Value of: Sven Baertschi or Loui Eriksson for a defenseman
- Thread starter Horse McHindu
- Start date
Bjornar Moxnes
Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Eriksson is due a 6 million dollar bonus on July 1st. I'd be curious if teams might have some interest in him after that. Some budget teams that aren't close to the cap might be able to handle the remaining 14 million over the next 4 years.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
Seabrook is interesting to me as I don’t think he’s as washed up as he showed this year (I think he’ll have a bounce back year), but there’s no question that he’s declining. The final two years of that contract could be extremely ugly.
I can’t check contracts of players right now (thank you Chinese mobile! :p), but Dion Phaneuf’s contract expires earlier than Seabrook’s does it not?
If so - that might be a better way to go. Eriksson would have better centers to play with in Kopitar and Carter, while Phaneuf would fill a huge vacancy on the right side defense.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
I think his contract will be even more desirable in two years. 31 of his 36 million will have been paid out in two years.
GoodbyeLuongo
Registered User
Those are two guys with very different value. I for one have little interest in dealing Sven. He’s been productive when healthy and has looked very good with Bo. His potential value to us is far superior than what we’d get
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
True, but I also think we have other guys that can fill that role for less money. Leipsic, Goldobin, Granlund, and Dahlen (if he makes the big club this year) are a few names that come to mind.
Another potentially unforeseen circumstance that could play out in my opinion, is that Gaudette excels next year so much to the point that he’s made our 2nd line Center. With Pettersson still filling out his frame, he plays on the right side, which then pushes Virtanen to the left side (which further creates a logjam on the left side).
The Canucks have bigger needs on defense.
Probably couldn't even get him. I think Chicago's just fine with paying him and keeping him as a thanks for the cups. TBH in a few years they'll probably just say that his gear makes him itch sooo...
Yamazaki
Registered User
- Feb 9, 2018
- 1,154
- 1,138
The Moose is Loose
Registered User
You're not an Oilers fan. So don't offer up players when they obviously get boned
Bjornar Moxnes
Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Neither does it. Oilers can't take that much cap. Canucks don't want a person that's not even a hockey player.
Canucks need a top 4 D. Both Baer and Eriksson don't have that value to get a top 4 D. Canucks don't need anymore 5/6/7 D
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
My line of thinking is this:
Eriksson could probably land us a #4 from a team that has a few good centers (conducive to Eriksson’s game), and also has a #4 calibre defenseman this is significantly overpaid.
My guess is that Baertschi could land the Canucks a young defenseman that is 50/50 to turn into a 2nd pairing calibre defenseman.
Umm Canucks will take a person that’s not a hockey player for Eriksson easily...Neither does it. Oilers can't take that much cap. Canucks don't want a person that's not even a hockey player.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
But seriously - would Eriksson for Phaneuf make sense for both teams?
With Carter and Kopitar, you would think that Eriksson would be able to rediscover his game and not be forced to be a driver of offense or play with non-offensive oriented centers as he has in Vancouver.
Phaneuf on the other hand, can add some depth to the very depleted Vancouver defense.
With Carter and Kopitar, you would think that Eriksson would be able to rediscover his game and not be forced to be a driver of offense or play with non-offensive oriented centers as he has in Vancouver.
Phaneuf on the other hand, can add some depth to the very depleted Vancouver defense.
Rorschach
Who the f*** is Trevor Moore?
No. LA got Ottawa to retain 25% on Phaneuf's salary so he's actually reasonable in price/cap hit. And he's effective for Los Angeles. Ericsson is negative value to LA.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
But indeed, I do! I *do* want the answer!
:::Insert popular South korean 2007 song::::
"Tell me Tell me ttttttttell me."
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
we live in a world of what have you done for me lately
Nuck fans will point back 3 seasons ago to the 15/16 season to point out what he did
Non nuck fans would point out his 2 injury filled seasons where his combined stats do not match those of that single year and then point at his 6mill cap hit
due to his hit and his last 2 years--you are looking at an equally bad contract going back. If he was 28 one could hope for a bounce back--but Louie is 32 turning 33 in july
StephenPeat
Registered User
- Jul 19, 2015
- 4,651
- 1,616
*Everyone*
Seriously. I don’t see any team that would trade anything of positive value for Loui Ericsson right now. I think Van is stuck with him unless they retain the max.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
True.
That was the whole point of my post. Trading Loui Eriksson (zero retention) for a decent veteran defenseman that is a #4, but has a bad contract.
The Canucks are weak up front, but they have some things in the pipeline that could make Eriksson expendable. On defense however, they are extremely anemic.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
the killer for the deal you want is the 0 retention. Unless Arizona or another team needs to get to the floor--I can not see a team wanting to get the player let alone giving anything up. That 6 mill cap hit he has hurts based upon the last two years of play and it will be interesting to see how he adjusts to the new Nucks and he might thrive. The nucks may be better off keeping him for one more year to see if he can turn it up a knotch and raise his value
Ad
Latest posts
-
What changes are the Leafs going to do this summer?
- Latest: bobholly39
-
