Player Discussion Oliver Ekman-Larsson

[VanJack]

The sad fact is that with a NHL-AHL 'tweener like Wolanin in the lineup; along with waiver-wire fodder like Stillman, they're an upgrade on OEL these days.

Canucks have to do something......just don't see how they can bring the guy back next season.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Hey, no one is saying this contract isn’t bad. But, if OEL is going to be playing like a bottom pairing defender, then a buyout is plausible as we can easily fill such a role with the savings and still have money to spare. Hopefully next year he bounces back, but if not, we need to consider this.

The net cap savings is 9mil if we buy him out this summer.

The downside is the cap penalty stretches to 2030.

Do you value that 9mil more than doubling the time we carry his cap hit?

 

[me2]

The net cap savings is 9mil if we buy him out this summer.

The downside is the cap penalty stretches to 2030.

Do you value that 9mil more than doubling the time we carry his cap hit?

It comes down to what they intend to do with the team and what other opportunities present themselves.

 

[iceburg]

The sad fact is that with a NHL-AHL 'tweener like Wolanin in the lineup; along with waiver-wire fodder like Stillman, they're an upgrade on OEL these days.

Canucks have to do something......just don't see how they can bring the guy back next season.

It is actually kinda sad for both the team and OEL. He has had a weird career trajectory. Came into the league as a 19 year old. Was a legitimate top 4 D-man at age 20. Peaked at age 24 and was clearly on the downhill by the time he was 28. His career span wasn't all that different. It's like it was accelerated by 4 years. And now he's playing like that 34/35 year old ex top 4 D-man who has a hard time keeping up. The problem is those D-men are typically on year-to-year $1M contracts.

 

[MarkMM]

The net cap savings is 9mil if we buy him out this summer.

The downside is the cap penalty stretches to 2030.

Do you value that 9mil more than doubling the time we carry his cap hit?

No

 

[VanJack]

The net cap savings is 9mil if we buy him out this summer.

The downside is the cap penalty stretches to 2030.

Do you value that 9mil more than doubling the time we carry his cap hit?

The only thing I would point out is that almost every projection has the NHL salary cap rising significantly over the coming years.

So by 2029-30 the cap hit for an OEL buyout might be a lot more palatable that it is now.

 

[iceburg]

From an economics standpoint a trade with max retention is far preferred to a buyout. Question is would there be any takers for OEL at 50% retained? Would a sweetener be required? If the 4th for O'Reilly was worth $1.8M...

OEL at 50% retained plus a 4th would get him below $3M per. Is he worth that to any team?

 

[me2]

From an economics standpoint a trade with max retention is far preferred to a buyout. Question is would there be any takers for OEL at 50% retained? Would a sweetener be required? If the 4th for O'Reilly was worth $1.8M...

OEL at 50% retained plus a 4th would get him below $3M per. Is he worth that to any team?

He still makes $3.63m after 50% retention. I don't think anyone touches that without a big bribe. A 4th would be laughed at. 50% retention and NYI first might get a long term tanking team to sniff about, but OEL would veto them.

 

[Aphid Attraction]

He still makes $3.63m after 50% retention. I don't think anyone touches that without a big bribe. A 4th would be laughed at. 50% retention and NYI first might get a long term tanking team to sniff about, but OEL would veto them.

Buy out is like 1000 times better imo.

 

[krutovsdonut]

if oel is toast and headed to ltir the only strategy i can see is to operate at the cap and use the ltir space. maybe leverage the ltir by getting paid to take on a still useful but overpaid player.

 

[VanJack]

Benning's parting gift to the organization.....a poison pill of a contract for OEL that will still be causing indigestion for the Canucks until 2030.

 

[gringo]

Hate to be blunt but I sincerely hope he’s played his last game as a Canuck.

The net cap savings is 9mil if we buy him out this summer.

The downside is the cap penalty stretches to 2030.

Do you value that 9mil more than doubling the time we carry his cap hit?

Is there a reasonable way to not buy him out but not have him on the team? Waivers?

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

Hate to be blunt but I sincerely hope he’s played his last game as a Canuck.


Is there a reasonable way to not buy him out but not have him on the team? Waivers?

Play him injured and deal with the medical malpractice suit. Those don’t count against the cap and neither do mangled players on LTIR.

 

[Cupless44]

Benning's parting gift to the organization.....a poison pill of a contract for OEL that will still be causing indigestion for the Canucks until 2030.

Thanks Jim

As if 5 years of Loui Eriksson we had to stomach and wait out wasnt enough

It really falls on the owner though. There is no way Benning should have been in place that last year of his tenure for this very reason, allowed to make stupid short sighted win now trades to to try to save his job

 

[MarkMM]

Buy out is like 1000 times better imo.

I don't like how the dead cap space then extends into the window when we should actually be competitive.

Don't like buyouts or retention, without wishing harm on anyone the best was if he got LTIRed into retirement, otherwise we take our medicine, eat his cap space these next few years while we rebuild, and hopefully by the time his contract is done we'll be a team on the upswing with his cap freed up right when we want to be locking up players for our window.

 

[Aphid Attraction]

I don't like how the dead cap space then extends into the window when we should actually be competitive.

Don't like buyouts or retention, without wishing harm on anyone the best was if he got LTIRed into retirement, otherwise we take our medicine, eat his cap space these next few years while we rebuild, and hopefully by the time his contract is done we'll be a team on the upswing with his cap freed up right when we want to be locking up players for our window.

As long as the management team has a plan that extends past the short term into the 5-10 year range, I have no problem with it.

I also hope the team is competitive by the last two season that we would be eating the buy out cap. And we will need to be in order to keep EP

 

[Green Blank Stare]

It would be franchise malpractice to not buyout OEL this summer. You cannot have his full contract on the books through 2027. If this CapFriendly link is reliable, the cap savings are invaluable, especially since the cap should be up quite a bit by the time those last four years count against the books:

Oliver Ekman-Larsson Buyout Results - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Oliver Ekman-Larsson buyout results and details including cost calculations, savings and final cap hit

www.capfriendly.com

2023-24 cap hit - $146,667
2024-25 cap hit - $2,346,667
2025-26 cap hit - $4,766,667
2026-27 cap hit - $4,766,667
2027-31 cap hit - $2,126,667

So next season they'd save $7 million in cap space and almost $5 million in two seasons. '25-27 is only $2.5 million but that's more than what Ethan Bear makes.

Even if the cap savings was $1 million a year, it'd be worth it because OEL is absolute dogshit now. He is a net negative player with an albatross contract on the books. They would be better with literally anybody with a pulse making the league minimum than him right now and going forward.

There is no reasonable argument to be made for allowing him to play out his contract. Hoping for LTIR is fantasy talk when his cap hit is that extreme.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

There's no reason to buy him out now & be stuck with the cap hit for 8 years.

Why is it the people who insist on a longer term tear down (and fair enough) also insist on buying out OEL immediately & doubling the length of the commitment? Doesn't make sense.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

It would be franchise malpractice to not buyout OEL this summer. You cannot have his full contract on the books through 2027. If this CapFriendly link is reliable, the cap savings are invaluable, especially since the cap should be up quite a bit by the time those last four years count against the books:

Can you please explain how you think this is a mitigating factor?

It keeps getting repeated here. I don't understand the logic at all.

 

[MS]

It would be franchise malpractice to not buyout OEL this summer. You cannot have his full contract on the books through 2027. If this CapFriendly link is reliable, the cap savings are invaluable, especially since the cap should be up quite a bit by the time those last four years count against the books:

Oliver Ekman-Larsson Buyout Results - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Oliver Ekman-Larsson buyout results and details including cost calculations, savings and final cap hit

www.capfriendly.com

2023-24 cap hit - $146,667
2024-25 cap hit - $2,346,667
2025-26 cap hit - $4,766,667
2026-27 cap hit - $4,766,667
2027-31 cap hit - $2,126,667

So next season they'd save $7 million in cap space and almost $5 million in two seasons. '25-27 is only $2.5 million but that's more than what Ethan Bear makes.

Even if the cap savings was $1 million a year, it'd be worth it because OEL is absolute dogshit now. He is a net negative player with an albatross contract on the books. They would be better with literally anybody with a pulse making the league minimum than him right now and going forward.

There is no reasonable argument to be made for allowing him to play out his contract. Hoping for LTIR is fantasy talk when his cap hit is that extreme.

I agree completely.

Make it your team. Clean out the trash. Invest the savings elsewhere.

Whether ownership is on board is a total other story, though. But if they are, it's a no-brainer.

 

[mriswith]

It's only 2.5M savings in 2025-2026 and 2026-2027, and that's not even counting a league minimum replacement slotting in.

In exchange for that 2.5M savings we'd have 4 years of 2.12M cap hit following the team around ending in 2031.

A buyout only makes sense if the intent is to compete immediately, like next year.

His ice time should be up for grabs though. If we have to play him exclusively on the third pairing or press box him because he sucks and so we can feed the ice time to a player with an actual future instead, so be it.

 

[credulous]

It's only 2.5M savings in 2025-2026 and 2026-2027, and that's not even counting a league minimum replacement slotting in.

In exchange for that 2.5M savings we'd have 4 years of 2.12M cap hit following the team around ending in 2031.

A buyout only makes sense if the intent is to compete immediately, like next year.

His ice time should be up for grabs though. If we have to play him exclusively on the third pairing or press box him because he sucks and so we can feed the ice time to a player with an actual future instead, so be it.

it's better to just bench him (can't send him down -- he has an nmc) than buy him out unless you have a really compelling use for the cap space next season or 2024-2025. beyond 2025 he's probably pretty cheap to dump on some other team and at worst his buyout gets way more manageable.

 

[MarkMM]

It would be franchise malpractice to not buyout OEL this summer. You cannot have his full contract on the books through 2027. If this CapFriendly link is reliable, the cap savings are invaluable, especially since the cap should be up quite a bit by the time those last four years count against the books:

Oliver Ekman-Larsson Buyout Results - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Oliver Ekman-Larsson buyout results and details including cost calculations, savings and final cap hit

www.capfriendly.com

2023-24 cap hit - $146,667
2024-25 cap hit - $2,346,667
2025-26 cap hit - $4,766,667
2026-27 cap hit - $4,766,667
2027-31 cap hit - $2,126,667

So next season they'd save $7 million in cap space and almost $5 million in two seasons. '25-27 is only $2.5 million but that's more than what Ethan Bear makes.

Even if the cap savings was $1 million a year, it'd be worth it because OEL is absolute dogshit now. He is a net negative player with an albatross contract on the books. They would be better with literally anybody with a pulse making the league minimum than him right now and going forward.

There is no reasonable argument to be made for allowing him to play out his contract. Hoping for LTIR is fantasy talk when his cap hit is that extreme.

What's the point of having "invaluable" cap space when if we're honest with ourselves those years we'd be saving money are years when his terrible play will be on a non-competing re-building team? We have to plan ahead and see when we'll be competitive and be doing everything we can to save cap for THOSE years, not blindly saving cap for years when we'll be losing no matter what only to have dead cap when we'll be wanting to squeeze every dollar out.

If we do end up buying him out then wait as long as possible to do it so that the extended dead cap window is as short as possible.

 

[iceburg]

If this TDL has emphasized anything it's that cap space is effectively like acquiring or paying cash in a deal. The best way to move OEL is a O'Reilly-esque deal that includes 2 x 50% retentions (is that actually allowed given that Arizona is already retaining?). Anyway, assuming it's allowed:

Vancouver trades OEL at $3.6M (50% retained) plus Asset A to team X for, e.g. 7th round pick
Team X trades OEL with 50% retention ($1.8M) to Team Y for Asset B
Team Y gets OEL at $1.8M

Result:
Canucks: keep $3.6M cap hit and lose asset A, but gain $3.6M in cap flexibility for 4 years and a 7th
Team X: Retains $1.8M cap hit for four years and loses a 7th but gains Asset A and Asset B
Team Y: Gets OEL at $1.8M and loses Asset B

Note: $1.8M would be closer to $1.5M in real dollars for 4 years.

Team X should be happy provided Assets A and B are worth the $1.8Mx 4 cap hit and a total of about $6Mish in real $$.

Finally, it only works if OEL is better than a replacement level player. I know some here don't believe that he is.

 

[quat]

Thanks Jim

As if 5 years of Loui Eriksson we had to stomach and wait out wasnt enough

It really falls on the owner though. There is no way Benning should have been in place that last year of his tenure for this very reason, allowed to make stupid short sighted win now trades to to try to save his job

I suspect Blueberries agreed it was a good move. Remember, Benning spent two years trying to land that fish.

It is very emblamtic of Benning and his confidence with his ideas, ie being the smartest guy in the room. Gudbranson, Myers and OEL. How many fans thought any of those players were worth pursuing at the time, never mind the costs, financially or through trades?

I have to believe that Fredo was in on all three as well. What a freaking tandem.