Jump to content

[Report] Conor Garland given permission to seek trade


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Déjà Vu said:

Agree, pls pls and thank you


But why?

 

Arent we trying to free up cap? How does that accomplish that and how does Parayko at 30 fit into our plans?

 

That contract is already aging poorly. We’re better off going after Zadorov. Similar size and game but younger.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DeNiro said:


But why?

 

Arent we trying to free up cap? How does that accomplish that and how does Parayko at 30 fit into our plans?

 

That contract is already aging poorly. We’re better off going after Zadorov. Similar size and game but younger.


first off,  ‘a trade proposal emerges’ could be referring to a proposal made here on CFF. Doesn’t sound like this has been offered or discussed, unless I’m missing something.

 

To answer your question, it does address some of our needs / plans. And the more I think about it, the less I hate it.
 

It frees up about $1.3M cap space immediately, which has been reported as one of our objectives in a trade. Possibly to sign Bear (love it or hate it).

 

It also gets us off Garlands contract, even though that cap is reallocated to a D. So in a sense, we’re clearing cap for the next two years, but spending it immediately on Parayko. Returning a D was also a reported objective of any Garland trade.

 

Parayko fits our plan to make the playoffs this year, and be competitive in 2-3 years. He should at least be a legit top 4D (3/4) for the next 3-4 years. 
 

At 30 he doesn’t fit our core age, but Miller at 30 doesn’t either. May not hurt to add another vet / champion. PA said they wouldn’t trade a 1st for a 30 year old player, but he may consider this.

 

It avoids retention, we clear two contracts at once. Parayko is a (mitigated) risk at $5.25, that adds size/shutdown ability to our top 4. The greatest risk will be the last few years of his contract (same as JT), at which point, the cap will rise.

 

If Vrana doesn’t work out, he can play in Abby to free another $1.15M this season, and/or maybe traded at the deadline for a pick.

 

Just some thoughts. Not sold on it. Shades of the OEL deal, except Parayko seems to compliment our group better, with a couple smaller, puck moving lefties. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

Where did you hear that? Or did you notice something?

Last season there were posters hoping we could get him. I read he had a bad back. There’s a history of him having back problems. 

https://theathletic.com/3905599/2022/11/17/blues-colton-parayko-back-injury/?amp=1

https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/hockey/news/blues-colton-parayko-lingering-back-injury/amp/

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Last season there were posters hoping we could get him. I read he had a bad back. There’s a history of him having back problems. 

https://theathletic.com/3905599/2022/11/17/blues-colton-parayko-back-injury/?amp=1

https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/hockey/news/blues-colton-parayko-lingering-back-injury/amp/

 

 

Yikes. Nope steer clear of that LTIR waiting to happen.

  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i believe the only type of garland trade that make sense is either

a) an expiring contract at the end of this year coming back and maybe we have to retent on garland a little

b) a deal revolving around garland + for a top 4 D (ideally boqvist or peeke personally i want boqvist more he have a higher ceiling)

c) a small retention deal and we get a pick or prospect back that doesn't cost us cap

 

since i think they want another top 4 D so either they make a bigger trade for a top 4 D or get cap relief for the summer to go for another top 4 D

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Yup. 7 year contract on damaged goods. New Beau is on an expiring contract. Garland can be moved in a different deal. Getting Parayko is a Benning move. Allvin don’t do that. 

 

He won't. Both fish boy Pesce or tanev could be available in free agency.

  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Yup. 7 year contract on damaged goods. New Beau is on an expiring contract. Garland can be moved in a different deal. Getting Parayko is a Benning move. Allvin don’t do that. 


Everyone needs to listen to Alf and his bottles here.

 

Well said!

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thundernuts said:


I do that deal.  It is a risk but it also shows Petterson and Hronek that we are “going for it” by adding.  That could save money in the long term as well in their contracts.

 

You likely get 3-4 good years out of Parayko on what would be a very team friendly cap hit as the cap increases.  He doesn’t have a NMC so is possible to move.  You could also end up with him on medical retirement at that point and offload the bad years of his contract for nothing.

 

I wouldn’t advocate for it except we are apparently in a win-mode (I don’t think we should have gone there… but that is where we are).

 

I don’t know why St. Louis does this unless they reply want to get out from his contract or plan on tearing it down.  This makes them worse for sure in the short term.

 

Edited by Provost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Provost said:


I do that deal.  It is a risk but it also shows Petterson and Hronek that we are “going for it” by adding.  That could save money in the long term as well in their contracts.

 

You likely get 3-4 good years out of Parayko on what would be a very team friendly cap hit as the cap increases.  He doesn’t have a NMC so is possible to move.  You could also end up with him on medical retirement at that point and offload the bad years of his contract for nothing.

 

I wouldn’t advocate for it except we are apparently in a win-mode (I don’t think we should have gone there… but that is where we are).

 

I don’t know why St. Louis does this unless they reply want to get out from his contract or plan on tearing it down.  This makes them worse for sure in the short term.

 

 

They do it because STL knows he's damaged goods. Wouldn't be the first time a team did that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

They do it because STL knows he's damaged goods. Wouldn't be the first time a team did that.

 

13 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

They do it because STL knows he's damaged goods. Wouldn't be the first time a team did that.

 

 

Yes Parayko's play is declining, but he is also playing 22-23 min a night in St Louis right now and playing well.

as a no.3 D man who will not have to PK much and can play mostly 5v 5 on 2nd pair, that would be a good player to get.

STL does this because they save money and they are not a huge market 5.25 x 7 years is almost 37 million, that's a lot of total money to pay someone who is not a star if you are a middle of the pack franchise. Could be ownership wants him moved.

Plus we get a 2nd. and some cap relief this year

 

I would do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

Right need, wrong player.


He might not even be the wrong player on the short term.

 

That contract is too risky though and this team can’t afford to take more risks. They need solid reliable players that live up to their contracts.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, canucks curse said:

 

 

 

Yes Parayko's play is declining, but he is also playing 22-23 min a night in St Louis right now and playing well.

as a no.3 D man who will not have to PK much and can play mostly 5v 5 on 2nd pair, that would be a good player to get.

STL does this because they save money and they are not a huge market 5.25 x 7 years is almost 37 million, that's a lot of total money to pay someone who is not a star if you are a middle of the pack franchise. Could be ownership wants him moved.

Plus we get a 2nd. and some cap relief this year

 

I would do it.

 

If he's not going to be a physical force I'd rather go for Pesce in free agency.

Just now, DeNiro said:


He might not even be the wrong player on the short term.

 

That contract is too risky though and this team can’t afford to take more risks. They need solid reliable players that live up to their contracts.

 

Yep, it's just too damn long. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DeNiro said:


But why?

 

Arent we trying to free up cap? How does that accomplish that and how does Parayko at 30 fit into our plans?

 

That contract is already aging poorly. We’re better off going after Zadorov. Similar size and game but younger.


The plan is to go all in on Zadorov in the summer. Book it. 
 

#WeAreGoldStar

Edited by Elias Pettersson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:


The plan is to go all in on Zadorov in the summer. Book it. 
 

#WeAreGoldStar

if we can move garland i actually wouldn't mind the canucks go for like another high end top 2/4 instead they'll have like 36mil to sign EP Hronek and another high end top 4 and can fill the rest of the bottom 6 and a couple prospect

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

If he's not going to be a physical force I'd rather go for Pesce in free agency.

 

Yep, it's just too damn long. 


Problem for me is I don’t see Pesce making it to FA. He’s highly valuable to a number of teams.
If CAR falters, I think they look for max value (within circumstance) and send him somewhere he will pre-agree to extension. It’s just best business for them. If you can get a 1st rounder and prospect + for him you have to take it. 

Edited by RWJC
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RWJC said:


Problem for me is I don’t see Pesce making it to FA. He’s highly valuable to a number of teams.
If CAR falters, I think they look for max value (within circumstance) and send him somewhere he will pre-agree to extension. It’s just best business for them. If you can get a 1st rounder and prospect + for him you have to take it. 

 

That's true but sometimes these guys do get to FA. More likely Tanev makes it.

 

I don't want us giving up our 1st for him either... Maybe a lower pick and prospects but we're pretty thin there too.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...