Proposal: Tyson Barrie to Vancouver for Connor Garland
- Thread starter UrbanImpact
- Start date
- Oct 9, 2012
- 33,694
- 32,692
Absolutely not, Barrie is dreadful and useless to the Canucks. Garland is still serviceable even with the longer contract
No, Garland drives that third line. This is probably the best third line we've had since the team last made it to the finals. We become a weaker team this season when it looks like we'll finally make the playoffs. The only reason I see doing this is if Allvin doesn't believe we have the cap space next season to sign our RFAs Pettersson and Hronek.
Serviceable is not what you want to describe someone making 5 mil.
Garland 100% has the skills to produce to make his contract worth it but we dont have that role available for him.
Canucks need to think big big picture. Getting out of 5mil a year for 2 more years would be huge Cap Space flexibility. It would be a massive step in helping us fix our defence ( not Barrie) but the cap space it opens up.
The 3rd line for sure would take a hit this year. But who knows maybe with the extra cap space we can trade for a rental bottom 6 player to solidify that role.
No, they should not. Barrie is a horrible target.
Offense-only defenseman who won't sniff the PP in VAN. Why?
Offense-only defenseman who won't sniff the PP in VAN. Why?
Barries expiring contract is the key.
We can healthy scratch him or even send him down the AHL.
Doesnt matter.
Our defence will be better for it in the long run when we freee up that 5mil contract over the next 2 years..
Because despite me being a huge Canuck fan, I dont believe they have the roster to be a cup contender this year.
They need to improve their defence, theyve done a good job thus far in taking steps to improve said defence. Getting rid of Garlands 5mil a year contract for 2 more years would be a massive massive step in helping do that just for the sheer strength of cap space.
Whether its via free agency in the summer or trade, that extra 5 mil cap space would be huge!
Barrie is irrelevant, his expiring contract is his biggest asset.
David Bruce Banner
Acid Raven Bed Burn
I agree with the bolded, but adding Barrie is not going to improve the defense in any way. If anything it makes them worse this season. Barrie isn't irrelevant given he is the centerpiece of your proposal.
I'm also of the mind that Garland does a lot more for the team than people think. He drives the 3rd line. That line would become far less effective without him.
Let go of Myers and Zadorov. There's the cap space to add another premium defender.
Worse this season, sure.... but thats why i said they gotta think big picture and why i also said i dont think they are true cup contenders this year.
Move Garland's 2.5 year contract, Take in Barrie's expiring contract, replace Garland with Bains or Podkolzin, Spend the extra 5mil this off-season on a legit top 4 Dman either via free agency or trade. Heck they can even move Hoglander up the depth chart and give him Garland's role. He has been under-utilized.
Letting go of Myers means nothing for the big picture....his contract is already expiring. If we move him now, it will cost us assets.. litterally opposite of big picture thinking.
herzausstein
Registered User
As a Nashville fan, id rather have the capspace next offseason
Buresflyingelbow
VanCity
- Feb 19, 2018
- 2,720
- 1,913
Myers for Barrie I’d explore straight up. Both expiring contracts and both terrible on each team.
1. Canucks would have to add a sweetener to convince Nashville to take on an extra 1.5 mil this season.
2. This doesnt help the Canucks further in the off-season. They would open up 6mil in cap space with this trade in off-season, where as if they move Garland for Barrie, they would open up 10.5 mil in cap space this off season- (Myers and Barrie contract)
Buresflyingelbow
VanCity
- Feb 19, 2018
- 2,720
- 1,913
It would be Barrie and Bear basically for Myers in this case and Garland shouldn’t be hard to move after this season with 2 years left. He also contributes to the team in a positive way and drives the third line. Without Beauvillier we need an insurance player if someone goes down to injury.
No to Barrie. At all. Yuck. He won't get any PP time and as such would be useless. Garland's contract with his current play make him very attractive with the estimated cap raises coming to more than a few teams I am sure. or even to stay in vancouver with those said raises.
If there's any target coming from Nashville it has to be/should be Fabbro because at least he is serviceable without PP time as an RHD
But it's a moot point. Even with bear needing a month or two to get up to speed he is STILL the better option for vancvouer from a purely assets in/out point of view and is arguably better than barrie as a defenseman and not point getter
If there's any target coming from Nashville it has to be/should be Fabbro because at least he is serviceable without PP time as an RHD
But it's a moot point. Even with bear needing a month or two to get up to speed he is STILL the better option for vancvouer from a purely assets in/out point of view and is arguably better than barrie as a defenseman and not point getter
Hoglander
I'm Höglander. I can do whatever I want.
Neutrinos
Registered User
- Sep 23, 2016
- 8,946
- 3,848
Neutrinos
Registered User
- Sep 23, 2016
- 8,946
- 3,848
While I agree that Barrie isn't an ideal fit on the ice for the Canucks, I think the negative view of this trade from Vancouver's perspective is a short-sighted one
Garland for Barrie straight-up
It frees up half a million in cap space this season, and then Barrie can be flipped (with retention if need be) for a bottom 6 winger who offers similar on-ice value as Garland, but at half the cap hit
Or, Barrie can be flipped for a bottom 6 winger on an expiring contract, thus freeing up 5 million in cap space for next season
Garland for Barrie straight-up
It frees up half a million in cap space this season, and then Barrie can be flipped (with retention if need be) for a bottom 6 winger who offers similar on-ice value as Garland, but at half the cap hit
Or, Barrie can be flipped for a bottom 6 winger on an expiring contract, thus freeing up 5 million in cap space for next season
If Garland is being dealt it should be for someone who will actually draw into the lineup... in your scenario Barrie is the 7D
They are not supposed to be a contender this year they are supposed to make the playoffs and go from there. Big picture can be dealt with and has been getting dealt with
This is not meant to come off rude but watching the games would give a little bit more context
- Oct 9, 2012
- 33,694
- 32,692
Canucks already have terrible forward depth, so let’s make that depth even worse!
Maybe to lose the extra years on connors deal. Guess there would have to be another move afterwards for a forward.
This year's lineup shouldnt be more important with the big picture of this club and trying to improve that defence.
The best way to improve the defence is by having cap space to make a trade or sign free agents.
Taking Garland out of the lineup and making Barrie the extra D will make us worse for now, but we will be much better for it come the off-season.
Also how much worse would we get taking Garland out of the 3rd line? I think Hoglander can do well filling that role.
