(Speculation) VGK expected to sign Max Comtois to PTO

[EddieVedder]

9 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Beauvillier was demoted to the 3rd line last year.  You would know this if you actually watched the games...

How many times have we seen Garland and boeser demoted to the 3rd line?  Its happened quite often.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

How many times have we seen Garland and boeser demoted to the 3rd line?  Its happened quite often.

 

Garland is a 3rd liner. I am not questioning that. But so is Beauvillier. Neither one is anything close to a top 6 player. Garland however drives play, Beauvillier doesn’t. If he’s not playing with Petey then Beauvillier is completely useless. Doesn’t kill penalties. Isn’t good defensively. 
 

Boeser played primarily with Miller last year. He at least can score 20+ goals consistently unlike the other two guys. He’s done it 4 times in 7 years. Should have had 30 goals twice. Boeser needs to get stronger and improve his skating. If he can do that he might have a shot at a good career. If not, he will end up like Beauvillier. Same with Garland. 
 

At the end of the day I don’t really see any of these guys long term with the Canucks. 

[DeNiro]

14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Garland is a 3rd liner. I am not questioning that. But so is Beauvillier. Neither one is anything close to a top 6 player. Garland however drives play, Beauvillier doesn’t. If he’s not playing with Petey then Beauvillier is completely useless. Doesn’t kill penalties. Isn’t good defensively. 
 

Boeser played primarily with Miller last year. He at least can score 20+ goals consistently unlike the other two guys. He’s done it 4 times in 7 years. Should have had 30 goals twice. Boeser needs to get stronger and improve his skating. If he can do that he might have a shot at a good career. If not, he will end up like Beauvillier. Same with Garland. 
 

At the end of the day I don’t really see any of these guys long term with the Canucks. 

Except Garland has had second line production for the last two seasons.

 

Say what you want about his size or how he plays but his stats say he’s a top 6.

 

Beauvillier looks to be a third liner, but we’ll see what he can do for a full season away from NYI’s low scoring defense first system. He’s just entering his prime breakout year so we’ll see what he can do.

[Elias Pettersson]

31 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Except Garland has had second line production for the last two seasons.

 

Say what you want about his size or how he plays but his stats say he’s a top 6.

 

Beauvillier looks to be a third liner, but we’ll see what he can do for a full season away from NYI’s low scoring defense first system. He’s just entering his prime breakout year so we’ll see what he can do.

46 points isn’t really 2nd line production. Also, if Garland was a 2nd liner he would have been easily traded. $4.95 million for a 2nd liner is good value. Problem is he can’t be traded because the rest of the league doesn’t view him as a legit 2nd liner. He’s also 5’8” on a good day and doesn’t kill penalties. 
 

I don’t have a problem with Garland on the 3rd line, but not at close to $5 million. And not with guys like Suter and Höglander. 

[DeNiro]

20 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

46 points isn’t really 2nd line production. Also, if Garland was a 2nd liner he would have been easily traded. $4.95 million for a 2nd liner is good value. Problem is he can’t be traded because the rest of the league doesn’t view him as a legit 2nd liner. He’s also 5’8” on a good day and doesn’t kill penalties. 
 

I don’t have a problem with Garland on the 3rd line, but not at close to $5 million. And not with guys like Suter and Höglander. 

He has averaged 50 points over 2 seasons.

You’re not gonna find many third liners putting up 50 points. That would put him 5th in scoring on the Maple Leafs last season for example.

 

Teams aren’t trading for him because he’s a small 2nd liner and there’s a cap crunch. Teams are either looking for bargains right now or looking to take advantage of cap crunched teams. If the cap were going up this season I don’t think they’d have any problem unloading Garland.

 

The Canucks would be wise to hold onto him. I still think there will be a market for him if he can up his points a little and the cap goes up significantly.

[CaptKirk888]

On 9/1/2023 at 4:36 PM, Ghostsof1915 said:

US doesn't care about scandals.

Yes WE does!

[Gawdzukes]

12 hours ago, DeNiro said:

He has averaged 50 points over 2 seasons.

You’re not gonna find many third liners putting up 50 points. That would put him 5th in scoring on the Maple Leafs last season for example.

 

Teams aren’t trading for him because he’s a small 2nd liner and there’s a cap crunch. Teams are either looking for bargains right now or looking to take advantage of cap crunched teams. If the cap were going up this season I don’t think they’d have any problem unloading Garland.

 

The Canucks would be wise to hold onto him. I still think there will be a market for him if he can up his points a little and the cap goes up significantly.

 

12 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

46 points isn’t really 2nd line production. Also, if Garland was a 2nd liner he would have been easily traded. $4.95 million for a 2nd liner is good value. Problem is he can’t be traded because the rest of the league doesn’t view him as a legit 2nd liner. He’s also 5’8” on a good day and doesn’t kill penalties. 
 

I don’t have a problem with Garland on the 3rd line, but not at close to $5 million. And not with guys like Suter and Höglander. 

I totally agree. I personally don't care what the stats say, the game is played on the ice. He's not a second line guy on any of my teams and I surely don't want him on the third line as a $5 mil dollar sub 5'8" winger who doesn't penalty kill.

 

You could have a guy playing on the third line for a fraction of the cost and pay a real quality second liner 6-7 million.

Edited September 3, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[DeNiro]

25 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I totally agree. I personally don't care what the stats say, the game is played on the ice. He's not a second line guy on any of my teams and I surely don't want him on the third line as a $5 mil dollar sub 5'8" winger who doesn't penalty kill.

 

You could have a guy playing on the third line for a fraction of the cost and pay a real quality second liner 6-7 million.

I mean it’s obvious you’re biased against smaller players. 
 

The fact is 50 point production is in line with a second line player. And there’s plenty of second line players that put up those stats and don’t contribute on the pk.

 

Production is production and Garland has been pretty consistent over the last three seasons. For comparison, Boeser has averaged the exact same amount and also doesn’t pk. Yet I think most would consider him a second liner (even if he’s overpaid)

 

 

Edited September 3, 2023 by DeNiro

[Alflives]

25 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I totally agree. I personally don't care what the stats say, the game is played on the ice. He's not a second line guy on any of my teams and I surely don't want him on the third line as a $5 mil dollar sub 5'8" winger who doesn't penalty kill.

 

You could have a guy playing on the third line for a fraction of the cost and pay a real quality second liner 6-7 million.

If Garland is 5’8 Alf will eat his empties. He’s 5’6 at most. He’s a garden gnome. He’s a small Benning stain (more of a spot) that has to go. 

[IBatch]

14 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Except Garland has had second line production for the last two seasons.

 

Say what you want about his size or how he plays but his stats say he’s a top 6.

 

Beauvillier looks to be a third liner, but we’ll see what he can do for a full season away from NYI’s low scoring defense first system. He’s just entering his prime breakout year so we’ll see what he can do.

Garland is 61st in EV points the past three seasons.   Also pretty much the same each year, so consistent at least.   There are 96 first line spots.    50 points for sure is second line production.      

 

Problem with our team, is we just have way too much money tied up in wingers.    Wheeler is just below him.   Sure he's getting on, but also had some typical Wheeler seasons in there.   

 

 BTW, he's 10 shy of EP who's got 122, Miller leads our team with 129, one ahead of Tavares.   McDavid has  221, second place Mathews, 187.    Also have to go way down the list quite a ways to find Horvat,  at 102, and Brock at 101 ...   

 

Edited September 3, 2023 by IBatch
Here's some more ... a lot of first liners below Garland

[IBatch]

13 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If Garland is 5’8 Alf will eat his empties. He’s 5’6 at most. He’s a garden gnome. He’s a small Benning stain (more of a spot) that has to go. 

QHs is 1/2 an inch taller. 

[Elias Pettersson]

20 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I mean it’s obvious you’re biased against smaller players. 
 

The fact is 50 point production is in line with a second line player. And there’s plenty of second line players that put up those stats and don’t contribute on the pk.

 

Production is production and Garland has been pretty consistent over the last three seasons.

Regardless of his production, he is still going to be playing on the 3rd line.  Vegas bottom 6 has guys that are all 6'1", 6'2" or bigger.  Garland doesn't have a chance against the likes of Barbashev, Roy, Carrier, Amadio and Kolesar.  Even 6'4" Mark Stone sometimes plays in the bottom 6.  

 

We have sub 6'0" guys all over the place on the roster.  A line of Suter, Hoglander and Garland would get eaten alive in the playoffs.  We need to get much bigger in the bottom 6 if we wish to compete with the big boys in the playoffs...

Edited September 3, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

23 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If Garland is 5’8 Alf will eat his empties. He’s 5’6 at most. He’s a garden gnome. He’s a small Benning stain (more of a spot) that has to go. 

Garland is probably the same size as Cliff Ronning.  Ronning was a beauty, but he also had giants like Sergio Momesso surrounding him.  If Garland is on the 3rd line, then you need some big boys on there too.  Not Suter and Hoglander...

Edited September 3, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[IBatch]

9 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Garland is probably the same size as Cliff Ronning.  Ronning was a beauty, but he also had giants like Sergio Momesso surrounding him.  If Garland is on the 3rd line, then you need some big boys on there too.  Not Suter and Hoglander...

Ronning was also built like a little block.   175-180lbs at 5'7", and a much better player.    The Production line, was actually one of the better ones we've had, and amped his game up in the playoffs.  

 

Moving Linden to center gave us two legit lines.   Momesso was one of my favourite role players all-time.    Don't make them like that anymore.   Looked like he was always coming off a bad night in jail, and he was the bad.  

 

Don't mind Garland, he'd be better off on a different team though.  Gourde is probably the best little playoff guy around right now. 

Edited September 3, 2023 by IBatch

[IBatch]

31 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If Garland is 5’8 Alf will eat his empties. He’s 5’6 at most. He’s a garden gnome. He’s a small Benning stain (more of a spot) that has to go. 

Listed at 5'10 so have to agree, that's with skates maybe. 

[IBatch]

36 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Regardless of his production, he is still going to be playing on the 3rd line.  Vegas bottom 6 has guys that are all 6'1", 6'2" or bigger.  Garland doesn't have a chance against the likes of Barbashev, Roy, Carrier, Amadio and Kolesar.  Even 6'4" Mark Stone sometimes plays in the bottom 6.  

 

We have sub 6'0" guys all over the place on the roster.  A line of Suter, Hoglander and Garland would get eaten alive in the playoffs.  We need to get much bigger in the bottom 6 if we wish to compete with the big boys in the playoffs...

Our bottom six is puny.   Our top six isn't big either, but respectable.   We for sure need to replace that or we will never get by Vegas style teams.    Don't know why this team has such an aversion to guys prime guys like Reaves, Deslaurier, Martin and Maroon.   And guys like Manson.   Sure wished we traded for him while we could.  

 

 

  If Pearson, Miller, Horvat,  and Brock is your "size", good luck.   Right now who is our size?  Podz and Joshua?  Ilya M?   EP should grow into his frame some more which is encouraging.   Miller at least throws so hits, but is no Cam Neely either.  At least Garland plays with a chip on his shoulder, too bad he's not 6'4, 230lbs. 

Edited September 3, 2023 by IBatch

[wai_lai416]

16 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Except Garland has had second line production for the last two seasons.

 

Say what you want about his size or how he plays but his stats say he’s a top 6.

 

Beauvillier looks to be a third liner, but we’ll see what he can do for a full season away from NYI’s low scoring defense first system. He’s just entering his prime breakout year so we’ll see what he can do.

lol look at his production against good teams.. it's non existent.. padding stats against bad teams doesn't make you a top 6

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

46 points isn’t really 2nd line production. Also, if Garland was a 2nd liner he would have been easily traded. $4.95 million for a 2nd liner is good value. Problem is he can’t be traded because the rest of the league doesn’t view him as a legit 2nd liner. He’s also 5’8” on a good day and doesn’t kill penalties. 
 

I don’t have a problem with Garland on the 3rd line, but not at close to $5 million. And not with guys like Suter and Höglander. 

Garland's production was top 50 in the league at 5 on 5.  

 

Producing like a top line winger at even strength, and not playing any power play. 

[Gawdzukes]

9 hours ago, DeNiro said:

I mean it’s obvious you’re biased against smaller players. 
 

The fact is 50 point production is in line with a second line player. And there’s plenty of second line players that put up those stats and don’t contribute on the pk.

 

Production is production and Garland has been pretty consistent over the last three seasons. For comparison, Boeser has averaged the exact same amount and also doesn’t pk. Yet I think most would consider him a second liner (even if he’s overpaid)

 

 

 

I actually don't mind smaller players. Cliff Ronning is one of my favorite players all time. But yeah, unfortunately being small is a disadvantage like being slow. I simply don't like Garland's style at all though. He holds the puck and dicks around with it in the corners too much, and then finally takes super bad angle shots all the time. It makes it hard for his teammates to read and react and I simply find him ineffective overall. If he's not in a top 6 role he's not a good defender for a third line either role imo, and 3 different coaches have bounced him around the lineup. He's not a horrible player but in my mind paying him $5 mil to bounce around the line-up, even if he's putting up points is not a good use of cap space. Blame the coaches lol. It would also be different if we had a couple bruisers in the top 6 to balance the line-up.

 

Similarly I don't like Gadjovich's game at all and I find MacEwan, and Bailey even worse. It doesn't mean I don't like big players. or hockey. I'm sure you have a player or two on the team you don't regard as highly the others yourself. Do you not?

 

Like I said I don't care about stats and whether 50 points is a second liner or not. For me production is not production and definitely not how you decide who plays and who stays and goes. I don't let that dictate how I see the game, He's currently the worst contract we got. His money would be better spent elsewhere imho.

 

  

9 hours ago, Alflives said:

If Garland is 5’8 Alf will eat his empties. He’s 5’6 at most. He’s a garden gnome. He’s a small Benning stain (more of a spot) that has to go. 

 

I think I agree sir but I'am too busy bowing to your empties. It is Sunday after all. 

 

 

  

8 hours ago, IBatch said:

Ronning was also built like a little block.   175-180lbs at 5'7", and a much better player.    The Production line, was actually one of the better ones we've had, and amped his game up in the playoffs.  

 

Moving Linden to center gave us two legit lines.   Momesso was one of my favourite role players all-time.    Don't make them like that anymore.   Looked like he was always coming off a bad night in jail, and he was the bad.  

 

Don't mind Garland, he'd be better off on a different team though.  Gourde is probably the best little playoff guy around right now. 

Thank you IBatch. Loved me some Ronning. Don't like to admit it but Gaudreau has some of that sublime skillset as a little player too. Can't touch the guy out there without compromising the back of your net. Also couldn't agree more on Gourde. He is awesome and a big reason TB won the cup. Brian Bradley was a player I used to like too. I think he was quite a bit smaller than 5'10".

 

The "I don't like small players thing isn't true at all"

 

Like you said he'd be better off on a different team. Or, if our coaches used him to set up a killer scoring line, like Ronning, I would be way more copacetic. One thing that stands out for me is that Garland is always initiating contact with bigger players (everybody lol). If he played a more cerebral game like Ronning or Gaudreau and didn't get caught up in the boards all the time, I think he'd be far more effective as well. I've said it before. I find it very admirable that he's such a battler, but unfortunately it detracts from his game as a smaller player.

Edited September 3, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[rekker]

4 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Like I said I don't care about stats and whether 50 points is a second liner or not. For me production is not production and definitely not how you decide who plays and who stays and goes. I don't let that dictate how I see the game, He's currently the worst contract we got. His money would be better spent elsewhere imho.

Yip. Fans get too fixated on points. So much more to the game as in Dzone play, takeaways, board play, possession play that don't show up on the scoreboard. High end players like the twins for example, ruled the boards and dominated possession stats. I will take that over a floater that puts on a great show when he has the puck any day. For bottom nine players I want some points, but points mean nothing if a player can't win the puck back or make a smart play to keep possession. Players like Gourde and Marchessault. These guys will win you championships over guys like Nylander. Garland is a good story, but a better fit elsewhere and I would rather see Pods or Hogs get his ice time.