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

[Buyout] Oliver Ekman-Larsson


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

He’s objectively better than that by every metric when healthy. 

He’s a pto. And he will show up to camp out of shape and that will be it. The league has no secrets. Only GMs who refuse to listen to the truth that’s available. We had a GM like that. And that’s how we ended up with OEL. 

  • Wat 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The difference between OEL and Loui Eriksson is OEL was already terrible when we traded for him - he actually far exceeded expectations his first season here and it wasn’t his choice to sign that contract in Vancouver. Eriksson on the other hand went from being a very good player and scoring 30 goals to playing like absolute garbage after signing and struggling to score even half getting prime minutes with the Sedins and on the power play.

 

I was in the camp of keeping OEL and seeing how he did with Hronek but I understand the buyout 

 

Trading OEL for Roussel, Beagle and Eriksson by itself would have still been a win for Arizona and a risk that would have made sense for the Canucks even if it failed. Perhaps a comparable albeit still worse version of the David Booth trade. 
 

But giving up a top 10 pick, a 2nd, 7th and now being saddled with Garland’s bad contract is unacceptable.

Edited by canucklehead44
  • Wat 1
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

The difference between OEL and Loui Eriksson is OEL was already terrible when we traded for him - he actually far exceeded expectations his first season here and it wasn’t his choice to sign that contract in Vancouver. Eriksson on the other hand went from being a very good player and scoring 30 goals to playing like absolute garbage after signing and struggling to score even half getting prime minutes with the Sedins and on the power play.

 

I was in the camp of keeping OEL and seeing how he did with Hronek but I understand the buyout 

 

Trading OEL for Roussel, Beagle and Eriksson by itself would have still been a win for Arizona and a risk that would have made sense for the Canucks even if it failed. Perhaps a comparable albeit still worse version of the David Booth trade. 
 

But giving up a top 10 pick, a 2nd, 7th and now being saddled with Garland’s bad contract is unacceptable.

Hahahaha always a 2nd rounder in the mix. blah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Hahahaha always a 2nd rounder in the mix. blah

I know! How on earth did Arizona negotiate that. “Well we are giving you one of the worst contracts in the league and a player who will only agree to go to two markets… can you throw in a 2nd as well? Oh and before you go might as well give us a 7th”

 

If we moved Miller for a top 10

Pick, 2nd, & 7th I’d be over the moon and he is infinitely better than OEL

Edited by canucklehead44
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, canucklehead44 said:

I know! How on earth did Arizona negotiate that. “Well we are giving you one of the worst contracts in the league and a player who will only agree to go to two markets… can you throw in a 2nd as well? Oh and before you go might as well give us a 7th”

 

If we moved Miller for a top 10

Pick, 2nd, & 7th I’d be over the moon and he is infinitely better than OEL

I mean, technically we were also dumping 12M in cap which we had to pay for, even if it all expired after one year. The biggest problem was just how short-sighted the whole move was. It is a move teams make to try and push themselves over the top, not to try and finally make playoffs. I actually still think OEL is a serviceable defenseman, and should be better this year after a healthy offseason, but he never made sense for our timeline.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Diamonds said:

I mean, technically we were also dumping 12M in cap which we had to pay for, even if it all expired after one year. The biggest problem was just how short-sighted the whole move was. It is a move teams make to try and push themselves over the top, not to try and finally make playoffs. I actually still think OEL is a serviceable defenseman, and should be better this year after a healthy offseason, but he never made sense for our timeline.

This the move had a window of 3-4 years max of OEL being effective, he was the first year and injuries torpedoed any chance of year 2 working out. I had anticipated year 4 onwards being bad here wasn’t expecting it happening so early. 
 

I would have preferred just finding a way to acquire Crouse and Garland in hindsight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Hahahaha always a 2nd rounder in the mix. blah

 

6 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:

I know! How on earth did Arizona negotiate that. “Well we are giving you one of the worst contracts in the league and a player who will only agree to go to two markets… can you throw in a 2nd as well? Oh and before you go might as well give us a 7th”

 

If we moved Miller for a top 10

Pick, 2nd, & 7th I’d be over the moon and he is infinitely better than OEL

You can thank the Sedin's for convincing Benning to include the 2nd that Arizona asked for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Have to wonder why there is interest from a Stanley Cup finalist, vs a basement dweller…

I'm sure you understand that there are varying degrees of "interest" - one end of the "interest" spectrum results in the signing of a player to a long-term big money contract; near the other end, it results in a one-year, nearly risk-free deal. I'll let you take a guess as to on which end of the spectrum was Florida's interest :lol:

 

Cup finalists are typically fairly tight against the cap, and they can't afford to sign UFAs for big money. So they go bargain-bin shopping...

 

I don't understand why you keep trumpeting "interest from a Stanley Cup finalist" - dude...they signed him to a 1y 2.25m deal :lol:  

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...