Quoting: squashmaple
I do. Making ACGM and justifying a trade where a team takes a bad contract on "because you can flip it later" is lazy and uncreative. A first, a sixth, and Jake Bean's absence is not enough enticement to take on both Myers and OEL's contracts, especially if it hinges on the idea that you have to take on the risk of finding a second deal later to flip one or both of them.
Lazy and uncreative, sure, but it still makes sense for a rebuilding team. Myers especially makes sense after July 1st, since he only makes $1M; and he's a huge right-shot defensive D-man, if he's even serviceable someone would overpay for that at the deadline. It's a relatively safe and cheap bet.
The criticism of OEL though is 100% valid, He's wildly inconsistent, and basically a Gudbranson-level liability at an extra year and almost twice the cap hit. But...for, in all likelihood, 11th or 12th OA? I doubt Vancouver pays that price, and they may even have to add more, but it's at least more interesting than just "Myers for pick". I'd be tempted, especially if you pick someone like Reinbacher who would theoretically be an immediate upgrade on D when OEL is up and the team is ready to compete.
Edit: I realize trading Myers after the draft defeats the purpose of those draft picks, but maybe the 6th goes to 2024 and the centerpiece is whoever Vancouver picks at 11th/12th OA instead.
CaseyFlyman and NHLfan10506 liked this.
Reply
Johnson,
CapFriendly
CapFriendly