Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Strong Opinions

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Doesn’t surprise me. I’d rather keep Garland for at least another year and trade Hoglander, but if someone wants to overpay I’d be all over it.

Yeah I suspect management feels the same, pending how things work out with Boeser. Drance did say today the Canucks are looking at everything but very "price sensitive", so that basically equates to the same thing ... if someone is willing to overpay there probably aren't a lot of guys they wouldn't move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vector
IMG-20250306-WA0000.jpg
 
Posts were trimmed due to references to political figures, which goes against our No Politics policy. It’s time and labour intensive to edit multiple posts, so a blanket deletion was done instead. Yes, there were perfectly sound hockey arguments and discussions embedded in some of them, and that can certainly occur - please just do so without comparing to, referencing or discussing political figures and/or politics.

Thank you.
M2B was relitigating the fall of the soviet union again, wasn't he?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baby Pettersson
Finally a season where we have a few attractive pieces in a crazy seller's market and we are actually in a position to sell (especially when the main piece, Boeser, isn't even doing much to help the team currently). I would be very disappointed if this "self rental" non-sense happens. This is how you get stuck in mediocrity forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baby Pettersson
If they are looking at trading garland they are probably looking at re-signing boeser
 
I'm sure a bunch of non-playoff teams are getting calls about guys not on the market considering the lack of supply and sky high demand.

It doesn't mean the Canucks are looking at trading Garland or their plans have suddenly changed with Boeser. But obviously if there's a severe overpayment offered they have to consider it.
 
Just because teams want Garland doesn't mean you trade him.

Using that logic we should trade Quinn Hughes, I'm sure we would get a lot of assets back too
depends on what is on the table. If Garland gets us like 1st + prospect back and we can use those asset and add more to get another guy, then sure.
 
Team is starved for offense and wants to convince Hughes to stay

Shop Garland??!?
 
Yeah, not keen on the idea of trading Garland...but I'd have to see the offer and direction the team is taking. I could be convinced to go in a number of directions based on what's on the table.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sting101
One thing to keep in mind when looking at these prices is this is not a coveted draft. And I believe one insider said it was perceived as a second is more like a third.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sting101

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad