Value of: Garland or Beauvillier for a similarly paid defenceman

[McJedi]

I just think Manson is (or should be) an obvious target to move for cap flexibility for the Avs. Maybe they can clear him out or swap him for a forward they can use.

Sure. Kuzmenko. A forward we could use. Signed to a good AAV.

But Vancouver wants to send lesser forwards the Avs don’t need. No team needs those players at their AAVs. There are many rea$on$ guys like Boeser and garland are still stuck in Vancouver.

Put something more interesting and that has value on the table if you want a Manson.

 

[bossram]

Sure. Kuzmenko. A forward we could use. Signed to a good AAV.

But Vancouver wants to send lesser forwards the Avs don’t need. No team needs those players at their AAVs. There are many rea$on$ guys like Boeser and garland are still stuck in Vancouver.

Put something more interesting and that has value on the table if you want a Manson.

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to a reply from @Mighty Makar who said that Garland seems at least somewhat interesting.

I also didn't continue to pitch Garland. I just said Manson seems like the cap-clearing option for the Avs, if possible. I also acknowledged in another post that some Avs fans (you) aren't interested in Garland.

Relax and get off your high horse.

Honestly "I", as an individual and not a member of the Canucks in any way, don't really want Manson. I'm just spitballing in this thread.

 

[blankall]

A player like Garland won't bring back the kind of d-man the Canucks need. Garland is signed for 3 more years at 4.95 million, back loaded. He had 46 points last year. You're like to get an overpaid #4/5 d-man. What Vancouver needs is a legit #2/3. Those don't run cheap.

 

[McJedi]

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to a reply from @Mighty Makar who said that Garland seems at least somewhat interesting.

I also didn't continue to pitch Garland. I just said Manson seems like the cap-clearing option for the Avs, if possible. I also acknowledged in another post that some Avs fans (you) aren't interested in Garland.

Relax and get off your high horse.

Honestly "I", as an individual and not a member of the Canucks in any way, don't really want Manson. I'm just spitballing in this thread.

I don’t think I’ve seen a thread on HFs that indicated a single fan base wanted Garland. Unless the exchange was package that was a dump of a bad deal back on Vancouver. It’s not “some” fans that don’t want him. It’s everyone. It’s the common response to all these Garland threads. His contract is considered unwanted. Garland will only fetch bad contracts, like the one Myers is on.

Losing Manson doesn’t clear cap for the Avs. It’s creates a hole in our 2nd pair and first PK unit. It leaves us without a large RHD with defensive responsibilities and assignments. It puts a huge hole in our lineup.

The Avs didn’t do well without Manson. They suffered and their outcomes were negatively affected.

 

[SenzZen]

How about Siegenthaler?

Does either side do that?

 

[bossram]

I don’t think I’ve seen a thread on HFs that indicated a single fan base wanted Garland. Unless the exchange was package that was a dump of a bad deal back on Vancouver. It’s not “some” fans that don’t want him. It’s everyone. It’s the common response to all these Garland threads. His contract is considered unwanted. Garland will only fetch bad contracts, like the one Myers is on.

Losing Manson doesn’t clear cap for the Avs. It’s creates a hole in our 2nd pair and first PK unit. It leaves us without a large RHD with defensive responsibilities and assignments. It puts a huge hole in our lineup.

The Avs didn’t do well without Manson. They suffered and their outcomes were negatively affected.

Mighty Makar, ostensibly an Avs fan, said it was at least reasonable/plausible. "Everyone" hates Garland though.

I'm not out here saying this is an obvious trade for Colorado or saying Avs absolutely should take this. Again, I acknowledged that it likely isn't ideal for Colorado. I was just spitballing on an interesting swap - something for discussion. I didn't pitch Garland that hard. You're the one taking this way over the top and implying that I am single handedly slinging Garland into every thread.

Again, Manson isn't really trusted by Bednar. He doesn't play 2nd pair even-strength minutes with the Avs. Makar-Toews seems to be his first choice PK pair. In the series against Seattle, Manson played 4 minutes of PK time in 5 games. Even during the 21-22 Cup run, Manson was 4th in PK TOI. Not a lot of responsibility. You are purportedly an Avs fan, but have the facts wrong. Yeah, they would need to get a guy to replace Manson on the bottom pair.

So please, get off your high horse here.

 

[McJedi]

M

Mighty Makar, ostensibly an Avs fan, said it was at least reasonable/plausible. "Everyone" hates Garland though.

I'm not out here saying this is an obvious trade for Colorado or saying Avs absolutely should take this. Again, I acknowledged that it likely isn't ideal for Colorado. I was just spitballing on an interesting swap - something for discussion. I didn't pitch Garland that hard. You're the one taking this way over the top and implying that I am single handedly slinging Garland into every thread.

Again, Manson isn't really trusted by Bednar. He doesn't play 2nd pair even-strength minutes with the Avs. Makar-Toews seems to be his first choice PK pair. In the series against Seattle, Manson played 4 minutes of PK time in 5 games. Even during the 21-22 Cup run, Manson was 4th in PK TOI. Not a lot of responsibility. You are purportedly an Avs fan, but have the facts wrong. Yeah, they would need to get a guy to replace Manson on the bottom pair.

So please, get off your high horse here.

Manson was playing injured in the playoffs. Literally didn’t play for six weeks prior to game one. This assumption he isn’t trusted is garbage. In game six vs Tampa with a one goal lead, 70 seconds on the clock. The Avs had a Dzone faceoff playing 5 vs 6.

Guess which defensive he had out there. Manson and Toews. Not makar. Not Byram. Not Girard. In the most important Dzone shift for the Avs in decades. On a team with the NHLs best defense and it’s Norris winner. Manson was on the ice.

Stop making up nonsense. Manson wasn’t trusted? No. Manson wasn’t physically capable of playing at his level. He tired. He’s a tough SOB, but his lower body injury kept him from being effective. He couldn’t perform thru the injury. That’s not a trust issue.

Replace Garland with Kuzmenko and you’ve got something to work with here. Where the Avs would add.

Garland has no value and he is a true cap dump.

M

Mighty Makar, ostensibly an Avs fan, said it was at least reasonable/plausible. "Everyone" hates Garland though.

I'm not out here saying this is an obvious trade for Colorado or saying Avs absolutely should take this. Again, I acknowledged that it likely isn't ideal for Colorado. I was just spitballing on an interesting swap - something for discussion. I didn't pitch Garland that hard. You're the one taking this way over the top and implying that I am single handedly slinging Garland into every thread.

Again, Manson isn't really trusted by Bednar. He doesn't play 2nd pair even-strength minutes with the Avs. Makar-Toews seems to be his first choice PK pair. In the series against Seattle, Manson played 4 minutes of PK time in 5 games. Even during the 21-22 Cup run, Manson was 4th in PK TOI. Not a lot of responsibility. You are purportedly an Avs fan, but have the facts wrong. Yeah, they would need to get a guy to replace Manson on the bottom pair.

So please, get off your high horse here.

Manson was playing injured in the playoffs. Literally didn’t play for six weeks prior to game one. This assumption he isn’t trusted is garbage. In game six vs Tampa with a one goal lead, 70 seconds on the clock. The Avs had a Dzone faceoff playing 5 vs 6.

Guess which defensive he had out there. Manson and Toews. Not makar. Not Byram. Not Girard. In the most important Dzone shift for the Avs in decades. On a team with the NHLs best defense and it’s Norris winner. Manson was on the ice.

Stop making up nonsense. Manson wasn’t trusted? No. Manson wasn’t physically capable of playing at his level. He tired. He’s a tough SOB, but his lower body injury kept him from being effective. He couldn’t perform thru the injury. That’s not a trust issue.

Replace Garland with Kuzmenko and you’ve got something to work with here. Where the Avs would add.

Garland has no value and he is a true cap dump.

M

Mighty Makar, ostensibly an Avs fan, said it was at least reasonable/plausible. "Everyone" hates Garland though.

I'm not out here saying this is an obvious trade for Colorado or saying Avs absolutely should take this. Again, I acknowledged that it likely isn't ideal for Colorado. I was just spitballing on an interesting swap - something for discussion. I didn't pitch Garland that hard. You're the one taking this way over the top and implying that I am single handedly slinging Garland into every thread.

Again, Manson isn't really trusted by Bednar. He doesn't play 2nd pair even-strength minutes with the Avs. Makar-Toews seems to be his first choice PK pair. In the series against Seattle, Manson played 4 minutes of PK time in 5 games. Even during the 21-22 Cup run, Manson was 4th in PK TOI. Not a lot of responsibility. You are purportedly an Avs fan, but have the facts wrong. Yeah, they would need to get a guy to replace Manson on the bottom pair.

So please, get off your high horse here.

Manson was playing injured in the playoffs. Literally didn’t play for six weeks prior to game one. This assumption he isn’t trusted is garbage. In game six vs Tampa with a one goal lead, 70 seconds on the clock. The Avs had a Dzone faceoff playing 5 vs 6.

Guess which defensive he had out there. Manson and Toews. Not makar. Not Byram. Not Girard. In the most important Dzone shift for the Avs in decades. On a team with the NHLs best defense and it’s Norris winner. Manson was on the ice.

Stop making up nonsense. Manson wasn’t trusted? No. Manson wasn’t physically capable of playing at his level. He tired. He’s a tough SOB, but his lower body injury kept him from being effective. He couldn’t perform thru the injury. That’s not a trust issue.

Replace Garland with Kuzmenko and you’ve got something to work with here. Where the Avs would add.

Garland has no value and he is a true cap dump.

 

[bossram]

M

Manson was playing injured in the playoffs. Literally didn’t play for six weeks prior to game one. This assumption he isn’t trusted is garbage. In game six vs Tampa with a one goal lead, 70 seconds on the clock. The Avs had a Dzone faceoff playing 5 vs 6.

Guess which defensive he had out there. Manson and Toews. Not makar. Not Byram. Not Girard. In the most important Dzone shift for the Avs in decades. On a team with the NHLs best defense and it’s Norris winner. Manson was on the ice.

Stop making up nonsense. Manson wasn’t trusted? No. Manson wasn’t physically capable of playing at his level. He tired. He’s a tough SOB, but his lower body injury kept him from being effective. He couldn’t perform thru the injury. That’s not a trust issue.

Replace Garland with Kuzmenko and you’ve got something to work with here. Where the Avs would add.

Once again I ask, as you refuse to answer, was Manson injured prior to and all throughout the 21-22 run? He didn't play for six weeks prior to G1, yet he still played 22 games for the Avs after the deadline?

Yes, again I am aware of his injuries during this season. Which is why I also noted his usage in 21-22. You continually are trying to rebut things I've already acknowledged and addressed. Yeah, Bednar used him on that [particular shift. Bednar also used Makar 50% more on the PK (51 minutes vs. 33 minutes) than Manson throughout that playoff run...on top of dramatically heavier even-strength usage. So who's the most trusted?

I'm not even pitching Garland to you. I'm trying to get you to reconcile with factual reality.

 

[Nucker101]

No thanks to Manson

 

[Americanadian]

Garland for Timmins

 

[biturbo19]

How about Siegenthaler?

Does either side do that?

Well i can tell you Vancouver takes that and runs away giggling with glee.

But i don't see why New Jersey would...

 

[HockeyWooot]

To CBJ with Bear for Peeke/Bjork and Robinson/Olivier?

With Jiricek on the rise, presumably they could stand to lose one of their RD while bolstering their forwards?

 

[PettersonHughes]

Beau for Brodie?

I'd do it, we need the defensive help at RD, and a 1 year trial run with Hughes could be a steal if he sticks.

 

[bossram]

I'd do it, we need the defensive help at RD, and a 1 year trial run with Hughes could be a steal if he sticks.

There's almost 0% chance Toronto does that.

 

[blankall]

I don’t think I’ve seen a thread on HFs that indicated a single fan base wanted Garland. Unless the exchange was package that was a dump of a bad deal back on Vancouver. It’s not “some” fans that don’t want him. It’s everyone. It’s the common response to all these Garland threads. His contract is considered unwanted. Garland will only fetch bad contracts, like the one Myers is on.

Losing Manson doesn’t clear cap for the Avs. It’s creates a hole in our 2nd pair and first PK unit. It leaves us without a large RHD with defensive responsibilities and assignments. It puts a huge hole in our lineup.

The Avs didn’t do well without Manson. They suffered and their outcomes were negatively affected.

It's not just the fans.

A player like Garland has worth, but he's also a luxury. He's a solid depth scorer, but also signed at about $5 million/year. How many contenders can fit that into their cap structure? It has just as much to do with the state of the cap, but Garland likely has negative value with his cap hit for the simple reason that very few teams can afford to take on $5 million in cap right now.

Once again, if you're moving him for a defender, you're likely getting an overpaid #4/5 guy back. Not what the Canucks need.

 

[mc1laren]

Garland with 1.5 mill in retention likely props up his value where we could possibly get a top 4 LHD from a team that has a glut of defenseman on the left side or a defensive RHS 3c.

I would be okay with retaining 1.5m on Garland for the next two years. Saves the Canucks 3.5 approx in cap and a team gets a 50 point 5 on 5 producer with grit at 3.5m per year. I think Garland would look good on several teams in the middle 6.

 

[biturbo19]

Garland with 1.5 mill in retention likely props up his value where we could possibly get a top 4 LHD from a team that has a glut of defenseman on the left side or a defensive RHS 3c.

I would be okay with retaining 1.5m on Garland for the next two years. Saves the Canucks 3.5 approx in cap and a team gets a 50 point 5 on 5 producer with grit at 3.5m per year. I think Garland would look good on several teams in the middle 6.

You can't pick and choose which years of a contract you retain on. It's either all 3 remaining years, or none at all.


That said...retaining $1.5M on Garland would certainly make him more enticing. Particularly to teams that lean on certain analytics and value even strength production without top quality of linemates and icetime.

But i think there's gotta be a way to unload him in some other sort of swap that ultimately still makes better use of that than $1.5M of dead money...and a retention slot tied up for 3 more years.

 

[mc1laren]

You can't pick and choose which years of a contract you retain on. It's either all 3 remaining years, or none at all.


That said...retaining $1.5M on Garland would certainly make him more enticing. Particularly to teams that lean on certain analytics and value even strength production without top quality of linemates and icetime.

But i think there's gotta be a way to unload him in some other sort of swap that ultimately still makes better use of that than $1.5M of dead money...and a retention slot tied up for 3 more years.

Apologies, I assumed he had 2 years left not including this one. Retention on a part of this year would be write-off as he likely then gets dealt at the trade deadline.

This isnt the ideal situation but an idea given Poolman, Pearson, Beuavillier, Myers are all off the books next year. 1.5m on the next two years wouldnt be entirely cumbersome or a burden on the Canucks cap, especially if OEl is bought out next summer or in 2025-2026.