Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Off-Season Edition | Not satisfied, so now what?

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Last one was over 1,000. Continue here.

Vector, here, I've taken over this original post. Here's the link to my spreadsheet. Contains regularly updated capspace totals, projected rosters, and UFA & RFA lists with AFP's contract projections.

Click to read more...

 

[iFan]

I like Zad and Joshua but if we have to pay Zad 5.5 mil and Joshua 3.5 mil, I'd rather go get an impact player at 9 million. I think those guys are easier to replace than an impact player.

 

[Jerry the great]

I've had a decent/cordial back-and-forth with some on this topic, including people where our arguments diverge, like @Hodgy and @arttk

I've gotten ornery with you because you have continually moved the goalposts, misconstrued my argument, and then literally claimed I was wrong about something by providing evidence that wasn't actually what I referenced.

On Garland, I made many posts on why I consider him a top-six forward that is unrelated to ice-time. You just continually ignored those points. @Jerry the great posted quite an illuminating chart on the ES production.


Garland's always been a pretty high-end ES contributor. I don't think subtracting him from the lineup will be easy to make up, especially at a more cost efficient AAV.

I believe the word i used when previously debating the merits of trading him was: lunacy. he's a guy who would be very hard to replace at a comparable cap hit and I think there are things he does that go beyond points. The urgency he plays with is just not something a lot of guys have and to the extent it sometimes becomes contagious....we'd be nuts to trade him to free up cap space for someone that will make more money and be less effective.

 

[mriswith]

Garland and Joshua gave us 1st line production for 3/4 of the season and outright carried the team for around 3 months. There are no replacements who can provide 70% of that for 1/3 the cap hit.

In fact you're far more likely to get the opposite - 1/3 of that performance for 70% of the cap hit.

Even if they drop back down to 2nd line production, for a combined 8M that's a massive steal.

Garland benefits a lot from having a heavy bodied shooter on his line - Horvat did it his first season and Joshua this season. Joshua's attributes are worth 3 mil even if he drops down to a 30 point pace, which is the absolute floor and will not happen paired with Garland.

Quibbling over giving Joshua low 2s when 3 would get it done is nuts. We're literally talking about overpaying Zad by 2 mil per year on his next contract for the same physical presence and intangibles that Joshua gives us but we can't buck up another half mil for Joshua for the same thing?

People are creaming themselves over paying 10+ mil for Sam Reinhart who barely outscored Garland at ES while riding shotgun with Barkov. Garland is the guy giving 70% of a 1st line for 1/3 the cap hit, not the guy you dump to try and get that effect.

 

[bossram]

I believe the word i used when previously debating the merits of trading him was: lunacy. he's a guy who would be very hard to replace at a comparable cap hit and I think there are things he does that go beyond points. The urgency he plays with is just not something a lot of guys have and to the extent it sometimes becomes contagious....we'd be nuts to trade him to free up cap space for someone that will make more money and be less effective.

Yeah, I don't think it's realistic to expect them to find a player to provide nearly the same impact as Garland, but at a cheaper price (which would allow them to allocate some more cap space elsewhere).

Maybe like Danton Heinen, but he's going to want a decent raise after his season and taking a league-min contract last year.

Meanwhile Garland's scored at a 1st line rate at ES for basically his career, can carry a line, and is locked in at a valuable AAV. The bird is in hand.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Garland and Joshua gave us 1st line production for 3/4 of the season and outright carried the team for around 3 months. There are no replacements who can provide 70% of that for 1/3 the cap hit.

I hope you see the irony there given Joshua is exactly the type of player that a replacement could (not necessarily will) be.

 

[mriswith]

I hope you see the irony there given Joshua is exactly the type of player that a replacement could (not necessarily will) be.

If it was so easy to find replacement Joshua's, I wouldn't be getting rid of them over half a mil, I'd be hoarding as many of them for 3 mil as I can and putting them on every line.

 

[arttk]

Garland and Joshua gave us 1st line production for 3/4 of the season and outright carried the team for around 3 months. There are no replacements who can provide 70% of that for 1/3 the cap hit.

In fact you're far more likely to get the opposite - 1/3 of that performance for 70% of the cap hit.

Even if they drop back down to 2nd line production, for a combined 8M that's a massive steal. You will not

Quibbling over giving Joshua low 2s when 3 would get it done is nuts. Garland benefits a lot from having a heavy bodied shooter on his line - Horvat did it his first season and Joshua this season. Joshua's attributes are worth 3 mil even if he drops down to a 30 point pace, which is the absolute floor and will not happen paired with Garland.

People are creaming themselves over paying 10+ mil for Sam Reinhart who barely outscored Garland at ES while riding shotgun with Barkov.

I mean yes for a stretch of like 10-20 games that line was like PPG. I am not sure if I would say they performed like a 1st like for 3/4 of a season because that would mean they put up 60 pts and they are not really close to that.

I think the question is, would the team be stronger if we have this
????-miller- Boeser
Necas-Petey-Guentzel
Pod-Suter-????
Vs
Suter-Miller-Boeser
Hog-Petey-????
Joshua-Blue-Garland

I mean even without seeing who the ??? are I would pick the 1st one.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

If it was so easy to find replacement Joshua's, I wouldn't be getting rid of them over half a mil, I'd be hoarding as many of them for 3 mil as I can and putting them on every line.

All I am saying is that this management group has shown they are capable of finding solid bottom 6 players like Blueger and Joshua.

 

[bossram]

I mean yes for a stretch of like 10-20 games that line was like PPG. I am not sure if I would say they performed like a 1st like for 3/4 of a season because that would mean they put up 60 pts and they are not really close to that.

I think the question is, would the team be stronger if we have this
????-miller- Boeser
Necas-Petey-Guentzel
Pod-Suter-????
Vs
Suter-Miller-Boeser
Hog-Petey-????
Joshua-Blue-Garland

I mean even without seeing who the ??? are I would pick the 1st one.

Again, I think it's an open question. But the top group will be substantially more expensive, and the sacrifice for that will also have to come on the blueline.

And in this scenario, I don't think swapping Garland for Necas is actually better. Guentzel is the upgrade. But going from Garland to Necas makes the team more expensive, and probably not better.

 

[mriswith]

All I am saying is that this management group has shown they are capable of finding solid bottom 6 players like Blueger and Joshua.

I agree in general with players like Blueger, just not on Joshua or Garland. Joshua is a lot different than someone like Blueger. His specific attributes are hard to find and as soon as he's gone we instantly need another big bodied shooter to pair with Garland.

 

[mriswith]

And in this scenario, I don't think swapping Garland for Necas is actually better. Guentzel is the upgrade. But going from Garland to Necas makes the team more expensive, and probably not better.

Necas has only outscored Garland once in raw production and it was last year during Garlands slump.

People really struggle to separate PP production from ES when evaluating players. Dumping Garland to pay Necas 50% more money for less production is awful.

Once Necas signs his next deal, accurate value for both players would be a lot closer if they swapped contracts.

 

[credulous]

i think people just don't understand what you can get for 2-4m in the nhl on the wing. are joshua (and even garland) amongst the best players in this group? for me the answer is no

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

 

[bossram]

Necas has only outscored Garland once in raw production and it was last year during Garlands slump.

People really struggle to separate PP production from ES when evaluating players. Dumping Garland to pay Necas 50% more money for less production is awful.

Once Necas signs his next deal, accurate value for both players would be a lot closer if they swapped contracts.

Agreed on all accounts here.

 

[arttk]

Again, I think it's an open question. But the top group will be substantially more expensive, and the sacrifice for that will also have to come on the blueline.

And in this scenario, I don't think swapping Garland for Necas is actually better. Guentzel is the upgrade. But going from Garland to Necas makes the team more expensive, and probably not better.

yeah it’s definitely going to be a lot more expensive and we’ll have to do more painful cuts. I think Necas adds a speed element to the team that we don’t have a lot of. That transition game that doesn’t exist, Necas will bring that and I can see him hitting PPG playing with Petey and he can go up and down and play on line 1-3. Garland even though he improved his game, doesn’t really work with Miller or Petey.

 

[bossram]

i think people just don't understand what you can get for 2-4m in the nhl on the wing. are joshua (and even garland) amongst the best players in this group? for me the answer is no

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

Yes, Garland is like undoubtedly at the top of this list. Maybe only Lowry and Jenner could/should be considered more valuable.

And you're mixing a ton of contracts that were signed as RFAs, which are completely irrelevant and inapplicable to the Joshua situation. Of the players that were signed as UFAs, I would take Joshua over the majority of them.

 

[Bleach Clean]

i think people just don't understand what you can get for 2-4m in the nhl on the wing. are joshua (and even garland) amongst the best players in this group? for me the answer is no

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

Right, but of the guys that will make it to FA this year, and their estimated contracts, Joshua at $3m AAV is likely the more efficient signing.

The context decides the value, not the entire field.

 

[bossram]

yeah it’s definitely going to be a lot more expensive and we’ll have to do more painful cuts. I think Necas adds a speed element to the team that we don’t have a lot of. That transition game that doesn’t exist, Necas will bring that and I can see him hitting PPG playing with Petey and he can go up and down and play on line 1-3. Garland even though he improved his game, doesn’t really work with Miller or Petey.

I agree on the speed/rush element. And I think Necas has more to give than he's shown in Carolina.

But you didn't mention/are ignoring the acquisition cost of Necas too. They'll have to trade assets for him then invest in a large AAV. I don't think it's a plausible route.

I see it as part of the value of Garland, that "not working" with Petey or Miller is that he basically gives them a top-six calibre line from the "third line".

 

[credulous]

Yes, Garland is like undoubtedly at the top of this list. Maybe only Lowry and Jenner could/should be considered more valuable.

And you're mixing a ton of contracts that were signed as RFAs, which are completely irrelevant and inapplicable to the Joshua situation. Of the players that were signed as UFAs, I would take Joshua over the majority of them.

i literally don't care how the player was signed. that's not the point. you have a finite amount of cap to spend and you need to spend it efficiently. you don't get a discount for having UFA contracts

also saying garland would be at the top of the list is absurd. nyqvist, vatrano, macielli, sharangovich, nick paul, nick roy and novak are all on it, for a start

 

[arttk]

I agree on the speed/rush element. And I think Necas has more to give than he's shown in Carolina.

But you didn't mention/are ignoring the acquisition cost of Necas too. They'll have to trade assets for him then invest in a large AAV. I don't think it's a plausible route.

I see it as part of the value of Garland, that "not working" with Petey or Miller is that he basically gives them a top-six calibre line from the "third line".

Yeah I don’t know what the cost of acquisition is but he doesn’t want to stay in Carolina so that will limit the value, also a lot will depend on whether or not he just want an extension with anyone not Carolina or is he picky there too.

With that, I assume Hog + pick +??? could get it done. I think Hog would be a 1st round equivalent and I am still mad at him for not blocking the Bouchard shot in game 7 and I am guessing Toc is pissed at that too.

Garland would return an asset, hopefully a 2nd or more that could be used in that package for Necas.

His cost should be 7x7?

I think having Necas on the 2nd unit would improve that considering how meh Garland is on the PP. yes pure ES points we might take a hit but I think overall the PP and team speed would improve and we can move him up and down the lineup to help a transition game especially in the playoffs when the other team throws 2 forechecked against us. We have no answer for that.

 

[mriswith]

The "Garland can't play with EP or Miller" is based off when he slumped last year and didn't work with anyone. It was barely tried this year and looked good in the very brief minutes it happened.

But then again, why bother when he can make a cumulative 8-9M 3rd line produce like a 1st or 2nd line and EP/Miller are both capable of 100 point seasons without him.

i think people just don't understand what you can get for 2-4m in the nhl on the wing. are joshua (and even garland) amongst the best players in this group? for me the answer is no

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years

www.capfriendly.com

If you filter by UFA's, the answer is 100% yes. Sure I'd love to replace them with younger RFA's signed for 2-4 mil who score at a 1st line pace like Garland but those players don't get traded.

 

[TruGr1t]

The "Garland can't play with EP or Miller" is based off when he slumped last year and didn't work with anyone. It was barely tried this year and looked good in the very brief minutes it happened.

If I recall, didn't Pettersson and Garland actually have one of the better stretches of play for Pettersson during the second half? I haven't checked the numbers.