Very unlikely the Canucks would retain that much on Garland.

Garland at 2.5 mil is actually a very valuable asset. It will cost more than that to acquire him if you are going max retention

like what? I mean smith and toffoli got way below capfriendly user asking prices so I think this is a pretty substantial offer.

Preds pass. Smith is a fine 4th line player making league min. We'd need more than a 5th to take that awful Goodrow contract

Teams reportedly wanted sweeteners to take Garland's contract but I imagine with retention it'd cost something. Honestly, probably not a whole lot.

Garland at 2.5 is a lot more desirable because of the low cap hit. Both Smith and Toffoli have higher cap hit than 50% retained Garland. He is also younger than both of them by quite a bit

That is just completely false, and if it was true, it was before the OEL buyout. Now the Canucks have a lot of cap space and are not pressured into making a move. 50% retention is an extremely valuable asset. A 50 point 2 way forward at 2.5 mil is a bargain deal

Your need for cap space doesn't negate that teams wanted him with a sweetener lol. Apparently teams aren't all that high on Garland like a couple of capfriendly Canucks fans are. He likely would have been moved ages ago if the demand was high. He might get moved if there's a bit of retention but don't expect to get a premium.

I see you don't know how negotiations work. Teams were asking for sweeteners because they had the leverage to do so. Of course they are going to want the best deal possible. It does not mean Garland has negative value. They are just trying to rip the Canucks off in desparate times. Well guess what? They don't have that leverage to do that. The Canucks don't have to give into that offer. They can hold Garland just fine. It won't take 50% retention to trade him. With this full cap hit, he may not have a lot of value, but Garland at 2.5 mil is an extreme bargain that will have teams lining up to get him. Canucks aren't going to be willing to retain 2.5 mil for 3 years anyway

And now that there is "no leverage", they've gone back to not caring about him.

Canucks don't have to trade him. I'm not saying they aren't going to, but if it comes with 50% retention, they will definitely be asking for a lot more

Garland at 50% starts with a first