Now that is a trade down that I can get behind. Honestly, that is bad for Columbus

Oliver Ekmam-Larsson doesn't waive for Columbus.

And sorry Sillinger + 11th overall pick and 2nd and 2024 1st round pick doesn't move you up to top 4 in a very deep draft Sharks aren't sliding 7 spots for that joke of an offer.

Canucks should gladly take that

Do you think OEL would do well with the Blue Jackets?
TBH putting OEL makes the Blue Jacket's defence look really bad.

The Sharks need assets. They are just starting a rebuild. While the 4OA pick does yield a great player, the value of this draft extends further in this draft than many others. Sillinger is still a very good player. Could very well be a great 2C. I do think the offer could be more enticing if the protection is dropped but nonetheless this provides SJ with fantastic value.

It would be interesting though. OEL could rebound if placed in the right situation. The Jackets have cap space and do need a 2LHD. 4 yrs term is steep at 7 mill AAV but the ability to move up in the draft and address the C position for the future could be a small price to pay. The Jackets have a long term plan in place for the left side of the D with Svozil and Mateychuk but these players might need a couple of years to really develop. It is a gamble but it could be a trade in a few years that turns out to be a steal.

WTF? Why would the Sharks trade down from the #4, especially since Carlsson or Smith would fit perfectly with Mike's vision for the team? I got love for Sillinger, but the Sharks will simply take whoever ANA and CBJ doesn't pick tween Fantilli, Carlsson, or Smith. They should not under any circumstances accept a trade down for this year's draft.

People need to understand a trade has to make sense. Sure the Canucks could just keep the pick trade Myers after July 1and give up a future 1st bc that is the likely cost of moving that much of cap. But Van is not going to be a very good team next year and I expect other moves to follow that allow them to get younger. For Columbus it is a gamble but the ability to get up high in the draft by acquiring a higher pick that very well could give them C depth in this organization that is sorely needed is worth it. Even if the SJ trade doesn’t happen. There are some decent C in this draft that could be perfect for the Jackets.

Again, the Sharks are just starting their rebuild. They need assets. GM’s think things differently. What perceive as fans is not what GMs see for the future. I see your point though.

I understand the idea because I saw our twitter was discussing the possibility of Vancouver wanting to gain cap space yet there are hardly any teams that can take JT Miller or OEL. The idea for swapping the first isn't for OEL but we are basically would be buying that pick for Cristall, Leonard or Reinbacher if they are still on the board. Basically we would be eating that cap dump to further reinforce our prospect pool though really if I was offering this I would give you Roslovic too and get a 3/4th round pick for them in the transaction as y'all need a 3C right now. Its not a trade I offer but I understand the concept behind the idea but if I would buy the first I would trade out JT Miller for the cap dump swap.

That OEL trade is AWFUL for CBJ

Flyers take that

I just don’t see the Flyers trade for Roslovic when Torts doesn’t like him. I doubt Danny would go and do that and I’m sure Torts would tell him that

I was just playing with that same idea of swapping 22 for 11 and OEL, but I'd like VAN to retain a little bit, maybe 1.5m?



Relax. It's okay to not like the offer, but it is certainly a reasonable attempt. There is a lot of value there for dropping seven spots. That 2024 1st is a real wildcard too if it becomes a '25 unprotected.

From a CBJ perspective I think it's a fair offer, but I'd rather get Hertl than 4 OA. CBJ is trying to become competitive now and SJS is facing a long rebuild, so 11OA and Sillinger should be close to a deal, but I could see CBJ needing to add a little more too.



Torts actually likes Roslovic. Not sure where you heard that at. He's also an affordable 1-year trial so if he doesn't work out in their system, they can let him walk or flip him at the deadline.

I've always really liked OEL and his game. He has certainly declined, and with 4 years remaining I would like to see a little bit of retention. But his usage has always been super high, and I think he could have a little more success playing fewer minutes against a little less tough competition.

Dude everything I read talks about how neither of them liked each other and both didn’t see eye to eye just like Hayes which is why he wants him gone. All the articles tell the same story with him that they do with Hayes. Healthy scratching, calling them out in press conferences, reduced roles. Why would he get rid of Hayes to take on literally the same time of situation with a different player?

I honestly think you're right, but just for argument's sake, Torts is a demanding coach, but that doesn't mean he doesn't like the player. I think the reason he gets so frustrated with guys like Roslovic and Laine is because he seems the immense potential they have and genuinely cares about making them better. He gets those stories everywhere he goes, and still all his former players talk about how much they love him and how he helped their games.

The difference could be that Hayes has had those rumors with multiple coaches throughout his career. Roslovic has issues in WPG as well, but I'm not sure if it was really about coachability or just his ability to understand the game. He's never been labeled as uncoachable. The distinction is the player's attitude versus just not being able to learn.

But again, I think you've made a fair point and I totally understand PHI not wanting to take back Roslovic in the deal, just not sure it has anything to do with Torts.

OEL aside, I'm always confused by this logic. In other words, "he's not a good player, and he's a net-negative on the ice. The more you play him, the worse it gets, and that's reflected statistically. The solution is simply play him less and against worse people, instead of replacing him with a useful player".

Now, I don't think OEL is as bad as people make it sound, but you can't separate the player from the contract, and he's not exactly a strength on the ice. There's simply no way to compete for a Cup if you're paying that much for a glaring weakness.

If you think the window to compete starts next year with the players already here, then absolutely stay away from the OEL trade. However, if you think the window is actually 4 years from now with the core being the current prospects and picks from this year, and you view OEL as a stopgap LD and mentor to those guys who's off the books when the window opens, I'd at least consider it.

Torts is on record saying Roslovic is absolutely not a C. Not to say that he doesn't like him but he doesn't think he has what it takes to play in the middle of the ice. If you read between the lines you can see that Torts doesn't like his motor and combativeness on the ice but whether or not he's totally out on him as a player remains to be seen.

I don't see SJ trading back from 4. I can see them trading back (probably to 7 or 8) if they don't like Smith and don't want to take Michkov. Then they are getting assets and still getting "their guy" who could be Ryan Leonard or Zach Benson or something. Pick 4, if it's Michkov or Smith, is around the value of a normal 1st overall pick or a 2nd overall in the case of Smith. You don't trade outside of this range without getting something special.

I like attacking Van for 11OA. I have taken quite the look at OEL, he had some decent PK numbers in a very small sample. His footspeed was gone and he couldn't do much on the rush. There's risk there in pairing him with Jiricek as it I'm not sure he has fully recovered from his ACL tear. Still so much risk and unless we move Guddy we would have $11 Million locked into a horrific 5 on 5 third pair. There was smoke they liked Roslovic. Maybe we can take Garland or Boeser or something and give them Peeke or Boqvist/Roslovic. Rutherford is just such a wild card.

IF we did get 11OA, it still might be worth moving up a little bit (hard to see any team in the top 10 not being thrilled with their pick location) and getting Leonard, Benson or Moore.

Fair point, but I think each case is specific to the player in question. I personally have an affinity for OEL and think he can still contribute as a 4-5 defenseman and could be a good veteran partner and mentor for Jiricek. As I've stated before, I wouldn't do it at his full salary, so for this to work for me some retention would have to be involved.

Idk Torts also hasn’t come out and said he doesn’t like Hayes but I see all of the same stories and lines to know when he’s saying something without saying it. I just don’t see Roslovic coming back to the Flyers in any deal.

Roslovic probably goes to Vancouver anyways as they need a 3C and their FO was high on him last year. Even then he's still has decent numbers for a 3C for them.