What was worse: Messier or Eriksson Canucks contract?

When it comes to unrestricted free agent signings in Vancouver Canucks history, two stand above the rest.

Or should I say below the rest?

In honour of Loui Eriksson’s return to Vancouver tonight, it’s time to decide who was the worst unrestricted free agent signing in Canucks history.

Was it Eriksson, who signed a six-year, $36 million contract with the Canucks in 2016? Or was it Mark Messier, who made $24 million in three seasons in Vancouver from 1997 to 2000?

At the risk of defending Messier’s time with the Canucks and being chased out of Vancouver, the answer is this: Eriksson’s was worse.

On-ice production: Eriksson was worse

Eriksson was 31 when he played his first game in Vancouver; Messier was 36. Both players were clearly well past their prime by the time they first slipped on a Canucks jersey.

In terms of goals and assists, Messier’s tenure in Vancouver wasn’t a disaster. He ranked second on the team in scoring in each of his first two seasons and was third in points in his final season in Vancouver.

Messier played 207 games in a Canucks uniform, scoring 162 points. He sits 57th in franchise history in total points, ahead of players like Igor Larionov, Chris Higgins, and Petr Nedved.

Eriksson appeared in 252 games as a Canuck, scoring only 90 points. That’s 103rd all-time among Canucks players — just two points ahead of Dana Murzyn. He scored fewer points with the Canucks than Trent Klatt, Sven Baertschi, Donald Brashear, and Taylor Pyatt.

But of course, we can’t look at Messier’s tenure purely in terms of goals and assists.

Off-ice: Messier was way worse

Messier was supposed to be the leader that would unite an underperforming Canucks team and lift them to new heights. Instead, almost instantly, the Canucks dressing room was divided, and the team imploded.

Messier wore No. 11 in Vancouver, despite the fact that it was unofficially retired by the team out of respect for Wayne Maki, a former player who died while a member of the Canucks.

The organization should share part of the blame, but Messier didn’t get the blessing of the Maki family, who were infuriated by him wearing the number. No. 11 still hasn’t been worn by a Canucks player since Messier left.

You might also like:
• A look at the handwritten contract Mark Messier signed with Canucks in 1997 (PHOTOS)
• The most expensive player contracts in Canucks history
• Mike Keenan explains how Mark Messier essentially hired him as Canucks coach

Messier took the captaincy away from Trevor Linden before ever playing a game for the Canucks, instead of supporting a player who had been wearing the C in Vancouver for seven years.

After Pat Quinn was fired as GM and Tom Renney let go as coach, Mike Keenan was brought in. Years later, Keenan said that Messier essentially hired him in Vancouver by going to ownership and requesting him.

What followed was one of the most tumultuous times in Canucks history.

Eriksson, by contrast, appeared to have no negative impacts off the ice. Aside from an interview in Sweden where he said he didn’t get along with Travis Green, Eriksson kept his mouth shut and collected his paycheque.

The money: Eriksson’s was way worse

Both Messier and Eriksson earned $6 million per season, though given they were signed 19 years apart, Messier’s contract was more lucrative when you adjust for inflation.

The Canucks had to pay Messier $2 million to buy him out after the third year of his contract, and years later, he secured another $6 million after he took the team to court.

Eriksson received $33 million in five years from the Canucks. Messier got $24 million for three years of service.

But the reason Eriksson’s deal was worse for the team was not because of total dollars. It’s because it was signed during the salary cap era.

Eriksson’s contract didn’t really hurt the Canucks until 2019 when the team started spending to the cap. In 2020, it resulted in good players leaving the team for nothing, as it became hard to re-sign Jacob Markstrom, Chris Tanev, and Tyler Toffoli, who all left for nothing as free agents.

To make Eriksson go away before the last season of his contract, the Canucks included him as an anchor in a trade, which saw the ninth overall draft pick go to Arizona.

Messier, by contrast, took money out of ownership’s pockets, but it’s not like his contract prevented the team from re-signing Linden or Kirk McLean. In fact, in retrospect, the Canucks got good value in both the Linden and McLean trades.

So which contract was worse? Pick your poison, but for me, the answer is Eriksson’s.