Really, I thought the discussions for the most part, have been fairly tame, with very few ranting, I would say it was people expressing disappointment, more than anything.
- Reubenkincade

I mean if some people want to see only positives in the move and ignore any risk there is so be it. It's not whining to discuss and analyze a huge move that your GM makes.

Anyone know if a player being bought has to be placed on waivers today?
- Reubenkincade

Depends if they have NMC

https://twitter.com/i/status/1419675172668383240

Schmidt

https://twitter.com/i/status/1419675172668383240

Schmidt
- VANTEL

I wonder what Montour would cost. Hamonic and Montour get similar 3x3 deals and Schmidt traded for futures?

OEL - Montour
Hughes - Hamonic
OJ - Myers
Bowie

Bones goes to AHL mostly due to no waivers and can still improve there before making the jump. OJ gets a year to show he belongs.

I mean if some people want to see only positives in the move and ignore any risk there is so be it. It's not whining to discuss and analyze a huge move that your GM makes.
- golfingsince

I think some consider it whining, if you disagree with a decision that has been made.
I usually get considered a whiner, yet I was fine with the trade, although I always like draft picks, especially earlier round picks.
I am also a fan of OEL and always enjoyed the effort Garland puts in.

Also as an added bonus, I don't have to watch the 3 players that went the other way.

With the Canucks, I have learnt to take the bad and the good.

A couple notes from different Athletic writers:

The trading game

There was a time not so long ago in the NHL when the general rule of thumb was, whoever got the best player won the trade.

Simple right?

The idea is that if you’re making a trade, you’re hoping to bring in a player that’ll make an impact, be a difference-maker and usually quality wins over quantity. That approach – or that thinking – started to shift in the salary-cap era because a lot of times, teams would practically give away a player in order to shed salary, so sometimes the only player in a trade was a contract you were trying to dump.

So, the trading game became a little blurrier; evaluations were based not just on what a player could do, but what he might do and at what price because you couldn’t just walk away from a contractual mistake anymore. They tended to linger on the books. Way back, jump-to-conclusion analysts were certain that the Predators would eventually win the PK Subban for Shea Weber trade, just because Subban was six years younger and thus had a longer career ahead of him.

But Subban was gone out of Nashville while Weber was in the lineup, playing hurt, while Montreal battled its way to the 2021 Stanley Cup Final.

Predicting when a player might plateau and then start his decline is an inexact science and it isn’t the same for everyone. There are a lot of potential ups and downs along the way and a lot of examples of players who found a second wind in a new home.

And once in a while, you get a Chris Chelios or a Zdeno Chara who simply defy the gods of ageing and carry on at a high level far longer than you’d expect.

Accordingly, there’s a part of me that clings to the old-fashioned notion – that there’s still value and merit to getting the best player in the trade.

Thus, while the general view was that both the Canucks and Blackhawks made horrible trades last week – Vancouver to bring in Oliver Ekman-Larsson and Conor Garland from Arizona and Chicago to land Seth Jones – who got the best player?

And who got better? And the answer is: Vancouver and Chicago did.

In Vancouver’s case, they actually got the two best players in the trade. Garland is a creative and dynamic addition to a team that, when healthy up front, is going to be fun to watch – Elias Pettersson, JT Miller, Bo Horvat, Brock Boeser, Nils Hoglander. I’m far more bullish on Ekman-Larsson than most and believe that a change of scenery, and playing in Travis Green’s system, is going to allow him to flourish more than he did in Arizona, where the strengths of his game didn’t necessarily get highlighted in Rick Tocchet’s system.

Ekman-Larsson’s name came up in a lengthy chat with former NHL coach Dave King – retired now, but who worked for years with the Coyotes, as an advisor, for a lot of the early arc of Ekman-Larsson’s career. King noted in our conversation about Ekman-Larsson that the Coyotes originally projected that he “would drive the offence and be a good situational defender, and so we were prepared to accept there was some risk in his game because we’d get point production from him. But he’s now fallen into that ‘we have to play careful’ mode – and the result is, for a guy whose got such great passing skills, he uses the up-off-the-glass or the indirect-pass-off-the-boards too much. He got stuck in the wrong spot.”

Maybe now he’s in the right spot.

&

The Canucks commit to Oliver Ekman-Larsson

The old cliche says that the team that gets the best player wins the trade, and this deal saw the Canucks get the best two while also clearing out three of their worst contracts. Easy win, right? Sure, as long as you don’t bother clicking on Ekman-Larsson’s CapFriendly page and … oh no, now you’re sad.

So yeah, the Canucks dumped three contracts that were undeniably bad but were also expiring in 2022 to land one that might be worse and has six years left. That doesn’t seem ideal, and a cynic might suggest that it’s a classic case of a GM making a trade for short-term gain while knowing he probably won’t be around for the long-term pain. And that’s assuming there is short-term gain, given Ekman-Larsson just turned 30 and hasn’t been a difference-maker in years.

Not surprisingly, the Canucks got ripped for the move. I don’t think I’m quite as pessimistic as my colleagues, since I like Conor Garland a lot and I do think there’s a non-zero chance that Ekman-Larsson has a bit of a rebound early in his Vancouver tenure. But this contract was already one of the worst in the league, and even with some salary retained, it might be topping the list within a few years.

Surprise scale: 75/100. My take here was all about the Canucks’ perspective, but great work by Arizona to dump a bad contract and get a high pick in the process.

A couple notes from different Athletic writers:



&
- NewYorkNuck

It would have been ice if the author of the 1st article, would have explained Travis Green's system, so dummies like myself could understand what it is.

Also, thanks for sharing.

David Pagnotta
@TheFourthPerod
·
12h
Along with Zack Hyman, it looks like TOR teammate Nick Foligno could be joining EDM as well on a 4 year deal with an AAV around 4-4.5 range when free agency opens on Wednesday.

It would have been ice if the author of the 1st article, would have explained Travis Green's system, so dummies like myself could understand what it is.

Also, thanks for sharing.
- Reubenkincade

I think TG has just built up a myth about his "system" that people just go along with...

David Pagnotta
@TheFourthPerod
·
12h
Along with Zack Hyman, it looks like TOR teammate Nick Foligno could be joining EDM as well on a 4 year deal with an AAV around 4-4.5 range when free agency opens on Wednesday.
- VANTEL

You got fooled again

It would have been ice if the author of the 1st article, would have explained Travis Green's system, so dummies like myself could understand what it is.

Also, thanks for sharing.
- Reubenkincade

Yeah, thinking the same thing. The 1st article stated that OEL was forces to play a safe game of moving the puck up the ice by dumping it off the glass and boards. It suggests that OEL is better suited to a puck possession scheme.

Isn’t Green’s system basically dump and chase? How does that work out better for OEL?

I think some consider it whining, if you disagree with a decision that has been made.
I usually get considered a whiner, yet I was fine with the trade, although I always like draft picks, especially earlier round picks.
I am also a fan of OEL and always enjoyed the effort Garland puts in.

Also as an added bonus, I don't have to watch the 3 players that went the other way.

With the Canucks, I have learnt to take the bad and the good.
- Reubenkincade

let me clarify: it's whining if you disagree with a management decision that has been made at the time. that whining then becomes "hindsight 20/20 vision" in 2 years when everyone agrees that it was a bad decision.

You got fooled again
- Codes1087

Oh well . Children need their jollies

I think TG has just built up a myth about his "system" that people just go along with...
- NewYorkNuck

From what i see, his system is very similar to how my Bantam rep team played, back in the early 80's. Mind you we were a decent team, so that type of system should translate well into the nhl.

Yeah, thinking the same thing. The 1st article stated that OEL was forces to play a safe game of moving the puck up the ice by dumping it off the glass and boards. It suggests that OEL is better suited to a puck possession scheme.

Isn’t Green’s system basically dump and chase? How does that work out better for OEL?
- bloatedhefty

I'm really hoping Shaw can implement a better system for the D. As that chart that I reposted the other day showed, both Myers and Schmidt were WAY better with their previous teams at carrying the puck out – it's a symptom of the system they aren't as good. If they have Myers, Hughes, Rathbone, and OEL to transition the puck up the ice under control, that would do a lot for the team.

Yeah, thinking the same thing. The 1st article stated that OEL was forces to play a safe game of moving the puck up the ice by dumping it off the glass and boards. It suggests that OEL is better suited to a puck possession scheme.

Isn’t Green’s system basically dump and chase? How does that work out better for OEL?
- bloatedhefty

No idea.

Dump and chase can be effective, during certain times of a game, but you have to do both parts of that and this team didn't do so well on the chase part.
Dickinson and Garland will help on the forecheck and should also help on possession, as will OEL.

let me clarify: it's whining if you disagree with a management decision that has been made at the time. that whining then becomes "hindsight 20/20 vision" in 2 years when everyone agrees that it was a bad decision.
- RealityChecker

Yeah, thinking the same thing. The 1st article stated that OEL was forces to play a safe game of moving the puck up the ice by dumping it off the glass and boards. It suggests that OEL is better suited to a puck possession scheme.

Isn’t Green’s system basically dump and chase? How does that work out better for OEL?
- bloatedhefty

No dump and chase when QH is on the ice... or EP.... that's more of a Horvat Pearson transition. If they can convince Green to use some skill with Horvat, maybe we'll see less of it.

I'm really hoping Shaw can implement a better system for the D. As that chart that I reposted the other day showed, both Myers and Schmidt were WAY better with their previous teams at carrying the puck out – it's a symptom of the system they aren't as good. If they have Myers, Hughes, Rathbone, and OEL to transition the puck up the ice under control, that would do a lot for the team.
- NewYorkNuck

i'm hoping for basically the same thing. hopefully shaw can implement better systems overall as in how he wants the forwards and d to play together.

and then, fingers crossed, he implements defensive systems/structure and tells baumer how he wants the d pairings deployed.

this could work if shaw is the hand wielding the sword.

No idea.

Dump and chase can be effective, during certain times of a game, but you have to do both parts of that and this team didn't do so well on the chase part.
Dickinson and Garland will help on the forecheck and should also help on possession, as will OEL.
- Reubenkincade

Dump and chase was very effective when the Sedins were on the ice. The D would time it right and Danny would get to the puck first and start the cycle with Hank and hardly ever lose possession..

No dump and chase when QH is on the ice... or EP.... that's more of a Horvat Pearson transition. If they can convince Green to use some skill with Horvat, maybe we'll see less of it.
- boonerbuck

Garland should be a nice fit on Bo's line.

let me clarify: it's whining if you disagree with a management decision that has been made at the time. that whining then becomes "hindsight 20/20 vision" in 2 years when everyone agrees that it was a bad decision.
- RealityChecker

You think "this is possibly the worst trade in history" will come back around to hindsight 20/20?

Pierre LeBrun
@PierreVLeBrun
·
43s
RFA Sam Bennett has re-signed with the Florida Panthers 4x 4.4

let me clarify: it's whining if you disagree with a management decision that has been made at the time. that whining then becomes "hindsight 20/20 vision" in 2 years when everyone agrees that it was a bad decision.
- RealityChecker

You think "this is possibly the worst trade in history" will come back around to hindsight 20/20?
- NorthNuck