Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Conor Garland | #8 | RW/LW


-AJ-

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

I hope he sticks with 83. I quite like the high numbers for offensive players

I bet he wears #83 why change now, he has had a good career and will continue..

2021-22 -- GP 75 - G 25- 29  --PTS -{62 --65}

Don't change anything...lol

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2021 at 8:43 PM, wildcam said:

I bet he wears #83 why change now, he has had a good career and will continue..

2021-22 -- GP 75 - G 25- 29  --PTS -{62 --65}

Don't change anything...lol

He really did change it. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -AJ- changed the title to Conor Garland | #8 | RW
  • 4 weeks later...
On 7/23/2021 at 9:57 PM, nux_win said:

I like the comparison, I hope that's the case.  I liked Ronning.  We just need two new twin towers out there to protect our skill guys.  I hope Benning isn't forgetting about that part of the equation.  Yes, we need the skill guys but we also need some muscle out there come playoffs.  Heck, we even get pushed around in the regular season and frankly I've had enough of that.  I think the trade looks good for us in general, I just want to see how it plays out on the ice before I make any definitive stand.  Go Canucks Go!

yeah with him and hogs being smaller, bit concerned but I think it will be ok especially when they can play on different lines but the last thing I wanted to see was another butter soft team we just got rid of but seems to me CG isn't afraid to mix it up with guys bigger than himself.. 

 Seems to me the idiots who wanted to see Myers gone can't see his value in this aspect of the game but glad he's still here because when the post season shows up, they will be glad he's still here as well but again, fans thinking through the media again.. never ends but laughable as hell...

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/10/2021 at 10:19 AM, Alflives said:

Cat:  40

Gar:  35

 

Mini Mouse:  11

Debrincat for sure is hitting 30-40 goals. 

Garland - Alf, I think 35 is a little optimistic, I'm saying he scores 25-27 goals. 

Caufield, depending on who he's playing with and where, probably 20-25 goals? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, kloubek said:

I was worried about this with Garland as well, but I was assured by another CDCer that he plays like Motte, and despite his smaller size it isn't a detriment to his play. (Like it isn't an issue with Motte). I just haven't seen him play enough to have had any sense of his motor and tenacity, but that sounded good enough for me. And Hoglander plays much the same way. 

No, you don't ultimately want to have a bunch of smaller sized guys, but if your smaller guys do play with passion, it's not usually a real problem.

Yeah.. Ronning comes to mind.. I just remember how many early exits in the first round we had BUT sometimes we almost hung on but got beat by a big team that went on to win the cup, well our lack of depth didn't help either but it's been a problem for a long time, however if we have bigger guys on the team I hope the Sedin treatment ends and we can actually go for it now our window is just opening, but I hope it works, I was kind of shaking my head about dumping players like Myers, we so need his size which we should have had in Tryamkin and Guddy but didn't, however we're not a big team, nor are we a small team. Certainly hope it gets adjusted if need be. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, knucklehead91 said:

Dont gotta worry about size, gotta worry about heart. Hogs has the heart of a f***ing Lion and goes into corners with some pretty big animals but he comes out with the kill quite often. Same goes for Garland, he seems like a pretty tenacious player and goes to the dirty areas.
As long as these guys dont shy away from the corners or front of the net, it gives us a chance to win each night, we arent gunna be pushed around or intimidated.
Also, look at TBL, they have quite a few small forwards.

Certainly, as long as their lil Bulldogs (and I'll pick our fearless beloved "Ripper") or anywhere near close to a player he was. 

 Good point, maybe I'm just so sick of "softness"  

 that even the thought of it makes me cringe! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/13/2021 at 2:35 PM, kloubek said:

I was worried about this with Garland as well, but I was assured by another CDCer that he plays like Motte, and despite his smaller size it isn't a detriment to his play. (Like it isn't an issue with Motte). I just haven't seen him play enough to have had any sense of his motor and tenacity, but that sounded good enough for me. And Hoglander plays much the same way. 

No, you don't ultimately want to have a bunch of smaller sized guys, but if your smaller guys do play with passion, it's not usually a real problem.

Look at Jake 6'2 220+ never used his size for 99% of the NHL games he played. Hoglander and Garland go to the net and dirty areas unlike Jake. You can have all the size in the world but if you aren't willing to use it to punish guys then it is pointless. I'd take Hogs and Gars competitiveness and work ethic over Jake's (or any any players) physical capabilities. What drives a player to be the best version of themselves can't be measured

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Outsiders said:

Look at Jake 6'2 220+ never used his size for 99% of the NHL games he played. Hoglander and Garland go to the net and dirty areas unlike Jake. You can have all the size in the world but if you aren't willing to use it to punish guys then it is pointless. I'd take Hogs and Gars competitiveness and work ethic over Jake's (or any any players) physical capabilities. What drives a player to be the best version of themselves can't be measured

I totally agree. Size alone doesn't mean much if you aren't willing to use it. Not only did Jake rarely apply his size, for a guy with his muscle mass you'd think he would win a lot more puck battles than he did.

Simply put: You ain't going to be a top NHL player unless you have heart are are dedicated to the craft.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, kloubek said:

I totally agree. Size alone doesn't mean much if you aren't willing to use it. Not only did Jake rarely apply his size, for a guy with his muscle mass you'd think he would win a lot more puck battles than he did.

Simply put: You ain't going to be a top NHL player unless you have heart are are dedicated to the craft.

Virtanen truly a waste of talent and skill. 

 

Höglander and Garland, later picks, but they have the “it” that Jake never had. The draft is truly a crapshoot. You can get a player like Garland in the 5th round, but have a bust in a top ten pick in Jake. Go figure. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, HomeBrew said:

image.gif.f122baf75ee8e9254fdeab707c8626e7.gif

 

The guy has some dangles! I missed hearing about his World Tourny showing this summer where he won Bronze on team USA and was 2nd in the overall tourny for points. Looking forward to his debut!


https://www.nhl.com/coyotes/news/garland-dazzles-at-world-championship/c-325255770

 

Wow, that is insanely smooth.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HomeBrew said:

image.gif.f122baf75ee8e9254fdeab707c8626e7.gif

 

The guy has some dangles! I missed hearing about his World Tourny showing this summer where he won Bronze on team USA and was 2nd in the overall tourny for points. Looking forward to his debut!


https://www.nhl.com/coyotes/news/garland-dazzles-at-world-championship/c-325255770

 

Really want to see him play. Seems like an excellent pick up by Benning. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...