Welcome back to WWYDW, the only hockey column on the internet to not sign with the Calgary Flames this offseason.

Speaking of which, a lot has changed since we got together last week. Jacob Markstrom and Chris Tanev have moved on to Calgary. Troy Stecher is a Detroit Red Wing. Tyler Toffoli joined the Montreal Canadiens. Josh Leivo remains twisting in the wind.

For a minute there, it looked as if Jim Benning’s only offseason acquisition might be goaltender Braden Holtby, a fine signing, but one that didn’t put much of a dent in fans’ disappointment at losing the four players mentioned above. Up until Monday night, this was going to be a much different, and significantly more pessimistic comment section.

Then, Benning filled the Canucks’ largest organizational need by acquiring Nate Schmidt from the Vegas Golden Knights for a 2022 third round pick, and now the perspective has shifted.

The offseason may not be over, but the Canucks have probably made all of their “big moves” already, so it’s the perfect time to ask:

How would you rate the Canucks’ offseason thus far?

Fittingly enough, last week we asked:

Do you want the Canucks to trade for Oliver Ekman-Larsson or not?

Either way, what is the maximum amount you would give up for him?

Your responses are below!


Yes, they should, provided the trade involves one of Sutter/Eriksson, one of Juolevi/Rathbone, Virtanen, mid-round draft pick in 2022 or 2023, and salary retained.

Beer Can Boyd:

(Winner of the author’s weekly award for eloquence)

If OEL was a UFA, would you sign him to a seven-year deal at an $8.25 annual cap hit? There’s your answer.


Myers for OEL straight-up might be the only deal that makes sense for the Canucks, and with the `Yotes new owners not paying their bills maybe that $2 mil savings in Myers cheaper contract is enough to entice them.


I appreciate the talent that OEL brings, but he is getting older and slower as the years pass along.

My simple answer would thus be no, do not trade for him. I hate to see this team strapped with yet another huge contract that hinders this team’s ability to retain home grown players.

El Kabong:

Stop spending on UFA. The Canucks are working their way to the end of a rebuild. This season we need to see what prospects can make the jump to the NHL. We have two or three defensemen who should be given a chance. Work Zack into a full time bottom-six player, and an outside chance of Nils Hoglander making the wing. After this season we can see what players made the cut and then fill any hole(s) that remain. With all the CAP, Covid, and revenue issues (for internal budgets) next season there should be even more quality players available at reduced rates. CAP space is going to be king so please don’t handcuff us with a contract like OEL’s. Let some of our bad contracts expire; Baer, Sutter, Benn etc.

Next season if when we should have a much better read on the team, and there should be less and smaller holes to fill with a top-pairing RD defenseman as a trade or future UFA target.


No, you absolutely do not trade for OEL. You don’t even take him for free. If OEL was an unrestricted free agent right now, it wouldn’t make any sense to give him the deal he’s currently on. I imagine the Coyotes are asking for significantly more than “nothing whatsoever.” So no, absolutely not.


So, do we want to bring in a fellow countryman of Pettersson who would love to be here and who has scored more goals every full season he has played than any Canucks D ever did during that time? Hmmm! Drance says his advanced stats show he’s made every D he’s played with much better and he’s definitely a top-30 D in the league. He could make Myers look much better and make an awesome top-four with Hughes and Tanev. So…yes, please, pretty please and thank you! Obviously, he needs to come with a cap dump, so I’d give up Juolevi, Tryamkin and a 1st if they took back Eriksson and Roussel, or just Juolevi, Tryamkin, and a 2nd if they would take Sutter and Baertschi.

Defenceman Factory:

The decision to trade for OEL is based on whether the priority is to win in the next two years or to build a team that is in contention for the next five to ten years.

Almost all fans want a contending team for the long-term, myself included. Unfortunately, it is not clear that is ownership’s preference. If it was, the OEL conversation would not even be happening.

If you want a team in contention over the long-term there is no price, within the realm of possibility, the Canucks should pay for OEL. His cost and inevitable decline will reduce the caliber of team you can put around the young stars. The NMC is an absolute deal breaker. If not confined by reality, a trade I would do is OEL with 33% salary retention for Eriksson and Virtanen.

I don’t believe the Canucks could win next year, even with OEL. The Canucks are not good enough in their bottom-six or at RHD. The year after Edler would certainly be gone and the cost of OEL prevents getting the upgrades in the bottom-six and RHD needed now.

Holly Wood:

I am not convinced OEL will provide much value within four years. He would become an anchor after that. Arizona has very little leverage in this situation. Last year, the Leafs sent a first pick to Carolina to rid of Marleau’s contract. To think we should send young talent like JV or Juolevi to help Arizona out of their bad financial choices is just crazy talk. If Canucks are the only team left in talks, then if Arizona really wants out then they will have to take on other debt and add an asset.


I’ve read every article and correspondence on this topic sometimes twice and I’ve gone from thinking it’s worth considering to the “absolutely not” camp. We’re on the verge, well two more seasons, of being out from under the weight of a number of onerous contracts to saddle the team with the biggest one yet with the longest term. Which brings up the most important reason: NO MONEY. Anyway, even with all the UFAs walking, it would still be virtually impossible. I’m not on the same page as Beer Can in regards to Virtanen but I do agree with a previous poster you have to qualify him. Wish they had done the same with Stecher. Perhaps Jake can get off to another amazing start and they can trade high before he hits the doldrums, like he does year after year. I also wouldn’t throw the moon at Markstrom. I’ve come around to Demko being the one. Can’t afford to give Marky term, cash, and a NMC, which is what someone else will offer. I would have tried to sign Toffoli of all the UFAs, but if ya can’t, ya can’t.

But I digress. OEL plays the wrong side for the team’s needs and is too expensive. Maybe Florida might be interested in a deal involving Ekblad; cheaper, younger, top-four, just what we’re looking for.


They gotta take Eriksson and Sutter or Beagle. Eriksson is owed hardly any money, and Sutter and Beagle don’t have much term left.


The Phoenix/Arizona Coyotes has been probably the biggest money pit in all of North American pro sports for 25 years. Why the board of governors and Bettman insist in keeping this loser franchise where it has been for so long is inexplicable. And now they want to dump the absurd OEL contract after one year AND Taylor Hall does not want to sign there. Who says people with money and power are smart? They’re not, but unfortunately are in charge. Acquire OEL, Benning, and people will end up watching fly-fishing instead. Pass.


OEL picked the Canucks and Bruins. Neither team can work any deal. This is just a BS play by the player rep.

I am Ted:

I’m on the fence with this one, but ultimately feel we need to pass on this trade. The cap hit is way too high and that is the salary OEL deserved a couple years ago. After the last couple seasons, OEL is maybe playing at the level where he should get $5-6 mill/year. Also, the new CBA allows OEL to KEEP his NMC even after being traded, so he has the Canucks held hostage for seven years. There is no way he performs like he used to. He is still a good player, but not worth the current cap hit.

If JB does make this deal, then he better be the clear winner. I would be OK if we dealt Eriksson, Sutter, Baertschi and maybe a 2nd and a B prospect for OEL. Anything more would be an overpay. Even then, those bad contracts expire in one or two years and then we have seven years of OEL. That also scares me.

Puck Viking:

No, don’t trade for him.

For $8.25 million this year, you could sign two or three nice players on one year deals. Barrie might sign if the money isn’t out there from another club. Plus, this allows us to clear up the horrible cap situation.

Either way, we take a step back on this, I think. Unfortunately, due the flat cap and horrible contracts, use this season to clear up the cap situation so we can hopefully get the Bear and Alien locked in to eight-year deals.

To take on OEL, they would need to take on Myers, Eriksson, Sven and Sutter for OEL. His long contract at huge money with a flat cap is horrible. It also would likely increase the cost of signing Hughes and Pete.

If you use Chabot at 8×8 for Hughes as a comparable, you most certainly can’t be paying a worse player more money than that. If OEL gets $8.25 mil, then Hughes gets $10 per, which means Pete gets $10 per. I’m hoping we can get those two locked up at 8×8 matching deals.


Just like any other potential trade, it simply depends on the details. Can I see a scenario where it works? Of course. But it depends on how desperate the Coyotes are to get rid of him. For me personally, it would involve retaining a lot of that salary, and taking back one of ours. Would I be upset if we got them to retain $3.5 million, take LE, and we gave them next year’s first or Rathbone? Probably not. OEL at $5 million a year starts to look fairly good even if it’s for seven years. In the end though, I suspect that kind of deal would be too far for the Coyotes to go. Anything much more than that from the Canucks’ side doesn’t really make sense.


Too much money, too much term, too many prospects given up. Not sure it’s a good idea having players making $8 million plus in their mid-thirties. Albatross contract in the future methinks. Good defenseman though.