Agreed. Think a Miller-Petterson-Garland top line could be real good.
Putting Boeser with Horvat vs 2nd pairings should also be in our favour.
Putting Boeser with Horvat vs 2nd pairings should also be in our favour.
Agreed. Think a Miller-Petterson-Garland top line could be real good.
Putting Boeser with Horvat vs 2nd pairings should also be in our favour.
I think having both Garland and Toffoli would be redundant especially with the glaring holes on D. I would have preferred to use the Toffoli money on keeping Tanev.This contract represents about $700,000 more than what the Habs are paying Tyler Tofoli. Is Garland a better top-six forward than Tofoli. Certainly he's younger, but the Canucks could have easily had both.
Toffoli was a bad fit here. We need Garlands speed as we aren’t the quickest teamI think having both Garland and Toffoli would be redundant especially with the glaring holes on D. I would have preferred to use the Toffoli money on keeping Tanev.
Given a choice between Toffoli and Garland I’d take Garland, primarily because of age. That Toffoli contract is a very good one too though.
Toffoli was a bad fit here. We need Garlands speed as we aren’t the quickest team
Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwardsToffoli was a very good fit and a big loss for the Canucks. Garland is faster and an able replacement. But I'm still sad about the loss of Toffoli.
Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards
More like Pearson is a Tofoli replacement, could of had him of 1M more.Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.
And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.
Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.
Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards
Questionable trade for sureWhy the hell did Benning trade for him, then, if the reason he wasn't a good fit was something that could have been easily realized by scouting him?
It's not like this was a chemistry issue or he struggled when coming here or something.
So Tofoli goes to the Habs and racks up 28 goals and 44 points in 56 games......and he wasn't 'a good fit' in Vancouver? Just for reference, the Canucks leading scorer was Brock Boeser with 23 goals.
Is it just me, or this debate about Tofoli not being a good fit for the Canucks, bordering on ridiculous.
More like Pearson is a Tofoli replacement, could of had him of 1M more.
But boy will they try.Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.
And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.
Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.
Yeah but mentorpedes per sixtythis is the key we could have kept Toffoli and let Pearson walk this year.
Disagree. Good player, not a fit with our slow forwards
Who’s the slower player ?So you would rather we traded for a slower player to keep up with our already slow players.
you related to Jimbo?
Who are you referring to?So you would rather we traded for a slower player to keep up with our already slow players.
you related to Jimbo?
Why it happens every trade deadline?So Tofoli goes to the Habs and racks up 28 goals and 44 points in 56 games......and he wasn't 'a good fit' in Vancouver? Just for reference, the Canucks leading scorer was Brock Boeser with 23 goals.
Is it just me, or this debate about Tofoli not being a good fit for the Canucks, bordering on ridiculous.
But what's even more ridiculous is giving up Tyler Madden and a second round draft pick for 10 games of Tofoli and a couple of playoff games.
This is normal because they live day-to-day.Whether or not Tofoli was a 'good fit' going forward is sort of immaterial. Because instead of re-upping him, the Canucks chose to use his money to re-sign Virtanen and then sign Holtby -- and then proceeded to buy both of them out this spring.
And I still like the Canucks lineup a lot better with BOTH Tofoli and Garland in the lineup. Both guys can seamlessly move up and down the lineup, and could have been just as effective on the third-fourth lines, as they would be in the top six.
Nobody will ever convince me that Garland is just a 'Tofoli replacement'.