Proposal: OEL to Toronto

[Jerkbait]

OEL(40% retention)
Canucks 2023 3rd



Sandin
Nicholas Robertson
Tor 2023 2nd

My thought process for the Leafs being that OEL is better than advertised and would slot in well as a Muzzin replacement that can fit into the top pairing while Rielly is out. Moving Sandin and Robertson hurts of course but getting the Canucks to retain that much isn't going to be easy and you have to give to get. I'm aware OEL is beginning to decline but he should push us over due to his age being in line with JTs and help us contend while Marner and Matthews are still signed.

The thought for the Canucks is that things aren't going as planned and they get two young prospects with the potential to boom over the next few seasons. They're not in a hurry to contend so retaining shouldn't be that harmful.

Not now. Leafs are playing unbelievable and the banged up D has been very good. I agree they will add another D before the deadline if needed.
Giordano has been lights out. Sandin very good. Benn when playing as well. Brodie is coming back soon ish...dubas isn't panicking

 

[BlackFrancis]

The amount of retention and bad contracts people in this thread want is a complete non starter. OEL is getting bought out at the end of the season. BOOK IT! If you can’t beat the savings on the buyout why bother making dumb offers?

The Canucks are going to buy out a player with a full NMC and get him to agree to a buy out that pays him $10m fewer dollars at the end of the day?

That'll be quite a trick.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

The amount of retention and bad contracts people in this thread want is a complete non starter. OEL is getting bought out at the end of the season. BOOK IT! If you can’t beat the savings on the buyout why bother making dumb offers?

And what exactly are Canucks management going to do to convince OEL to this buyout? Ask really really nicely?

 

[bossram]

Our whole team, minus Petey and Kuz and Hughes have been awful and again as the team has played better, so has OEL.

So let me get this straight, your allowed to use small sample sizes to prove points but when I do, its lmao......

I smell hypocrisy.

No. It's because plus/minus is a worthless stat.

Kyle freakin' Burroughs (no disrespect to him, he's solid) has been better than OEL.

And what exactly are Canucks management going to do to convince OEL to this buyout? Ask really really nicely?

This comment makes no sense. They don't need his approval to buy him out. They can just do it.

They won't though, because there would hardly be any cap savings.

 

[bossram]

You used xG% to determine a defenseman's individual impact. Same difference.

It's literally not. But hey, you conflate things you don't know about. You do you.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

No. It's because plus/minus is a worthless stat.

Kyle freakin' Burroughs (no disrespect to him, he's solid) has been better than OEL.


This comment makes no sense. They don't need his approval to buy him out. They can just do it.

They won't though, because there would hardly be any cap savings.

Your opinion bud, its a pretty good indicator of what the team does when he's on the ice and no Burroughs has not been better, the fact that you think that shows how little you know, and I really like Burroughs, he isn't trusted to do the same things OEL does, doesn't play as much both minutes and games, doesn't contribute as much etc.

 

[TS Quint]

The Canucks are going to buy out a player with a full NMC and get him to agree to a buy out that pays him $10m fewer dollars at the end of the day?

That'll be quite a trick.

I think he would find that $10m somewhere else. Would a $4m x 3 years be unreasonable? I don’t believe so. Plus he gets out of that hell hole.

 

[bossram]

Your opinion bud, its a pretty good indicator of what the team does when he's on the ice and no Burroughs has not been better, the fact that you think that shows how little you know, and I really like Burroughs, he isn't trusted to do the same things OEL does, doesn't play as much both minutes and games, doesn't contribute as much etc.

No, it's not. It uses a small sample size (only goals) and also pointlessly mixes game states (PP/PK shorties and empty net situations).

Burroughs and OEL have a difference of 1.5% in their defensive zone start percentages. He has the lowest (which is good) xGA/60 of any Canuck defenseman, meaning he allows the fewest chances. If you want to go by goals, he is also the lowest. OEL is third-most.

OEL is facing tougher competition. But he's not doing a good job handling it - and shouldn't be played in those situations.

I mean, you say I don't know what I'm talking about. But I'm the only one with any actual evidence here. You're just saying, "OEL GOOD!"

 

[belair]

It's literally not. But hey, you conflate things you don't know about. You do you.

Hockey isn't as simplified as you perceive it to be. GF% is actually a very poor statistic to evaluate defensemen because goals in general happen due to an overwhelming number of factors. And defensemen generally aren't the ones primarily responsible in most cases both for or against. The same logic goes for shots.

Either stat is you essentially telling the same story. Hockey is a team game. It's exceptionally difficult to determine what one player is contributing themselves. Especially defensemen.

 

[banks]

I've been an OEL fan and supporter in the past. I thought Vancouver made a great deal when they got him from Arizona. But OEL was really bad last season, and all reports say he's no better this season.

I wouldn't add him right now with the term he has left. He's signed for 4 more seasons after this one. You can't take the risk that he continues to regress. He'd be a boat anchor as early as next season, even with %40 retained by VAN.

Hard pass.

 

[bossram]

Hockey isn't as simplified as you perceive it to be. GF% is actually a very poor statistic to evaluate defensemen because goals in general happen due to an overwhelming number of factors. And defensemen generally aren't the ones primarily responsible in most cases both for or against. The same logic goes for shots.

Either stat is you essentially telling the same story. Hockey is a team game. It's exceptionally difficult to determine what one player is contributing themselves. Especially defensemen.

I didn't use goals for percentage.

Yes, hockey is very chaotic. Which is why for an on-ice impact measure, you'd want a much, much larger sample. xG weighs all shots according to how dangerous they are. You don't really want to be on the ice for tons of chances against.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

No, it's not. It uses a small sample size (only goals) and also pointlessly mixes game states (PP/PK shorties and empty net situations).

Burroughs and OEL have a difference of 1.5% in their defensive zone start percentages. He has the lowest (which is good) xGA/60 of any Canuck defenseman, meaning he allows the fewest chances. If you want to go by goals, he is also the lowest. OEL is third-most.

OEL is facing tougher competition. But he's not doing a good job handling it - and shouldn't be played in those situations.

I mean, you say I don't know what I'm talking about. But I'm the only one with any actual evidence here. You're just saying, "OEL GOOD!"

Your evidence is flawed again Burroughs plays less and isn't trusted nearly as much by Bruce, he also doesn't contribute nearly as much. OEL creates offense far better. I watch him play that's how I know that he is fine in his own end, yep he had a rough start to the year along with the rest of the team, he's playing better and oh look so is the team.

 

[HockeyVirus]

What does this upgrade for Toronto? They are still very deep on the left side when healthy. Even assuming Muzzin is never returning, the LD has Rielly, Gio, Sandin, and Mete. Sandin is included here, so the thought is this is an upgrade on Sandin to OEL?

Personally, I don't see that as being worth anything. Sandin has been more than fine and only 22 years old. I think this trade is bad without even considering the contracts because you are trading a #5 dman with a decade of play ahead and a reasonable upside of being a 2nd pairing dman for a good chunk of that for a #5 dman on his last legs and who will decline through the rest of the Leafs window.

Sure the Leafs want to win now, but they want to win tomorrow too. Sandin and Liljegren are going to be key pieces on the Leafs defense as Gio and Brodie age out and retire. Can't really afford to move these guys right now.

 

[bossram]

Your evidence is flawed again Burroughs plays less and isn't trusted nearly as much by Bruce, he also doesn't contribute nearly as much. OEL creates offense far better. I watch him play that's how I know that he is fine in his own end, yep he had a rough start to the year along with the rest of the team, he's playing better and oh look so is the team.

I watch 90% of Canucks game too. OEL is slow as molasses and was a major reason for their slow start. Yes, he is playing better now (after being attached to Bear). It doesn't absolve how bad he was early and the hole it dug them.

That Bruce doesn't trust Burroughs as much is his mistake. He was playing trashcan Riley Stillman ahead of him.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

I watch 90% of Canucks game too. OEL is slow as molasses and was a major reason for their slow start. Yes, he is playing better now (after being attached to Bear). It doesn't absolve how bad he was early and the hole it dug them.

That Bruce doesn't trust Burroughs as much is his mistake. He was playing trashcan Riley Stillman ahead of him.

He was slow and was bad, again the whole team was, but now is playing better, and played fine for us last year, now it doesn't absolve him but a small sample size doesn't somehow extinguish last year and how he's playing now, does it?

I totally agree that Bruce trusting Burroughs over Stillman is a massive mistake.

 

[belair]

I didn't use goals for percentage.

Yes, hockey is very chaotic. Which is why for an on-ice impact measure, you'd want a much, much larger sample. xG weighs all shots according to how dangerous they are. You don't really want to be on the ice for tons of chances against.

Mistake on my part. Was meant to say xG%, which is just as poor a tool to isolate individuals.

You look back at his stats last season and you'll see a trend of his linemates finishing their chances at a much higher rate with him than without. Is it something worth noting? Sure. Is he the reason they score more? There's very little data suggesting that other than on ice data that counts team stats.

Teams that get massively outshot generally consist of forward units that do a poor job of sustaining OZ possession. They don't generate a ton of high danger chances for themselves. It's difficult to see why a defenseman would be the primary reason for this.

Adam Larsson used to get crushed in these stats some years in Edmonton. People tried to suggest that he was a bad defenseman using the same logic. It's flawed.

 

[bossram]

Mistake on my part. Was meant to say xG%, which is just as poor a tool to isolate individuals.

You look back at his stats last season and you'll see a trend of his linemates finishing their chances at a much higher rate with him than without. Is it something worth noting? Sure. Is he the reason they score more? There's very little data suggesting that other than on ice data that counts team stats.

Teams that get massively outshot generally consist of forward units that do a poor job of sustaining OZ possession. They don't generate a ton of high danger chances for themselves. It's difficult to see why a defenseman would be the primary reason for this.

Adam Larsson used to get crushed in these stats some years in Edmonton. People tried to suggest that he was a bad defenseman using the same logic. It's flawed.

You're not applying this correctly. xG has nothing to do with finishing. It's not part of the metric. Why are you bringing that up in relation to xG? Larsson is also a misapplication of this stat. He was slightly below 50% in Edmonton, but was never getting crushed (despite playing tough minutes). If you use xG relative stats, he was basically net neutral compared to the team overall. A pretty good outcome in tough circumstances.

Your claim basically boils down to, "defensemen cannot control shot/chance impacts". Which seems demonstrably false, considering elite defensive guys like Tanev have had strong xG impacts, and elite offensive guys like Makar have strong xG impacts. Is that a fluke?

 

[Namikaze Minato]

It is hilarious, I agree, but the funniest part is how little you seem to know about OEL, I've already stated I don't like OEL and I didn't like the trade, that doesn't mean I'm not gonna call you out for your illogical conclusion. Now that is funny.

You think I'm emotional because your a leafs fan, oh that's cute.......

So what is it thats made you so emotional that you have to run around pretending you dont like OEL while also pretending hes some great asset that nobody in the world sees except you?

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

So what is it thats made you so emotional that you have to run around pretending you dont like OEL while also pretending hes some great asset that nobody in the world sees except you?

Ummm how am I emotional exactly? Is calling people out for being wrong categorized as being so emotional? LOL then I guess everyone on here is so emotional in your eyes? Perhaps HF isn't the place for you.

I don't like OEL and I've explained, that as much as I don't like the contract and even player to an extent that doesn't mean that every illogical pundit on here can make bogus claims and not be called out for it.


To say OEL is a 4/5 Dman that makes too much money and is declining (not rapidly) is accurate, to say he's not even an NHL player at this point is completely ludicrous, claiming that OEL and Gudbranson are some how on par with each other as players is just an awful take.

 

[Namikaze Minato]

Ummm how am I emotional exactly? Is calling people out for being wrong categorized as being so emotional? LOL then I guess everyone on here is so emotional in your eyes? Perhaps HF isn't the place for you.

I don't like OEL and I've explained, that as much as I don't like the contract and even player to an extent that doesn't mean that every illogical pundit on here can make bogus claims and not be called out for it.


To say OEL is a 4/5 Dman that makes too much money and is declining (not rapidly) is accurate, to say he's not even an NHL player at this point is completely ludicrous, claiming that OEL and Gudbranson are some how on par with each other as players is just an awful take.

buddy, OEL makes 8.25 million in total and you pay 7.2 for 5 more f***in years, hes got way less value as a number 5 defenseman than Gudbranson does at 4 million for 4 years as a number 5 or even 6 defenseman.

Neither contract is good. Your contract is absolutely atrocious and it makes OEL a negative value asset at any price.

Name me one team that would take OEL and give you any asset near the value youre pretending he has.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

buddy, OEL makes 8.25 million in total and you pay 7.2 for 5 more f***in years, hes got way less value as a number 5 defenseman than Gudbranson does at 4 million for 4 years as a number 5 or even 6 defenseman.

Neither contract is good. Your contract is absolutely atrocious and it makes OEL a negative value asset at any price.

Name me one team that would take OEL and give you any asset near the value youre pretending he has.

Well considering the premise of this entire thread is OEL 40% retained everything you just posted is moot, way to pay attention bud.

 

[Namikaze Minato]

Well considering the premise of this entire thread is OEL 40% retained everything you just posted is moot, way to pay attention bud.

The premise of the entire thread is OEL to Toronto, thats why the thread is titled "Proposal: OEL to Toronto".

Would you rather have 40% retained on OEL for 5 years or 40% retained on Gudbranson for 4?

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

The premise of the entire thread is OEL to Toronto, thats why the thread is titled "Proposal: OEL to Toronto".

Would you rather have 40% retained on OEL for 5 years or 40% retained on Gudbranson for 4?

The premise is OEL to Toronto 40% retained actually.

OEL every day of the week, the fact that you have to ask that show how little you know about OEL.

Gudbranson is an offensive black hole, he's the slowest player in the league and has been for years. Also he's got rocks for brains, like a caveman of a player, just completely useless.

OEL while declining in foot speed is still decent enough offensively, has a good hockey IQ and is fine in his own end, OEL at 40% retained is what his value is.

 

[Namikaze Minato]

The premise is OEL to Toronto 40% retained actually.

OEL every day of the week, the fact that you have to ask that show how little you know about OEL.

Gudbranson is an offensive black hole, he's the slowest player in the league and has been for years. Also he's got rocks for brains, like a caveman of a player, just completely useless.

OEL while declining in foot speed is still decent enough offensively, has a good hockey IQ and is fine in his own end, OEL at 40% retained is what his value is.

The premise is OEL to Toronto, the proposal is 40% retained and people are able to change a proposal at any time, therefore they can change the 40% to 50% and the return to matthews and a first and now the proposal has changed but the premise of OEL to Toronto is the same.

OEL at 40% for 5 years retained is worth less than Gudbranson at 40% retained for 4 years, your screeching about "You never seen him! You dont know him! lalalalla!" doesnt change much lol

 

[innitfam]

The premise is OEL to Toronto, the proposal is 40% retained and people are able to change a proposal at any time, therefore they can change the 40% to 50% and the return to matthews and a first and now the proposal has changed but the premise of OEL to Toronto is the same.

OEL at 40% for 5 years retained is worth less than Gudbranson at 40% retained for 4 years, your screeching about "You never seen him! You dont know him! lalalalla!" doesnt change much lol

Never seen someone try so hard to not recognize something so obvious.

The OP clearly says 40% retained. So it's not OEL @ $7.26M, it's OEL at $4.356M. Unless OP means 40% retained in TOTAL, from his $8.25M (ex. NOT 40% taken off OEL's current cap hit of $7.26M, but 40% retained from 8.25M, which has Vancouver retaining 28%) which means a cap hit of $4.95M.

Whether or not that has value, and what it is, is different.