[Discussion] OEL buyout thread

[canuck73_3]

8 minutes ago, WSAcanuck said:

Trading Neely was a terrible move for sure. But it did not cripple the Canucks anywhere near what the OEL deal did. Suggesting Neely would have helped us win in 94 is a stretch. That’s a long time. He may not have even been in Van that long either way. 
 

Cap matters because that’s a huge part of the outcome of any trade now. 
 

Comparing the Neely trade and its subsequent epic levels of fail arc in the many years since is moving the goalposts. At the time we made a bad trade. But it was only eligible for worst all time due to all the subsequent moves that made it look even worse. 

Neely would have absolutely helped he’s a legit hall of famer that was given up on too soon. As for the cap you can’t include it vs non cap era trades. And either way costing a legit shot at a cup is a bigger blunder than OEL hindering us from a wild card appearance. 

[WSAcanuck]

4 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Neely would have absolutely helped he’s a legit hall of famer that was given up on too soon. As for the cap you can’t include it vs non cap era trades. And either way costing a legit shot at a cup is a bigger blunder than OEL hindering us from a wild card appearance. 

How do you call or even debate a trade being the “worst of all time” if you can’t directly compare different eras? 
 

It’s the same as me saying you can’t compare a non cap era trade to the current cap environment. 
 

There is no reasonable way to know if Neely would have helped or not that far out. There’s also no way of knowing how he would have developed had he stayed in Vancouver. The Canucks considered him more a checker than a power forward. I mean they were dumb about him for sure but had he stayed he may have only been a bottom 6 guy. He was given huge opportunity in Boston and ran with it. 

Edited September 27, 2023 by WSAcanuck

[canuck73_3]

10 minutes ago, WSAcanuck said:

How do you call or even debate a trade being the “worst of all time” if you can’t directly compare different eras? 
 

It’s the same as me saying you can’t compare a non cap era trade to the current cap environment. 
 

There is no reasonable way to know if Neely would have helped or not that far out. There’s also no way of knowing how he would have developed had he stayed in Vancouver. The Canucks considered him more a checker than a power forward. I mean they were dumb about him for sure but had he stayed he may have only been a bottom 6 guy. He was given huge opportunity in Boston and ran with it. 

Holding cap against a trade versus a trade with no cap is inherently dumb. Therefore the best way to compare is the players. It really is that simple. 

[WSAcanuck]

7 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Holding cap against a trade versus a trade with no cap is inherently dumb. Therefore the best way to compare is the players. It really is that simple. 

Under that scenario then was the Neely trade really that bad? Pedersen was a 100 point player. Iirc he had two 70+ point seasons in Van after the trade. 
 

Using cap in a cap world is a far more fair evaluation tool than using a 30 plus year trade arc. At the time the trade was bad but using your criteria it was not in consideration for worst of all time anything. 

Edited September 27, 2023 by WSAcanuck

[canuck73_3]

1 hour ago, WSAcanuck said:

Under that scenario then was the Neely trade really that bad? Pedersen was a 100 point player. Iirc he had two 70+ point seasons in Van after the trade. 
 

Using cap in a cap world is a far more fair evaluation tool than using a 30 plus year trade arc. At the time the trade was bad but using your criteria it was not in consideration for worst of all time anything. 

Yes it was full stop we got damaged goods for a hall of fame calibre power forward. The fact you have to move goal posts is further proof the Neely trade was worse.

[WSAcanuck]

15 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Yes it was full stop we got damaged goods for a hall of fame calibre power forward. The fact you have to move goal posts is further proof the Neely trade was worse.

Neely wasn’t a HOF calibre power forward when we traded him though. 
 

OEL had been declining for several years when we traded for him. And Garland had no real track record showing he deserved the extension he got. 

[ScottyBoy]

On 9/26/2023 at 10:36 AM, Gawdzukes said:

 

That was the worst move in Canucks history and top 5 overall in NHL history.

Get rid of LE no matter what everyone demanded...so it was done.

[RWJC]

Ekman-Larsson was 'surprised' by buyout from Canucks

Josh Wegman

2h ago

 

Oliver Ekman-Larsson had no inclination that he was going to be bought out by the Vancouver Canucks in the offseason.

 

"I was surprised," Ekman-Larsson told The Athletic's Thomas Drance. "We had exit meetings, and I didn't see it coming."

 

Ekman-Larsson had four years left on his contract with an $8.25-million cap hit, resulting in the largest compliance buyout in the salary-cap era in terms of total value. The Canucks are paying him $17 million over the next eight years to play elsewhere, per CapFriendly.

 

The veteran blue-liner inked a one-year, $2.25-million pact with the Florida Panthers as a free agent in the offseason.

Ekman-Larsson was one of the game's top defensemen during his 11 seasons with the Arizona Coyotes, receiving downballot Norris Trophy votes on five occasions. He was traded to Vancouver in 2021, but his two-year stint with the Canucks was marred by injuries and inconsistent play.

"Look, we loved living in Vancouver and I loved playing for the Canucks," Ekman-Larsson said. "So it was disappointing. Obviously there were a couple of tough years, but I don't feel like it was all bad like everybody else does.

 

"There were ups and downs and we didn't make the playoffs, we were struggling as a team, there were a lot of changes. It wasn't easy, but I don't have a bad thing to say about the city of Vancouver or the organization. It's just part of the business. You get disappointed when things like that happen and you're not ready for it."

Ekman-Larsson is thriving with his new team. He's recorded two points in four games, and, with Aaron Ekblad and Brandon Montour out to begin the year, OEL is logging huge minutes, averaging a team-high 25:31 per contest.

 

The Canucks and Panthers square off in Sunrise on Saturday. Ekman-Larsson will make his return to Vancouver on Dec. 14.

 

link to rest of article:

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2742073

[RWJC]

Canucks luck? Ekman-Larsson playing big minutes for Florida Panthers

 

Trevor Beggs

Oct 20 2023, 9:46 am

 

The Vancouver Canucks wanted Oliver Ekman-Larsson to go away.

 

And now? The Florida Panthers can’t seem to take him off of the ice.

 

On Saturday, the Canucks will face-off against Ekman-Larsson and the Panthers for the first time since they agreed to pay nearly $20 million over the next eight seasons not to play for Vancouver.

Chances are, the Canucks will see a lot of Ekman-Larsson on Saturday night.

 

So far this season, the Panthers defenceman has averaged an astonishing 25:31 per game of ice time. That’s currently the third-highest average ice time in the entire NHL.

 

 

 

The 32-year-old hasn’t averaged more than 25 minutes of ice time per game since 2014-15, back when he was just 23 years old.

 

There were signs that the Panthers were falling in love with Ekman-Larsson during preseason action. In his first preseason contest, the Swedish defenceman notched three assists, including one of the highlight-reel variety.

 

 

 

Then, after the Panthers’ first game of the season, head coach Paul Maurice had complimentary things to say about the veteran defender.

“His overall game – he’s an offensive guy and when you don’t score, he’s going to want to get a few more of those pucks through – but his game was good,” said Maurice. “The five-on-five, the plays he broke up with his stick, we were real happy with his performance.”

 

There’s an obvious reason why Ekman-Larsson’s ice time has skyrocketed…

 

 

link to rest of article:

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canucks-luck-ekman-larsson-big-minutes-florida-panthers

[King Heffy]

On 10/5/2023 at 6:28 PM, ScottyBoy said:

Get rid of LE no matter what everyone demanded...so it was done.

The correct solution was to put him in the AHL where he belonged.  Sadly, current management compounded the problem with this idiotic buyout.

[aGENT]

12 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Canucks luck? Ekman-Larsson playing big minutes for Florida Panthers

 

Trevor Beggs

Oct 20 2023, 9:46 am

 

The Vancouver Canucks wanted Oliver Ekman-Larsson to go away.

 

And now? The Florida Panthers can’t seem to take him off of the ice.

 

On Saturday, the Canucks will face-off against Ekman-Larsson and the Panthers for the first time since they agreed to pay nearly $20 million over the next eight seasons not to play for Vancouver.

Chances are, the Canucks will see a lot of Ekman-Larsson on Saturday night.

 

So far this season, the Panthers defenceman has averaged an astonishing 25:31 per game of ice time. That’s currently the third-highest average ice time in the entire NHL.

 

 

 

The 32-year-old hasn’t averaged more than 25 minutes of ice time per game since 2014-15, back when he was just 23 years old.

 

There were signs that the Panthers were falling in love with Ekman-Larsson during preseason action. In his first preseason contest, the Swedish defenceman notched three assists, including one of the highlight-reel variety.

 

 

 

Then, after the Panthers’ first game of the season, head coach Paul Maurice had complimentary things to say about the veteran defender.

“His overall game – he’s an offensive guy and when you don’t score, he’s going to want to get a few more of those pucks through – but his game was good,” said Maurice. “The five-on-five, the plays he broke up with his stick, we were real happy with his performance.”

 

There’s an obvious reason why Ekman-Larsson’s ice time has skyrocketed…

 

 

link to rest of article:

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canucks-luck-ekman-larsson-big-minutes-florida-panthers

 

I mean some of us could see this coming...

 

We had (still somewhat have) a bad mix of ill fitting, un-complementary players on this roster that's only going to (hopefully) finally get sorted out once we move Garland and Myers/Beau get moved/expire. That combined with the flat cap/lack of cap space...I get why they bought him out... They needed cap to address that hot mess of an ill fitting roster. But as an individual player, I maintain that he wasn't the problem here. The Hronek trade was basically the last nail in that coffin though (and is a better long term fit/better age alignment).

[Bob Long]

11 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The correct solution was to put him in the AHL where he belonged.  Sadly, current management compounded the problem with this idiotic buyout.

 

it was a choice of bad choices. I'm OK with it because it didn't destroy our future picks. 

[King Heffy]

7 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

it was a choice of bad choices. I'm OK with it because it didn't destroy our future picks. 

It did however destroy our future cap space.  Picks can be recovered, but these clowns caused irreversible damage with the buyout.

[Bob Long]

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

It did however destroy our future cap space.  Picks can be recovered, but these clowns caused irreversible damage with the buyout.

 

They are betting on some ELCs to be able to step in and produce. 

 

It is what it is. It was blow it up or make the best roster they can and hope our picks develop fast.

 

It appears we might just get lucky with Willander e.g 

[King Heffy]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

They are betting on some ELCs to be able to step in and produce. 

 

It is what it is. It was blow it up or make the best roster they can and hope our picks develop fast.

 

It appears we might just get lucky with Willander e.g 

It was still by far the worst idea out of all the options.  Ownership should have fired Rutherford the minute he suggested it.  We're going to be suffering for eight years thanks to him sabotaging our future. There's literally no reason this should have been acceptable to any GM with a functioning brain.

[Bob Long]

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

It was still by far the worst idea out of all the options.  Ownership should have fired Rutherford the minute he suggested it.  We're going to be suffering for eight years thanks to him sabotaging our future. There's literally no reason this should have been acceptable to any GM with a functioning brain.

 

It won't matter if the back 1/2 of that occurs during a rebuild.

[Breadnbutta]

There should be a poll.

 

What is worse. The trade to acquire OEL and Garland,  or the buyout?

[King Heffy]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

It won't matter if the back 1/2 of that occurs during a rebuild.

That's the thinking that got us into this mess with Gillis and Benning.  We haven't had a GM who had the integrity to not destroy the future of the franchise since Nonis.  Bottom line is that we were about to finally not have any dead cap this season until management decided to prove they are as incompetent as they are unprofessional.

[Bob Long]

36 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

I mean some of us could see this coming...

 

We had (still somewhat have) a bad mix of ill fitting, un-complementary players on this roster that's only going to (hopefully) finally get sorted out once we move Garland and Myers/Beau get moved/expire. That combined with the flat cap/lack of cap space...I get why they bought him out... They needed cap to address that hot mess of an ill fitting roster. But as an individual player, I maintain that he wasn't the problem here. The Hronek trade was basically the last nail in that coffin though (and is a better long term fit/better age alignment).

 

people can argue with JR/Allvin's strategy, but at least they have one, and are making some decent moves regardless of how one feels about OEL in particular. 

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

That's the thinking that got us into this mess with Gillis and Benning.  We haven't had a GM who had the integrity to not destroy the future of the franchise since Nonis.  Bottom line is that we were about to finally not have any dead cap this season until management decided to prove they are as incompetent as they are unprofessional.

 

sure no dead cap, but an 8 mil boat anchor on the 3rd pair. It was a shitty situation no matter which way you cut it. Allvin is banking on getting more out of his ELCs/bridge players than he'd get out of OEL. It not unreasonable imo. 

 

Now if Willander, Lekkerimaki, Podz, Ratu don't rise to the occasion, yeah the team is in trouble. But worse than before? dunno. OELs contract was horrible. 

[Canuckfanforlife82]

1 hour ago, RWJC said:

Ekman-Larsson was 'surprised' by buyout from Canucks

Josh Wegman

2h ago

 

Oliver Ekman-Larsson had no inclination that he was going to be bought out by the Vancouver Canucks in the offseason.

 

"I was surprised," Ekman-Larsson told The Athletic's Thomas Drance. "We had exit meetings, and I didn't see it coming."

 

Ekman-Larsson had four years left on his contract with an $8.25-million cap hit, resulting in the largest compliance buyout in the salary-cap era in terms of total value. The Canucks are paying him $17 million over the next eight years to play elsewhere, per CapFriendly.

 

The veteran blue-liner inked a one-year, $2.25-million pact with the Florida Panthers as a free agent in the offseason.

Ekman-Larsson was one of the game's top defensemen during his 11 seasons with the Arizona Coyotes, receiving downballot Norris Trophy votes on five occasions. He was traded to Vancouver in 2021, but his two-year stint with the Canucks was marred by injuries and inconsistent play.

"Look, we loved living in Vancouver and I loved playing for the Canucks," Ekman-Larsson said. "So it was disappointing. Obviously there were a couple of tough years, but I don't feel like it was all bad like everybody else does.

 

"There were ups and downs and we didn't make the playoffs, we were struggling as a team, there were a lot of changes. It wasn't easy, but I don't have a bad thing to say about the city of Vancouver or the organization. It's just part of the business. You get disappointed when things like that happen and you're not ready for it."

Ekman-Larsson is thriving with his new team. He's recorded two points in four games, and, with Aaron Ekblad and Brandon Montour out to begin the year, OEL is logging huge minutes, averaging a team-high 25:31 per contest.

 

The Canucks and Panthers square off in Sunrise on Saturday. Ekman-Larsson will make his return to Vancouver on Dec. 14.

 

link to rest of article:

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2742073

When someone says it wasn't all bad. You just know they aren't there to win. Should be unacceptable and it's not his fault he isn't built that way. There are JT Miller/Kesler type players and then there are players like OEL who just don't look like they have drive and are just happy to be there. Not his fault but that interview just show he is ok with losing.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Canuckfanforlife82

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

sure no dead cap, but an 8 mil boat anchor on the 3rd pair. It was a shitty situation no matter which way you cut it. Allvin is banking on getting more out of his ELCs/bridge players than he'd get out of OEL. It not unreasonable imo. 

 

Now if Willander, Lekkerimaki, Podz, Ratu don't rise to the occasion, yeah the team is in trouble. But worse than before? dunno. OELs contract was horrible. 

OEL is doing decent in Florida.  He probably would have been fine here too if management hadn't brought in a head coach with character issues and a history of being unable to coexist with OEL in a professional manner.

[Canuckfanforlife82]

I am trying to figure out what sort of clause the Canucks have when making trades? Is Pittsburgh the only organization we can make deals with. It's very odd so far that they have targeted players who played in Pittsburgh. Kind of laughable at this point. What player will we likely get from Pittsburgh for Garland or Myers?

[NewbieCanuckFan]

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

OEL is doing decent in Florida.  He probably would have been fine here too if management hadn't brought in a head coach with character issues and a history of being unable to coexist with OEL in a professional manner.

been able to draft/acquire a player to help carry him.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(looks like he's paired up with Forsling - though I haven't watch any Florida games this season).

[Provost]

Leading Florida in Ice time with over 25 minute a game... paired with Forsling who is also playing over 25 minutes as an extra little kick to the teeth for Canucks fans.

I don't think that OEL will end up with eye popping stats by the end of the season, but I have long said the problem wasn't as much with him as being put in a position to fail with the Canucks.  He isn't a minute munching shutdown defensive D, and he was paired with Myers for much of his time.  No one succeeds in that situation.  We saw when Hughes was out of the lineup, and OEL got moved to a different role, he played it really well.

OEL-Hronek would have been worth a shot for a season to see how he responded being healthy and with an NHL calibre partner... but the last regime as well as this one seems incapable of managing the cap in a way that doesn't result in having to make terrible decisions to make up for it.