Popular Post stawns Posted October 10, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted October 10, 2023 36 minutes ago, N4ZZY said: Yeah, I'm not sure what Benning and the management at that time saw in Garland. Benning also came from a Boston Bruins organization that tended to always look for tough, larger, and physical players. So acquiring Garland was a bit of a head-scratcher, because he was none of those things. He's basically a player that doesn't fit the roster, but management can't seem to move him, because nobody wants the price Garland comes at. In other words, he's not worth it for his price tag at a flat cap world. Garlands gotten a raw deal in Van. Had he been given the same opportunities and patience that they gave Boeser, his numbers would be similar and he'd been much more effective overall. Because he's a better overall player, he's easier to move down the lineup than Boes. 2 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 minutes ago, stawns said: Garlands gotten a raw deal in Van. Had he been given the same opportunities and patience that they gave Boeser, his numbers would be similar and he'd been much more effective overall. Because he's a better overall player, he's easier to move down the lineup than Boes. So why does he get such vitrial criticism? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, N4ZZY said: So why does he get such vitrial criticism? Because he’s small. Thats all it is. If Boeser had Garland’s motor and snarl he’d be a hell of a player. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Analyst82 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 5 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Because he’s small. Thats all it is. If Boeser had Garland’s motor and snarl he’d be a hell of a player. Is it too late to hope? I really hope Boeser has a great season. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 So the mega OEL trade the only thing that will be left is the 7 year cap penalty 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goal_thecup Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Peeke plus more if they take both Garland and Beauvillier and to make cap work and to add value to the return; maybe Corson Ceulemans? (Please.) Retention available on Beauvillier as he only has one year left. Jack Roslovic (26yrs; C/RW) has one year left at $4.00m, then he's UFA; CBJ not happy with him. One year tryout; could be motivated to do well for his upcoming UFA status. CBJ has $3m room; VCR has none. From Vancouver: Garland ($4.95m 3yrs remaining) Beauvillier ($4.15/yrs remaining) Rathbone ($0.85m 1 yr remaining) then RFA Total $99.500m To Vancouver: Roslovic $4.00m 1 yr remaining then UFA Peeke $2.75m 3 yrs remaining then UFA Ceulemans $.975m 3yrs remaining ELC Plus CBJ's 3rd round pick, CBJ-owned LA's 3rd round pick, or CBJ's 5rd round pick. Total $10.425m GO AHEAD. FLAME AWAY. I'm never any good at this, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Columbus has a 6’5 physical chaotic giraffe on their team that has a similar cap hit to Garland. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 (edited) 29 minutes ago, stawns said: Garlands gotten a raw deal in Van. Had he been given the same opportunities and patience that they gave Boeser, his numbers would be similar and he'd been much more effective overall. Because he's a better overall player, he's easier to move down the lineup than Boes. Exactly! He just gets goobled up when he doesnt have other dynamic bigger players to play with. I'd be all over getting rid of Boeser over him....then put out some wanted: missing person posters for 2021 Podz. I really don't understand where he went. Edited October 10, 2023 by BC_Hawk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 minutes ago, toochmahgooch said: I wouldn't say he's solely the reason for any progression. Myers is vastly overpaid. Our 3rd line should be bigger, with more grit and two way versatility. So I would welcome a Garland trade, but I do enjoy watching him play. No not solely at fault. I completely agree. He's just the solution ideally. He's the most logical player to move when you look at the roster and the reality of it. Myers was always a pipe dream considering we didn't have any RD replacements and we're short on RD to begin with. Plus it would have cost us big. It was also circular in that we needed his money first to guarantee we had a replacement player but could never get that player because the money was always stuck in Myers. Boeser was a player they signed themselves last summer. He could go personally but I'd understand one of the many possible reasons he wouldn't. That doesn't leave much unless you want to trade Petey, Hughes, Demko, Miller, Kuzmenko, (Mik, Hronek or (Beau). Unfortunately Podkolzin and Hoglander carry little value, and neither does anyone else (unless I forgot someone). When you're this tight against the cap you need to make a larger salary maneuvers to move the needle. As such it seems obvious that moving Garland is the first step to addressing that better third line you mentioned. I would also add we need some more grit with skill in the top 6, not to mention a partner for QH. Remember too that Petterson and Hronek both need raises and the OEL penalty goes up to $5 mil in 2025 and 2026. So while some people think he's alright to watch I would argue the success of the team is far more important. As a Canucks fan I'am excited about the possibilities for when and if we can move Garland, get rid of Myers for that matter, and free up Beauvillier's salary. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 35 minutes ago, BTueyCanucksFan said: I thought Miller has a NTC that just kicked in?? If true, then he is universally no matter how much we might like to (I don't by the way) Yeah, and I doubt he chooses Columbus, or Columbus wants his contact, but... I'd love for them to wow us with an offer though. 4 minutes ago, Trebreh said: Columbus has a 6’5 physical chaotic giraffe on their team that has a similar cap hit to Garland. We already have the original chaos giraffe with a big cap hit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Interference Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 35 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Because he’s small. Thats all it is. If Boeser had Garland’s motor and snarl he’d be a hell of a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 It'd be funny if it wound up being Gudbranson coming back for a second stint and not Peeke A straight across swap with Guddy's NTC being the only potential hiccup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 41 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Because he’s small. Thats all it is. If Boeser had Garland’s motor and snarl he’d be a hell of a player. And that in there lies the only thing you can criticize the guy for; totally out of his control. He works his ass off every shift and works the boards/corners the best he can. Not to sound like a parrot, but the team just needs to put him with a couple line mates with size, and he will shine. I'd rather have an undersized Garland get pushed around a bit vs. an overpaid Boeser float around all game like its a pregame skate...then net a PP or top line "give me" goal to pad his stats. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Gawdzukes said: I don't think there is any chance they are moving Jiricek for anything like that package. Have to be a big ++. Pretty sure I covered this already... 5 hours ago, aGENT said: I doubt they'd be moving him (jiricek) either. Just noting those are the the players I'd be interested in. Maybe Podz, +1st+ instead... Didn't put much thought in to it as it's unlikely. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 hour ago, elvis15 said: I mean, if they wanted to give us a *great* package for Miller that included Peeke, would that be interesting to us? Miller and Beau for Roslovic, Peeke and their 1st? Maybe they add a little? Swap Rathbone for Bjork as well? I think that ship has sailed. I doubt Miller wants to move, the team doesn't seem inclined to move him, and don't think teams want to stomach that kind of money. Perfect storm to say JT will remain a Canuck for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Well should be good interesting day.I sure hope we get that one RHD in a deal. Alvin on the phone to three clubs asking about who they had on waivers and who might also be able to be traded. Get the best deal and run. Then after all that if the CBJ's have a D similar rape them last minute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 3 hours ago, toochmahgooch said: Would rather a Peeke for Beauvillier trade. I am biased with Garland. Really enjoy watching him play. I know we rather have 2 way versatility with our forwards and paying a 3rd line forward 5 million per, who doesn't play on your first PP or PK for that matter doesn't make sense long term. Buttt, it's Garland. He's entertaining. I like Garland...but if his cap can get us someone on RD while Hoglander plays/develops in to the "small, pesky mid 6 winger" role at 1/4 of the price...you do what you gotta do. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwarrior Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Columbus is trying to move a defenceman. We are trying to move Garland. I wouldn't hat a Garland for Bean trade straight up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Coconuts said: It'd be funny if it wound up being Gudbranson coming back for a second stint and not Peeke A straight across swap with Guddy's NTC being the only potential hiccup Would that be the first trade in CDC history that actually happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 10 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Would that be the first trade in CDC history that actually happened? I dunno, maybe? We know the Canucks kept tabs on what we said over at CDC, there's no way they don't know about this forum. Wouldn't be surprised if they plucked ideas from the fanbase the way the local media does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 (edited) Hearing about Garland getting permission for him and his agent to seek out a trade means we can stop trying to include him in deals as I’m sure management has tried. I just don’t see Beauvillier being appealing for them as a return. Maybe the Canucks could get him included as a salary matcher on the expiring deal helps. Really if we’re in this I feel like it’s Podkolzin, Rathbone or picks with Beauvillier as the salary match. Edited October 10, 2023 by flickyoursedin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HorvatToBaertschi Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 16 hours ago, Coconuts said: It'd be funny if it wound up being Gudbranson coming back for a second stint and not Peeke A straight across swap with Guddy's NTC being the only potential hiccup Gudbranson wouldn't be the worst thing to add to our roster. Back in 2017 we wanted a top 4 dman with size and skill. Now we just need a big body and someone willing to drop the gloves. I'm sure he could do well in this more sheltered role. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 8 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said: Gudbranson wouldn't be the worst thing to add to our roster. Back in 2017 we wanted a top 4 dman with size and skill. Now we just need a big body and someone willing to drop the gloves. I'm sure he could do well in this more sheltered role. Yup. We get a lot bigger and tougher switching Garland for Guddy too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 20 hours ago, Gawdzukes said: I don't think there is any chance they are moving Jiricek for anything like that package. Have to be a big ++. There is only one way I can see Jiricek ending up a Canuck in the next 12 months: the year goes sideways, Petey doesn't want to extend, and Jiricek is part of the package coming back from CBJ for him. Short of that, it's not worth talking about. I suspect Canucks are close to a deal to add a defenseman, or else I don't think they'd pass on all of those names on the waiver wire. Maybe it's one from CBJ. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure10Kuzmenko96 Posted October 11, 2023 Share Posted October 11, 2023 Apparently Boqvist and Kent Johnson are healthy scratches for their season opener Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.