Canucks do that, I doubt Flames think that enough and they only do this if they've given up on the season. Probably need to add a third I'd guess, although Flames fans will for sure say it needs a first.

I don't hate it, I think Garland just brings more of the same to Calgary though. Tanev could be a really nice piece on the rental market and if the Flames ever decide to retain on a deal he could definitely get a better return than this. A second round pick at 4.5M is probably fair though.

What about Matt Dumba? 4 years younger, we could re-sign him to a short deal while Willander percolates. Just a thought.

Do you think Calgary is interested in Conor Garland?
Does Calgary have enough cap space to afford him?

I don't think the Canucks do that. Tanev as a rental for a 2nd is not a good idea for this team.

I think Tanev is probably worth a 2nd with retention pretty easy and getting rid of Garland is probably worth more than the retention on Garland's contract. Totally valid opinion to not want to sacrifice the pick though.

I think to a cup contender Tanev is worth a 2nd for sure. Just not to the Canucks who I don't believe are a contender and who have traded so many picks lately. Including this yrs 2nd already.

As for Garland I think worst case scenario is we keep him into next offseason when the cap goes up 4-5 mil at which time his cap hit will look good to other teams and the term will only be 2 yrs. I think at that point we could get an asset for him. But I agree i would not trade him retained that would be a panic move that would hurt the team long term.

I agree with you 100%. Worst case I think you can give him away after this year. I don't like retaining unless we're doing it to make him an asset that brings back real value. Like I would consider 1m retention for Fabbro. Improves us and gives cap space this year, plus he's an RFA so we are getting long-term RD.