BondraTime
Registered User
Everything in this regarding the Sens is wrong
Proposal: OTT - COL
- Thread starter hughdreamz
- Start date
We really dont need a LHD as we have Chabot and Sanderson that are LHD ,again we need Norris more than Girard so this deal makes no sense
Masked
(Super/star)
Yeah, referring to the guy who was top 50 in points among centers in his rookie season as a 2/3C is a completely idiotic statement.
assennayo
Wondercarrot
By The Power of Canadian Tire Centre
- Jul 2, 2002
- 8,313
- 4,259
lol
I mean, I appreciate your confidence here but none of this is especially accurate from an Ottawa perspective.
The Devilish Buffoon
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2018
- 12,637
- 11,381
Sting
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2004
- 7,997
- 3,103
Love the people saying "fair value" lol. This is not fair value.
Norris > Girard.
Norris > Girard.
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
Hahahaha, it absolutely is not.
Today I am learning Norris is really underrated.
The Devilish Buffoon
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2018
- 12,637
- 11,381
There are teams who would trade Norris for Girard. It's not so atrocious. Just makes absolutely zero sense for the Sens.
If we didn't have Chabot, though, and had the C depth of Tampa, this would be a trade that makes a good deal of sense.
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
It absolutely does not.
I saw Girard be LVG new fav afternoon school toy. Norris is projected to be a 1B C/top end 2nd line C realistically with potential of being more. I would absolutely not trade Norris for Girard under any context. Norris should ONLY be packaged for a top end defender or top end C. Not no second pair guy who gets demolished under strong pressure.
Look at the stats, Norris already one of our best defensively, improving in faceoffs, 22 year old who has scored 15 goals 22 points in his last 30 games played.
Last edited:
The Devilish Buffoon
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2018
- 12,637
- 11,381
Lol I don't need to look at the stats. I've been boosting Norris since day 1.
Girard struggled, absolutely, he's also a good 2nd pairing D on a great contract and is very young. He scored at a 55pt pace and played 23min a night on one of the best teams in the league as a 22yr old. Yes, he had a really bad playoff series. Yes, he needs to improve in certain areas.
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
Zero arguments there. I just wouldn't trade a guy who's doing well holding his own as a number 1 c vs a guy who's doing very well holding his own as a 2nd pairing d.
Simple.
The Devilish Buffoon
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2018
- 12,637
- 11,381
I get that, but obviously Norris would be in a very different role if we had Point, Cirelli, Stamkos, etc.
I wouldn't make this trade at all, but there are many teams where Norris would be the 2 or 3 C and a handful where Girard would be #1LD. In those circumstances, I don't think the value is actually too far off.
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
Where he would do more poorly. Vs Norris who would probably do the same as a 2nd line C.
Girard has already played top pairing minutes and played his best hockey last year when the Avs we’re dealing with injuries. All people know about Girard is the Vegas series and think he’s a small offensive D, when in reality he’s basically Spurgeon 2.0 with a better offensive game. I get why Ottawa wouldn’t do this deal, but it’s quite obvious you haven’t watched Girard.
He isn’t an ideal top pairing defenseman in the playoffs right now, but he’s also still only 23. Regular season I have zero qualms about him excelling on the top pair.
Neiler
Registered Loser
- Jul 16, 2006
- 2,195
- 786
Don't know what's going on in Colorado this year but just looking at the stats, both Girard and Makar seem to be struggling at even strength.
Wondercarrot
By The Power of Canadian Tire Centre
- Jul 2, 2002
- 8,313
- 4,259
He sounds like Brannstrom honestly.
0.5 ppg, smart, but smaller and takes heavy hits, can be overwhelmed by heavy forecheck but very good transition player as well can QB a PP.
I definitely like Brannstrom but we certainly don’t need another, even if he is a little better.
I'm a Sens fan and Girard is way better in about every way than Brannstrom. Not a little better, a LOT. Let's wait and see if Brannstrom can crack the worst D in the league before comparing him to proven top 4 Dmen.
That said, I don't see a fit for him on this team but he's not comparable to Brannstrom at this point.
At the same age here's their stats:
Brannstrom : 64GP - 17PTS
Girard: 225GP - 84 PTS
Girard was better at 19 years old than Brannstrom is now at 22 and last year he put up over 30 points in 48 games playing over 20 minutes every night
Last edited:
- Jan 18, 2016
- 34,886
- 26,043
I mean it's not like Girard has been horrible a long period of time, just like a 10 game slump. Also I don't think CO is looking to move Girard at all. I think Chambers found out that Sakic offered Girard for Eichel, which makes a lot of sense if you can get a player like Eichel, and is adding to that rumor to drum up news. He's a horrible source of news.
The whole team is struggling. And ar this poibt we don't really know what's going on
Ottawa is solid at LHD so this trade doesn’t make sense for them.
Girard is way under rated in this thread. He’s a legit top pair guy on several teams. But Ottawa doesn’t need LHD. Their needs are elsewhere.
Girard will have more value to other franchises that need an elite puck carrier and skater that can log 23 minutes a night. Lots of teams need that. But not Ottawa. This offer only considers the Avs needs. It’s a swing and miss proposal.
Imnotagoodposter
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2020
- 850
- 935
I’d rather someone squat over my mouth after eating Taco Bell than wake up to Norris being traded for that
