The hawks and canes will take those guys but not till September

That lindholm contract going to get UGLY long term, but that'll be the price

Also feels like running a sub 7 mill bottom 6 will get you cooked long term

Is Lindholm a better center than Miller?

The Canes trade is from this season? I don't understand how it's in September? He won't be under contract then.

For the Hawks no one is trading cap in September. what would be the point. It doesn't really matter, they'll trade Garland somewhere or do something else.





Yeah definitely has some serious backend risk. At least it's only 7 years. I agree it's more or less the cost.

The bottom 6 could be ugly, but if it doesn't work you're putting Miller there for this season and then you'll have the cap to fix it next season.


No, he's not better. It's that Miller is a good center, but a great winger. If the Canucks can get a high end 2nd line center like Lindholm they can push Miller to the wing which then gives them the star winger they're missing. Plus you can still play Miller at Center when needed. The Canucks have winger depth coming it's center and D where they need help.

Trade away contracts you don’t want to sign players you do want.
So original on here

I'm basing my Garland trade on other threads Hawk fans responded with what they would do or might do. But good for you, you're really contributing something to the dialogue here.

The Kuz trade was in the other thread that goes with this one. Kuz for Pesce. But I doubt you're really even reading.

Hawks aren't taking Garland for free is what other hawks fans have said many times on here. If the Knucks want to move his cap, they need to do better than a 7th.

I've seen lots of Hawks fans say specifically, not during this season, but in the off-season, they would do Garland for around a 6th-7th. https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/4679349

I do try to at least look at other teams' fans' opinions, although different fans have different opinions.

But since I'm talking to a Hawks fan and not a random Bruins fan who doesn't even understand the discussion, what would you want for Garland if it's the 2024 offseason?

Hawks had an opportunity apparently to get Garland for nothing and passed. I would guess it would take at least a 3rd to move his cap at the rate he's playing. 5 points in 19 games is on pace for 22 points for the season...that's bad and certainly not worth a $5M cap hit or even half of it.

Thanks for your input.

Garland's counting stats are definitely not good so far this year. Luckily it's a low sample so it won't be that hard to bring it up. That being said he's played great so far this year and I expect he'll be 40+ points with his usually low ice time and pp opportunity by the end of the year, but we'll see.

But 40 points doesn't net a $5M cap hit unless he is a very solid two way player, which he's not.

He is a very good two-way play driver. He's 22nd in 5v5 Corsi, % 37th in xgf%, 5th relative corsi% among forwards if you like advanced stats.

It's also how you score the 40 points that matters in my opinion, are you doing it on a first line playing with Petey on a third line with Pius Suter and Dakota Joshua? Are you playing first-line PP or on a 2nd PP behind a top 3 PP 1.

I'm losing interest in trying to convince people Garland is good at this point. I'm perfectly happy with him at $5m come next season, he drives our 3rd line and is essentially an alternative to a high-end 3C. I'd rather move that money to D or Center because the Canucks have too much on the wing, IMO, but I don't have a problem with the value of his contract and if they keep Garland, I'll be fine.

I'm glad you are losing interest in trying to convince people. I think you misinterpret people conceding that he is an okay player, for them being willing to pay for him. He may be a fine player, but he is not a viable target for CHI, and certainly not one worth $5M per year for two more years, to any team. The only way they consider him is if they are being paid to take his contract as a pure cap dump. There is literally no other reason for CHI to consider it. We have plenty of other options. Doing what you have proposed would simply be a favor. Which is also possible, I guess, but I'm not sure what incentive there is for KD to do VAN a favor right now.

Like I said I was basing on another hawk fans comments.
https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/4679349

When a Hawks fan in this thread disagreed, I asked for their opinion. I'm here actually trying to figure out what you think, not trying to impose my opinion. If someone says something I disagree with or isn't backed up by objective facts like Garland isn't good defensively, then I'll explain why I think that's wrong and try to point to evidence. But I'm not going to shout that Chicago fans should just be happy that I would even deign to consider letting Garland play for their lowly team.

Incidentally, I'm a big Bedard fan and cheering for Chicago to do well this year. Chicago has had a great contingent of BC-born players in the modern NHL and was my second team for years. Seabrook grew up in my hometown.

My bad. I took your other comments the wrong way. It's easy to get lost with the lack of tone/inflection while reading text. Also, that probably sounded more abrasive than I meant it, as well.

Even still, I don't think there is any reason for CHI to consider this. CHI would likely be looking for something in the ballpark of what VAN paid to dump Dickinson, at the very least. Futures are all that matter to CHI right now, and Garland is not a future. Although, KD could make the bet that he can flip him for a decent profit. But, we'd also have to have the roster space available. You'd probably have better luck with a team closer to contention that might be hoping for a bounce back/reclamation project candidate to come to their roster and be a difference maker or fill a role.

All good. It's also easy to get frustrated and to have that tone drift into your writing and hey it's the internet we all can be a little guilty of getting a little shouty.

I appreciate your input, and honestly, this thread wasn't really about dumping Garland it was about fitting Pesce in year two of a Kuz for Pesce trade and I decided to throw in an example of a subsequent move which was move Garland (for a reasonable price if possible) and add another big splash.

I hope Chicago builds really smart around Bedard and I think that is balancing some level of not letting him fail too hard, while not rebuilding too fast. I think they did a fantastic job this year with bringing in veterans like Perry, Foligno and Hall to really support Bedard in the short term.

I'm a little jealous of how great of a job they've done so far with the rebuild which runs completely in contrast with what the Canucks could and should have done with Petey and Hughes. They've definitely got to manage the transition to competing over the next few years, but they've set themselves up for the best chance of success. Cheers buddy, here's to hoping that none of Bedard's best years are wasted (cough McDavid cough).

Yeah. Same here. KD has done an outstanding job, thus far. I thought it was a mistake passing on Tulsky and Darche at the time, but I am totally sold on KD at this point. There are still some questions to be answered. Like, is he the guy to take this team beyond a rebuild? Same question could be asked about Luke Richardson, as well. But, for the purpose of the tear down and development portion of CHI's rebuild, I don't think anyone could've done a better job. It also helps that Danny Wirtz wasn't shy about tearing it down, too. I'm sure there are plenty of GM's who could've done better jobs if they weren't handcuffed by management and ownership.

This balancing act is difficult, though. I think it'd be near impossible to mess up Bedard, but messing up the rebuild could be done very easily. So, the patience and attention to details that aren't always reflected on stat sheets, has been admirable. I'm almost sure we are gonna have to add a long term piece or two from outside the system at some point, but the execution and timing of those things are likely going to be make or break for those kinds of moves.