78
Photo Credit: Darrel Dyck, The Canadian Press

Agent: For a lot of hockey reasons, might be better for Eriksson to play somewhere else

The rumoured desire of the Canucks moving Loui Eriksson has been at the forefront of the news cycle over the last week and this morning JP Barry, who is Loui Eriksson’s agent, was on Sportsnet 650.

Needless to say, the rumours are going to kick into high gear after his comments

With both parties having a desire for a fresh start, it now becomes a matter of when the Canucks deal Eriksson and what the deal ends up being. In fact, it appears that Loui Eriksson’s camp will be actively involved in making this happen:

This shouldn’t come as a shock, Eriksson just hasn’t fit with the team since signing his contract as a free agent. He was originally signed to help the Sedin twins in their finals years but it just never clicked. He then never seemed to click anywhere else and thus saw his role diminish leading to a healthy scratch later last season. With the Canucks turning towards their youth, it was hard to envision where Eriksson would fit which is likely what has the Eriksson camp motivated to get a trade done.

Eriksson does currently have a full no-trade clause.

Normally, a buy-out might be the next option but given the structure of his deal, there is zero reasons to do so:

Image: CapFriendly.com

The Canucks would only save about $450,000 in cap hit for the next two years and then $2.5M in the final year of his deal. Given that, the trade will be the best way to rectify this and the main reason why the Eriksson for Milan Lucic deal has been making the rounds in the rumour mills.

Ultimately, the organization will have to find something that makes sense before pulling the trigger but it appears that we are heading down the road of something getting done.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

The full interview can be found here:



  • DeL

    Did he ever get a chance to “click” with the Canucks here? He played with them for Sweden and it clicked. That’s why he signed here.This was a bad coaching decision by Willie and exasperated by Greene.

    • Goon

      Not sure what the bad coaching decision was. Eriksson received ample time with the Sedins early on, and has received time on the top line and the powerplay under Green, and he’s done nothing with those opportunities.

      • Bud Poile

        Injuries and lack of depth meant he was quickly moved to the second line with Sutter and then Green kept moving him down the lineup.
        I can see LE’s desire to play more of an offensive role elsewhere.

        • Goon

          LE started the season on Pettersson’s wing this year and spent about 30 games there, if memory serves, and received first unit powerplay time.

          He was moved off the first line and off the first unit PP because he wasn’t putting up points.

          • canuckfan

            The two years leading up to this season were tough because he was injured and just could not get any offense going. Green wants to win and saw the best part of his game was killing penalties and checking the other teams top line. It is too bad he will be leaving as it will be tough to replace. With his age is was hard for him to get anything going from losing so much playing time. So now we will make the trade with Edmonton and see if either one of the players can revive their career.
            Louie’s first game was a sign of what was to come when he scored against his own team and just never got any better.

          • Bud Poile

            7 games,in reality.
            Goldobin was the other winger and in Green fashion it lasted a but moment in time before banishing LE to defensive duties.
            “He started the season on the right side with Nikolay Goldobin and Elias Pettersson, but when he didn’t score in his first seven games, he was given a shutdown role with Antoine Roussel and Brandon Sutter.” Ben Kuzma

    • Gino's 3rd Cousin

      He has had plenty of opportunities. The thing I can’t really handle with Louie is his complacency and operating with the body language of a beaten man. I wish him well wherever he ends up.

  • orcaNV

    There is no point to trading a 3rd line player with 3 years remaining on a bad contract for another 3rd line player with 4 years remaining on a bad contract. There are cheaper options to get grit than getting Lucic.

    • Locust

      Exactly.
      Unless JB gets a good deal, send him to the Comets. If he cant / wont compete, demote him to the ECHL.
      He may retire if he has to go to the Comets anyway, problem solved.

      • Goon

        This makes no sense. If sent to the AHL, the Canucks are on the hook for almost his entire salary against their cap. Eriksson hasn’t lived up to his contract, but he’s still better than most bottom-six players, so there’s no reason for the Canucks to pay him *not* to play for them.

        Eriksson is also on a 35+ contract, which means if he retires before the end of the contract, the Canucks are on the hook for the entire cap hit for the remainder of the contract. Again, they’d just be taking a $6 million/year hit to the cap for Eriksson to not play for them. He hasn’t been a $6 million dollar player, but he hasn’t been so bad that they’re better off with no player at all.

        • Gino über alles

          How is he on a 35+ contract when he’s only 33? It doesn’t extend to the years when he turns 35, just to when he’s 35 when he starts the contract. If he retires now then the only concern is a cap recapture penalty due to it being front-loaded, but it won’t be near the full amount.

          • Goon

            It’s a 35+ contract if the contract takes you past age 35, which Eriksson’s does. It’s part of the reason the Canucks are reluctant to sign Edler to a 3-year deal.

          • Goon

            I just went and reviewed the CBA and it turns out I was mistaken about this. The 35+ rule does not apply to Eriksson.

            Trying to force a player into retirement is still not a wise move for a bunch of reasons, but it would not have the same kind of cap penalty as if he were on a 35+ deal.

        • DJ_44

          Eriksson is also on a 35+ contract, which means if he retires before the end of the contract, the Canucks are on the hook for the entire cap hit for the remainder of the contract.

          It is not a 35+ contract; he was 30 years of age at time of signing. The only lingering cap hit due to retirement (a very unlikely option) might be a cap recapture for front loading, but that I am unsure of.

        • Gino's 3rd Cousin

          I would rather have Big Zack taking up his spot on the roster. There is no compete in Louie’s game. We need a bottom 6 that makes life miserable for the opposition. Louie just lingers around like a stale fart.

      • TheRealRusty

        Marian Hossa was dumped by Chicago to Arizona with a $5.25 million contract. (after being diagnosed with skin disorder).
        Pavel Datsyuk ($7.5 million cap hit) and 2016 16th overall pick was traded by Detriot to Arizona for the 20th, 53th and Joe Vitale. Pavel played the season in the KHL, was never paid his $7.5million which still counted towards Arizona’s cap.

  • Green Bastard

    Boston just keep doing a number on us don’t they… Cam Neely trade, 2011 SC Final, Benning, Schaller, Bartman, Spooner, Eriksson and more than likely Lucic next.

    Never mind no more Russians, what about no more Bawstan lol

    • PQW is a Nation Network Contributor

      GB, you’re late starting your morning troll. Did you pee the bed again? If you’re worried about Bawstin, maybe you can help Rat Face lick his wounds.

      • Green Bastard

        WTF – This stalking shut-in loser must just sit there waiting for the great original Green Bastard to post lol.

        Get a life punk, you are a total joke. seriously… Leave or be banned. The great GB has spoken. Hup hup….

  • liqueur des fenetres

    JP Barry deserves full props for putting together a deal where his client holds all the cards. You might even think he saw this conflict coming.

    • North Van Halen

      what cards does Ericksson hold exactly? He will have little choice in where he goes cuz few teams would even want him. If he holds out, the Canucks won’t miss him, they’d likely thank him for freeing cap & roster space.
      IF, by some miracle, Vancouver finds a trade partner and Ericksson refuses, his other option is likely Utica. This is more Luongo, with the untradeable contract and desperation to leave than Ryan Kesler and his demand to be traded to one team.
      But I’d be fascinated to read your take on how Louie is driving this bus.

      • Beer Can Boyd

        Simply by his agent saying that he wants out, it weakens any hand that the Canucks might have been holding. Don’t think Holland isn’t paying attention to this.

        • North Van Halen

          If Louie was ‘driving the bus’ he wouldn’t be choosing Edmonton. The agent whine seems really dumb to me. Forcing down the offers will make it even tougher to move him. It’s like he’s angling to get Louie sent to Utica, thats a ntc not a nmc. If he makes this process difficult the Canucks can make it just as sh**ty for him.

          • Beer Can Boyd

            Tippet was his coach for 3 seasons in Dallas where he scored 150 goals in 7 seasons. I’m sure Loui would rather play for him than Green. Especially if he gets a chance to play with McD, Draisaitl, or Nugent-Hopkins instead of Jay Beagle or Granlund.

          • Bud Poile

            Barry said he talks to Jim 3 times every day and says they have a good relationship.Just guessing but if Barry is openly discussing it the league’s GM’s have already long been contacted.

        • DJ_44

          Simply by his agent saying that he wants out, it weakens any hand that the Canucks might have been holding.

          Nonsense. This is only the case there are extenuating circumstances causing severe disruptions in the room (think Karlsson/Hoffman disruption) . Stating that he had more trust from other coaches (which is crap since Green has incredible trust in Eriksson’s two way play) is not going to weaken any hand the Canucks have.

          Funny, not many comments stating Edmonton would have to even more sweeteners to any potential trade because Lucic actually talked about playing somewhere other that with the Oilers.

          For overpaid veteran contracts, their desire to be else where simply helps reduce the impact of their NMC/NTC would have on a potential deal.

      • liqueur des fenetres

        If he gets bought out, Louie can sign for literally any team he wants and for pennies on the dollar if he needs to fit under the cap, so he has little motivation to accept just any trade that comes up.

        The Canucks could bring him back, and it shouldn’t be much of a problem while the team is playing well, but as soon as adversity hits you probably don’t want a guy on the bench that’s questioned the coach’s ability.

          • liqueur des fenetres

            There are fewer than 10M Swedes on the planet, if you’ve ever worked with Scandinavians you know they tend to stick together. Who knows if that’s the case here in Vancouver, but if you’re management do you want any of the games you might play with Eriksson to splash onto young Pettersson especially after he saw how his bud Nikolay was treated?

        • Goon

          Eriksson’s contract is buyout-proof. The Canucks would just be taking a $6 million cap hit and have no player.

          Buying out Eriksson, demoting him to the AHL, or trying to force him to retire: In all of these scenarios, the Canucks are on the hook for at least $5 million per season against the cap, and don’t even have a 3rd line winger to show for it.

          • North Van Halen

            I’m am merely responding to the people saying somehow Ericksson is driving the bus. Driving the bus means you are in control. Ericksson has too much dollars and term to dictate anything.
            He has 3 options, take whatever trade is offered, suck it up and play for Vancouver or make things difficult and have Van return the favour, send him to Utica and make him want to retire (which won’t affect the cap).
            There is no scenario where Ericksson dictates terms and drives the bus, I’m still waiting for an explanation on how Ericksson controls this situation.

          • DJ_44

            I agree with @Goon with respect to the fact that Eriksson brings significant value to the team as a bottom 6 forward and he is more of an asset in Vancouver than Utica.

            Utica, however, is an option and it would lower his cap hit to $4.9M AAV. Better than a buyout and an option that is not be available on Lucic’s contract.

          • Goon

            DJ, you then have to replace Eriksson in the lineup with another player.

            Are you going to find free agent under $1.1 million who gives you more than what Eriksson does? Almost certainly not, so you’re going to end up with a worse team for the same cap hit.

          • DJ_44

            you then have to replace Eriksson in the lineup with another player.

            Yes, you do. However you would have to replace Eriksson if bought out, or any type of salary retention as well, without the $1.1M relief afforded a player in the minors.

    • tyhee

      Barry’s client holds poor cards and only wins if the GM folds, similar to the situation with Drouin Tampa Bay a couple of years ago in which Yzerman to the surprise of many who weren’t used to general managers standing firm, didn’t fold.

  • Captain Video

    This is all on Benning. He’s left himself with no good options. I’d prefer if the team just bought Loui out, rather than trade for Milan. Lucic simply doesn’t have the wheels to be effective anymore.

    • Green Bastard

      Benning will have no choice than a buyout if there are no takers. Let’s face it, nw Chia has gone who else wants a 6 million dollar goalscorer over 30 who cannot score lol

      Erikssons stock is now lower than Bud P, Locust’s and my stalkers IQs combined lol

  • I hang onto Eriksson and have a show-me period to call out Eriksson and his agent: “Ok, you have XYZ hockey reasons/grievances. If I give you a trial period in pre-season where I give you all of your conditions against weak competition, let’s see how good you are. If you dominate, let’s see if you can do it in the regular season. If you can’t produce, then you’re both full of crap so shut your mouths.”

    Wait until next summer to do a trade for several reasons. First, his NTC becomes a modified NTC. Second, his cap hit vs. salary after paying the last big signing bonus means he has a $6M AAV vs. $2.5M annual salary. Third, it chops off a year from his contract. Finally, it gives him one more chance to build equity because right now, he has zero trade value as a player.

  • kagee

    Given the Canucks have a plethora of smaller players or player who lack grit besides Virtanen, injured Roussel and 13th forward Motte, I’d be ok with Lucic.

    Shame Looch couldn’t keep up with 3X fastest skating all-star champ McDavid, but I think he can do great with any of our current centers, likely Sutter on the 3rd line to give mr Skin & Bones Sutter some muscle on his LW.

    All for the swap cost of #10 for #8 (better odds to land Zegras/Cozens/Dach), maybe both teams retain 20%, & NMC waived for expansion draft.

    Another option is Eriksson being moved to a cap floor team like the Senators, where we once again retain 20% for cheap sens owner, and maybe Karlsson re-signs in Ottawa as that was the rumour.

    Plan C is the Habs, it’s well known Claude Julien had coached with great success for Loui Eriksson, julien knows him well and his strengths to score.

    Habs and the Canucks could make it simple Eriksson for Alzner.
    OR make this a blockbuster with many other pieces involved, habs a plethora of Right Shot dmen, while the Canucks have a plethora of Left Shot dmen.
    Habs have 2 second rounders and #15, Canucks could drop back to #15 and get a 2nd rounder as compensation for the Habs to move up to #10 to select one of Caufield or Boldy.
    I’ve seen some fans wanting to move out Drouin, he’d be a great fit beside Petey and Boeser.

    So many options for a Montreal Canadiens – Vancouver Canucks blockbuster.

    • TD

      Lucic’s play has fallen off a cliff the last two years after a good start in Edmonton. Eriksson’s play has been lower throughout the last 3 years but at least consistent. This past year Eriksson put up 29 points to Lucic’s 20. On a 2 or 3 mil contract, no one would complain about having Eriksson as he provides value defensively and on the PK. Beyond some grit that doesn’t appear to be able to play with the players that need it, what does a 20 point Lucic offer. Even at that, it may be worth the gamble if he didn’t have the extra year on his contract. That is the killer. Adding the extra year prevents the Canucks from having 6 mil in cap space to help go after a top free agent in three years when they are likely trying to compete for the cup.

  • J-Canuck

    Another example of why NMCs are a bad idea. He is unhappy and can hold the team hostage.
    I thought Loui had more character than this. Literally the only thing you do well is kill penalties so what should the coach do? If the Lucic contract was 3 years and he didn’t have to be protected in expansion, I would say do it.
    Burke once said Naslund walked into his office unhappy with the coach and Burke knew he was going to ask for a trade. Burke said, “don’t say it. If you say it then I have to trade you.” He ended up firing Keenan.
    Point is you can’t keep someone around that doesn’t want to be in that room.
    Like Kesler, get what you can with same years left.

    • Goon

      I don’t have a problem with NTCs or NMCs, personally, but I believe that they should be void if the player requests a trade. It’s ridiculous that a player can negotiate a no-trade/no-move provision as a shield to protect himself from being traded, and then use that provision as a weapon to force a trade to his team of choice.

      • truthseeker

        That would require the team negotiating that point in. It’s a contract. It can be worded whatever way they like so long as it doesn’t break the CBA rules. What your saying doesn’t really make any sense.
        Teams are under no obligation to sign these contracts if they don’t want to so it’s not ridiculous at all. If a player asks for it and a team gives it to them, then more power to that player. And if teams wake up and realize that it’s stupid to give players that much control then more power to the teams. This is the freedom for both sides to negotiate and come to an agreement.

        • TD

          The two options to get around it would be to bargain a clause into the CBA that waives the NMC or NTC, or opens it to half the league if a player asks for a trade. The second option is to tell the player to have a seat until he opens up the clause to enough teams.

    • First, Eriksson has a No Trade Clause (NTC), not a No Movement Clause (NMC). There is a subtle difference. We can always send Eriksson to Utica and see if someone wants to pick him up on waivers. Second, the player can always waive the NTC. If Eriksson is so unhappy yet won’t waive his NTC, then it’s on him. Third, the entire story with Eriksson isn’t known. We’re basing everything on one Google Translation and it’s his agent that’s stirring the pot, not the player.

  • Freud

    Why is manager who would sign such a player to such a deal still allowed to manage? All evidence screamed don’t do it. But Dimbo figured he knew better.

    Best part is, Dimbo is back in the same position as he was when he signed Eriksson. He has built little and he’s looking to “compete”, so here comes the crappy, crippling deals for Myers, Ferland, etc…

  • Hockey Bunker

    When Green sat a healthy Loui late in the season I’m sure that started the “I want out” talk. This is a great thing!!!
    Loui has value to teams like Ottawa who need to get up to the floor but really don’t want to spend the money. Once Canucks pay his July 1 bonus, then he becomes a $6 million cap hit for at a $1.5 million actual cost. Great Deal!!!!! Worth a 2020 draft pick or a prospect.
    As a player Loui would help a young team’s PK so the skill players can get stilled ice time.
    And bonus for the Canucks, even more cap space to weaponize.
    When an event is talking, the client is walking.

    • truthseeker

      I hear this kind of thing a lot. Like there are all these teams out there wanting terrible cap contracts with low real dollars to reach the floor, but I’m skeptical.
      What kind of examples do we have of teams taking contracts like this to “reach the cap floor”?

  • Kanuckhotep

    Trading Loui for Lucic would just make things worse. This contract of Eriksson’s hangs around like a bad smell given the ludicrous term and money he received. It’s been said countless times that if Loui was a $2M per year it wouldn’t seem that bad to have him in the line up. There is no effective way to putting lipstick on this pig.

  • AaronK

    I like the idea of trading him to a cap floor team. If he will waive his ntc. After his bonus is paid his salary is 9 mill over the next 3 yrs (1 mill, 4mill and 4 mill) with a cap hit of double so he has value and is still a solid 3rd line player. Potentially more value is we retain a portion of his salary. Hes still a decent player in the right role so some one may want him. No to Lucic unless they throw in a great sweetener.

    • Nuck16

      Agreed. The idea is to get rid of Loui while no receiving a negative asset in return. Tell GMs he’s available for a bag of pucks (our pucks) and see who’s interested. Give Louie a list of teams, if there are any, and tell him to pick.

      • Nuck16

        There are examples of cap floor teams trading for retired players that still had cap hits…so they didn’t have to pay them but their contract still counted towards the cap. Tim Thomas retired for the last season of his contract which was traded to the Islanders. There are other examples but I can’t recall the name of the players.