Photo Credit: Bob Frid - USA TODAY Sports

CanucksArmy Post Game: Saturday Nights Alright for Lightning

Puck Drop

The Canucks faced off against the league-leading Tampa Bay Lightning on Saturday night. Tampa Bay came in winners of four of their last five games, fresh off a 7-4 track meet with the Calgary Flames. Any trepidation Canucks fans felt going into this one was justified; the Bolts are as advertised.

It took just one minute and twenty-six seconds for Tampa Bay to open the scoring. Anton Stralman floated a wrister on net that appeared to take two deflections. The second one by Chris Kunitz earned him credit on the goal.

Markstrom was busy early on as the Canucks struggled to deal with the puck possession and movement of Tampa’s attack. After making a stellar glove save under a minute earlier, Markstrom was beaten again to make 2-0. Sven Baertschi failed to clear the zone with a trio of Lightning players between him and the blueline. From there Kucherov picked up his second assist as he slipped the puck to Stamkos, who made a great pass to find Victor Hedman streaking down the middle of the ice. Hedman put the puck five-hole on Markstrom, who on one angle appeared to have the puck stopped but opened up giving up the goal.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

The Canucks didn’t fold going down two early. They pushed back with chances of their own and several shifts in the offensive zone by the Horvat and Sedin lines.

With just under ten minutes left, Michael Del Zotto was called for interference after Alex Killorn chipped the puck past him. Del Zotto stepped in front of him and pushed him to the ice. The Canucks would manage to kill off the penalty, but the skill possessed by the Lightning was on full display as they snapped the puck around creating plenty of opportunities.

Despite being down 2-0 after twenty minutes, the Canucks had 67% of the expected goals at five-on-five and controlled 57.69% of shot attempts.

2nd Period

Tampa Bay picked up where they left off in the first creating an early scoring chance, while the Canucks countered five minutes in with a great chance set up by a drop pass by Brock Boeser to Troy Stecher. Stecher put a good shot on net where Sven Baertschi just missed getting control of the rebound as Boeser sat just to his left ready to fire it into the yawning cage if the pass came. Stecher continued his strong play as of late, was active and jumping in the play all night.

The periods only goal came with 4:13 left in the period. As Matthew Peca broke into the Canucks zone he backed off the Canucks defence and dropped the puck to Yanni Gourde who played catch with Mikhail Sergachev, Gourde blasted a one-timer high deep off the right wing, giving Tampa a 3-0 lead.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

With five seconds left in the period, Vladislav Namestnikov was sent off for holding.

3rd Period

Starting on the powerplay, the Canucks wound up with a 5-3 advantage for a minute-fifty, as Anton Stralman sailed a clearing attempt from his own zone over the glass behind Jacob Markstrom.

The Canucks power play looked great. It was compiled of the usual suspects but in a different formation as Boeser lined up more like a traditional point-man alongside Alex Edler. The Canucks had great movement on the powerplay. They pounded the puck on net but ultimately didn’t score.

Steven Stamkos was called for cross-checking. As he battled Del Zotto in front of the Canucks net with Jacob Markstrom, Stamkos took a cross-check from Del Zotto. After taking an elbow from him earlier in the game, Stamkos got up and broke his stick across the Canucks resident DJ.

The power play would be short-lived, as just three seconds later Bo Horvat was called for tripping off the next face-off.

Down 3-0 and having their chances on the power play it would have been easy for the Canucks to fold. They didn’t. Brock Boeser, who had a strong game, broke out in the third and was all over the ice, setting up Stecher with another drop pass but no goal came of it.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

With ten minutes left it was Stecher again, walking in, faking a shot in the slot feeding Vanek on the right wing. Vanek had Vasilevskiy fully committed hugging his post and wrapped it around. We had a game.

Less than five minutes later the Canucks got within one. Picking up the puck just outside his own blueline — this one was all Boeser. As he skated the puck all the way fending off three defenders and unloading his signature shot.

The Canucks continued to pour it on, and it was nearly Boeser again tying it up. But Chris Tanev had a tough go at keeping a puck in at the blueline, conceding a break-away to Cory Conacher. Tanev gave chase and just missed lifting Conacher’s stick; unfortunately, he didn’t miss his face. As he split Conacher open, he was called for a penalty shot and a minor penalty for the injury caused. Conacher scored on the penalty shot putting this one to bed.

The Numbers

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
  • The Canucks won the expected goals battle on the night, at five-on-five they had 50.92%
  • Jacob Markstrom gave up two goals on seven high danger shots.
  • The Canucks didn’t score on any of their five high danger shots.
  • Marsktom’s .857 save percentage was 6.2% below his expected 92%.
  • Thomas Vanek had a game-high 0.51 individual expected goals.

Quick Hits

  • Troy Stecher had a great game and continued his run of good games recently. He’s been much more active off the rush and aggressive in the offensive zone. He looks more like the player Canucks fans remember from last year. Once again paired with Alex Edler, he’s playing more minutes and being relied upon by Travis Green. He picked up an assist against Tampa Bay.
  • Tampa sits atop the league, and it’s easy to see why. They’re loaded with skill up front, and their puck control game is something to behold. Hedman is among the leagues very best on the blueline, while Stralman and Bolts rookie Mikhail Sergachev are standout in their own right. But this team lives and dies on the back of Andrei Vasilevskiy, his .930 save percentage is fourth among goalies with at least ten games played. His GSAA ( Goals Saves Above Average) of 21.78 is good for just over a half goal per game saved compared to league average.
  • Michael Del Zotto’s struggles continued. Tonight he took a pair of ill-advised penalties. One a blatant interference call after Alex Killorn dumped the puck in and tried to skate past Del Zotto. The other a retaliatory elbow to the back of Steven Stamkos’ head after taking a hit from the Lightning’s superstar.
  • For the second straight game, it was apparent that being physical has been a talking point for the club recently. Brandon Sutter, Jake Virtanen and Erik Gudbranson all laid noteworthy hits. The Canucks also engaged in a pair of scrums, something it feels like we haven’t seen in some time. Michael Del Zotto had a game-high nine hits, three times more than any other skater.

  • Brent

    Good game, way better than I thought it would be. Really a win, win as we got no pints, Boeser got a goal and an assist, and there was a great compete level. Interesting to see the double minor changed to a penalty shot plus a penalty. Never seen that before. And apparently neither had Steve Stamkos.

    • crofton

      Actually it was first changed from a penalty shot to the double minor with one penalty then coming off the board for the penalty shot. Never heard of that rule before, but I’d have to say it was at least fair, can’t say if it was correct, but it probably was.

        • Wise_Canuck

          Well, well Chrissy Searle the deadbeat slithers back in – still bent out of shape that you were outted and shamed Chrissy… suck it up Challister lol

          • North Van Halen

            Hey Army staff. Is there anyway to get a block button?!?!?! I’ve read everything this guy has to say ad nauseum. Boring, unproductive & adds nothing.

        • TheRealPB

          I think he means the same Sergachev that was a healthy scratch a few games ago and spent two games playing the fourth line wing position a la Andrey Pedan…In all seriousness, Sergachev is awesome and will be just fine, as will in all likelihood Juolevi. I was thinking that there’s all kinds of great young players I saw struggle in their first few seasons and if we’d been as impatient with all of them when they were 20 or 21 we would never have seen the Sedins or Kesler or many other blossom into the players they became.

  • truthseeker

    Does anyone know the over all record in the NHL of teams that win the “shot battle”? So basically the team that wins the shots on goal battle wins the game how often?

    • truthseeker

      I appreciate the cheers and trashes, but I’m really asking. Is there somewhere where I can find that stat? Or what’s an average every year between “shot wins” and winning the games? I would imagine it averages out over a multi year span.

    • I’d expect it’d be a little noisier than corsi/fenwick, but in the same ballpark – a statistically-significant correlation, but not an overwhelming one. Don’t know if someone has compiled the stat in one easy to read graph or anything, though.

      Why you’re getting downvoted on this is beyond me – it’s a perfectly reasonable question.

      • truthseeker

        lol…as I mentioned before…several here have an adverse reaction to the user name. It’s a reflex for them, and content doesn’t matter to them. Just childish emotionalism. It’s nice to know that I get under their skin like that though.

        It’s strange but I would think that would have been tracked by now. Seems very obvious to compare even if it’s just for giggles. Or maybe I’m just not looking in the right place? Can’t say I’m that dedicated to searching this type of thing.

    • Nuck16

      he should be quarterbacking the 2nd unit power play right now. We are rebuilding, right? That should mean giving opportunities to the young guys oozing with upside over dead men walking/skating guys like MDZ that have no upside and likely won’t be on the team next year. Last time I checked, we have zero chance of making the playoffs.

  • Beer Can Boyd

    I think one thing we cn all agree on, is that the Canucks are a better team than last year, and way more enjoyable to watch. Linden needs to grow a pair and give Benning the contract extension he deserves right now. Guarantee if you gave Canucks fans a choice of keeping either Linden or Benning, Trevor would be out of a job. Remind me again what exactly he does?

    • Dirty30

      Aquaman sock-puppet. Must be made of 100% pure teflon so nothing sticks to ownership … er … management. Able to speak eloquently but say nothing that hasn’t been heavily redacted by ownership. Only Trev Linden or the Pope need apply.

      • defenceman factory

        That seems an apt description. Not sure I’ve ever heard an ex player so eloquently say nothing. I believe Trevor has also added his own personal traits of loyalty and generosity to many management decisions and left Benning to wear all of it.

        • Hack-smack-whack

          Agree on Benning extension. Let’s remember though that there’s more to a good organization than ice cold business and calculated moves. Like Quinn started before him this franchise is continuing to build on a reputation where players are part of a family and their achievements, both on and off the ice are celebrated. I think as a Canuck, there is something to be proud of, and it’s not the winter rain or the inflated housing market.
          Do we really think players would want to sign here if this organization wasn’t looking out for their interests? Or agree to lower than market salary and start their families here to be part of something?
          There are amazing climates like Florida California or Phoenix. There are incredible cities like New York or Chicago. There are original 6 teams with a chance to be a part of a storied history.
          And there’s Vancouver where you’re treated like (fill in the blank with description of choice).
          Hopefully in a few years we’ll be in a situation where looking to sign multiple talented contracts, and fill in the weak spots with the best free agents possible, and build another winner.

          • defenceman factory

            I generally agree with your comments. I do however believe Linden (and perhaps ownership) was instrumental in several decisions widely considered to Benning’s worst. I include in this the Ericksson contract and the cost of contracts for Sutter, Sbisa and Dorsett. I also believe coach Willy was all on Linden and the Virtanen pick wasn’t Benning’s. All the ratings had Virtanen well inside the first half of the 2014 draft. Boston was picking much later and would not have spent much time looking at Jake.

            Benning has made mistakes of his own but Linden’s influence has made things worse. Yet Linden is Mr. teflon and just lets Benning wear all the flack.

          • Hack-smack-whack

            Your interpretation of what has gone down here the last few years seems entirely possible.
            And honest critique is fair and called for. I’m just not willing to join the growing sentiment against Linden, when I think his overall course is the right one for this franchise. There was always going to be a challenging period of time for this organization, and selling out on our culture and reputation for the sake of a little more cap space or an extra draft pick isn’t going to make us any better long term, if those prospects aren’t protected (I’m talking about physical protection, and veteran protection, absorbing the harder on ice minutes and the media feeding frenzy after), and incentivized by the tangible futures they see here.
            Linden is intelligent and has always been successful, and I’m willing to bear with his mistakes because I suspect he has the character to learn from them.

    • Freud

      Its pretty clear Linden took control since last year’s trade deadline.

      That’s when the team stopped lurching from one reactive “compete” decision to the next. Also know as the Benning plan.

      The team started longer term planning. It’s a safe assumption that’s because the decision making was taken away from Benning. Funny how people think Benning is behind this year’s moves, yet fail to realize he has no contract because he isn’t coming back.

      No one lets the guy not coming back make decisions.

      • Beer Can Boyd

        Glad to know you have a seat in the Canucks boardroom. Perhaps , seeing as you have such clear in sight, you could tell us who the next GM will be? BTW, there is zero evidence to support any of the claims you make here.

        • Freud

          Beer can knows what Linden’s role is, but I’m not in the boardroom to comment on Benning?

          I’ll humour you, it’s all Linden’s doing. Let’s then ask why Benning is so weak that he would accept a job under someone else’s terms? He’s so desperate for a GM spot that he’ll manage contrary to his values and principals? He’ll make public comments about turning the team around quickly, knowing other interviews in the future will link him to that comment, even though he doesn’t mean it? Who wants a grovelling GM like that?

        • liqueur des fenetres

          There’s plenty of evidence, like in every corporate board room in America. Hotshot CEO gets hired, makes all the crazy moves he wants based on his Svengali status, the honeymoon period eventually ends and the board starts taking a more active role… CEO gets axed.

      • defenceman factory

        Ya way more likely the owner or a huge multi Billion dollar corporation just threw the keys to an inexperienced GM and let him make any decision he wanted from day one and then after three years asked Linden to step in. I know you and the rest of the Benning haters have a lot invested in that narrative but it seems awfully naive. The direction of the team didn’t shift until ownership and Linden wanted it to.

        Benning was hired by Linden to implement a long term plan not to tell him what it should be. I don’t think Benning is a particularly good GM but ignoring the president of hockey ops role is something only a Linden fanboy could do.

        • Freud

          ???? Jezzus, that’s exactly what Aqulini did when he hired Gillis. Gillis was a player rep and had no management experience whatsoever. How dim can you be to make that statement with laughable evidence to the contrary?

          If it were up to me, the narrative should be this team needs a new owner and a completely new management crew from top to bottom.

          • defenceman factory

            Yes your evidence is laughable. The roles of president of hockey ops and GM were separated after Gillis. That wasn’t done to give the GM unfettered control over decisions.

        • liqueur des fenetres

          You do realize that Benning and a number of candidates sat through a job interview process for the GM role, don’t you? Are you suggesting the one that was hired was the least qualified? The easiest to push around? You’re the one taking Benning hate to a real personal level. Everyone else is just taking issue with his decisions.

  • Nuck16

    Impressed with the late push, something we’ve been lacking most of the year. Shame we were robbed of an exciting last few minutes by that unfortunate double minor.

  • Wise_Canuck

    Wow this Tampa team is for real aren’t they – I’m sure all you blowhards were twisted up like pretzels watching Sergachev flying around the ice like a Russian Mig Fighter – he is EVERYTHING the Canucks needed and did NOT get with the Benning bust Juolevi… absolutely devastating watching this kid tear it up. Sergy would easily be top pairing already on this disaster of a team.

    Add Larkin to the mix over bust Vurtanen as a legit 1C and WJC MVP Middlestadt over the wimpy winger Pettersen and we are talking another 2011 type core here… alas we are a million miles away from that after four years of ineptitude as the standings and last nights game clearly show.. man up guys and admit the truth… this is a Titanic type disaster – even Colorado are better!

  • Dirty30

    Great write up Jason … I missed the game but your report gives a good take on what happened. One small ask — if you’re going to mention other highlights, could you also incluse a clip or a link to a clip? You mention Sutter, Guddy and JV laid noteworthy hits … would be great to see those.

    Otherwise, keep up the great work!

  • DJ_44

    I enjoyed the game yesterday. It is good to see that Vancouver can play and skate with the best. It bodes well for the future and indicates the Canucks are on the right path.

    I one negative that stood out was just how poorly the Sedin’s play in their own zone, or on the backcheck. The shift change on Tampa’s third goal was brutal. We have be incredibly lucky to be able to watch them play. They are great people. But having them back for another season has limited upside. To think people actually are discussing $4-5M AAV each it ridiculous.

    If you would like a bit more of an unbiased, neutral view of the Canucks team, I highly recommend listening to the opposing teams PxP for the game. Yesterday I did so, simply because I find any game called by either Randorff or Romanuk to be basically unwatchable. Rogers Gamecentre does not enforce the local 48hr blackout for Vancouver games (assuming you are on a BC ISP) for the Saturday free games (like last night).

    The Lightning PxP team were pretty buoyant on the Canucks team, and impressed with the team speed and the young talent. They also stated that, when talking Green during the day about some negative comments from Vancouver media, he basically rolled his eyes.

    • Nuck4U

      Good points. The use in the 3rd period push where Sedins hardly had a shift especially Danny is a sign. They just can’t compete 5v5 especially if they lose the puck. As PP specialists they have use but can’t the Canucks find that in their highly touted prospects?
      It should come down to what Petersson, Gaudette and if Canucks land high end young UFA? They need to show they can handle the NHL level and Canuck deficiencies in brutal spotlight market.

  • Beefus

    Couldn’t help but notice what a great player Brayden Point has turned out to be for Tampa. He was picked by them in the 3rd round (79th overall) in 2014. Craig Button had him ranked 17th and Jake Virtanen not in the first round at all. Maybe Button should be hired by the Canucks as head of scouting.

    • Nuck4U

      Button does favor small skilled players more but they bust out as much or at greater volume then the bigger physical players. The trending determining factor that is common to both is they need to be exceptional skaters.

      Don’t know if cherry picking in hindsight is a fair evaluation. You can flip the script and say how could the pundits and GM’s over look Gaudette or Boser for example.

      • Beefus

        Go to mynhldraft.com and Button is one of the few that didn’t have Virtanen in the first round. And he had Brayden Point ranked higher than anyone at 17 overall.

        • Andy

          The discrepancy between Button’s list and his mock draft is explained on his TSN hits.

          When he conducts his mock drafts, he utilizes the contacts he has with each organization’s scouts to get a sense as to who each team will pick, rather than his own personal opinion.

          His draft rankings usually reflect how he personally feels about prospects and their potential.

          If I recall correctly, he noted how much the hometown aspect of Virtanen factored into his mock draft of Vancouver selecting him 6th overall.

  • Steamer

    Thank you, Jason. ” Despite being down 2-0 after twenty minutes, the Canucks had 67% of the expected goals at five-on-five and controlled 57.69% of shot attempts.” – Believe this illustrates an inherent weakness of the ‘expected goals’ stat – obviously not a reliable measure given that the opposing team was up 2 goals at that point. There are problems – rarely acknowledged – with many of the analytical metrics currently in vogue. Writers at CA & other sites are always looking for a new analytical formula in hopes of finding more accurate prediction-models – fair enough, but we must also pay attention to models that fail to reflect actual outcomes, This is why the +/- stat is not given much credence, as it fails to convey meaningful information. Perhaps the ‘expected goals’ was simply ‘off’ in this instance, but think it is one that might prove to be more of a curiosity than an actual reflection of play. Aware that Van was carrying play & getting shots, but 67% vs. a 2-0 deficit is significant. Thoughts?

    • Andy

      Expected goals is helpful because it accounts for shot quality (which is comprised of factors that include shot distance, shot quality, historical shooting percentage of the shooter, historical save percentage of the goaltender, etc) and creates context into which one doesn’t have to wonder if the team was ‘still trying’.

      If the team’s taking half-hearted scoring chances (like last year), it reflects in a stat like xG, as cited a few times last year when the Canucks were bottom 5.

      Here’s a good primer on Expected Goals.(http://www.goal.com/en/amp/news/expected-goals-football-soccer-statistic-explained/1u6ww9f69rhah15ahllye5ketl)

      As to your statement regarding models not reflecting actual outcomes, that’s what the scoresheet is for – it tells us what the score is. But stats like Corsi, PDO, and Expected Goals can help one determine whether a team is good or just lucky, and whether that stretch is likely to continue.

  • Steamer

    Why on earth is Hutton sitting while Granlund & Eriksson play? Or forget Hutton – the question remains: Granlund hasn’t scored in 17 games; Eriksson is, well, pathetic for a guy cashing $6 million a year. Clearly last year was a career-year for Granlund, he has now reverted back to where & what he was when traded for, – a 4th line player. Eriksson needs to be bought out; his presence is harming the team ( imagine being a young guy & having to listen to what;s expected of you while an undeserving vet is pampered? ) – & this must happen before Seattle expansion, when Canucks will have to furnish ‘protected’ status to Eriksson as per his contract. A very, very negative situation having him on the team.

    • Beer Can Boyd

      For one thing, Hutton is a defensemen and the other 2 are forwards, in case you hadn’t noticed. Eriksson is a disappointment for the money, but doesn’t hurt the team on the ice.He may be nothing more than a 3rd line player for the next 4 years, but so be it. Granlund is having a poor season, but he is still a young player. His role has also been radically altered under Greens guidance, he spent a lot of time playing with the twins last year. Also, the 2 steps forward, 1 step back rule is in often effect for young players. Hutton is suffering from the same thing this year. But I do agree about him sitting. For me, Hutton, Pouliot, MDZ, and Biega should all be taking turns in the press box. Edler, Tanev and Stecher are the only defensemen who have shown that they deserve to be in the lineup every night. Gudbrandson just needs to go, and the sooner the better. How he was ever a 3rd overall pick is baffling.

      • Steamer

        Thanks Boyd – yeah, I noticed Hutton’s a D – thanks; that’s why I edited myself & said ‘or forget Hutton’ – a general grouse on some of TG’s scratches, that’s all. Agree with you on the appraisal of the D as a group.

    • Unfortunately, barring another lockout that gives teams a “free” buyout, Eriksson’s contract is effectively buyout-proof.

      Because of the way it’s structured, if the Canucks buy out Eriksson, they’ll be on the hook for $5.5 million / year for the duration of the contract, and then a couple seasons of $0.5 million. Eriksson’s definitely not been worth the contract he signed, but he’s not been so bad it’s worth paying him $5.5 million *not* to play.

      • argoleas

        They are stuck with Eriksson`s contract and cap. There is an outside possibility of him going to Seattle as part of an expansion deal, but that would be in 2 years. His cap space is just something the team must accept and move on. He should still be a top 12 player for the next 4 years, and if he`s not, there`s always a demotion to AHL Really, the best outcome could be an injury and LTIR relief, and I only say that in the business sense. I do not wish injuries on anyone.

        • AHL demotion isn’t really helpful in this case either as it would only grant them about a million in cap relief. They’d be stuck with a $5 million cap hit for a player not with the team. Not ideal.

          I just don’t understand this deal. 6 million for Eriksson was about what he was worth in the couple of years before this deal was signed. But he’s over 30 – obviously he’s going to decline (though no one thought as fast as he did). So why give him that much, over that term, and make it buyout proof? Either give him $6 mil over a short term, or give him $4 mil over a long term. At 4×6, this deal still doesn’t look great, but it doesn’t look like a complete disaster. Or do the 6×6 but don’t structure it to be buyout proof – that’s just hilarious bad management.

          • argoleas

            AHL demotion only to free up a roster spot. There is no real cap escape here under any scenario except a potential LTIR.

            Trouble with this contract is how it is structured. I agree it has to be one of the most irresponsible deals I have seen out of this mgmt team. The only saving grace for this team now is that cap will not be an issue for the duration of this contract due to so many ELCs entering the roster.

            Perhaps it will scare mgmt and ownership from more stupid UFA deals (hello E.Kane!!). So it may have an additional benefit of being a UFA scarecrow.

          • I doubt they’ll be in a position where they need a roster spot so badly. Eriksson’s struggled, but he’s still better than a solid chunk of the team. Even as he declines further, he’ll still be a better bottom-six forward than most.

          • liqueur des fenetres

            Any of the other options you list and he would have signed for another team. The structure of the contract was so player friendly because management was desperate to have him sign after losing out on Lucic.

          • Nuck4U

            Liqueur des fenetres has a point on being desperate to sign UFA after Lucic snub job. But his deal was just as player friendly with Oilers and look at where they are now. That’s the problem with giving UFA’s a pay day they often don’t produce to expectation.

            The detriment to the team is does it effect their cap space where they are barred or hampered to make other moves. As player friendly LE’s contract is and as little he has given for it the end result is was a miss by management not an anchor to the team.

            If LE is playing fourth line or a press box guy because younger better players are producing then the loss is on ownership not the team. The players aren’t saying oh man we suck because LE has a big contract and isn’t playing. Where it may become a problem is if LE is being gifted a roster spot and played over and over when a better player is available but being held back.

          • I doubt he was getting offers quite so rich, but if he was, so what? Let him sign somewhere else and be an anchor on their team.

            Nuck4U – no the contract isn’t hurting them now, but what about three years from now? That’s another part of what makes that contract so baffling – it might have made sense for a team in “win now” mode, but the Canucks aren’t, and weren’t when the deal was signed. So they gained very little by having him these first two years, but down the line could lose a great deal by having so much cap space tied up in a 35-year-old who is barely producing.

            Benning’s made a number of high-risk low-reward moves over his tenure, which is not a wise way to gamble.

          • I don’t think I made my point very clearly – the problem is not just that Eriksson takes up a roster spot. It’s that he takes up a significant chunk of the cap, which isn’t a problem now, but competitive teams spend to the cap. Eriksson’s contract could conceivably prevent the team from resigning a talented player, or signing a more impactful UFA, or taking on another team’s bad contract in return for useful assets. That isn’t just a management problem – it’s a problem that makes the team on the ice worse.