Both of these trades hurt Toronto so no they’ll never get done

why would the canucks pay to have retention on garland when they could just keep him

Swap Garland for Brodie straight up and send your picks to someone else to retain if you want.

Yep nothing like trading two superior Dman for one inferior Dman to make the defence better.

So you are taking over for those two chuckle heads who came on here daily to post terrible leaf trades eh? Fixing the d by taking out two good players and replacing them with a 3rd pair 6/7 guy is real smart

Stars aren't trading Stankoven for a question mark on the blue line. Liljegren has shown flashes, but can't work his way into more time on a lackluster defensive unit in Toronto. Dallas already has a player like that in Nils Lundkvist.

If Dallas is trading their top prospect, it's going to be for a bonafide top-4 defensemen that can step in and give a serious boost to their blue line.

Nill hasn't been in the business of trading away his top prospects, and I don't see it happening with Stankoven. You make a great point that Dallas needs cheap talent that they can use to fill out the roster, due to a couple of large contracts. Stankoven fills that role as well, so that point is moot.

You also make the comment that "Nill always has a top-5 team in both height and weight" & then you have him trading a 5'8 Stankoven (and a 6'6 Hakanpaa) for a 5'9 Robertson. Your comment literally contradicts itself when you look at the sizes of the players you have in your trade.

Dallas isn't trading a Stankoven-caliber prospect for Liljegren & I'm not sure why Toronto would want to replace Liljegren with Hakanpaa, who is objectively the worse defenseman.