Seravalli: Garland is a "free asset", teams want assets to take him

[jackjohnson]

I still think Vancouver needs to move one of Boeser, Pearson or Garland. That blueline doesn't have a single guy capable of playing top 6 competition. Not a good place to be. As a Flames fan I know how much it sucks to have crappy ownership. Part of the blame is on Benning, but the lions share on the ownership he was taking his marching orders from.

Canucks will probably move Garland and picks in a trade for a top 4D. That is guaranteed now that OEL is bought out. We won't go into next season with Hughes and Hronek as the only Dmen in top 4, Myers doesn't count. I see a trade for a dman and maybe an FA signing of another dman to bolster the D. Myers will be traded in my mind, whether it's September or early in the season after his bonuses are paid. Preferably it should be done sooner

I'm actually surprised a team hasn't just taken him for nothing. He's a 15-20 goal, 50 point, 2nd/3rd line tweener who is fiesty and can produce in the crunch making sub $5 mil for only 3 more seasons.

Only reason teams didn't trade for him was because they were greedy and wanted assets from desperate Canucks needing cap space. Now the gig is up and teams need to trade for Garland at face value. All in can just wait it out and have some desperate team that missed on big fishes in FA to call him for Garland or even Boeser.

 

[jackjohnson]

I agree that they still likely end up trading Boeser or Garland, but as others have said, the OEL buyout eliminates the need for them to make that move. They can sit on Garland and Boeser until they get an offer they like.

I still don't think Garland would have crazy high value because the Vancouver management doesn't seem super high on him, but he will bring back positive value now.

I agree, Garland is not a free asset that "needs" sweetners attached anymore. He might fetch a 2nd round pick. His value is definitely a positive for sure. He could also be packaged with 11th overall during the draft for a big trade involving a top 4 D.

 

[BobClarkesfrontteeth]

Lol what an awful post. Must be a new fan of the game.

Not at all. Didn't think Canuck ownership would want to swallow the OEL Buyout pill but apparently they are willing to light about 30 million on fire to get rid of him. Garland's buyout was 1/3 the cost of buying out OEL

 

[elitepete]

Once Myers bonus is paid, trade him and Garland to Arizona for a 2026 6th rounder.

Canucks accept.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Canucks will probably move Garland and picks in a trade for a top 4D. That is guaranteed now that OEL is bought out. We won't go into next season with Hughes and Hronek as the only Dmen in top 4, Myers doesn't count. I see a trade for a dman and maybe an FA signing of another dman to bolster the D. Myers will be traded in my mind, whether it's September or early in the season after his bonuses are paid. Preferably it should be done sooner


Only reason teams didn't trade for him was because they were greedy and wanted assets from desperate Canucks needing cap space. Now the gig is up and teams need to trade for Garland at face value. All in can just wait it out and have some desperate team that missed on big fishes in FA to call him for Garland or even Boeser.

If garland is such a valuable player, and the Nucks now have cap space with OEL buyout, it makes sense for Nucks to keep him right??

There will be no desperate team’s looking for Garland. That’s a fantasy. Nucks still need a sweetener to dump him. Flat cap is still a thing.

 

[Homesick]

Garland for Ceci and Yamamoto.
Opens up some flexibility for the Oilers to upgrade RD

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

ain't free anymore f***ers..

Nah still free

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Title should read "teams want 11OA to take him.

They won't get it but that's the asset they want.

That or Hoglander

 

[andora]

Nah still free

I was mostly riding the high of the oel buyout

But if he moves he wont be free

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I was mostly riding the high of the oel buyout

But if he moves he wont be free

He won't get much.

I've made no secret I want him here, have since he was in Arizona.

I don't get why his value is so low but it is.

 

[andora]

He won't get much.

I've made no secret I want him here, have since he was in Arizona.

I don't get why his value is so low but it is.

Because it is timing.. he really only has one good trading window.. like say mid july to training camp.. i think thats all it is

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

There was a time before the OEL buyout (B-EOL) when Garland was a "Free" asset but that was then and this is now.

Sorry to report, Garland is now a positive asset.

Change the title of the thread please Mods.

 

[oceanchild]

Canucks accept.

No way, why would we accept. The dman pool
Is shallow, we have over $12m in cap space now and we can go over. We can also get an asset for Myers once the bonus is paid and teams that missed out start looking

 

[Junohockeyfan]

There was a time before the OEL buyout (B-EOL) when Garland was a "Free" asset but that was then and this is now.

Sorry to report, Garland is now a positive asset.

Change the title of the thread please Mods.

No one would trade for Garland if it cost them assets to do so, or if they don't receive a sweetener in return.

Change the title to Garland will remain a Nuck.

 

[Martin Skoula]

I'm actually surprised a team hasn't just taken him for nothing. He's a 15-20 goal, 50 point, 2nd/3rd line tweener who is fiesty and can produce in the crunch making sub $5 mil for only 3 more seasons.

You can just sign Kerfoot for 3 mil and get 90% of what Garland brings.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

There was a time before the OEL buyout (B-EOL) when Garland was a "Free" asset but that was then and this is now.

Sorry to report, Garland is now a positive asset.

Change the title of the thread please Mods.

If it's true that he's a negative value asset that buyout doesn't change anything.

And if it's not that buyout isn't the reason why.

 

[RandV]

Absolutely not

I'd probably do POJ for Garland straight up if I could find another deal for Granlund somewhere else, but absolutely not Pettersson.

Canucks need a more defensive orientated #3C, they're not looking for a #2C that can maybe score 50 points. Unless there's a larger deal that trades Miller, but that's highly unlikely too happen.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

No one would trade for Garland if it cost them assets to do so, or if they don't receive a sweetener in return.

Change the title to Garland will remain a Nuck.

Time will tell.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

You can just sign Kerfoot for 3 mil and get 90% of what Garland brings.

Not really. Very different players.

 

[OilCityBoomer]

As an Oilers fan, I'd build a trade around Kulak for Garland. Vancouver does some retention on it, say a million? Gets us a top 6 RW for 1.25m added to the cap. Which I don't think we could add a top 6 cheaper than that with term (same amount of years left on contract). Makes it so Lavoie can play on the 3rd line this year to get his feet wet and also gets Broberg full time into 3LD finally.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

I'm perfectly fine with keeping him at this point.

And I was perfectly fine with keeping him before this point too.

 

[canuckslover10]

Can someone explain to me why a player like Josh Anderson has value but Connor Garland doesn't?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Can someone explain to me why a player like Josh Anderson has value but Connor Garland doesn't?

In the old days when teams had Cap space it would be as simple as 6’3” vs 5’9”.

Today when nobody has Cap space neither of them have any value, right?

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

Can someone explain to me why a player like Josh Anderson has value but Connor Garland doesn't?

Anderson is a power forward with size and skill, 4 years, 5.5 per

Garland is about a 5 million cap hit for 3 more year's, @ 4.95 per.

Power forwards are usually worth more than scuttlebutt wingers.

 

[biturbo19]

Can someone explain to me why a player like Josh Anderson has value but Connor Garland doesn't?

Would you not immediately swap Garland for Anderson at the drop of a hat? I certainly would.

Garland is the "better player" in the sense that he's more capable of producing offensive numbers and he's shown he can do it without top caliber linemates and mostly at even strength. But the reality is...small wingers who can produce are just not that rare. There are tons available as Free Agents every summer, teams all over the place looking to move them for basically nothing just to free up cap space, and just generally not difficult players to acquire.

Big, physical, power forwards who can play that sort of game with the skill to pot 20G+ are rare these days. They're a scarce commodity and that makes them valuable. There are a hundred players who are interchangeable with Garland. There are half a dozen who are interchangeable with Anderson and the attributes and role he can fill.