobody could have the foresight that it would be a terrible signing and I seriously had trouble understanding how anybody could fail to see that it was more likely than not that the contract would be awful.

Btw, my thoughts about Free Agency Frenzy haven't changed from what I posted on July 1, 2016.

 

[me2]

buyout for Loui

2019-20 $5,555,556
2020-21 $5,555,556
2021-22 $3,555,556
2022-23 $555,556
2023-24 $555,556
2025-25 $555,556

It is cheaper on the cap to send him to the minors than buy him out. that is seriously amazing.