Ilya Mikheyev Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Quote Oliver Ekman-Larsson’s name has been all over trade rumours recently. The Vancouver Canucks have reportedly inquired about the Coyotes defenceman, with Rick Dhaliwal reporting on TSN 1040 that the “Canucks are trying hard to make this happen.” Ekman-Larsson, who has a full no-movement clause, has Vancouver on his list of acceptable trade destinations, according to Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman. Quote Ekman-Larsson’s underlying numbers support the assertion that he’s closer to being a quality No. 2/3 defenceman than he is a credible No. 1. He’s good at driving possession but ranks third among Coyotes defenders at controlling 5-on-5 scoring chances, with a 49.4 percent share over the last two seasons. That middling two-way impact has translated on the scoresheet too. Arizona has only scored 45.8 percent of 5-on-5 goals with its captain on the ice in the last four years. Even when accounting for poor teammate quality, which we can do using Evolving-Hockey’s RAPM tool, Ekman-Larsson grades out as an average even strength play-driver. He pushes play offensively, but his negative expected goals against impact (xGA/60) shows that he doesn’t help limit scoring chances against. Quote Ekman-Larsson is an offensively oriented blueliner who garners a lot of value on the power play. He isn’t a defensive liability the way someone like pending UFA Tyson Barrie is, but he’s not exactly a two-way stalwart, either. Those who’ve watched him regularly really like his physical tools (skating and size) but believe his decision making and overall hockey sense hold him back. While he would instantly become Vancouver’s second-best defenceman, it’s important for the Canucks to realize that he’s not the dynamo No. 1 he was at the apex of his career. Quote With the Coyotes forfeiting their 2021 first-round pick (plus their 2020 second-round pick) and embarking on a rebuild, it’s expected they will ask for picks and prospects in return. TSN’s Darren Dreger said he believes the Coyotes would likely want a first and a quality prospect. This is noteworthy from Vancouver’s perspective because it would enable them to acquire a highly rated top-four defenceman without having to surrender Brock Boeser or Thatcher Demko. “The ask, if true, of a first plus a quality prospect is more than fair,” the NHL scout said of Arizona’s asking price. The ask is more or less what Jake Muzzin and Ryan McDonagh — defencemen of similar age and quality — have fetched in a trade. But the crucial distinction between Ekman-Larsson compared to Muzzin or McDonagh is his contract, which pays him $8.25 million annually over the next seven years. That’s the elephant in the room: Ekman-Larsson is still good but he’s not $8.25 million AAV level good. Quote Even for the trade to make sense in the short term for Vancouver, Arizona would need to take back a bad contract like Loui Eriksson’s. Without that, the Canucks wouldn’t be able to re-sign any of their key UFAs and would have to cut corners to fill out their roster. That Eriksson is only owed $5 million total over the next two years in actual salary does make the contract more palatable to absorb for Arizona. What would arguably be even more appealing is if the Canucks could get Arizona to retain on Ekman-Larsson’s contract as opposed to taking back a bad contract. Vancouver’s glut of inefficient bottom-six deals all expire in two years, so you’d rather spread the reduced salary burden over the entire life of Ekman-Larsson’s contract with a retention rather than take the short-term fix of jettisoning a bad contract. Perhaps Canucks GM Jim Benning can leverage Ekman-Larsson’s no-movement clause and apparent interest in Vancouver to minimize the return or lessen the financial burden. Acquiring Ekman-Larsson only makes sense if you think your team is that close to being a Stanley Cup contender. Such a move would significantly bolster the team in the present, though it would come at the expense of potentially shortening the club’s window. - Harman Dayal 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Before I lose my mind, could those pushing HARD for this explain why? What is it you love about this guy? In the here and now and heading into the future in consideration of how this could/will handcuff us down the road? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 i’ld rather see us push hard for cernak. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 To me there are better 'perfect' fits than OEL but he'd still be a massive improvement on a team that made it to game 7 of the "2nd" (3rd) round of the playoffs. If they take Loui on too, I'd be pretty keen. Hughes & OEL on two separate pairings pretty much guarantees the Canucks have two good pairings to eat up 80 or 90 percent of a game when needed. If Hughes can truly play the right now they can also pair together in intense playoff situations. Edler and Stecher would be a great third pairing. I agree his contract is a risk but maybe finally playing on a decent time would also be a huge boost for this guy. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 34 minutes ago, The Lock said: When he's 35 and we still have him in the books at an 8.25 million cap hit, will you still be saying the same thing? He's not the player he used to be now, let alone down the road. Literally look at his stats the past few years. He's already deteriorating and doesn't play to his cap hit. Big no thanks here. He's a great player but not 8.25mil great. Have we won a cup in those 5 years with him playing a significant role? Answer depends on that. If we won a cup, 8.25 mil is not a big deal when OEL is 35 yrs old is not a big deal. Who knows, maybe the cap will be 90 mil by then. And keep in mind that Edler is 34 and still playing well. OEL is a better player than Edler, there's a good chance that he might be playing well into his mid 30's. The question is, can we get OEL without giving up Boeser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 I mean in 2018-2019 he was second on the Yotes in points lol 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, khay said: The question is, can we get OEL without giving up Boeser. Probably since it is reported that we're 1 of 2 teams he's willing to go to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 I mean I'm all for getting OEL if it means we are dumping Eriksson's contract. OEL is going to really change our defensive make-up. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Hughes - DeMelo OEL - Myers Edler - Stetcher 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 hour ago, Top Sven Baercheese said: 7 years is a long time, but makes sense why a Swede wants to come here. I love that we always have star Swedish players that others want to play with. If OEL waives his NMC to come here, does he lose the NMC altogether? For what I remember, its up to the team acquiring and the player to negotiate whether they honor it or not. I.e Calgary and Edmonton swapped Neal for Lucic, and Calgary decided to allow Lucic to keep his NMC in effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 5 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said: Before I lose my mind, could those pushing HARD for this explain why? What is it you love about this guy? In the here and now and heading into the future in consideration of how this could/will handcuff us down the road? To hopefully send LE the other way and it sounds like Arizona is in a spot to move him. He’s a quality defencemen who can move the puck. Hughes can’t do it by himself. I understand we need to look at the right side more obviously but if Arizona is willing to move him as a cap dump so to speak. Why not see what we can do. If the price is too high move on. Or if Arizona is in a pinch play hardball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 28 minutes ago, messier's_elbow said: Benning isn’t Jesus resurrected. Well, he did sign all those players for too much $ and term...So he is the only one to blame for us being in this predicament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Why lose assets when Pietrangelo is available... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 I’m surprised no one has brought up Brian Burke trading for Chris Pronger the summer after signing Scott Niedermayer since he was recently on the airwaves discussing just this. Basically, his point was that the Ducks management team & coaching staff had a concerted debate about whether or not the Ducks were one piece away from being a top Cup challenger. People are rightly concerned about the long term salary cap ramifications of these deals but in some ways that is obfuscating the whole point of NHL hockey. Our window to win a Cup is not going to be open as long as the Tampa Bay window has been open. We don’t have the same quantity of mid to late round draft finds. Our window is more based on the Horvat, Miller, Boeser contracts. Two to three more years after which there will need to be a retooling. Trading Boeser in a package for OEL makes no sense in that regard because it takes away from our window. Having Boeser and OEL adds to our window. Personally, I’d much rather try and sign Pieterangelo and dump Eriksson (with the overused “sweetener” phrase) than give up all the extra pieces that would be required to acquire OEL. It’d be cheaper to dump Eriksson on Ottawa for a Staal-Detroit type of compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, Me_ said: Why lose assets when Pietrangelo is available... Very few people on the planet know whether Pietro would consider Vancouver; and most teams would like to add him 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said: Before I lose my mind, could those pushing HARD for this explain why? What is it you love about this guy? In the here and now and heading into the future in consideration of how this could/will handcuff us down the road? Its new and shiny... the myth and possibility of newness is so alluring all logic gets thrown out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, Me_ said: Why lose assets when Pietrangelo is available... Loui Eriksson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 Just now, Me_ said: Why lose assets when Pietrangelo is available... because you know oel is willing to come here but also because you NEED to lose assets to make a contract like that fit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, Me_ said: Why lose assets when Pietrangelo is available... Valid point, unknown if he would have interest coming to the wet coast. Also can go after in a trade: Cernak/Foote, Severson, Subban, Pulock/Mayfield. Also, in the FA market there is: Barrie, Hamonic, Shattenkirk, DeMelo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 1 minute ago, tas said: because you know oel is willing to come here but also because you NEED to lose assets to make a contract like that fit. Not the type of assets the Yotes are apparently asking for... Don’t like it. Way too expensive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts