Garland was a tiny scoring winger with a career high of 39 points due for an RFA raise. This is not a valued commodity.
...
If anything it's being very generous to say that Garland for a high 2nd was fair value at the time.
Keep in mind that this was just ahead of an expansion draft and values were depressed.
Garland's career high of 39 points came in 49 games. You are wrong on Garland's value. Friedman would agree that your are out to lunch.
There is a huge difference in balue between a late first and a top 10 pick. Toronto's pick would of been about the same value as a 2nd and b prospect I said above. There is zero precedence of a small winger taken in the 5th round with half a season of high end production being worth a top 10 pick. Especially in a flat cap where owners were trying to save every dollar. Kevin Fiala got a first and a very good D prospect but he was coming off an 85 point season and has draft pedigree.
So he's not worth a top 10 pick. We overpaid. That's not the same as being worth a 2nd round pick.
Again, Toronto "preferred" Garland. So logically Arizona was offered AT LEAST what they offered for Foligno. I don't know why you have to twist Toronto's pick as being worth a 2nd and a B prospect. Toronto traded a 1st (25th overall) and 3rd for Foligno. That was the trade. Are you telling me that you think the 33 year old pending UFA Foligno with 7 goals 16 points in 42 games was equal in value to a 25 year old Garland who was a pending RFA with 12 goals 39 points in 49 games? C'mmon...
Fiala was traded for the 19th overall pick + Faber (a former 45th overall pick who was one of the top NCAA prospects). I think Faber was easily worth a mid 1st round pick at the time (I say this having completely underrated him). Keep in mind that there were discussions regarding Miller for Fiala. There were also trade discussions regarding LA targets and some posters like
@VancouverJagger rated Faber highly. I think it's fair to say that Faber was a significant piece at the time of the trade. If you consider that the Canucks' draft targets were gone, I would have taken 19th overall pick + Faber to trade down from 9th no question. But that's not the point. Fiala was worth more than Garland and while Fiala's trade value was reduced due to his free agency status vis a vis Garland, he should still be considered to have been traded for more than Garland (arguably significantly more).
Trade deadline 2020 was before the pandemic as well and Arizona gets to the cap floor by taking on LTIR contracts that are payed through insurance and Garland was due a raise. Players that were slightly overpaid could basically be had for free because of the flat cap. Like Pacioretty or how we got Schmidt (top pairing D for Vegas) for a 3rd. The pandemic and flat cap completely changed the value of players.
Huh? We're talking about the 2021 trade deadline here.
Oh and Schmidt was acquired for a 3rd and then traded for a 3rd because he wasn't a top pairing D. He was overpaid. As for Pacioretty, he was making $7M, couldn't stay healthy, Vegas missed the playoffs, and he was critical of other players/ Vegas organization for having no accountability. I was definitely surprised at what Pacioretty was traded for but he was 34 years old, making $7M AAV, and coming off wrist surgery. Thats a bit different from trading for a 25 year old Garland who made his salary demands known.
Let's use some common sense here...