Confirmed with Link: Canucks re-sign F Drew O'Connor to 2-Year, $5M Deal ($2.5M AAV)

[tantalum]

Allvin doesn't wait. If they wanted Boeser, he would be signed. The org must be thinking he is too slow, and believe Lekk can replace his 30 goals and be a better faster forechecker. Get some assets for boeser at the deadline and repackage for a top 6 C and top 6 winger. Lots of cap space to work with.

Or the various sides are using the deadline for leverage.

This is a good signing. Alvin has done some tidy work the last few weeks IMO.

 

[ahmon]

its ok, skill wise he's bot 6 speedster with tunnel vision. If we lucky maybe they can use him higher in the lineup as a forward with some size/speed - like how Vegas used Howden with Stephenson/Stone or how Chicago used Kopecky with Sharp/Hossa

 

[PavelBure10]

I don't mind this deal at all. I like what I've seen from O'Connor so far. Good signing.

 

[oceanchild]

Looks to me like we intend to build a fast,
Physical, defensive juggernaut. One more solid top 4 dman on the right side and Willander and D Petey being good next year and our d group will be hard to play. The bottom 6 will grind teams down. I see this looking more like a Ryan Oriely type team than a Pettersson team (needs to deliver). But my biggest concern is in goal, a Venezia caliber tender that can’t stay healthy, and a soon to be free agent who doesn’t have a history. This is fixing to be a problem.

 

[racerjoe]

I don't doubt that and I get it. At the same time, if I'm Boeser and I'm seeing Debrusk, Lindholm, and Horvat get offered 7 year deals, it's hard to be accept less.



That's not true. I mentioned this before, this management group has shown a consistent pattern of starting low and increasing their offers. There was reportedly a huge gap between the Canucks' initial offers to Horvat and Miller and where the Canucks' final offer ended up. Zadorov is another example of where the Canucks refused to offer more than 4 years and then later offering him 6 years. Hronek's deal took some time too but the two sides essentially just closed the gap in AAV.

Horvat is probably a good example as we made a final offer to him before trading him (I acknowledge that he was having a career year).

That’s fine, but you were portraying it as Boeser taking less AAV, to stay, when it would have to be the team going up in years.

 

[God]

like the player and understand the urgency, but we really need to replace JTM's offensive contributions and this is 2.5m less space to work with

 

[arttk]

like the player and understand the urgency, but we really need to replace JTM's offensive contributions and this is 2.5m less space to work with

If there is a good opportunity to get a top 6, I think they will trade away Garland and Soucy to free up cap to make it happen.

 

[Regal]

If there is a good opportunity to get a top 6, I think they will trade away Garland and Soucy to free up cap to make it happen.

Trading Garland to make cap for another top 6 player is Benning level wheel spinning

 

[Honour Over Glory]

seems alright but i don't understand why this management group is so eager to throw money at bottom of the lineup guys who have 5 good games. i would have waited until the offseason. it's possible that money could be put to better use and i don't think the risk of losing o'connor is really relevant

Pens fan coming in peace...

If you went by what he was last season, a very very good 3rd line winger that was breaking out and showed potential to score 20 goals before Sullivan kept shoving him into a top 6 role with Sid (a defensive disaster without Rakell), then this is a fantastic signing and add to your team. That's all you should be going by, what he's turned into this season because of Sullivan isn't his fault, in the 4 games so far he looked like he was very quick to forget the Sully bs, so he should be absolutely fine.

He's fast, doesn't use his size often, but he will show you some nice power moves to the net and isn't necessarily shy from the physical game at all, he's just a bloke that was small for a while and had an insane growth spurt, it's like he sometimes forgets "oh right, I'm tall." But he's a fantastic PK'er and is best utilized on the 3rd line to get his legs back under him after Sullivan's idiocy. He's a great depth add and from the 4 games I saw of his as a Canuck, he looked more like he did when he was with Eller and Puustinen last season when he was absolutely fantastic in a shit situation with the coach. The way he looked so far for the Canucks, is closer to the 33pt winger that should have progressed into a 40-45pt type winger which I think he will just with the style Tocchet plays and what he wants out of his players, DOC will thrive in that environment.

 

[F A N]

That’s fine, but you were portraying it as Boeser taking less AAV, to stay, when it would have to be the team going up in years.

Lol. I don't think I'm portraying anything here. I guess you think that the Canucks and Boeser have basically reached a consensus on what the AAV should look like with only term being the sticking point (a la Zadorov negotiations?) I don't think that's the case. Again, the club was willing to offer 7 years to DeBrusk, Horvat, Miller, and Lindholm (for sure Guentzel as well if they had a chance). Boeser has signed successive 3 year contracts. Hard to convince Boeser's camp that he doesn't deserve the 7 year term Allvin was willing to give an older Lindholm etc.

 

[arttk]

Trading Garland to make cap for another top 6 player is Benning level wheel spinning

Garland is getting pp1 time and 18ish min or ice time and is on pace to maybe 60points?
He has 1 year left on his contract, I mean how much is he going to cost?

Trading Garland and using his assets/ cap for an upgrade shouldn’t be seen as a bad idea. Garland is not really that amazing of a player..

 

[racerjoe]

Lol. I don't think I'm portraying anything here. I guess you think that the Canucks and Boeser have basically reached a consensus on what the AAV should look like with only term being the sticking point (a la Zadorov negotiations?) I don't think that's the case. Again, the club was willing to offer 7 years to DeBrusk, Horvat, Miller, and Lindholm (for sure Guentzel as well if they had a chance). Boeser has signed successive 3 year contracts. Hard to convince Boeser's camp that he doesn't deserve the 7 year term Allvin was willing to give an older Lindholm etc.

Again, it’s just what has been reported

 

[F A N]

Again, it’s just what has been reported

So what are you trying to “portray” here since you took issue with my comment that Boeser might be willing to come down on this AAV ask.

 

[arttk]

So what are you trying to “portray” here since you took issue with my comment that Boeser might be willing to come down on this AAV ask.

Issue is around term.

 

[Regal]

Garland is getting pp1 time and 18ish min or ice time and is on pace to maybe 60points?
He has 1 year left on his contract, I mean how much is he going to cost?

Trading Garland and using his assets/ cap for an upgrade shouldn’t be seen as a bad idea. Garland is not really that amazing of a player..

The entire team can’t score and he’s been the best forward this year. His numbers aren’t quite as good this year as last when accounting for minutes, as there’s been no consistency in the lines, but he’s still a top 6 quality forward making under 5 million. I think he’s also a player who is generally underrated league-wide, so you’re unlikely to get full value for him in a deal. For a team struggling to score they need to add a top 6 player not just trade one to make room for another.

 

[Michael Dal Swolle]

Sorry folks, the Dongle score has spoken and Drew O'Connor is actually bad

 

[me2]

I really like this contract. Pretty much right in-line with what he would get in a free agent but maybe a year less. Higher AAV due to increasing cap but otherwise the same contract that they've given to Suter, Blueger, and Sherwood.

Wait until those other re-sign to judge.

 

[Nucker101]

Sorry folks, the Dongle score has spoken and Drew O'Connor is actually bad

Lol, here's some better data:

Also for context, he's getting about mid usage in terms of difficulty in Pitt this year, tough to really comment on linemates, he's been bouncing all over their lineup.

 

[Slapshot_11]

Seems like a player you could get for 1m in ufa

 

[strattonius]

Seems like a player you could get for 1m in ufa

Seems like your player evaluation isn't great.

 

[Slapshot_11]

Seems like your player evaluation isn't great.

Was calling out 11.6 4th liner last year while he was racking up points early on so not too sure bout that one bud

 

[B-rock]

Garland is getting pp1 time and 18ish min or ice time and is on pace to maybe 60points?
He has 1 year left on his contract, I mean how much is he going to cost?

Trading Garland and using his assets/ cap for an upgrade shouldn’t be seen as a bad idea. Garland is not really that amazing of a player..

He’s one of the only play drivers on this team. I can’t think of any other forward that consistently makes things happen when he’s on the ice. Not to mention he gives 110% effort every game, every shift.

Not sure why you’d get rid of that.

 

[arttk]

He’s one of the only play drivers on this team. I can’t think of any other forward that consistently makes things happen when he’s on the ice. Not to mention he gives 110% effort every game, every shift.

Not sure why you’d get rid of that.

The entire team can’t score and he’s been the best forward this year. His numbers aren’t quite as good this year as last when accounting for minutes, as there’s been no consistency in the lines, but he’s still a top 6 quality forward making under 5 million. I think he’s also a player who is generally underrated league-wide, so you’re unlikely to get full value for him in a deal. For a team struggling to score they need to add a top 6 player not just trade one to make room for another.

Ok disclaimer: not saying we should actively try to get rid of him, it’s a matter of, if there is an opportunity to get an upgrade, then you can look at trading away Garland.

He is going to be an UFA after next season, no idea what he’s going to ask for but I am guessing more than 5, probably closer to 6.
Does he drive play? Yeah but his shot f***ing sucks and it looks like with 18min worth of ice time and PP1 opportunity, he’s going to top out at maybe 60 points and not even 20 goals and he gets his points mostly by doing his own thing and not really elevating his linemates.
If there is a guy at 6M-7M that can score like 25G and bring speed or size, I would trade away Garland to free up space to make that happen.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Agree with those who say that if you don't like this, it's because you're comparing it to old contracts, not looking ahead at the marketplace.

My only criticism is that it isn't for 5 years.

In 5 years getting a fast (top percentile or so in the league), smart tenacious forechecker, whom the coach describes as eminently coachable for 2.5 million will look like a fevered dream.

 

[Nucker101]

Agree with those who say that if you don't like this, it's because you're comparing it to old contracts, not looking ahead at the marketplace.

My only criticism is that it isn't for 5 years.

In 5 years getting a fast (top percentile or so in the league), smart tenacious forechecker, whom the coach describes as eminently coachable for 2.5 million will look like a fevered dream.

I know we love Joshua with Garland but I think he could thrive with Garland with his speed/size and ability to find open ice. Joshua has the better hands though.