Canucks accept, the retention by a 3rd party might need more than a 3rd though, as $2.5 over 4 years is a lot

Instant accept by VAN

if you're asking for multiple years of retention, you will need to offer more than that!

That crossed my mind, and TO wouldn’t have much trouble upping the value on that with another piece.

That’s fair, and I think TO could easily up the value if need be

user name checks out

This you?
https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/2462903

I think swap the 1st to the retention team and the 3rd to Vancouver and it’s more fair

Meh, I’m looking at it from TO’s perspective anyways and the in/out balance on the ledger doesn’t change for them either way, so whatever makes it work.

It is always very funny when people try to use that as some sort of gotcha but never read the description.

Why are we paying that for Garland when hes on buyout watch per Rick Dhaliwal . Van will most likely sell low on him as it seems evident they want to move on

And as to why he is on buyout watch he is rn under the 1/3 buyout which would save them 3mill

Explain this to me. Garland is a buyout candidate this summer, why is that? My guess is he doesn't have any value at his current contract. If he doesn't have value at his current contract why are we paying this much for him? I am sure someone is going to hell about retention costs a lot. But so does a buyout and for longer. If retaining money makes more sense than a buyout, why is anyone having to pay for that still? If buying him out is bad for the Canucks but a necessary evil, how is not adding him for a reduced cap hit still not a favor to the Canucks?

We are talking about about a middle 6, offensive winger who's 5'10 and 165 pounds, he's essentially the same size as Robertson who's apparently too small. He isn't very good defensively either. So why is he worth so much when a team is taking him to save the Canucks the buyout pain?

You beat me to it by like 1 second my friend