[Report] Conor Garland given permission to seek trade

[Rekker]

7 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

I still stand by the longer we hold on to garland the higher the cost it would be to unload him if he continues to not produce. Sure there might be teams that view him as a potential top 6 in the right scenario.. but at the same time they’ll probably view garland as a reclamation project if he say finish in the 25-30 point range. It doesn’t matter if he plays hard plays the right way or whatever. At the end of the day he’s paid to produce. Not paid to play hard play the right way but can’t produce. I mean sure he can bounce back go on a streak and bring his trade value back up. But I think the chance of him continue to slump is higher playing on the bottom 6.. heck he was on the ice last night when his line scored 4 or 5 goals and he still only managed the 1 assist. 

 Bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't, it's a dilemma for sure. I'm guessing Alvin has been working this one hard and it's so tough to really know what options are there. If any.

 

[Rekker]

6 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

We really look like we can do some damage in the playoffs. Beauvillier and Garland are eating up over $9 million in cap space. I mean that’s one Leon Draisaitl. 
 

I’m sure they are working the phones to try and reallocate that money. Retaining on Beauvillier is a no brainer. The harder thing to do is to retain on Garland who still has 2 years left after this one. 
 

If Carolina chokes out I could see a Beauvillier for Pesce trade. The numbers work. Just have to figure out what the “add” is. Most likely a 1st and a prospect. 

I could see Beau producing again and getting his contract to par value, one year left, no big commitment. Garland, man, he's just so far off his real value at the moment. Pretty sure the only way Gar goes is with retention. Whatever it is, we all better brace for it being ugly. 

[canucks curse]

1. I would add a sweetener to moving garland for cap and a early-mid round pick 

ex: klimovich + Garland no retention to a crap team with several picks for a 3rd in 2025

 

2. use beauvelier to equalize cap in a trade where we get a good player 

 

ex: podkolzin+ Beauvelier for Tanev and CGY 3rd 

[canucks curse]

To CGY

podkolzin

2025 1st top 3 protected 

Beauvelier 

Klimovich

 

To VAN

Rasmus Anderson 

[aGENT]

7 hours ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

Figure out a deal to turn a Garland or " extra forward " into Artem Zub. 

 

Right hander. Big, skates well, can move the puck, very good defensively. Can be physical and blocks shots.

 

Is he available though?

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Is he available though?

Zub would be a great get. But wouldn’t he cost a lot more than Garland? 

[Jester13]

4 hours ago, canucks curse said:

1. I would add a sweetener to moving garland for cap and a early-mid round pick 

ex: klimovich + Garland no retention to a crap team with several picks for a 3rd in 2025

 

2. use beauvelier to equalize cap in a trade where we get a good player 

 

ex: podkolzin+ Beauvelier for Tanev and CGY 3rd 

We could sign tanev for free in the offseason, so pass on trading Podz. 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Zub would be a great get. But wouldn’t he cost a lot more than Garland? 

I'm struggling to see why he'd be available but by all means, sign me up if he is... And yes, I'd imagine we'd need to add "something".

[Lemon Face]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Zub would be a great get. But wouldn’t he cost a lot more than Garland? 

We dont care for cost.Your emptiness is important to us

[WHL rocks]

6 hours ago, canucks curse said:

1. I would add a sweetener to moving garland for cap and a early-mid round pick 

ex: klimovich + Garland no retention to a crap team with several picks for a 3rd in 2025

 

2. use beauvelier to equalize cap in a trade where we get a good player 

 

ex: podkolzin+ Beauvelier for Tanev and CGY 3rd 

No thanks on trading Podz.

 

Not the type of player you trade away especially for an aging UFA to be. We can get him for free in the summer.

 

This type of trade would be OK when you're a piece away from being the favorite to win the Stanley Cup like the Bolts did a couple of years ago to load up.. 

 

We're not in position to be even thinking about this type of a trade yet.  

[CaptainCanuck12]

1 hour ago, WHL rocks said:

No thanks on trading Podz.

 

Not the type of player you trade away especially for an aging UFA to be. We can get him for free in the summer.

 

This type of trade would be OK when you're a piece away from being the favorite to win the Stanley Cup like the Bolts did a couple of years ago to load up.. 

 

We're not in position to be even thinking about this type of a trade yet.  

Biiiiig no thanks.

[Sativika]

TO ST. LOUIS: 

– Conor Garland (3 years at $4.95M)

– Anthony Beauvillier
(1 year at $4.15M)

– Christian Wolanin
(2 years at $0.775M)

TO VANCOUVER:

– Colton Parayko (15% Cap Hit)
(7 years at $5.25M)

– Jakub Vrana
(1 year at $2.625M)

– 2nd Round Selection Toronto 2024

 

 

I copied and pasted this from FB. Anyone hear of this? Does it hold water?

I'm guessing it's a rumour and/or proposal from some NHL writer or whatever......Thoughts?

[lionized27]

19 minutes ago, Sativika said:

TO ST. LOUIS: 

– Conor Garland (3 years at $4.95M)

– Anthony Beauvillier
(1 year at $4.15M)

– Christian Wolanin
(2 years at $0.775M)

TO VANCOUVER:

– Colton Parayko (15% Cap Hit)
(7 years at $5.25M)

– Jakub Vrana
(1 year at $2.625M)

– 2nd Round Selection Toronto 2024

 

 

I copied and pasted this from FB. Anyone hear of this? Does it hold water?

I'm guessing it's a rumour and/or proposal from some NHL writer or whatever......Thoughts?

As a Vancouver fan, this would be a great trade. 

This means it's a pipe dream. 

[Mike Vanderhoek]

On 11/3/2023 at 10:25 PM, wai_lai416 said:

I still stand by the longer we hold on to garland the higher the cost it would be to unload him if he continues to not produce. Sure there might be teams that view him as a potential top 6 in the right scenario.. but at the same time they’ll probably view garland as a reclamation project if he say finish in the 25-30 point range. It doesn’t matter if he plays hard plays the right way or whatever. At the end of the day he’s paid to produce. Not paid to play hard play the right way but can’t produce. I mean sure he can bounce back go on a streak and bring his trade value back up. But I think the chance of him continue to slump is higher playing on the bottom 6.. heck he was on the ice last night when his line scored 4 or 5 goals and he still only managed the 1 assist. 

 

I think you are wrong on this assessment.

 

He is paid to play and contribute to the team. Yes he's a 50 point player given he is in the right role. But he is paid to play hard, smart, reliable hockey. This is exactly what he is paid to do.

 

Garland is also not slumping in his role. It takes one injury or the coach juggling his lines to elevate this player. If as a fan you feel his worth goes up because he adds production playing in a top six spot albeit temporary or if he's on a run that just simply is not how it works.

 

Garland holds the most value to Vancouver right now versus trading him. Management will be patient and a trade will either work for Vancouver or Garland will remain a Canuck.

 

He is helping this team not hindering it. The reason there is a perception he has less value is simply dollars. His cap is fair give or take 500k? 750k? its his term. Inquiring teams no his value, what he brings on the ice, NHL valuations don't fluctuate with every goal scored or being on the ice for a goal against. He has built his resume.

 

 

[Rekker]

56 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

 

I think you are wrong on this assessment.

 

He is paid to play and contribute to the team. Yes he's a 50 point player given he is in the right role. But he is paid to play hard, smart, reliable hockey. This is exactly what he is paid to do.

 

Garland is also not slumping in his role. It takes one injury or the coach juggling his lines to elevate this player. If as a fan you feel his worth goes up because he adds production playing in a top six spot albeit temporary or if he's on a run that just simply is not how it works.

 

Garland holds the most value to Vancouver right now versus trading him. Management will be patient and a trade will either work for Vancouver or Garland will remain a Canuck.

 

He is helping this team not hindering it. The reason there is a perception he has less value is simply dollars. His cap is fair give or take 500k? 750k? its his term. Inquiring teams no his value, what he brings on the ice, NHL valuations don't fluctuate with every goal scored or being on the ice for a goal against. He has built his resume.

 

 

This isn't the try hard league. If your getting paid as a top six forward for two more seasons you need to produce. If Garland could produce, he'd be in the top six. They tried him there and it hasn't worked. It hasn't worked to the satisfaction of a coach who is demanding a higher level than previous coaches. Garland is just simply grossly overpaid. $500-$750? Try $2 millionish. He's full of hustle but nowhere near worth his contract. Terrible JT stain of a contract unfortunately tied to a decent player who now has negative value.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, Rekker said:

This isn't the try hard league. If your getting paid as a top six forward for two more seasons you need to produce. If Garland could produce, he'd be in the top six. They tried him there and it hasn't worked. It hasn't worked to the satisfaction of a coach who is demanding a higher level than previous coaches. Garland is just simply grossly overpaid. $500-$750? Try $2 millionish. He's full of hustle but nowhere near worth his contract. Terrible JT stain of a contract unfortunately tied to a decent player who now has negative value.

If they want him to produce like a top 6 player, they need to play him with top 6 linemates 

 

Garland is probably one of the most effective players on the team right now 

[Rekker]

4 minutes ago, stawns said:

If they want him to produce like a top 6 player, they need to play him with top 6 linemates 

 

Garland is probably one of the most effective players on the team right now 

They did try Stawns. He dragged EP down. Didn't do squat there. I hate to harp on the guy when he's down, but he is difficult to read and play with. His hustle and forecheck (that instills fear in no dman) are worthy of a contract way, way less than currently. I do think we are best keeping him than doing something stupid in trade. He will get another chance top six if someone gets hurt or struggles. Even in second unit PP, he seems difficult to read, slow to shoot and at the wrog time. He's our worst player to contract at the moment. He and Myers share the title at different times

 

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, Rekker said:

They did try Stawns. He dragged EP down. Didn't do squat there. I hate to harp on the guy when he's down, but he is difficult to read and play with. His hustle and forecheck (that instills fear in no dman) are worthy of a contract way, way less than currently. I do think we are best keeping him than doing something stupid in trade. He will get another chance top six if someone gets hurt or struggles. Even in second unit PP, he seems difficult to read, slow to shoot and at the wrog time. He's our worst player to contract at the moment. He and Myers share the title at different times

 

He played with EP for a short amount of time and scored on his second shift didn't he?  

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Rekker said:

They did try Stawns. He dragged EP down. Didn't do squat there. I hate to harp on the guy when he's down, but he is difficult to read and play with. His hustle and forecheck (that instills fear in no dman) are worthy of a contract way, way less than currently. I do think we are best keeping him than doing something stupid in trade. He will get another chance top six if someone gets hurt or struggles. Even in second unit PP, he seems difficult to read, slow to shoot and at the wrog time. He's our worst player to contract at the moment. He and Myers share the title at different times

 

 

Yep that was a bad fit. The only way I see him back in the top 6 is if there's an injury.

[Rekker]

3 minutes ago, stawns said:

He played with EP for a short amount of time and scored on his second shift didn't he?  

My take on Garland is he's to predictable. Book on him is angle him to the boards, check him there. He may try his spin move, but just hold him low. A true top six player will draw in his check, take that check out of the play while having the wherewithal to dish the puck having created some room. The puck dies to often with Garland. Or just a dumb odd angle shot. Not saying he's complete trash. Just a 2.5 or 3 million dollar winger who can occasionally slot in top six. Because of the stupid contract, he's now negative value. I truly hope he turns it around, he's a hell ofl a battler, but just a lot of nothing so far this season.

[Rekker]

7 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Yep that was a bad fit. The only way I see him back in the top 6 is if there's an injury.

Unfortunate, but true. Honest, hard working player on a terrible contract. Ffnn Benning. 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Rekker said:

My take on Garland is he's to predictable. Book on him is angle him to the boards, check him there. He may try his spin move, but just hold him low. A true top six player will draw in his check, take that check out of the play while having the wherewithal to dish the puck having created some room. The puck dies to often with Garland. Or just a dumb odd angle shot. Not saying he's complete trash. Just a 2.5 or 3 million dollar winger who can occasionally slot in top six. Because of the stupid contract, he's now negative value. I truly hope he turns it around, he's a hell ofl a battler, but just a lot of nothing so far this season.

I disagree, Garland is the first to almost every puck, digs pucks out, draws penalties, has good vision a great shot and plays much much bigger than he is.  He is a fearless player and rarely gets injured.  

 

His value is much higher to the team than it is trading him.  Hrs a key player, imo 

[Bob Long]

Just now, stawns said:

I disagree, Garland is the first to almost every puck, digs pucks out, draws penalties, has good vision a great shot and plays much much bigger than he is.  He is a fearless player and rarely gets injured.  

 

His value is much higher to the team than it is trading him.  Hrs a key player, imo 

 

Sure but on a 3rd line. Consider it this way - who would he replace on any contenders top 6?

[BPA]

Garland could possibly replace PDG on the top 6.  He meshed with Miller a few seasons ago.  Might work.  But I’m hesitant in changing the Miller line as it’s doing well scoring and defensively.  Especially since it seems that line usually matches up with the opposition 1st line.  Not really sure about Garland defensive quality.

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Sure but on a 3rd line. Consider it this way - who would he replace on any contenders top 6?

What's wrong with him on the third line then?  What they need to do is put Hogz on that line and upgrade on AB.  Then they've got a formidable two way third line.