Player Discussion Conor Garland
- Thread starter Angry Little Elf
- Start date
theguardianII
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2020
- 3,731
- 1,876
What all you aren't seeing is the business side of the contract.
Garland was on the league minimum and a RFA, in 3 years with the Yotes he hadn't got a regular position. Benning could have offered him 2.5 mil a season or even less. Sadly for Garland he would have had no option to take the offer or quit hockey. It would not be the first time a hockey player got railroaded by this team or Benning.
Garland did not need to be offered that much, he had no leverage, the BUSINESS of hockey and CAP control. He could have been the poor man's MacKinnon although he makes almost as much with a lot less impact.
But if using your methods of monetary reward system, Miller, Horvat, Boeser all deserve over 10 mil a season because they had a lot more games with a lot more points with a lot more consistency.
They have different levels of free agency for a reason. This contract just shows how badly Benning understood cap control or the impact of paying him as much as Horvat while not close to Horvat's value to the team. An outsider was just respected more than the guy putting out every night
Coffee
Take one step towards the direction you want to go
- Nov 12, 2021
- 9,284
- 8,165
And that's not happening
Can get kind of ugly here with that contract. I only catch about 20 Coyotes games a year, but from the eye test he has gotten more sound defensively and just overall seems more engaged in the game. I'm hoping he can bring some offense and have a bounce-back year in that regard
Actually what YOU aren't seeing is the business side of the contract.
It doesn't matter that he was making league minimum and a RFA. He signed a cheap bridge and significantly outperformed his last contract. He DID have a regular role with the Yotes. He finished top 3 in scoring with the Coyotes the previous two seasons.
Garland DID have leverage. He was arbitration eligible.
canuckking1
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2015
- 12,952
- 14,095
"He didn’t play very well, and I need more out of him…You’ve got to use your teammates and I think he could’ve passed the puck, he carried it a little too much"
This quote by Bruce sums up my thoughts on Garland. 90% of the time he just skates around with the Puck doing nothing instead of using the space his skating creates to pass to open teammates. It's frustrating because his edge work is great but he just wastes it going for a skate.
Garland is a guy who would be far more effective as the third member of a heavy, forechecking line with a big physical center like a Ryan O'Reilly or a Leon Draisaitl......but with his current line-mates he just has no room to operate. Teams put him in a phone-booth and he doesn't have the size or strength to get out of it.
If Boudreau really thinks that Garland is one of the team's biggest problems right now, then he's either getting frustrated with some of the key losses; or he's trying to somehow motivate him.
Still think it's no better than 50/50 that Garland is still with the Canucks next September.
If Boudreau really thinks that Garland is one of the team's biggest problems right now, then he's either getting frustrated with some of the key losses; or he's trying to somehow motivate him.
Still think it's no better than 50/50 that Garland is still with the Canucks next September.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 16,848
- 16,186
yes because Miller and Pearson are such wimps?
Shot has no range and he's getting boxed out and unable to produce. Very disappointing stretch of play.
Bobby9
Registered User
- Feb 10, 2019
- 2,444
- 3,357
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 29,832
- 18,081
tbh it kind of reminds me of mason raymond, only instead of always skating toward the corner until he falls down, garland always stickhandles into the corner until he runs out of room.
it looks like he’s accomplishing more but the net result is the same.
I agree with others. Initial impression is good, because he is noticeable and can drive possession, but that possession almost never ends up in a goal for and often results in a turnover/counter attack. Second line winger that needs to either improve his shot or passing (ideally both) to be top line material. Not underpaid for what he brings.
Garland is the type that should be able to be replaced by younger cheaper players if we only didn't sell of so many draft picks these past few years.
Garland is the type that should be able to be replaced by younger cheaper players if we only didn't sell of so many draft picks these past few years.
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
He is absolutely fine as a middle sixer.
And his contract is also ok. He is just about the least of our worries.
Just doesn't work with Miller, at, all.
His Jfresh card reads that he is a Solid middle Sixer who should probably only be on the Top line and PP if we run into injury troubles. Which personally matches my view of him. This recent string of meh performances doesn't really change that view. At most he might be overpaid, but i really don't think he is.
- Aug 28, 2011
- 18,077
- 22,856
I remember a few posters saying the "Arizona-factor" was holding this player back from eclipsing 70 points.
Serves as a reminder to always temper expectations and not get carried away. He is what he is getting paid for. A streaky 2nd liner winger. A Zack Hyman or Patric Hornqvist (in his prime).
Serves as a reminder to always temper expectations and not get carried away. He is what he is getting paid for. A streaky 2nd liner winger. A Zack Hyman or Patric Hornqvist (in his prime).
Garland hasn't really found a stable role on the roster. He doesn't get to see the ice on the PP because he's on the second unit. He's bounced around the lineup.
I'd like to see him stapled to Horvat for a stretch. He's got jam and Horvat could use a passer, which I think Garland is pretty good at. He might also drag Horvat into the fight with some of his antics.
I'd like to see him stapled to Horvat for a stretch. He's got jam and Horvat could use a passer, which I think Garland is pretty good at. He might also drag Horvat into the fight with some of his antics.
What's really held him back is his total inability to generate anything on the 2nd PP unit. 2 points this year and is averaging 1:43/game on the PP.
If he was picking up a few points there, his recent struggles at ES wouldn't look so terrible on paper.
If he was picking up a few points there, his recent struggles at ES wouldn't look so terrible on paper.
Tables of Stats
Registered User
Garland has frustrated me this season because he has a ton of great tools but has a fairly low IQ. I keep seeing a player who relies on his skating and dangling to keep the puck but who lacks the vision to work that puck into scoring areas. If he can't skate the puck there, he's rarely getting the puck there and his shot isn't good enough to where you want other players feeding him the puck. He has to be the third man on any top-6 line he's on and ideally shouldn't be the one carrying the puck on a zone entry.
If his counting stats weren't so low this season I'd want to trade him for a better fit. I think to get the most from him I'd want to see something like:
Pearson - Miller - Boeser
Pettersson - Horvat - Garland
On that second line, Horvat and Pettersson can handle zone entries and Garland can focus on winning puck battles for the line.
If his counting stats weren't so low this season I'd want to trade him for a better fit. I think to get the most from him I'd want to see something like:
Pearson - Miller - Boeser
Pettersson - Horvat - Garland
On that second line, Horvat and Pettersson can handle zone entries and Garland can focus on winning puck battles for the line.
Last edited:
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,427
- 9,125
People tend to think all progression is linear, rather than prepare for worst case scenario.
Fun to watch but his effectiveness doesn’t match the fun. He’s not exactly the Bartkowski of forwards but it’s a similar thing (I still remember people loving Bartkowski because he skated the puck up ice fast…only to not do anything with it).
His production hasn’t been good enough of late and he’s really struggled. While his quick turns along the boards are exciting I fear come playoff time when there is more allowance to finish checks and run people he is going to get smashed.
Really not sure what to do with this player. Contract isn’t horrendous but I also don’t think he’s a guy that is missed if he’s moved.
Edit: I guess he’s a complimentary player. A large premium was paid for him and the very overpaid complimentary player he came over with.
His production hasn’t been good enough of late and he’s really struggled. While his quick turns along the boards are exciting I fear come playoff time when there is more allowance to finish checks and run people he is going to get smashed.
Really not sure what to do with this player. Contract isn’t horrendous but I also don’t think he’s a guy that is missed if he’s moved.
Edit: I guess he’s a complimentary player. A large premium was paid for him and the very overpaid complimentary player he came over with.
Last edited:
Frankie Blueberries
Dream Team
- Jan 27, 2016
- 9,414
- 10,992
I remember a lot of people were justifying the trade by saying Garland = 9th overall in value. Would you still make that trade? Looks pretty bad now.
1:43/game sounds like a decent amount of PP time, but they're just getting the last 30 seconds of the PP, if they're lucky, and breaking out from their own zone.
I really don't like how long they let the first unit stay out there and wouldn't be surprised if it hurts team morale/chemistry.
Breakers
Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
What?
I dont remember a lot of people saying Garland is worth the 9th overall and 2nd rounder
Buchnevich got traded LITERALLY 2 hours earlier in the day on July 23rd for a 2nd rounder
I dont remember a lot of people saying Garland is worth the 9th overall and 2nd rounder
Buchnevich got traded LITERALLY 2 hours earlier in the day on July 23rd for a 2nd rounder
Last edited:
I can tell you people definitely did… I had debates with them on it.
mathonwy
Positively #toxic
- Jan 21, 2008
- 19,516
- 10,469
I would still make the trade and not have to watch beagle, Roussel and Eriksson for 82 games.
