Proposal: Loui Eriksson to Anaheim

[Paul4587]

2009-2010: .87 PPG
2010-2011: .92 PPG
2011-2012: .87 PPG
2012-2013 (lockout year): .60 PPG
2013-2014 (missed 20 games w/ concussion): .61 PPG
2014-2015: .55 PPG so far

I'm not liking that trend too much. We don't need another soft defensive specialist. Silfverberg already does that for peanuts (although not quite as good). I just wouldn't trade a 22 year old power forward who can be a huge asset for us the next 5-10 years for 2 years of a guy making more money and not scoring as much as he once did

Fair enough. I just see him as a massive upgrade over Silfverberg for the second line. I get why you don't want to trade DSP though.

 

[Dirk316]

Fair enough. I just see him as a massive upgrade over Silfverberg for the second line. I get why you don't want to trade DSP though.

Why not just trade Silfverberg for him instead

 

[AngelDuck]

Fair enough. I just see him as a massive upgrade over Silfverberg for the second line. I get why you don't want to trade DSP though.

Why not just trade Silfverberg for him instead

Pros:
Eriksson is better than Silf at producing
Better defensively

Cons:
Silf is younger
Silf is cheaper

I wouldn't be against it. I think the best we could possibly hope for out of Silf is what Eriksson is now. I doubt Murray would do it though

 

[HanSolo]

Pros:
Eriksson is better than Silf at producing
Better defensively

Cons:
Silf is younger
Silf is cheaper

I wouldn't be against it. I think the best we could possibly hope for out of Silf is what Eriksson is now. I doubt Murray would do it though

I don't know...Murray only gave him one year. Can't think he's too highly rated an asset.

 

[salsa man]

I don't know...Murray only gave him one year. Can't think he's too highly rated an asset.

Seriously? I see the 1 year deal as a "prove your worth before I pay you" type of deal. By the same logic, Vatanen and DSP aren't worth much either.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

I thought it was publicly stated, the one year cheap deal was Silf's idea. I think he was offered more years and money but he wanted the "prove it" contract.

 

[Emerald Duck]

I thought it was publicly stated, the one year cheap deal was Silf's idea. I think he was offered more years and money but he wanted the "prove it" contract.

I think this is a creative spin by Silf's team. Murray wanted to buy low and lock him up for more years at a higher salary, but he didn't offer Silf/agent what they wanted in years/money. Silf agreed to a one year deal so he would be in a better negotiating position to sell high and get more value in a multi year deal.

While I commend Silf for the risks he took and his confidence for the upcoming season, so far his decision looks like a poor one after the first 20 games.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

I think this is a creative spin by Silf's team. Murray wanted to buy low and lock him up for more years at a higher salary, but he didn't offer Silf/agent what they wanted in years/money. Silf agreed to a one year deal so he would be in a better negotiating position to sell high and get more value in a multi year deal.

While I commend Silf for the risks he took and his confidence for the upcoming season, so far his decision looks like a poor one after the first 20 games.

I don't think it's spin. I'm sure BM offered more than the the one year minimum wage deal. It just probably wasn't a whole lot more based on NHL production to date.

It's hard to say just what kind of scorer he will ultimately become, but he certainly has looked much better of late compared to the start of the season. If he keeps playing like he is and getting the opportunities like he is, he will win the bet and BM will end up paying him more in the next contract.

 

[Seedling]

DSP should be virtually untouchable IMO. He's a terrific player and looks better than Simmonds was at this stage (big strong and can score). If Pelly was available, I'm pretty sure every single GM in the league would want him. You don't trade players like this.

If you trade somebody it's a guy like Etem or Karlsson who has potential but is not quite as good as DSP IMO. You need guys like DSP in the west.

 

[anezthes]

DSP should be virtually untouchable IMO. He's a terrific player and looks better than Simmonds was at this stage (big strong and can score). If Pelly was available, I'm pretty sure every single GM in the league would want him. You don't trade players like this.

If you trade somebody it's a guy like Etem or Karlsson who has potential but is not quite as good as DSP IMO. You need guys like DSP in the west.

I like DSP, but I'd rather keep Karlsson if it came down to it.

 

[Seedling]

I like DSP, but I'd rather keep Karlsson if it came down to it.

Tough call. Both are very good guys breaking in. I guess, as an Oiler fan I look at the decisions of keeping smaller skilled guys and would never trade a guy like DSP, especially in the west. To me, the Ducks success is because of a combination of being a very heavy team and skilled too. DSP just seems to be the kind of guy that you need to win in the west, especially against teams like St. Louis and L.A.

Just my opinion. I like both guys a lot. I know this though, I wouldn't trade him for Eriksson. Eriksson is a good vet but he's been on the decline to me production wise. That is likely due to the Boston system a bit, but that's a bit of a risk. I'm not sure it's worth it.