Newsletter Signup
Stay up to date on all the latest news from Boston.com
Could the Bruins target Oliver Ekman-Larsson as a low-risk, high-reward free agent?
"I do wonder about the Boston Bruins with Oliver Ekman-Larsson."
The Bruins aren’t necessarily equipped for a spending spree this summer.
With under $5 million in available cap room as of Sunday evening and just 14 skaters currently under contract, Don Sweeney has few options available this summer, unless he manages to shed a few contracts.
Even if Boston does manage to craft additional wiggle room, most of that cap space is likely going to be diverted toward retaining existing talent on the roster, be it a veteran stalwart like Patrice Bergeron or one of the team’s deadline pickups like Tyler Bertuzzi.
IF Boston someone gets the cap room to add to this team once the free-agency feeding frenzy begins on July 1, it’ll have to be low-risk, high-reward assets willing to ink cheap deals.
Advertisement:
Given those tight parameters, it comes as no surprise that Oliver Ekman-Larsson has already come up as an intriguing offseason option for Boston.
The 31-year-old Ekman-Larsson is now a free agent after his previous team in the Canucks opted to buy out the final four years of his eight-year, $66 million contract.
Vancouver, in a cap crunch of its own, opted to take on an average cap penalty of $2.126 million over the next eight years just to wipe that contract off the books.
Once one of the more underrated blueliners in the NHL during his tenure with the Coyotes, Ekman-Larsson’s game declined rapidly with the Canucks. His 2022-23 campaign was one to forget, with a middling Vancouver club outscored, 82-50, during his 1,089 minutes.
If the 6-foot-2 blueliner is looking to recoup his value on a cheap, “prove-it” contract, the Bruins might come calling.
Advertisement:
Back in 2021 when the Coyotes were fielding offers for Ekman-Larsson, multiple reports had the defenseman opting to only waive his no-trade clause for Boston or Vancouver.
Arizona opted to send him west to the Canucks, but it seems like the intrigue in Boston is still there from Ekman-Larsson’s camp.
“We’ve talked about various teams that have made plays for Oliver Ekman-Larsson in the past. The Boston Bruins have been on that list, were on that list previously,” Jeff Marek said on the “32 Thoughts” podcast last week.
“And he likes them,” fellow NHL insider Elliotte Friedman added.
“That’s one of the teams I wondered about right out of the gate here,” Marek continued. “Listen, it’s not exactly a secret that the Boston Bruins are going to have to do some things here. If you can get an Oliver Ekman-Larsson on the cheap, maybe that affords you the luxury of being able to do something that you otherwise had some misgivings about. So, I do wonder about the Boston Bruins with Oliver Ekman-Larsson, whether that can finally come to some fruition.”
At first glance, there doesn’t appear to be a spot for Ekman-Larsson on Boston’s blue line.
Advertisement:
But given the need for more cap room and the backlog of players on the left side of the B’s defense, it’s an area of the roster destined to be diced up this summer.
It feels like a given that at least two of Mike Reilly, Derek Forbort and Matt Grzelcyk will be either bought out or traded at some point this offseason.
Replacing one of Forbort or Grzelcyk with a cheaper player in Ekman-Larsson might be a savvy way for Boston to shake things up, create cap space and potentially inject more talent into Boston’s lineup.
Of course, such a scenario requires Ekman-Larsson to want to take a short-term deal for around $1.5 – $2 million this season. And Boston has to carve out a roster spot as well.
Ekman-Larsson is more mobile than Forbort and even if he’s not a bruiser, he should be able to withstand the punishing nature of the playoffs more than the 5-foot-9 Grzelcyk. But even if he’s relegated to a third-pairing role, is a change of scenery enough for Ekman-Larsson to reverse his downward trend?
Ekman-Larsson will likely never be the offensive conduit he once was in Arizona, where he averaged 24:38 of ice time and 16.5 goals per season from 2013-19.
Advertisement:
But for as poor as his 2022-23 campaign was, Ekman-Larsson’s first foray with the Canucks offered some promise over his ability to hold his own as a two-way ace.
Along with posting 29 points (five goals, 24 assists) over 79 games and averaging 22:19 of ice time per contest, he had just 44.01 percent of his faceoffs set in the offensive zone during 5v5 play.
That D-zone usage ranked 171st out of the 213 NHL defensemen who logged at least 500 minutes of 5v5 ice time in 2021-22. But even with Vancouver handing him plenty of shifts in his team’s own zone, a rather middling Canucks team still outscored opponents, 55-46, during Ekman-Larsson’s 1387:43 of 5v5 ice time.
Much like how Hampus Lindholm thrived in Boston following his trade from a rudderless Anaheim roster, perhaps Ekman-Larsson is due for a resurgence in Jim Montgomery’s system?
If Boston does move on from one of Forbort or Grzelcyk, Ekman-Larsson does have a chance to slot in on the left side of Boston’s second or third defensive pairing. On a short-term deal, he not only potentially lifts the Bruins’ defensive ceiling, but is a more-than-serviceable stopgap as Boston awaits Mason Lohrei’s arrival.
Of course, if Ekman-Larsson’s game is indeed on a steady decline, the Bruins could be replacing Forbort or Grzelcyk with a lesser player, and that not even be worth the cap saving — which might still be unrealistic if Ekman-Larsson’s wants a deal around $3-4 million.
Advertisement:
Is Ekman-Larsson the perfect addition to Boston’s blue line? Probably not. Is he a sure bet to bounce back? Definitely not.
But given Boston’s cap situation, Sweeney and the Bruins don’t necessarily have the leeway to pick and choose each and every available option out there on the market.
But if they’re looking to roll the dice on low-cost, high-reward options, Ekman-Larsson does make plenty of sense.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com