What would the OEL/Garland trade look like this summer instead of last summer (Discussion)

[J.I.A.H.N]

I am sitting here nursing my first cold in 3 years (Covid test Neg), so I am wondering, with no Benning, no Player Name, no Beagle, and no Rousell, "IF" OEL and Garland would still be in Arizona, what would the cost be for the Canucks, "IF" they wanted them? Would they?

 

And yes, I know the easy answer. LOL

[Alflives]

Make our Team Great Again?

 

Edited May 8, 2022 by Alflives

[King Heffy]

Probably a 2nd.  Might have still been worth it to get rid of the cancer in LE though.  You don't want that floater around your young players if you can help it.

[J.I.A.H.N]

@Alflives

 

Is that like a distant relative?

[King Loui]

I think the OEL contract at his age is way too big for way too long.  I would undo that trade, take Dylan Guenther and 12 million in savings.

[hammertime]

I think the question you're really asking  is should we have tanked this year? The answer JB couldn't he would have had to have been fired prior to this trade. I do agree the best thing would have been to let those 3 contracts play out. It's impossible to know how another season swirling the bowl would affect our team long term. I'm happy with having enjoyable hockey to watch if we'd made the coaching change a week earlier we'd likely be in the playoffs and not having this conversation at all. 

 

To answer your posed question I would pay this years 15OA for Garland chances are no player we draft at 15OA exceed the proven ability of Garland. I'll have the boat over the mystery box. 

Edited May 8, 2022 by hammertime

[J.I.A.H.N]

19 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I think the question you're really asking  is should we have tanked this year? The answer JB couldn't he would have had to have been fired prior to this trade. I do agree the best thing would have been to let those 3 contracts play out. It's impossible to know how another season swirling the bowl would affect our team long term. I'm happy with having enjoyable hockey to watch if we'd made the coaching change a week earlier we'd likely be in the playoffs and not having this conversation at all. 

 

To answer your posed question I would pay this years 15OA for Garland chances are no player we draft at 15OA exceed the proven ability of Garland. I'll the boat over the mystery box. 

Well, you see, I do not see it as clearly as you...........

 

I see we would have had Guenther, which had an outstanding year in junior

 

We would have our 2nd this year

 

And we would have had, more likely a top 10 pick this year

 

Plus we would have had, approx. 12 million dollars this year

 

and if we do the trade this year, we do not have to spend as much on Garland and OEL

 

All of which collectively is worth a hell of alot more than our non-playoff run this year, and still probably would have resulted in a coaching change

 

But all I am really saying is that, waiting one year would have given us more for less

 

 

[hammertime]

2 hours ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

But all I am really saying is that, waiting one year would have given us more for less

Yep.

 

Pretty hard sell to Aqua and this fanbase if you're Benning though. I have no Benning hate but he should have gone to the wood shed sooner. 

[JM_]

considering the trajectory AZ is on right now, and playing in a college rink, we might have been able to get OEL 50% retained. 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, JM_ said:

considering the trajectory AZ is on right now, and playing in a college rink, we might have been able to get OEL 50% retained. 

Lots of work for Allvin to fix the Benning mistakes.  I don’t think we can move OEL without adding too much sweetener, which we can’t afford.  So it’s Myers that will need to go to better control how much we spend on D.  

[JM_]

Just now, Alflives said:

Lots of work for Allvin to fix the Benning mistakes.  I don’t think we can move OEL without adding too much sweetener, which we can’t afford.  So it’s Myers that will need to go to better control how much we spend on D.  

there is, but maybe just maybe we get lucky this offseason and ink Karlsson (our Karlsson) and Kuzmenko and we have cheap value there while we wait for the dead cap money to pass.

 

We have to get bigger. Look at what Dallas is doing to Cowgary if you need evidence of why. 

 

So trying to poach Hague (or another big body on d) is the kind of move we need to see. We need to get some big guys in to the F group too. These do not have to be expensive guys salary wise, but may be available via hockey trades. 

[Angry Goose]

Who knows the type of season the Canucks have with those 3.  Doubt Miller has a career year.  That affects his willingness to stay and/or trade value.  

 

OEL/Garland can be effective contributors imo.  

[Alflives]

11 minutes ago, JM_ said:

there is, but maybe just maybe we get lucky this offseason and ink Karlsson (our Karlsson) and Kuzmenko and we have cheap value there while we wait for the dead cap money to pass.

 

We have to get bigger. Look at what Dallas is doing to Cowgary if you need evidence of why. 

 

So trying to poach Hague (or another big body on d) is the kind of move we need to see. We need to get some big guys in to the F group too. These do not have to be expensive guys salary wise, but may be available via hockey trades. 

If we are taking a couple steps back (which it seems like after JR’s radio interview) then getting young assets/picks into our club at all levels will be the key to taking three steps forward - and surpassing where we are now - when we are competitive again.  So guys like Hague are perfect.  

[wildcam]

13 hours ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

11 hours ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

Well, you see, I do not see it as clearly as you...........

 

I see we would have had Guenther, which had an outstanding year in junior

 

We would have our 2nd this year

 

And we would have had, more likely a top 10 pick this year

 

Plus we would have had, approx. 12 million dollars this year

 

and if we do the trade this year, we do not have to spend as much on Garland and OEL

 

All of which collectively is worth a hell of alot more than our non-playoff run this year, and still probably would have resulted in a coaching change

 

But all I am really saying is that, waiting one year would have given us more for less

 

 

Correct me if I am wrong?

I don't think Arizona wanted OEL and his big contract jus after signing it the previous year? Boston and Canucks were 2 teams he would except if traded?

Right then Vancouver knew very limited trade partners? Yes we were giving up 3 player Russel 3 million, Beagle 3 million, Erickson 6 million with all contracts expiring May 2022..

We give up 3 bad contacts = 12 million @ 1 yr..-- We have to add 1st rounder  2021--Very good winger,  2nd rounder 2022 . 7th rounder 2023

Arizona - OEL contract =  48 million @ 6 yrs ---  Arizona adds Garland to deal

 

I like ,Garland 25, 4.9 million X 4 more years -- Playing top 6 no 1st PP - should produce GP-82--G 22-26 -- Points 52--58 = Grade Ct

 

OEL 30 #3 LD-- 31 yrs old July-- 5 yrs  X 7.2 million - Arizona retains 1 million of original 8.2 million...Arizona should of  had to retain more of the OEL contract..

OEL had a okay season playing with Myers..We must remember no PP 1-- playing against other teams best players.. Grade = B

 

[iinatcc]

15 hours ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

I am sitting here nursing my first cold in 3 years (Covid test Neg), so I am wondering, with no Benning, no Player Name, no Beagle, and no Rousell, "IF" OEL and Garland would still be in Arizona, what would the cost be for the Canucks, "IF" they wanted them? Would they?

 

And yes, I know the easy answer. LOL

OEL is probably a 2nd or maybe early 3rd

Garland, I think might cost a 1st or maybe a 2nd + a prospect  ( Hoglander, Podkolzin, or Rathbone) 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2022 by iinatcc

[Coconuts]

In retrospect I'd rather we had not made that trade

 

Just ride it out with Rouss, Loui, and Beagle for one more year and we'd be home free with a whack of cap 

 

I like Garland, and I think OEL's got more to give if paired with someone more defensively minded, but I think Benning tried pushing too early 

[iinatcc]

19 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

In retrospect I'd rather we had not made that trade

 

Just ride it out with Rouss, Loui, and Beagle for one more year and we'd be home free with a whack of cap 

 

I like Garland, and I think OEL's got more to give if paired with someone more defensively minded, but I think Benning tried pushing too early 

yes this is the right answer 

[Crabcakes]

That OEL contract is a non-starter even with the $990,000 retained.  Let's face it, the contract is virtually unmoveable so the real elephant in the room on D is OEL.  

 

 

[rawkdrummer]

OEL is our #2 D.

Next year he's likely our #2 D.

If he moves down to #3 then something good has happened.

[Alflives]

54 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

In retrospect I'd rather we had not made that trade

 

Just ride it out with Rouss, Loui, and Beagle for one more year and we'd be home free with a whack of cap 

 

I like Garland, and I think OEL's got more to give if paired with someone more defensively minded, but I think Benning tried pushing too early 

Was it Benning’s choice to go all in last summer, or was that a directive from above?  Benning himself, after that OEL Trade, said he hated giving up their first.