Alflives Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 Garland and Myers got to go. The Benning stains must all be cleansed. 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 44 minutes ago, Alflives said: Garland and Myers got to go. The Benning stains must all be cleansed. We agree 100% Alf. And you’re not even drunk. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlockerHigh Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 (edited) Isn’t it funny how the crazy media and some nonsense fans thought we could get nothing for garland and would have to pay to get rid of his contract? I explained to Drance on 650 via text and he responded in disagreement on air… that because of our cap issues teams would try and hold us hostage. That Garland has value (and of all people Drance and his nonsense fancy stats should have accepted that), and that once we solved our cap issues, we could move him for value, not pay to move him. sure enough, the list of teams interested is now growing. Sorry Drance, Alvin and I were right. Patience matters. You don’t deal from weakness. Edited October 18, 2023 by BlockerHigh 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 8 hours ago, BlockerHigh said: Isn’t it funny how the crazy media and some nonsense fans thought we could get nothing for garland and would have to pay to get rid of his contract? I explained to Drance on 650 via text and he responded in disagreement on air… that because of our cap issues teams would try and hold us hostage. That Garland has value (and of all people Drance and his nonsense fancy stats should have accepted that), and that once we solved our cap issues, we could move him for value, not pay to move him. sure enough, the list of teams interested is now growing. Sorry Drance, Alvin and I were right. Patience matters. You don’t deal from weakness. So you would gladly sabotage the season and hold on to garland until the cap issue resolves before dealing him? Coz it ain’t resolving till either the TDL or end of season when contract expires. So what if the Myers and beauvillier can’t be moved till the deadline? You will gladly still hold on to garland and wait until you can get value for him at the cost of having no flexibility can’t even call players up and risk tanking another season and EP refuse to sign with the team because they miss the playoff again just so you can wait till you can get value for garland? The list growing means absolutely nothing.. for all we know teams could be phoning and asking how much are you willing to retain and are you willing to add. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 9 hours ago, BlockerHigh said: Isn’t it funny how the crazy media and some nonsense fans thought we could get nothing for garland and would have to pay to get rid of his contract? I explained to Drance on 650 via text and he responded in disagreement on air… that because of our cap issues teams would try and hold us hostage. That Garland has value (and of all people Drance and his nonsense fancy stats should have accepted that), and that once we solved our cap issues, we could move him for value, not pay to move him. sure enough, the list of teams interested is now growing. Sorry Drance, Alvin and I were right. Patience matters. You don’t deal from weakness. Garland has negative value. If PA is able to move him he'll have to take a bad contract back. If he doesn't want to take a bad contract back then he'll have to give up draft pick(s) and/or prospect(s) for some team to take on Garland's bad contract. They've been trying to trade him for a year now and still haven't been able to get value for him. The teams on the "list" want to send us something they don't want or want to get paid handsomely by the Canucks for taking Garland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyG Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 On 10/15/2023 at 2:37 AM, filthy animal said: Clearly an exaggeration, considering Benning trading for OEL will go down as probably the worst trade this franchise has ever made Trading Luongo for Markstrom and Shawn Matthias, the former basically kept the team from being the worst team in the league on your boys watch, and the latter helped him get to his ONLY 100+ pt season Yea tell me exactly how many rebuilding organizations have 100+pt seasons. NJD 11 straight years… not once. Edmonton took how many 1OA to finally be a consistent playoff team? 4 was it? took McDavid til his 6th season to make playoffs in consecutive years. How many picks inside the top 10 did Edmonton have the last 14 years? 11?? No way get outta here how come they dont have 2 stanley cups by now and only 4 playoff appearances? They made the SCF and missed playoffs 10 straight years and 3 of McWhiners first 4 seasons. I could go on about how many teams with better drafting position took a decade. The fact we made playoffs twice, once with an aged out core and the other with fresh young blood is respectable. Colorado is another example. How many top 5/10 picks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 (edited) 29 minutes ago, WHL rocks said: Garland has negative value. If PA is able to move him he'll have to take a bad contract back. If he doesn't want to take a bad contract back then he'll have to give up draft pick(s) and/or prospect(s) for some team to take on Garland's bad contract. They've been trying to trade him for a year now and still haven't been able to get value for him. The teams on the "list" want to send us something they don't want or want to get paid handsomely by the Canucks for taking Garland. He doesn't really have "negative value", or if negative, only marginally and relative to his contract in the flat cap. And that's largely due to flat cap, not his contract itself (which is probably $500k+/- rich for the current cap) The reason he hasn't been moved is because teams don't have cap space. The few that do, want assets for taking on cap and also don't really need or want someone that makes them better, as they're tanking. Garland the player has value. As noted by the teams actually interested in adding him (and the fact that he's proven able to put up points and help drive pay on two teams). Rising cap this summer makes him more moveable going forward. Cap for cap, he's moveable... But we're hoping to clear $1-$2m by reports. It's the cap clearing that has the "negative value". Edited October 18, 2023 by aGENT 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanSeanBean Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, BlockerHigh said: Isn’t it funny how the crazy media and some nonsense fans thought we could get nothing for garland and would have to pay to get rid of his contract? I explained to Drance on 650 via text and he responded in disagreement on air… that because of our cap issues teams would try and hold us hostage. That Garland has value (and of all people Drance and his nonsense fancy stats should have accepted that), and that once we solved our cap issues, we could move him for value, not pay to move him. sure enough, the list of teams interested is now growing. Sorry Drance, Alvin and I were right. Patience matters. You don’t deal from weakness. How do you end this post with I was right? Nothing has happened yet. It's possible all of these trades are looking for a sweeter to take him or to give a contract they don't want back. The list of teams if growing because Garlands agent was given permission to help facilitate a trade. Something that historically further lowered a players value. We've been trying to trade Garland for a year, maybe more. Obviously the value isn't there or we would have traded him by now. Drance was likely right here, why don't you save your victory lap until your theory is proven correct, because it's likely you aren't. I hope you are, as much as I dislike Garland he does bring on ice value to the team. But it's evident his value is absolutely minimal right now and may be dipping into the negative based off all the numerous reports about teams wanting us to retain or send sweeteners. Edited October 18, 2023 by MeanSeanBean 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 11 minutes ago, aGENT said: He doesn't really have "negative value", or if negative, only marginally and relative to his contract in the flat cap. And that's largely due to flat cap, not his contract itself (which is probably $500k+/- rich for the current cap) The reason he hasn't been moved is because teams don't have cap space. The few that do, want assets for taking on cap and also don't really need or want someone that makes them better, as they're tanking. Garland the player has value. As noted by the teams actually interested in adding him (and the fact that he's proven able to put up points and help drive pay on two teams). Rising cap this summer makes him more moveable going forward. Cap for cap, he's moveable... But we're hoping to clear $1-$2m by reports. It's the cap clearing that has the "negative value". That is true, but that is parsing what he said in a meaningless way. Garlands value is inextricably tied to his cap hit. You can’t separate the two. The poster a few posts above went on a rant about how dumb folks here and the media were talking about possibly having to retain cap or take other bad money back… and that lots of teams are interested in Garland and will give up assets for him now. Weird to that we haven’t moved him yet if that was the case. I entirely agree with you, the only reason Garland doesn’t have value now if the flat cap. I have said repeatedly that when (if) the cap rises significantly next summer, teams will be signing worse players than Garland for more money. He will likely have at least some value then, or at least neutral value. He is one of our best winger. Only Kuzmenko, Boeser, and Mikheyev are better. Other guys on our team may complement the top two lines better, and Garland may just not be a fit… but he is a good solid player. I hope the team is patient and waits this out the season, or at least any deal doesn’t involve US sending sweeteners or retaining. Ideally there is a contract we take back that is a couple million less but also a good player and on shorter term. That is the only likely winning scenario for an in season trade. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conscience Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 If he had positive value, his agent wouldn't be looking for the trade 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billabong Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 With all the noise around garland recently, this certainly feels like it’ll be done sooner rather than later 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 1 minute ago, Billabong said: With all the noise around garland recently, this certainly feels like it’ll be done sooner rather than later I like that this management team doesn't seem very interested in dragging their heels. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted October 18, 2023 Garland to his agent 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 8 minutes ago, Provost said: That is true, but that is parsing what he said in a meaningless way. Garlands value is inextricably tied to his cap hit. You can’t separate the two. The poster a few posts above went on a rant about how dumb folks here and the media were talking about possibly having to retain cap or take other bad money back… and that lots of teams are interested in Garland and will give up assets for him now. Weird to that we haven’t moved him yet if that was the case. I entirely agree with you, the only reason Garland doesn’t have value now if the flat cap. I have said repeatedly that when (if) the cap rises significantly next summer, teams will be signing worse players than Garland for more money. He will likely have at least some value then, or at least neutral value. He is one of our best winger. Only Kuzmenko, Boeser, and Mikheyev are better. Other guys on our team may complement the top two lines better, and Garland may just not be a fit… but he is a good solid player. I hope the team is patient and waits this out the season, or at least any deal doesn’t involve US sending sweeteners or retaining. Ideally there is a contract we take back that is a couple million less but also a good player and on shorter term. That is the only likely winning scenario for an in season trade. Yup a bigger/grittier (if less offense) 2nd-3rd liner or #4-#5 RHD coming back at $3-$4m, with minimal "sweetener". 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 Just now, aGENT said: Yup a bigger/grittier (if less offense) 2nd-3rd liner or #4-#5 RHD coming back at $3-$4m, with minimal "sweetener". 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 17 minutes ago, Conscience said: If he had positive value, his agent wouldn't be looking for the trade Hoping those other teams have slow starts and become desperate. Desperation for scoring might take away the negative value a bit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogs and Podz Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 I'm just happy there are a number of teams in the mix. Should make the retention, if any, minimal. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 13 minutes ago, Hogs and Podz said: I'm just happy there are a number of teams in the mix. Should make the retention, if any, minimal. Exactly. I can see a decent exchange of players happening here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mando27 Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 Seems like this trade gets done sooner rather than later. Hopefully we can find someone to take Myers off our hands as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 Just now, Mando27 said: Seems like this trade gets done sooner rather than later. Hopefully we can find someone to take Myers off our hands as well. What team hates itself that much? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mando27 Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: What team hates itself that much? There's always a dumb GM in the NHL that sees a big defenceman and thinks they can play lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 1 minute ago, Mando27 said: There's always a dumb GM in the NHL that sees a big defenceman and thinks they can play lol. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenspear Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 7 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: What team hates itself that much? One that's looking for a tank commander on a budget? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 18, 2023 Share Posted October 18, 2023 (edited) 1 minute ago, Chickenspear said: One that's looking for a tank commander on a budget? or or Edited October 18, 2023 by PhillipBlunt 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Devron Posted October 18, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted October 18, 2023 9 minutes ago, Mando27 said: There's always a dumb GM in the NHL that sees a big defenceman and thinks they can play lol. And fans. See Tryamkin 1 2 1 1 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.