[Rumour] Canucks trying to find a market for Oliver Ekman-Larsson

[mll]

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

Just because they had NTC’s did not make them immovable, nor not discussed. The Miller narrative to discredit Benning has been squashed numerous times and only perpetuated by the clueless at this point. Makes sense that AV is still whining about it. 
 

You can credit Benning with a W when he has one he’s not getting re-hired. 

Miller was the only one without an NTC and they were in hurry to move him because it would kick in on 1 July.  They wanted to clear that cap space to sign Brayden Point and avoid the risk of an offer-sheet.  

 

[canuck73_3]

2 minutes ago, mll said:

Miller was the only one without an NTC and they were in hurry to move him because it would kick in on 1 July.  They wanted to clear that cap space to sign Brayden Point and avoid the risk of an offer-sheet.  

 

I guess they “ran out of time” and again this does not equal the fact other options weren’t considered or talked about. It wasn’t Miller or bust like you guys imply. 

Edited May 11, 2022 by canuck73_3

[AV.]

10 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Them moving Killorn was widely talked about and speculated, you plugging your ears and stamping your feet does not change that. Lmfao. 
 

Tampa didn’t NEED to move Miller specifically. Again you repeating this does not make it fact. 
 

If you think 1 player acquisition is needed to push the team to the playoffs it really shows your lack of understanding of the game. A 99 point player for a lotto ticket is a win, period. 

Widely talked about and speculated by who?  The voices in your head?  Just stop lol.  

They weren't touching Kucherov, Hedman, Stamkos, or Vasilevskiy.  Johnson and Killorn may have crossed their minds, but trade protection made any deal difficult.  J.T. Miller was always the odd man out.  Numerous posters have corroborated this fact.

Don't even know what to make about the last part, but it's not relevant to anything I have said.  That "99 pt player" has a career 50 pt average, btw.

Edited May 11, 2022 by AV.

[canuck73_3]

1 minute ago, AV. said:

Widely talked about and speculated by who?  The voices in your head?  Just stop lol.  

They weren't touching Kucherov, Hedman, Stamkos, or Vasilevskiy.  Johnson and Killorn may have crossed their minds, but trade protection made any deal difficult.  J.T. Miller was always the odd man out.  Numerous posters have corroborated this fact.

Don't even know what to make about the last part, but it's not relevant to anything I have said.  That "99 pt player" has a career 45 pt average, btw.

The Hockey Writers, Elliotte Friedman, Dreger, just stop your denial is pathetic. 

[AV.]

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

The Hockey Writers, Elliotte Friedman, Dreger, just stop your denial is pathetic. 

Same guys who credited BriseBois with a slam-dunk move to net a 1st and 3rd under the circumstances he was in, and criticized Benning?

Not so much of a W, then.

[canuck73_3]

Just now, AV. said:

Same guys who credited BriseBois with a slam-dunk move to net a 1st and 3rd under the circumstances he was in, and criticized Benning?

Not so much of a W, then.

Nashville had spent a couple years kicking tires on Killorn too. Continue moving goalposts though it’s all a troll like you is good at. 

[AV.]

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

Nashville had spent a couple years kicking tires on Killorn too. Continue moving goalposts though it’s all a troll like you is good at. 

Good for Nashville.  Killorn is still in Tampa Bay, and since the Miller trade, Tampa Bay has moved numerous contracts (with and without trade/movement protection)

Doesn't sound like a player that was seriously looked at for being moved.

Hope that helps.

[canuck73_3]

8 minutes ago, AV. said:

Good for Nashville.  Killorn is still in Tampa Bay, and since the Miller trade, Tampa Bay has moved numerous contracts (with and without trade/movement protection)

Doesn't sound like a player that was seriously looked at for being moved.

Hope that helps.

Them not moving him does not mean it wasn’t considered or seriously talked about.

 

Hope this helps. 

[AV.]

54 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I think it's important to clarify that Tampa didn't NEED to move Miller.  What they NEEDED to do was move one of Miller, Palat, or Killorn. 

 

Palat was the preference.  He was making about the same as Miller (a bit more actually), but put up a measly 34pts in 64 games. 

Killorn and Miller were probably a toss up.  Killorn was on a lower cap hit, but also produced a bit less. 

 

The situation was that Palat and Killorn had NTCs, whereas Miller didn't.  To move Palat or Killorn, they'd have to ask them to waive their NTC, so the EASIEST move was to trade Miller.  They found a team willing to give them good value for him, so they took it.  If Vancouver offered a 2nd round pick and Mazanec, you could be assured that Tampa would have simply said no, and moved onto Plan B. 

 

Just remember that Tampa had options, just like Vancouver does right now.  Miller was putting up Top 6 numbers on the 3rd line, so a 1st round (20th OA) pick, a 3rd, and a throw-in piece in Mazanec is probably not far off in terms of value.

 

Put it another way, Miller had 47 points in 75 games on a very reasonable cap hit for long term similar to Garland for the Canucks right now.

What do you expect a guy like Garland to cost?  A late 1st and a 3rd wouldn't be that far off in value IMO.

 

 

1.  Palat and Killorn have never been a serious options.  It was Miller or Johnson.  And as we've seen in history, Miller and Johnson both moved out, Killorn and Palat still thriving and still playing important roles.  This idea and this "speculation" is completely made up by some of Benning's goblin cronies on this forum because they can't fathom thinking of a reality where their favourite GM jumped the gun and paid a premium on a guy that needed to go.  No matter how much evidence is out there of him making trades in this vein where he overpays and doesn't do his due diligence, they refuse to believe that Miller was not one of those.  In their heads, they honestly believe he did a great job to pay full market value to a team that had virtually no leverage.  Well and truly some of the most foolish fans in sports history.  And make no mistake, Miller has been a stellar addition, but it doesn't change the fact that the price paid was massive.  We could wake up tomorrow, move ten 1sts for Cale Makar, and he could become a perennial Norris winner, but I'm sure even you would agree that paying that sort of price isn't worth whatever happens on the ice, winning a cup aside.

2.  I don't doubt Tampa Bay had options, but none were as great as Vancouver's offer, and probably by a landslide. 

A pair of 2nds from a contending team? A pick and prospect?  Cheaper alternative?  Sure, they were probably offered that or had discussions on that.

A 1st and 3rd from a team that missed the playoffs the previous four seasons?  Hell no, not a chance a team that was in a similar position to Vancouver was offering that.  BriseBois probably couldn't believe his ears when that offer came in.

3.  Arizona had no immediate cap problems (beyond figuring out how to reach the floor) like Tampa Bay did.  Really, if Arizona had any pressure, it was figuring out how to move OEL to get rid of his long-term contract and to move on from a player that had soured on the organization.  But I say they escaped pretty well to recoup a series of picks, a series of expiring contracts, and to only do all that at the cost of moving a winger they weren't too interested bringing back anyway.  So, yeah, a great comparison to show, once again, Benning paying a premium to help teams fix their issues.

Edited May 11, 2022 by AV.

[canuck73_3]

4 minutes ago, AV. said:

1.  Palat and Killorn have never been a serious options.  It was Miller or Johnson.  And as we've seen in history, Miller and Johnson both moved out, Killorn and Palat still thriving and still playing important roles.  This idea and this "speculation" is completely made up by some of Benning's goblin cronies on this forum because they can't fathom thinking of a reality where their favourite GM jumped the gun and paid a premium on a guy that needed to go.  No matter how much evidence is out there of him making trades in this vein where he overpays and doesn't do his due diligence, they refuse to believe that Miller was not one of those.  In their heads, they honestly believe he did a great job to pay full market value to a team that had virtually no leverage.  Well and truly some of the most foolish fans in sports history.  And make no mistake, Miller has been a stellar addition, but it doesn't change the fact that the price paid was massive.  We could wake up tomorrow, move ten 1sts for Cale Makar, and he could become a perennial Norris winner, but I'm sure even you would agree that paying that sort of price isn't worth whatever happens on the ice, winning a cup aside.

2.  I don't doubt Tampa Bay had options, but none were as great as Vancouver's offer, and probably by a landslide. 

A pair of 2nds from a contending team? A pick and prospect?  Cheaper alternative?  Sure, they were probably offered that or had discussions on that.

A 1st and 3rd from a team that missed the playoffs the previous four seasons?  Hell no, not a chance a team that was in a similar position to Vancouver was offering that.  BriseBois probably couldn't believe his ears when that offer came in.

3.  Arizona had no immediate cap problems (beyond figuring out how to reach the floor) like Tampa Bay did.  Really, if Arizona had any pressure, it was figuring out how to move OEL to get rid of his long-term contract and to move on from a player that had soured on the organization.  But I say they escaped pretty well to recoup a series of picks, a series of expiring contracts, and to only do all that at the cost of moving a winger they weren't too interested bringing back anyway.  So, yeah, a great comparison to show, once again, Benning paying a premium to help teams fix their issues.

Source on Arizona not being interested in bringing back Garland? 

[AV.]

2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Source on Arizona not being interested in bringing back Garland? 

https://nhltradetalk.com/zero-communication-between-coyotes-conor-garland/

According to DailyFaceOff.com’s Frank Seravalli, there have been no developments between the Arizona Coyotes and restricted free agent forward Conor Garland on a new contract.

The only problem is, the Coyotes aren’t bothering to get back to Garland’s agent after the player’s side submitted two contract proposals, as per the request of Coyotes’ GM Bill Armstrong.

[canuck73_3]

1 minute ago, AV. said:

https://nhltradetalk.com/zero-communication-between-coyotes-conor-garland/

According to DailyFaceOff.com’s Frank Seravalli, there have been no developments between the Arizona Coyotes and restricted free agent forward Conor Garland on a new contract.

The only problem is, the Coyotes aren’t bothering to get back to Garland’s agent after the player’s side submitted two contract proposals, as per the request of Coyotes’ GM Bill Armstrong.

Bad move to let your 3rd leading scorer hang like that. Isn’t that what your ilk criticized Benning for with Toffoli? 

[AV.]

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

Bad move to let your 3rd leading scorer hang like that. Isn’t that what your ilk criticized Benning for with Toffoli? 

Don't recall Bill Armstrong coming out to the media and crying that he ran out of time to sign Garland.

[canuck73_3]

2 minutes ago, AV. said:

Don't recall Bill Armstrong coming out to the media and crying that he ran out of time to sign Garland.

But not communicating to the player was the issue, or have the goal posts been moved again? 

[HKSR]

9 minutes ago, AV. said:

1.  Palat and Killorn have never been a serious options.  It was Miller or Johnson.  And as we've seen in history, Miller and Johnson both moved out, Killorn and Palat still thriving and still playing important roles.  This idea and this "speculation" is completely made up by some of Benning's goblin cronies on this forum because they can't fathom thinking of a reality where their favourite GM jumped the gun and paid a premium on a guy that needed to go.  No matter how much evidence is out there of him making trades in this vein where he overpays and doesn't do his due diligence, they refuse to believe that Miller was not one of those.  In their heads, they honestly believe he did a great job to pay full market value to a team that had virtually no leverage.  Well and truly some of the most foolish fans in sports history.  And make no mistake, Miller has been a stellar addition, but it doesn't change the fact that the price paid was massive.  We could wake up tomorrow, move ten 1sts for Cale Makar, and he could become a perennial Norris winner, but I'm sure even you would agree that paying that sort of price isn't worth whatever happens on the ice, winning a cup aside.

2.  I don't doubt Tampa Bay had options, but none were as great as Vancouver's offer, and probably by a landslide. 

A pair of 2nds from a contending team? A pick and prospect?  Cheaper alternative?  Sure, they were probably offered that or had discussions on that.

A 1st and 3rd from a team that missed the playoffs the previous four seasons?  Hell no, not a chance a team that was in a similar position to Vancouver was offering that.  BriseBois probably couldn't believe his ears when that offer came in.

3.  Arizona had no immediate cap problems (beyond figuring out how to reach the floor) like Tampa Bay did.  Really, if Arizona had any pressure, it was figuring out how to move OEL to get rid of his long-term contract and to move on from a player that had soured on the organization.  But I say they escaped pretty well to recoup a series of picks, a series of expiring contracts, and to only do all that at the cost of moving a winger they weren't too interested bringing back anyway.  So, yeah, a great comparison to show, once again, Benning paying a premium to help teams fix their issues.

NO.  In fact, Miller was the one expected to stay as he had just re-signed with Tampa.  Just because you don't believe it to be so, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

Here's an article from a reputable source from back then:  https://theathletic.com/955017/2019/04/30/tampa-bay-lightning-roster-who-is-staying-and-who-is-going-this-offseason/

 

Read the part about "The Question Marks". 

 

Now you go and find me an article that tells us that the Lightning NEEDED to move JT Miller.

 

PS - in your head, how much do you think Garland is worth?  Now add a bit more because a player like JT Miller is more versatile than that.

In my mind, a Top 6 forward that puts up 50 points and can play up and down the lineup is worth a late 1st round pick and a 3rd.  I don't know what kind of premium you think was added here for Miller.  Was it Mazanec?

[AV.]

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

But not communicating to the player was the issue, or have the goal posts been moved again? 

It's not comparable at all, beyond the fact that the communication in both scenarios was non-existent.

The key difference here is that Arizona didn't care to bring back the player and were set on moving him, whereas the Canucks *did* want to bring Toffoli back.

How is that hard to understand?  Better yet, why do you even think this scenario is comparable?

[canuck73_3]

2 minutes ago, AV. said:

It's not comparable at all, beyond the fact that the communication in both scenarios was non-existent.

The key difference here is that Arizona didn't care to bring back the player and were set on moving him, whereas the Canucks *did* want to bring Toffoli back.

How is that hard to understand?  Better yet, why do you even think this scenario is comparable?

Not buying Arizona walking away from their 3rd leading scorer. And if they were it was an incredibly stupid move considering he was a cost controlled RFA. 
Your need to constantly vilify Benning over everything is sad. 
 

He made good and bad moves like any gm, admitting he made some good moves does not mean he’s coming back here. You are safe the Benning can’t hurt you anymore. 

[AV.]

4 minutes ago, HKSR said:

NO.  In fact, Miller was the one expected to stay as he had just re-signed with Tampa.  Just because you don't believe it to be so, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

Here's an article from a reputable source from back then:  https://theathletic.com/955017/2019/04/30/tampa-bay-lightning-roster-who-is-staying-and-who-is-going-this-offseason/

 

Read the part about "The Question Marks". 

 

Now you go and find me an article that tells us that the Lightning NEEDED to move JT Miller.

 

PS - in your head, how much do you think Garland is worth?  Now add a bit more because a player like JT Miller is more versatile than that.

In my mind, a Top 6 forward that puts up 50 points and can play up and down the lineup is worth a late 1st round pick and a 3rd.  I don't know what kind of premium you think was added here for Miller.  Was it Mazanec?

Well, first off, thanks for linking the article.  That said, Miller was clearly the #1 question mark ahead of the others, and the speculation was clear enough a few years ago that it would be Miller to go.  Miller's reputation as a team player in NYR + his deployment in Tampa Bay made him a top choice to be moved.  And again, not having certain movement protections was the key in making a deal happen.

The "premium" was not holding Tampa Bay to the sword where we could and should have.  History knows teams have put us to the sword many times, history shows other teams holding each other to the sword (Colorado getting Devon Toews is a great example).  But, in this case, you believe that other teams were offering similar deals to Vancouver and that Tampa Bay had contingency plans.  I don't believe that was the case, so better to agree to disagree at this time.

[AV.]

6 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Not buying Arizona walking away from their 3rd leading scorer. And if they were it was an incredibly stupid move considering he was a cost controlled RFA. 
Your need to constantly vilify Benning over everything is sad. 
 

He made good and bad moves like any gm, admitting he made some good moves does not mean he’s coming back here. You are safe the Benning can’t hurt you anymore. 

Well, if you are choosing not acknowledge what the article is telling you, that's just willful ignorance on your part lol.  I think Arizona realized the price to keep Garland may have been better spent on differently, perhaps, weaponizing cap-space to gain picks/prospects, and that's why they decided to move on from him.

[canuck73_3]

1 minute ago, AV. said:

Well, if you are choosing not acknowledge what the article is telling you, that's just willful ignorance on your part lol.  I think Arizona realized the price to keep Garland may have been better spent on differently, perhaps, weaponizing cap-space to gain picks/prospects, and that's why they decided to move on from him.

I don’t think that is all that valid an argument as that team has been a dumpster fire for over 2 decades. 
 

Not even remotely a good example of “weaponizing” cap space or making good personnel moves.