Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign F Conor Garland to 5-Year Deal ($4.95M AAV)

[alternate]

Agreed. Think a Miller-Petterson-Garland top line could be real good.

Putting Boeser with Horvat vs 2nd pairings should also be in our favour.

 

[canuckking1]

Agreed. Think a Miller-Petterson-Garland top line could be real good.

Putting Boeser with Horvat vs 2nd pairings should also be in our favour.

Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser line was really good in the short time they were together this year. Wouldn’t mind those lines.

 

[VanJack]

This contract represents about $700,000 more than what the Habs are paying Tyler Tofoli. Is Garland a better top-six forward than Tofoli. Certainly he's younger, but the Canucks could have easily had both.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

This contract represents about $700,000 more than what the Habs are paying Tyler Tofoli. Is Garland a better top-six forward than Tofoli. Certainly he's younger, but the Canucks could have easily had both.

I think having both Garland and Toffoli would be redundant especially with the glaring holes on D. I would have preferred to use the Toffoli money on keeping Tanev.
Given a choice between Toffoli and Garland I’d take Garland, primarily because of age. That Toffoli contract is a very good one too though.

 

[DonnyNucker]

I think having both Garland and Toffoli would be redundant especially with the glaring holes on D. I would have preferred to use the Toffoli money on keeping Tanev.
Given a choice between Toffoli and Garland I’d take Garland, primarily because of age. That Toffoli contract is a very good one too though.

Toffoli was a bad fit here. We need Garlands speed as we aren’t the quickest team

 

[F A N]

Toffoli was a bad fit here. We need Garlands speed as we aren’t the quickest team

Toffoli was a very good fit and a big loss for the Canucks. Garland is faster and an able replacement. But I'm still sad about the loss of Toffoli.

 

[DonnyNucker]

Toffoli was a very good fit and a big loss for the Canucks. Garland is faster and an able replacement. But I'm still sad about the loss of Toffoli.

Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards

 

[VanJack]

Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.

And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.

Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.

 

[F A N]

Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards

The proof is in the production though. Toffoli had 6 goals 10 points in 10 games. He wasn't the same after his foot injury of course.

 

[BluesyShoes]

Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.

And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.

Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.

More like Pearson is a Tofoli replacement, could of had him of 1M more.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards

Why the hell did Benning trade for him, then, if the reason he wasn't a good fit was something that could have been easily realized by scouting him?

It's not like this was a chemistry issue or he struggled when coming here or something.

 

[timw33]

Really enjoying the RetConning of Toffoli's fit with the team.

 

[DonnyNucker]

Why the hell did Benning trade for him, then, if the reason he wasn't a good fit was something that could have been easily realized by scouting him?

It's not like this was a chemistry issue or he struggled when coming here or something.

Questionable trade for sure

 

[VanJack]

So Tofoli goes to the Habs and racks up 28 goals and 44 points in 56 games......and he wasn't 'a good fit' in Vancouver? Just for reference, the Canucks leading scorer was Brock Boeser with 23 goals.

Is it just me, or this debate about Tofoli not being a good fit for the Canucks, bordering on ridiculous.

But what's even more ridiculous is giving up Tyler Madden and a second round draft pick for 10 games of Tofoli and a couple of playoff games.

 

[Peen]

Huh, I totally disagree with all that.

I think the trade was bad but I really liked the fit for the player here. Still do.

He did a lot of really good things in the offensive zone. Smart player.

 

[F A N]

So Tofoli goes to the Habs and racks up 28 goals and 44 points in 56 games......and he wasn't 'a good fit' in Vancouver? Just for reference, the Canucks leading scorer was Brock Boeser with 23 goals.

Well that's poor logic. A player's ability to produce on another team doesn't prove a fit with the Canucks. Other than that, I think Toffoli was a good fit here in Vancouver. It was an acquisition that could have worked out really well for the Canucks.

Is it just me, or this debate about Tofoli not being a good fit for the Canucks, bordering on ridiculous.

Yes it is.

 

[Bam19]

More like Pearson is a Tofoli replacement, could of had him of 1M more.

this is the key we could have kept Toffoli and let Pearson walk this year.

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.

And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.

Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.

But boy will they try.

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

this is the key we could have kept Toffoli and let Pearson walk this year.

Yeah but mentorpedes per sixty

 

[strattonius]

Don't think Toffoli was necessarily a bad fit - I do agree we need more speed in the line up. The two aren't really synonymous.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards

So you would rather we traded for a slower player to keep up with our already slow players.

you related to Jimbo?

 

[Nazzlind]

So you would rather we traded for a slower player to keep up with our already slow players.

you related to Jimbo?

Who’s the slower player ?

 

[DonnyNucker]

So you would rather we traded for a slower player to keep up with our already slow players.

you related to Jimbo?

Who are you referring to?

 

[sting101]

So Tofoli goes to the Habs and racks up 28 goals and 44 points in 56 games......and he wasn't 'a good fit' in Vancouver? Just for reference, the Canucks leading scorer was Brock Boeser with 23 goals.

Is it just me, or this debate about Tofoli not being a good fit for the Canucks, bordering on ridiculous.

But what's even more ridiculous is giving up Tyler Madden and a second round draft pick for 10 games of Tofoli and a couple of playoff games.

Why it happens every trade deadline?

it was on sound logic. Boeser was hurt Leivo was out for the season. That was RW1 and RW2 in the stretch leading to the decision. Just because Covid and a foot injury derailed what he should have accomplished is not a reason to say. Boy was that ridiculous for 10 games.

The logic behind not re signing when he showed a desire to sign in Van and the results of how they used the cap space last summer is the issue. Have to take into account that the deal Montreal got wasn't the 5-5.5 x 5 that they wanted from Vancouver either and coming off 18goals there was thoughts Virtanen could emerge as a bigger piece and they could use the 2-3 million elsewhere on the roster. Obviously all that turned to stone and the difference between those 2 players couldn't have been bigger considering Jake was a joke and Tyler had a career year scoring goals.

 

[mathonwy]

Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.

And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.

Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.

This is normal because they live day-to-day.