[Proposal] Garland traded to LAK

[BigTramFan]

53 minutes ago, mll said:

LAK wants to add scoring - would they really consider Garland a goal scorer.  

 

 

 

Well according to several posters here, he is top 30 in the league in 5v5 points, so he contributed to the scoring of goals, so I don't see why LAK wouldn't be keen to trade for him.

 

46 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Brock for Grans?

The entire premise of the original post was that it looks like JR wants to resign Boeser, so presumably Boeser would not be on the table when discussing a trade with LAK.

Edited May 19, 2022 by BigTramFan

[mll]

1 minute ago, BigTramFan said:

Quanthockey.com for 2021-22 regular season filtered for ESP (even strength points):

 

EVP =  5v5 but also 4v4, 3v3, 6v5 (empty net with 6 skaters v 5 skaters+1 goalie)

 

47pts at 5v5 and 49 at EV.

 

[BigTramFan]

1 minute ago, mll said:

EVP =  5v5 but also 4v4, 3v3, 6v5 (empty net with 6 skaters v 5 skaters+1 goalie)

 

47pts at 5v5 and 49 at EV.

 

Thanks that explains the difference in ranking for 5v5 points and ESP.

[Pears]

25 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

Yeah. But if cap construction is important, then I’d take Garland over Brock. Garland is cost controlled for the next four years. They know what they’re getting, and would get value for his production (assuming he produces). 

 

People are also not mentioning the fact Garland very quietly put up career highs almost across the board this year too. As much as I love Brock we’d get more for him than Garland and would save us some cap too. 

[Phil_314]

I like Grans as the RHD, and as long as they scout the C coming back properly for that 3rd C role then I'd be down.  Doubt Byfield/ Turcotte would be available, Vilardi's more of a wing at this point, Kupari's more offensively oriented and Lizotte's too small at 5'7", so I think JAD would be the safe choice.  Good proposal OP (if we could get an extra pick that'd be gravy).

[N4ZZY]

2 hours ago, Phil_314 said:

I like Grans as the RHD, and as long as they scout the C coming back properly for that 3rd C role then I'd be down.  Doubt Byfield/ Turcotte would be available, Vilardi's more of a wing at this point, Kupari's more offensively oriented and Lizotte's too small at 5'7", so I think JAD would be the safe choice.  Good proposal OP (if we could get an extra pick that'd be gravy).

Would love it if we could land Grans, or Faber from the Kings. 

 

I like Clarke, but there are reports out there about his defensive play. 

 

Grans for Garland and a pick?

[BigTramFan]

1 hour ago, N4ZZY said:

Grans for Garland and a pick?

Did you mean Garland for Grans + a pick?

[kloubek]

I'm not going to comment on the return, as I know little about the LA players involved.

 

I will say, however, that I find it surprising how many people want to use Garland as trade bait. I know he's small and all which isn't ideal, but his playing style negates much of the detriment usually posed by a smaller player. (Much like Hughes is able to squirm away from pressure) At only 26 years old I think he still has opportunity to improve his game, and I don't think it's a stretch to believe he may well become a bonified 1st line player at 60-75 points a season. That ain't bad for a guy who gets paid 5m and is signed long(ish) term. 

As much as I hate to say it because I truly love the guy, with a 7.5m QO pending along with the fact management has already stressed speed and sandpaper as keys to their vision, I'd be happier to see Boeser moved. 

[VegasCanuck]

12 hours ago, BigTramFan said:

To VAN: Helge Grans (RD) + Jaret Anderson-Dolan (C)

To LAK: Conor Garland

 

The Kings need some more offense added to their lineup and Garland is a 26 year old player locked in for 4 more years that has averaged 0.67 pts/gp over the past 3 seasons. Kings are stacked at RD and C, so I think this trade makes sense for them.

 

Reports in VAN seem to point to a resigning of Boeser, so for cap space reasons Garland may be traded. JR has talked about how VAN needs to add RD and C prospects into their pipeline. Grans is a big 6'3" 206 lbs Swedish RHD, just turned 20 years old and was selected in the 2nd round of the 2020 draft. No NHL experience yet but has performed well at the AHL and U-20 levels. Might be pushing for the NHL roster next season, but likely one more year logging big minutes in Abby.

 

Anderson-Dolan is a 22 year old former 2nd round pick who has played 50 games in the NHL and hasn't quite stuck. He had a breakout season in the AHL this season and looks poised to make a push to stick in the NHL next season. He would be a good option as a 13th forward (center depth) and potentially grow as a future 3C in the long term.

 

Thoughts?

If a trade makes us better then, awesome! I’m not sure why everyone is worried about cap space. JR has also said that we can easily fit Boeser at 7.5 million QO, into next season’s cap.

[nergish]

Grans is exactly the type of player we need.

 

I really like how smooth Spence is... I like Durzi, obviously Clarke would be the prize..

But Grans is the kind of big, physical, RHD we've been searching for. Not necessarily a top pair guy, or somebody to slot alongside Hughes, but definitely the kind of defender we need more of.

 

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

I just want to address the Boeser vs Garland debate @mll

 

 

Garland.............77 games...........19 goals.............52 points.............+18...............3 Power Play Points...........49 Even strength Points

Boeser...............71 games...........23 goals............46 points................-5.............17 Power Play Points...........28 Even strength Points

 

So if I am looking at this seasons numbers only, I would come to the conclusion that Garland has contributed a greater portion to Offense than Boeser ("This year"), as it was only Garlands first year here, we can not go back further on a Canuck comparison

 

I would even go as far to say that "IF" Garland was put onto the PP, his totals for Points and Goals for the year would be greater, however Garlands style of play is not suited for the PP, as he is more of a player who needs control of the puck to shake loose his defender. In the Canucks case, that is Hughes, and Hughes stats are much better than Garlands on the PP. It is also a positional need to have Hughes out on the PP, where it is not of Garland. Garland is an excellent player to have out right after the PP, where he would be against the 2nd tier defensive Dmen.

 

Generally, when you look at all factors, I think it may be easier to replace Boeser than Garland, but I think that is subjective, and could be argued both ways. Probably, when you look at it from all angles, they are very equal. 

 

Two factors, come to mind.....one on one.....Garland vs Boeser......Boeser could not stay with Garland......and contract wise, Garland comes at a much better cost.

 

IMO, as much as I like Boeser's shot, Garland brings more to the team...................and for a little guy, brings a lot of sandpaper to his game.

[flickyoursedin]

Just hate the idea of underutilizing a guy who should have been given more top 6 and PP ice time then moving him. I feel like if you gave him more he’d hit over 55 points in a season and we’d get a lot more in a trade. Still on his good contract I think you ask for at least Grans and Turcotte. 

[mll]

13 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

Yeah. But if cap construction is important, then I’d take Garland over Brock. Garland is cost controlled for the next four years. They know what they’re getting, and would get value for his production (assuming he produces). 

 

 

It's still 5M for someone that's not really a goal scorer, not particularly fast or physical and under-sized.  Not really the go-to player to put out late to tie the game or protect the lead.  He has the work-ethic going for him but not sure he's a player that teams who eventually want to contend would target.  

 

Hoven says they want to add a goal scoring winger.  Dillman says they want to add speed to their top line.  Top line goal scoring winger with speed is not Garland or Boeser.

 

Also:

 

Edited May 19, 2022 by mll

[hammertime]

50 minutes ago, mll said:

 

It's still 5M for someone that's not really a goal scorer, not particularly fast or physical and under-sized.  Not really the go-to player to put out late to tie the game or protect the lead.  He has the work-ethic going for him but not sure he's a player that teams who eventually want to contend would target.  

 

Hoven says they want to add a goal scoring winger.  Dillman says they want to add speed to their top line.  Top line goal scoring winger with speed is not Garland or Boeser.

 

Also:

 

So get rid of them both and boom 10m + cap space.

 

I'm not advocating moving Garland but if a deal makes sense then I'm open to it. This deal however is selling way to low on Garland who is hard af on pucks puts up top 6 points and puts us on the PP which I think is hugely important. We should be a very good PP team on paper. Garland gets us on the PP. If he was 2 inches taller no one would consider this deal the work he put in is infectious we need that. We don't need slow guys who are 210 but playsmaller than Garland.

 

IMO we keep him and move Brock draft a power house in Bichsel. 

 

Sign Nichushkin + Peeke

go after Roy/Hague from vegas

Edited May 19, 2022 by hammertime

[Rabbit]

I would like to get more return, i.e. 2nd round pick or 3rd round pick.

[BigTramFan]

11 hours ago, hammertime said:

So get rid of them both and boom 10m + cap space.

 

I'm not advocating moving Garland but if a deal makes sense then I'm open to it. This deal however is selling way to low on Garland who is hard af on pucks puts up top 6 points and puts us on the PP which I think is hugely important. We should be a very good PP team on paper. Garland gets us on the PP. If he was 2 inches taller no one would consider this deal the work he put in is infectious we need that. We don't need slow guys who are 210 but playsmaller than Garland.

 

IMO we keep him and move Brock draft a power house in Bichsel. 

 

Sign Nichushkin + Peeke

go after Roy/Hague from vegas

Just based on what JR has said, I think we will resign Boeser, but we may end up moving him for assets a little further down the road.

 

If we moved Garland this offseason, then we would have the space to sign (for example) Nichushkin and N Paul.

 

We get much bigger and sandpapery but we yield some returns for Garland in the process.

 

Top 9:

Miller EP Boeser

Nich Bo Podz

Pearson Paul Hogs

[hammertime]

5 hours ago, BigTramFan said:

Just based on what JR has said, I think we will resign Boeser, but we may end up moving him for assets a little further down the road.

 

If we moved Garland this offseason, then we would have the space to sign (for example) Nichushkin and N Paul.

 

We get much bigger and sandpapery but we yield some returns for Garland in the process.

 

Top 9:

Miller EP Boeser

Nich Bo Podz

Pearson Paul Hogs

I'll be pretty choked if JR re signs Brock without a trade lined up. Signing Brock goes against everything he's claimed to be after. Speed nope! Grit nope! Brocks a nice guy he's not a winner. He literally has no tenacity. On the flip side no one on our team plays with more tenacity than Garland.  That seriously needs to be addressed.

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I'll be pretty choked if JR re signs Brock without a trade lined up. Signing Brock goes against everything he's claimed to be after. Speed nope! Grit nope! Brocks a nice guy he's not a winner. He literally has no tenacity. On the flip side no one on our team plays with more tenacity than Garland.  That seriously needs to be addressed.

Sorry, but get ready to be disappointed.  Brock will be signed (6.3 x 5)

Garland will be traded.  Likely in a hockey trade to a team that struggles to sign players to term, for a right shot D.  Don’t be too shocked if he goes to the Desert Dogs.

 

[hammertime]

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Sorry, but get ready to be disappointed.  Brock will be signed (6.3 x 5)

Garland will be traded.  Likely in a hockey trade to a team that struggles to sign players to term, for a right shot D.  Don’t be too shocked if he goes to the Desert Dogs.

 

Lord I hope not I'm so sick of watching Brock cruise around just waiting for someone else to get him the puck. 

[mll]

40 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Sorry, but get ready to be disappointed.  Brock will be signed (6.3 x 5)

Garland will be traded.  Likely in a hockey trade to a team that struggles to sign players to term, for a right shot D.  Don’t be too shocked if he goes to the Desert Dogs.

 

Arizona not taking Garland back and Vancouver should be able to get an asset if they trade him.  Armstrong has been actively calling teams to tell them that he can help them out by taking on unwanted contract if they add futures. Their focus is really to acquire as many picks/prospects as they can.