When the Canucks added J.T. Miller, Micheal Ferland, and Tyler Myers this season, the assumption from most fans was that the team would find a way to jettison the Eriksson contract this summer, likely in the aftermath of his signing bonus being paid for the year.
Well, that moment has passed, and Loui Eriksson remains on the team. By all accounts, the relationship between the team and player has completely deteriorated, so it seems increasingly unlikely that he’ll start the season in Vancouver. What would you do with Loui Eriksson?
Last week I asked: How would you handle the Brock Boeser situation?
Beer Can Boyd:
He’s a 22 year old winger who has played all of 2 years in the league. His defensive play is still suspect. Rumours are that the 2 sides are far apart. $7 million per should be the max they offer him. At that price, sign him for as many years as he will agree to. If he wants more, then its either a bridge contract or a trade.
Spotrac has estimated cap space a touch over 5mil. What is terrible is the 3+. Mill retained for Lou. I still don’t agree with punishment to this Canucks team because the last group found a loophole in the Cap rules!
That being said, Schaller can be put in Utica getting close to 7mil and a few minor tweaks will get it done. Or there might be a Tanev trade on the horizon then asking Quinn or Jordie Benn.
The best plan would be find trade for Sutter or pull an Oil and trade Loui for a similar, but buy out worthy contract.
Boeser’s only power is to hold out, Canucks have the hammer. However using that hammer can destroy a relationship. He’s probably worth about 5 million in the current market. 6 is the Canucks internal max. He knows it so it’s all about term. At least that’s how it appears to me. A probable lockout in two years is a complication, but likely just means a heavily front loaded contract.
Right now he’s a proven under 30 goal scorer with the potential to be a 40 goal scorer. Will he be paid for the proven or the potential?
At the end of the day the Canucks are running a business and should pay players like Brock a wage that is fair to the player, but also make financial sense to the team and their aspirations of winning a cup. You look at Edmonton and how so much of their cap space is allocated to two players (McDavid and Drasaitl) and it is no wonder they are not competitive even though they have the best player in the game. The player agent is only interested in maximizing the contract their player gets and they don’t care about winning a cup, and they will try to leverage any angle they can to maximize the dollars.
Canucks do not need to do anything with Brock other that insist on offering a fair contract. They should wait as long as it takes to get a fair contract even if it means he doesn’t play during the regular season. IE they should do what Toronto did with Nylander.
If the player is more concerned about dollars than winning a cup, then the team is better without that player. The Canucks have improved the team enough that they can start the season without Boeser, and Boeser can decide whether he wants to chase dollars or a cup.
He’s likely looking for 7+ on a bridge length deal and the team is likely looking for max length at around 6. For a max length Boeser would be looking for more than 7M at this point. Yes the team has leverage but if you want him to be part of your core going forward you simply have to pay him more than you payed guys like Myers and Edler or you risk damaging the relationship. His agent will be all over this team with comparative contracts this management has signed and others around the league as well. Depending on what you look at you could argue that 6 is the right number but you could also argue that 8.5M is the right number as well.
Odds are the deal comes in around 7M on a “Bridge deal” or between 7-7.5M on a 7-8 year deal. Both of which the team has to do some work to make the contract fit under the cap. First thing they have to do is paper down the players that don’t need to go through waivers to start the year dropping the roster to 21 players and staying under the 81.5M cap. Once they pass that hurdle of “opening day” they can put Rousell on LTIR for the relief, call back up the guys they papered down that made the roster and move anyone that did not make the roster but was kept up to stay under the cap for “opening day” cap compliance.
At that point they are running cap compliant until Rousell is back and longer if there is another significant injury in the mean time. They have to continue to try to move LE, Sutter, Schaller, etc. from now until the end of the season and hope that one/some of them build some value so they can be moved without paying a team to take them before all the LTIR relief is gone or they will have to move a player they don’t want too. I would imagine that moving Tanev will be explored this season as it’s the last year on his current contract and they may be able to get value back. We have to remember that they have to also move out enough salary to not face penalties if bonuses cause them to go over the cap at the end of the year.
This management has a lot to do this year and have to be on top of it and not sit on their hands. They will not have a lot of cap space next summer without moving money before then unless they let guys like Marky, Stecher walk without replacing them with anyone paid more than league min so avoiding cap penalties is a major priority. Hopefully they get lucky and can move Sutter and LE but I’m betting that one if not both are still here to start next season.
Damn, I hate when my view appears to be the “odd man out” view; but when it comes to what Brock Boeser is worth in both dollars and term, I apparently disagree with most.
Brock’s played two seasons (on a bad team), he hasn’t scored 30 or more goals (yet), his back checking or two way game is mediocre, but was better last season than his first.
Yes I get he’s young, and I too believe he has all the potential, he needs time and better players to prove it (one down).
I wonder if there is a creative way to pay a player (via incentives/bonus) more money, but not like LE contract were it’s guaranteed.
For example if a player scores 30 goals he gets (for lack of a better term) a scoring bonus of say $1 M, if he scores 40 goals he get’s a second scoring bonus of an additional $1 M, this could be for assists or any stat i guess.
I checked the CBA tab on the NHLPA web site but got no hits when I searched for said type of bonuses or incentives, so I don’t know if they are allowed but it might be an option. Not sure how this would impact/affect the CAP issue.
Please don’t think I’m hating on Brock, I love guy, I believe that from his short stint in the NHL and that he’s not scored 30 goals a season yet, not to mention injuries, that his true value is somewhere between $5 M and $5.5 M with the bonuses (or something like them) as an incentive for Brock to take the money on the table if he’s able on a 5 year term.
The league, player agents, players and yes at times owners, not to mention the media and fan’s over inflate what a players market value is, which is evident with some of the monster contracts in the past few years, only to have the team trying to unload them years before they expires, because either the game has changed or the years of wear and tear on the player as lowered their value and usefulness, it’s a no win situation for anyone.