Dreger: Multiple teams interested in Conor Garland - TOR, BOS, NJD, COL

[Just a Fan]

Leafs are looking at Schenn. They have nothing worthwhile to trade for the others.

You guys are gonna be so disappointed…..

 

[Drew311]

Dubas inquiring about a 5’9 forward, shocker!

Kid has more fire and intensity than 95% of the current roster. He would be a fantastic addition.

 

[Drew311]

Alex Kerfoot
Timothy Liljegren
2022 1st

for

Garland @ 3.5 mil ($1.4 mil retention)

Canucks won't retain on Garland, he's on a sweetheart contract. Deal would likely be 1st + Robertson. Maybe Holl/Engvall thrown in for cap reasons.

 

[Connor McConnor]

How is a 25 year old that is getting better only a win now piece?

He’s getting better? Seems like he’s been worse on a better team.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Oh ya true you’re 100% right how silly of me.

Thatcher Demko: “Garland is one of the main leaders on our team”

Lays: “No he isn’t”

Case closed!


Also, please point me to where it says he’s being “shopped”

He actually said keeping things light in the room. Not biggest vocal leader? Keeping it light with JT would probably consist of humor, they like to play practical jokes etc

 

[Just a Fan]

Canucks won't retain on Garland, he's on a sweetheart contract. Deal would likely be 1st + Robertson. Maybe Holl/Engvall thrown in for cap reasons.

I would pass on that one as a Leafs fan.

 

[elitepete]

He’s getting better? Seems like he’s been worse on a better team.

Wrong. His production is worse because he doesn't get much pp time.

 

[elitepete]

Canucks won't retain on Garland, he's on a sweetheart contract. Deal would likely be 1st + Robertson. Maybe Holl/Engvall thrown in for cap reasons.

No thanks.

 

[Love]

He actually said keeping things light in the room. Not biggest vocal leader? Keeping it light with JT would probably consist of humor, they like to play practical jokes etc

Ok? I was paraphrasing. The poster I was quoting said Garland is “a locker room issue” and Demko says him and JT Miller are the guys who get everyone laughing and having a good time.

 

[Captain97]

Not again... size does not always matter but the Bruins need more size, not less, and not one who weighs 160 lbs. Especially at the price posters cite. 1st +??

The Bruins need a 2C or a high end defenseman to play with McAvoy.

I would much rather the Bruins leave Debrusk with Bergeron and Pastrnak with Hall. Garland is not a need.

If he's available wouldn't Horvat be a far better target for the Bruins?

 

[Connor McConnor]

Wrong. His production is worse because he doesn't get much pp time.

His ES production is almost identical to last year while playing on a better team?

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Newhook for Garland straight up?

 

[Just a Fan]

Newhook for Garland straight up?

Landslide win for Vancouver….

 

[elitepete]

His ES production is almost identical to last year while playing on a better team?

So in other words he didn't get worse?

 

[elitepete]

Landslide win for Vancouver….

Nah, Canucks pass.

 

[Mal Reynolds]

His ES production is almost identical to last year while playing on a better team?

He's also playing around a minute and a half less

 

[Just a Fan]

Nah, Canucks pass.

Well that would be a mistake, but that’s just my opinion.

 

[Sevendust]

I would probably do Debrusk and maybe a B level prospect or a mid round pick for Garland but to add a 2nd and a former 1st round pick?

Garland has six more points (all assists) with two more minutes of ice time. He has never cracked 40 pts and never paced for 30 goals all of which JD has done.

Their values are a lot closer than some might think but Canucks overvalue Garland (as they should he's a great player) and Bruins fan value Debrusk as a 3rd round pick throw in to any deal.

It would only make sense if Canucks wanted to add more size to their lineup.

Canucks paid a steep price for Garland, he is on good contract, is having a great season and the Canucks don't have to really trade him. Because of this I think the offered package for Witz an extended DeBrusk would be fair for both sides.

 

[elitepete]

Well that would be a mistake, but that’s just my opinion.

It doesn't make sense to trade Garland unless it's for something that fills a huge need.

 

[Just a Fan]

It doesn't make sense to trade Garland unless it's for something that fills a huge need.

Much like the draft, you don’t normally turn down the BPA, there is next to no chance that anything close to a Newhook valued player is offered….but if they are, you don’t say no.

 

[tyhee]

The Canucks would be dumb to retain on Garland. I can't see the Canucks using a retention spot for 4 more years on an already good contract.

You're right. The proposal was obviously made by a Leaf fan who may not have been aware that Rutherford has been talking of the need to clear cap space. The proposal gives the Canucks a first, but costs them cap space in the first year and thereafter until the player picked with the first gets beyond his elc. It clearly runs contrary to the direction Rutherford has indicated he wants to go.

I can certainly understand the proposal. It gets the Leafs a player and saves them some cap space at the cost of a low first round pick +. That makes it good for the Leafs going for broke during their window. He might have figured that the Canucks are like many teams who have been bad, with extra cap space they are willing to use for picks. Of course, this doesn't work well for the capped out Canucks, who actually need to use LTIR to get under the cap this season and are looking to make moves to lessen their future cap problems.

 

[elitepete]

Much like the draft, you don’t normally turn down the BPA, there is next to no chance that anything close to a Newhook valued player is offered….but if they are, you don’t say no.

You don't just trade players for the sake of it. It doesn't make sense to trade Garland for Newhook.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Landslide win for Vancouver….

It’s really not

 

[dellzor]

Never said Garland didn’t pace 40 pts. Reread. Everything I said above was factual lol.

Using this year and last is ignoring the career numbers and that fits a narrative.

JD averages 32 points over 5 years

Garland averages 32 points over 4 years.

Hence my point above, closer in value than people think.

I meant cracking 40 points when he was literally one off.

Why would you use his earlier seasons when it's clear DeBrusk's point totals over the past few seasons have stagnated?

 

[Just a Fan]

It’s really not

Again, just my opinion, I’ll let AVs fans field this one…maybe I’m over valuing Newhook.