Tower102

First off, why are multiple people discussing the Rangers here. No way they grab someone like Gibson when they have Shesterkin. NJ makes a lot of sense as others have said. Something around: 2OA + Blackwood for Gibson + 10th. NJ could then really swing for the fences trading the 10th for another win now piece and all of a sudden they have become a possible threat. Prediction: Gibson stays a Duck

What would it take to move OEL? a first? What would it take to replace his impact on the ice? 6 million a year contract and assets to get said player? Is saving under 2 million a year in cap worth the first and other assets? For me its a no brainer that giving up those assets is not worth getting rid of OEL. While he is overpaid and I would wash my hands of the contract if we could, he is still a minute eating solid defensemen that isn't as bad as he is made out to be. Every team has contracts that are overpaid by various amounts, a few million dollars in this area is not going to kill the team.

I dont think Grubaur is that good. He looked good behind the Avalanche defense. I thought he was the perfect case of a guy that would always struggle leaving that team. I dont think he is as bad as last year showed because Seattle was awful but I don't think he would help the Oilers much. He's probably about as good as Smith. Oilers should be trading draft picks for a higher end goalie.

Is there nothing set up where league doctors can evaluate these players and deem them healthy enough to come off the LTIR? If not, I find it ludicrous that they would trust team doctors on this.

He won way more trades than he lost.

Id like to see last year compared to this year. The fact that this year has bumped his EV defense up by 13% while they are still using last years stats with this years shows he is probably right around league average of 50 this year. I imagine his WAR and offense are right at the top well into the 90s looking at this year alone.

So the timeline for a non pro hockey player or rugby players offers no timeline for a pro hockey player???? There is a timeline or they wouldn't have provided one.

Edler made 6, and when the cap inflates for those last few years, they will take up a very similar percentage of the cap...

How on earth does he get that. I can't even imagine the agent using that as a starting point. They really think he is going to turn it around and didn't want to bridge and then pay more I guess.

Nah, he will be more like an Edler.

For numbers to work I think it would need to be something like: Pearson for Kane 50% retained. This has the numbers roughly the same but Kane carries an additional year. I would not be interested in this 1 for 1. I also don't think I would do it if it was just picks added by SJ, they would also need to add a cheap piece that can replace Pearson on the PK (a motte type if they have any)

No, its that we are admitting our defense and defensive structures suck compared to Calgary's and that if you traded the goalies the numbers would likely be reversed. How fragile do you have to be to pretend the two goalies are operating under comparable circumstances. Even if Markstrom wins the Vezina this year and is the better goalie this year, it was still the right decision to go with Demko. Demko is proving he is a top end goalie. Demko has a lot more years at this level (and maybe higher) than Markstrom and fits our winning window way better.

Markstrom was gone by last year, and injured in his last year under contract. Why do Canuck fans pretend we are the only team that ever loses players to free agency.

I think that any team that didnt get a chance to claim him get a chance to claim and put him on their NHL roster, if it goes beyond that then the Canucks would have first dibs on re-claiming and putting him in the minors. Not entirely sure though.

So you think Benning just volunteered the 4 years with no other teams in the running? If I had to venture an educated guess on how negotiations went, it was something like: "If you want Poolman on your team you got to give him the 4th year". Seems more likely to me. While I agree the 4 years is not ideal, not UFA signing ever really is and adding term was less of an evil than adding $. So I ask you this question: Would you rather Poolman at 2.5 x 4 or a defense without him (especially with Hamonic maybe not playing).

WOW, did not expect that. He is elite but not Makar level.

If a C gets hurt we can shift Miller into C and adjust wingers. Motte is capable of third line. Pod or Pearson are capable of top 6. Agree with right side D though for injury sake. Maybe OEL could shift over?

While also getting MASSIVE draft lottery help too lol.

Where is the glaring hole on in the bottom 6? Pearson Dickinson Pod Motte (Insert one of many options) MacEwen Our D does needs to be completed though.

As soon as we trade for a player, apparently they suck and are just cap dumps... TB with Miller, and now OEL with AZ. Is he overpaid? Yes. Is he a top 4 dman with the possibility of regaining #1 dman form? Yes. Pretty sure this is a way better deal than was speculated last summer. Pretty sure we all assumed a 1st to get rid of Eriksson based on past deals was market value. Pretty sure we would have been ok trading a 2nd and 7th to dump Beagle and Roussell. Pretty sure we would have been over the moon to take a free Garland and OEL. A lot of people here wanted Risto. OEL is better than Risto, and not much more expensive after the 12% retained. Risto netted a slightly worse 1st, a 2nd and Hagg... I get that Risto is younger but....

After this blockbuster deal what would we want for Schmidt? Our forward group is set now. I would rather keep Schmidt and just get rid of Holtby to make the cap work as we need someone to play the right side of D. If we can get a mid 1st for him though I would take it as it lessens the risk that today produces.

I like this trade and think it really helps us in the next couple years. I also have been a Benning guy. With that said, the trade is a huge risk and Benning is betting his career on it. If OEL keeps his sharp decline (I tend to think he will uptick for 4 years on a better team) and if the 9th pick nets a Clarke who becomes a stud, than its a huge loss. If we can fit them all in without moving Schmidt then this is a roster that will compete and be favorites for 2nd behind Vegas in the division assuming the OEL uptick.

Too much hate on OEL in here. Will be better with better players around him. Yes the contract is a bit long and a bit high but the retention is huge. This makes us WAY better for the next 2-3 years. After that, maybe not depending who is available at 9. Garland is going to be a slightly worse Miller. We have a good looking versatile top 9 now where players can shift up and down and have a couple decent two way lines and a strong 4th line with Motte there. Miller Petey Boeser Hoglander Horvat Garland Pearson Dickinson Pod Motte Hawrylyk MacEwen Curious what we do on our back end, I hope we keep Schmidt as I don't want to sell low and think this would be a pretty good 7. OEL - Schmidt Hughes - Hamonic Rathbone - Myers Juolevi

He may not have made a move as early as you want him to to take advantage of the expansion, but moves like that and taking advantage of teams in cap problems is pretty much the same and he has done that in back to back offseasons with Miller and Schmidt. The most illogical arguments for someone being bad at their job are the ones you are using where you are speculating on information you don't have. None of us have any idea what discussions go on behind the scenes and what was asked of us in return of a trade. For all we know, Benning's break off point of negotiations was exactly the same as what you would have done, but we have no idea. You Benning haters that will literally jump on any spec of dust pretending its a grenade in your dogmatism of "Benning sucks" need to stick to the actual facts that we know, and those are the transactions he has made, and weight is success rate against other GM's in the league. You would have all hated him for giving up a draft pick and prospect for a player that doesn't fit our needs so be happy he is holding his chips looking for the right move at the right time.

Can we not turn every other teams transaction into a "Where was Benning", "Benning is MIA on this one"? Do you really think the Canucks will be involved in every trade, and if they were involved as much as you all want him to be, it would require overpayments to beat all these other deals. Do you ever stop to think maybe Benning made an offer with equal value as a trade that was made but the team liked the other option more, and if Benning raised his price to get it done it would have been an overpayment? Comments like these are understandable on a Taffoli signing in MTL where if we offered the same amount we probably get him, but trades like this where its not even a player that fits our needs, can you all just take a break on your illogical Benning hate.