Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Rumour] Canucks getting calls on Conor Garland


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MattWN. said:

Jesus christ.

 

Management/Ownership wouldn't have paid OEL 20 million to f**k off if they could have just traded Garland for a 2nd, or for another cheaper asset.

The fact that they backed up a brinks truck to OELs door is all the proof this forum should ever need that Garland has no trade value, he has negative value if anything.

It doesn't matter if you think he's a good player, his value based on his cap dollar and term is a negative asset for a winger who was #384 in points per dollar.

Nobody is calling about Garland. You aren't getting Peeke for Garland. You aren't getting a cheaper effective C for Garland. Please stop. 

Good god man what is with this hate parade you’re running on Garland recently? No matter what you say about him he’s not this bum you’re desperately trying to make out to be. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, R3aL said:

FRIENDS STICK TOGETHER

 

Season 1 Netflix GIF

Not sure why this poster is swearing and condescending to CDC’s player valuations, after making proposals that are so highly in favour of the home team. 
 

Ah well…back on ignore

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pears said:

Good god man what is with this hate parade you’re running on Garland recently? No matter what you say about him he’s not this bum you’re desperately trying to make out to be. 

Trying to give Eddie Vedder a run for his money?

  • Cheers 2
  • There it is 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Junkyard Dog said:

 


 

For sure.  Ideally we’d trade one of our wingers Garland/Boeser/Beauv for a 3rd C in a hockey trade for a team in need of wingers. Save our cap for a D. 
 

Islanders are another team with Pageau who’s a solid defensive 3rd C that wins draws, plays with an edge or supplies secondary scoring. He’s a bit more pricey with cap, a bit smaller and is a bit older but fits the mold for the most part. 
 

We should start identifying teams that can move a C for a wing. 
 

Unless we’re fine spending picks/prospects for a guy like Laughton from the rebuilding Flyers. 
 

A cap for cap move wing for C would allow us to spend more on D. 

Goodrow in NY would be another target. 

 

1 hour ago, MattWN. said:

Sure, that would be great, but C position has a lot more value than W.

There are a bunch of teams out there with a glutton of wingers who are short on NHL calibre centres.

There is just no reason for teams to be paying for an undersized winger on a average-below average contract with term.

Guys like Pageau while not worth a lot, still are substantially more valuable for Garland for all the reasons you mentioned. 

Even if Pageau for Garland was a wash for contract lenth and dollar, you'd still need to add for the difference in position. 

You're not wrong, precisely why we can use some of our new found cap space to help a team like the Rangers out of their cap bind. Something like Garland ($4.95) for Goodrow ($3.64) + Lindgren ($3 and expiring) helps them clear $1.7m (of their tight) cap, a needed upgrade at 2RW, and allows them to replace those two (arguably overpriced) contracts with cheaper prospects/UFA's.

 

Meanwhile it shifts some of our winger cap to more needed 3C and 3LD, clears $1.3m after this season etc. These are just the types of deals they'll have to swing.

 

Bonus points if we can add something to snag Laff as well.

 

That said, I'd still prefer something around Garland ++ for Sissons and Prokop ::D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Nope.

 

He was on a 50 point, 22 goal pace with us.

 

Very good value for 4.1 mil.

I still think we keep Beau and trade Boeser and/or Garland. Beauvillier-Miller-Mikheyev is a very good second line. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Not if you desperate to get rid of OEL?

I guess so.

 

Last season was a bad year BUT he supposedly had a broken foot.  The year before he wasn’t too bad as a #3/4 D.  Still overpaid as a #3/4D.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Nope.

 

He was on a 50 point, 22 goal pace with us.

 

Very good value for 4.1 mil.

Beau point production trailed off once he was taken off EP and Kuz line.  So don’t expect him to be at that pace next year unless he’s on their line.

  • elephant 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BPA said:

I guess so.

 

Last season was a bad year BUT he supposedly had a broken foot.  The year before he wasn’t too bad as a #3/4 D.  Still overpaid as a #3/4D.

Agree 100%. 
However, Tocchet has worked with OEL before, and I think, he may have convinced PA that this won't get any better. 
 

I think its about value for dollars. If they think they can get a player in to play OELs position better at 3 or even $4M, then if well worth it... especially if they expect some of the defenders on ELCs to be able to come in and take up spaces. 
 

Ideal? Not at all, but probably the lesser of two evils, or at least thats how management sees it... 

 

Edited by spook007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Agree 100%. 
However, Tocchet has worked with OEL before, and I think, he may have convinced PA that this won't get any better. 
 

I think its about value for dollars. If they think they can get a player in to play OELs position better at 3 or even $4M, then if well worth it... especially if they expect some of the defenders on ELCs to be able to come in and take up spaces. 
 

Ideal? Not at all, but probably the lesser of two evils, or at least thats how management sees it... 

 

So who can the Canucks possibly get at $3-4M playing top 4D minutes?

 

 

Edited by BPA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BPA said:

Explain to me why Soucy would not just re-sign with Seattle for $3-4M?  Did Seattle indicate they would move off of Soucy?

Hasn't signed yet. 

 

Less crowded blue line, opportunity to probably play top 4 next to Hronek vs 3rd pair in SEA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BPA said:

So who can the Canucks possibly get at $3-4M playing top 4D minutes?

 

 

Soucy, maybe, but tbh they need a player thay can play top 4. Even if it cost $5M...

without a player able to play top 4 its all irrelevant...

OEL last year was a bottom pairing dman and just a waste of $7.2M...

Now time will tell if they can get better with less money in a couple of years. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...