
Oliver Ekman-Larsson is a good player.
No longer a great player, but a good player, and barring a big injury or steep decline, a serviceable player for the next 2-3 years.
Heâs been paid like a great player, so I can understand why Jim Rutherford and Patrik Allvin are exploring a trade, according to reports.
That said, I also find those reports comical.
Who is going to trade for a contract that has five years remaining and takes the player to age 35, averaging $7.26 million per year, with total monies owing at nearly $40 million?
Itâs why we are asking on our poll question whether you would trade OEL for no return, just to rid the team of the contract.
POLL QUESTION: Would you trade Oliver Ekman-Larsson for zero return, just to get rid of the contract (5 years, $7.26 million/season, 39.5 million remaining)? #Canucks
Presented by @BodogCA
— Sekeres and Price (@sekeresandprice) May 10, 2022
After more than 5,000 votes, over 80% of respondents are saying they would.
The 80% gets that OEL money can better be deployed, that gaining $7.26 million of cap space per year for the next five years is the asset the Canucks would be receiving back.
And admittedly, the poll is fantastical.
I canât see a team taking on the full freight of this deal. Too long, too much risk, even at the cost of nothing.
If the Canucks are intent on moving Ekman-Larsson, first they need his consent as he has a full no-move clause. Youâll remember that he would only accept trades to Boston and Vancouver the last time this was requested of him.
Next they need a willing party among the OEL-blessed destinations.
Then, theyâll need to eat money and probably a fair bit of money â say $1 million or about what the Arizona coyotes ate â that will handicap their cap for the next five years.
And even with all that, theyâll still need one missing element: an acquiring GM who is Jim Benning desperate.
- You might also like:
- Troy from Richmond: Canucks fans are loving Stecher's playoff resurgence