Easy pass from Canucks, no reason to do that trade.IMHO.

Other than the fact they've been trying to trade Garland for awhile now. Can very easily seeing them do this trade.

Not a chance,Mantha is done.He has scored a total of 51 goals in the last five years in total Garland is closer to 90.Garland is still a servicable player.Rumours of us giving Garland away are JUST rumours.Like i said NO reason to make that trade from a Canucks point of view.Again just MY opinion.

LOL Garland has just 7 more goals in 52 more games. Believe me, I don't want to give up Mantha, he's the better player but if they were to trade him I hope it's for someone like Garland.

Might be in the minority here, but I think the Caps should avoid this (specific Garland). I think he is Mantha 2.0, but on a longer contract.

I'd like to keep Mantha and start fresh next year -> use his cap space (and the additional cap increase) to resign Wilson / Sandin and then go after a big fish (or two depending on Backy / Oshie retiring).

Long story short - I do not think Garland is good enough for his contract and the Caps should avoid those types of players, imo.

Mantha has 51 goals in 203 GP going back to 2019-20 (4 seasons not 5); in the same time frame Garland has 70 in 275 GP. Mantha scores 0.25 G/GP; Garland has scored .004 more goals per game over the same period. You can 100% get on Mantha for his injury history and lack of availability, but comparing goal scoring rates is just splitting hairs.

I prefer to keep Mantha and I hope they do, but Garland is really freakn good on a great contract. He's a 50+ point speedy, skilled winger that shoots righty, which we don't have many of. He's easily live up to his contract.

Looking up Mantha's injury history he missed 10 games in 21/22 season due to Injury and 1 game in 22/23 meaning he was a healthy scratch for 50 games over the past 2 seasons. You forgot to factor in the other half of the point production where Garland in that same period had 106 assists vs Mantha's 66. so 59 more points over the course of those seasons. Garlands cap hit is almost a million less and he has been playing in a bottom 6 role(due to excess wingers for Van not lack of skill) for the majority of the past 2 seasons making those numbers even more impressive. Van is in no rush to trade garland for a bag of pucks and his value will jump come trade deadline due to the expected cap increase next year.

did you miss this part of my post:



thank you for literally proving the point i was making

Mantha has more upside. See what Carbery can do with him and if it doesn’t work out, we aren’t tied to him next season

Canucks aren’t trading Garland for a worse, more expensive player

The Canucks whole incentive to trade Garland is to clear cap space. This does not do that

The only reason to trade Garland is to free up cap space. How is acquiring an older and more expensive player going to do that?

I would assume the draw is getting out of the last 2 years of the Garland deal at the expense of an extra $750K against the cap this season.

I think there's *something* here but it wouldn't be 1 for 1. Maybe Washington retains $750K to make it cap neutral for the Canucks and gets a little treat? Maybe they retain in full and get a bigger treat? Maybe there's a pick swap, too? Who even knows?

The report is they want to get out of his contract. This way you get a potentially better player but at the very least get out of a contract in 1 season instead of 3.

We have NO interest in Mantha he is not in our future .I was just trying to show hes just not a fit for where our team is headed.Again this is MY opinion no disrespect intended.

Mantha plays a much different game.We are not really in any position to trade Truculence for an older declining skilled pro.No disrespect just not for us.Not a fit.IMHO.

Yeah no the logic is not there buddy..... Whats the point of trading Garland now if it doesn't help our cap situation right now? We can just trade him another time when the cap goes up and his value goes up