Salary Cap: Oliver Ekman-Larsson

[JAK]

Uh actually it went in the same transaction but again RFA rights for a player like Garland is not worth a top 10 pick.

See what Pavel Buchnevich was just acquired for.

Just because another GM made a blunder in a trade that is universally seen as bad value, doesn't mean our GM over paid.

Was Schmidt for a 3rd bad ?

Was JT Miller for a 1st bad ?

How about Naslund for Stojanov?

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

The timing of this core's window was EXACTLY why people here were arguing against the Benning Blunders of Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson in the first place. But those mistakes were made, and if we had the foresight and discipline to wait it out then we'd be able to have the maneuvering room and assets to make the most of what's left.

Now the remaining window is handicapped as well, and people are still defending it. Denying that Benning made bad decisions and then defending this bad decision using the argument that it's needed to get us out of the situation we're in (caused by the mistakes his defenders denied were mistakes all along) shows how much people aren't learning despite being repeatedly proven wrong for going on a decade now.

No one's denying the past blunders, but the past is the past. Dwelling on that rather than seeking solutions does us no good. (This was a creative solution)

And I don't think our window has been handicapped. Continuing to waste Bo Horvats prime also handicaps our window. They leveraged the situation to reallocate deadweight into a younger T6 player like Garland & a legit T4D (and hopefully with more upside). That makes us much better now & going forward.

Now there's risk & you can say it was only 1 more year, but there's no guarantee whoever the money is spent on in a years time would be bulletproof either.

 

[Nucker101]

No one's denying the past blunders, but the past is the past. Dwelling on that rather than seeking solutions does us no good. (This was a creative solution)

And I don't think our window has been handicapped. Continuing to waste Bo Horvats prime also handicaps our window. They leveraged the situation to reallocate deadweight into a younger T6 player like Garland & a legit T4D (and hopefully with more upside). That makes us much better now & going forward.

Now there's risk & you can say it was only 1 more year, but there's no guarantee whoever the money is spent on in a years time would be bulletproof either.

This is the disconnect between those of us who hate this deal and those like it. OEL has been flat out bad as a top 4 dman for awhile now. He’s like another Myers.


The bad team excuse is just not a good one, OEL was part of the problem there while guys like Chychrun and Garland played well.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Ngl, kinda funny that he said this on Vancouver radio

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Wait and see mode here
Simply because I have zero interests debating about OEL the whole off season

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Ngl, kinda funny that he said this on Vancouver radio

Epp is doing his job in standing up for his client. I don't think that last comment should come as a big shock to anyone - same can be said for any Canadian market, and any large market with a hockey mad fanbase in general.

 

[GetFocht]

Epp is doing his job in standing up for his client. I don't think that last comment should come as a big shock to anyone - same can be said for any Canadian market, and any large market with a hockey mad fanbase in general.

The problem isn't Vancouver being a hockey mad market, its the media culture here that seems to constantly shit on Canucks. Even when Canucks were at the apex of their success in 2011, the media was still going after Canucks that they "weren't winning the right way".

Take a look around the league for what OEL offers as a defenceman, they're all getting 7.5 million+, that's the market value for these defenceman, yet, there is this unrealstic expectation that you can acquire a top pairing defenceman for below 5 million.

 

[timw33]

Exactly. Benning made a number of cap-killing mistakes that he 'cleaned up' with the trade, only to saddle us with a bigger anchor - Kudos to the poster with the Simpson's Stonecutter reference; it's perfectly apt.

The only way this works out is if the following things happen:
1) OEL re-invents his game to be the high minute tough match up dman this team desperately needs. He was that guy through most of the teens but a number of worrying injuries to his knee and wrist have robbed him of his lateral mobility and shot, respectively. But stranger things have happened.

2) OEL maintains that level of play for 3 years minimum when the buyout is a bit less rocky.

3) The salary cap rises and further dilutes the buyout penalty.

4) Garland shows he's a legit top6 forward and lives up the big contract we're about to award to him.

I can see 3 and 4 kind of working out. 1 and 2 are very iffy bets and the consequences of them not working out are dire.

Every single season in Benning's era has hinged on something like 7 different variables where *every single one* has to break their way for them to just be a playoff team, not even a contending team.

19-20, everything broke their way, including a pandemic preventing the team from missing the playoffs with a now to-be-expected back quarter of season slide, and they were just barely a bubble team who ran into some of the worst goaltending performances possible in the play-in and first round.

20-21, they get less breaks and were just chained to the bottom-10 of the standings because they didn't get the best outcome from the many variables they set up with the build of the roster.

 

[Nucker101]

Epp is doing his job in standing up for his client. I don't think that last comment should come as a big shock to anyone - same can be said for any Canadian market, and any large market with a hockey mad fanbase in general.

It's sink or swim, you're also treated like a God if you play well. Guys like Pettersson, Hughes, Horvat, Hoglander, Demko, etc. are adored by this fanbase and can't walk down the street without getting told how awesome they are.

Even a dude like Tyler Motte is a fan fav here.


I think Garland will enjoy his time here, I don't think OEL will.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

This is the disconnect between those of us who hate this deal and those like it. OEL has been flat out bad as a top 4 dman for awhile now. He’s like another Myers.


The bad team excuse is just not a good one, OEL was part of the problem there while guys like Chychrun and Garland played well.

I don't blame 'bad team' as much as I think it was just a bad situation for him. From some of the things he said it seems like he was demoralized.

Time will tell who's right on this part but I'm optimistic because of his hockey sense, and also because he lost motivation in Arizona. He's always been a far smarter player (and frankly better talent) than Myers.

There risk that he doesn't bounce back, but if he does there's also big upside.

I think of Kesler who was on the decline & lost his luster here, then bounced back and was a very good player for Anaheim after. Perhaps not a perfect comparison (Keslers body was likely more broken down), but it's an example anyways.

 

[bandwagonesque]

19-20, everything broke their way, including a pandemic preventing the team from missing the playoffs with a now to-be-expected back quarter of season slide, and they were just barely a bubble team who ran into some of the worst goaltending performances possible in the play-in and first round.

Against St Louis, maybe. But they clearly outplayed Minnesota and Stalock wasn't the reason Minnesota lost.

 

[timw33]

Against St Louis, maybe. But they clearly outplayed Minnesota and Stalock wasn't the reason Minnesota lost.

Vancouver got .932% goaltending and faced .899% goaltending in the playoffs. Minny was .897%.

 

[logan5]

It's sink or swim, you're also treated like a God if you play well. Guys like Pettersson, Hughes, Horvat, Hoglander, Demko, etc. are adored by this fanbase and can't walk down the street without getting told how awesome they are.
Even a dude like Tyler Motte is a fan fav here.


I think Garland will enjoy his time here, I don't think OEL will.

it doesn’t take much for the fan base to turn on you. I remember everybody turning on Horvat not too long ago, calling him a terrible captain, “Miller should be captain”!

 

[Nucker101]

it doesn’t take much for the fan base to turn on you. I remember everybody turning on Horvat not too long ago, calling him a terrible captain, “Miller should be captain”!

HF and even Twitter doesn't represent the majority of this fanbase. Talk to some fans at a game, or just overhear conversations at a bar/restaurant and you'll get a much better idea of what the casual fan thinks.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Vancouver got .932% goaltending and faced .899% goaltending in the playoffs. Minny was .897%.

I'm aware of this. We both watched the series and know the Canucks won because there were the better team by a noticeable margin. Your original post was another case of making an overall argument that is essentially correct but supporting it with details you know are exaggerated or false, which is totally unnecessary.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

Ngl, kinda funny that he said this on Vancouver radio

Eh i'm sure the Sedins prepared him.

The twins got crucified for years then became gods in Vancouver.

 

[The Poacher]

Players that don’t live up to their contracts get crucified by fans and media. That’s professional sports in a crazed market.

If OEL plays like a 4 mil defence man he better get ready for the hate.

 

[Peen]

it doesn’t take much for the fan base to turn on you. I remember everybody turning on Horvat not too long ago, calling him a terrible captain, “Miller should be captain”!

The one guy on here who posted that garbage is the biggest Benning supporer on the board

And was routinely mocked for this belief. By everyone.

Try again, Logan

 

[The Vasili Jerry]

The real negativity is about the contracts of players, not the players themselves (unless it's a guy like Virtanen). That all comes back to management. People wouldn't have been so negative about Eriksson, Beagle, Roussel, etc. if they were all making $1m/season.

Also, if there had been a clear direction from day one and the plan had been stuck to then there would be less negativity. Hell, even if Benning were fired this past season then there would be a whole lot more positivity. I don't see how a fan base and media being upset after almost a decade of being terrible -- and a 50+ year history of never winning a thing -- is some crazy idea.

 

[Peen]

Pretty sure the only two “OMG Horvat Soft” “Miller Captain Material!!” people were Get North and that one high-school teacher guy. Forget his username.

Edit: Russian Racket

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Pretty sure the only two “OMG Horvat Soft” “Miller Captain Material!!” people were Get North and that one high-school teacher guy. Forget his username.

Edit: Russian Racket

There was one other guy who has a video games avatar who was questioning Horvat's manhood and saying he was worthless during the bubble rounds last year, too.

 

[Scorvat]

I'm aware of this. We both watched the series and know the Canucks won because there were the better team by a noticeable margin. Your original post was another case of making an overall argument that is essentially correct but supporting it with details you know are exaggerated or false, which is totally unnecessary.

how were they the better team by a noticeable margin? That is your own opinion that can be challenged by the basic facts of the series.

We won in game 4 in OT in a 5 game series. The predictive metrics pointed at the two teams being roughly even with Vancouver having the obvious edge in goaltending. The results largely reflected with the metrics showing it was an even series with Vancouver winning because their goaltending was better. We won because we had EP and Markstrom and they had Fiala and Stalock.

I don't get why you are harping on this point when it could easily be interpreted that way is probably correct. Vancouver had success because they played team with very weak goaltending

 

[F A N]

Vancouver got .932% goaltending and faced .899% goaltending in the playoffs. Minny was .897%.

But that's expected no? Markstrom was among the league's best and Stallock was a career backup goalie who was actually having a career season prior to the stoppage. There's nothing wrong with winning with better goaltending. There aren't that many teams who manage to win a series by bailing out subpar goaltending. The Canucks could have put Demko in and still won the Minnesota series.

 

[F A N]

Epp is doing his job in standing up for his client. I don't think that last comment should come as a big shock to anyone - same can be said for any Canadian market, and any large market with a hockey mad fanbase in general.

Not as shocking as saying, "There's this little group out on the side that somehow manages to be heard, and it's an annoying part about working in [Vancouver]."

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Every single season in Benning's era has hinged on something like 7 different variables where *every single one* has to break their way for them to just be a playoff team, not even a contending team.

19-20, everything broke their way, including a pandemic preventing the team from missing the playoffs with a now to-be-expected back quarter of season slide, and they were just barely a bubble team who ran into some of the worst goaltending performances possible in the play-in and first round.

20-21, they get less breaks and were just chained to the bottom-10 of the standings because they didn't get the best outcome from the many variables they set up with the build of the roster.

So 19-20 was lucky but 20-21 was regular luck?
So regular luck year involves being put in stronger division, losing important players because of team owners other affected businesses, best player injured for most of the year and an unprecedented Co-vid infections ravage the team for about 40% of the schedule. What does a bad luck year look like? Already next year we are in weaker division, so good luck so far.