Gurglesons
Registered User
Who is Garland replacing in the top six though?
Why are we spending 5 million dollars on are a 5'10 40-50 point winger?
Last edited:
Salary Cap: Pens Salary Cap Thread: If we score 6 we win, its science!
- Thread starter Zirakzigil
- Start date
- Status
Who is Garland replacing in the top six though?
Why are we spending 5 million dollars on are a 5'10 40-50 point winger?
BusinessGoose
Registered User
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
Gotcha. So he should be scoring 70+ points in a PP2 role. Wasn't aware being one of the best 5v5 wingers in hockey was a prerequisite for 2nd line LW on the Penguins. No one told me.
Will be good when Rakell and Zucker do that this year for us, with comparable price tags to Garland.
Ah so being 5'10" or smaller includes a dole on point totals? Man, this league is making the weirdest changes right now. Thankfully Guentzel and Sid are just above the cut-off line and are exempt, at least in the official records
As to who he can replace... hmm that's a brain buster. Are there lifelines on the board here? Phone a friend?
50/50? Ask the audience?
Last edited:
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
I think I'd agree that I want Garland over Boeser.
But Garland is more of the same.
Also:
But Garland is more of the same.
Also:
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
He has a better 5v5 scoring rate than Malkin, Rakell and Rust going back to last year.
Not far behind Crosby. #1 on Vancouver.
Are you talking about lineup diversity for entertainment or winning?
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
Winning.
I think I'd prefer a bastard to play against than another winger of the same ilk of what we've got.
Also, careful using the rates. They never tell the full story. And some could take it as you saying that you think Garland is better than Geno.
But those people are fools and Garland has played enough top six for his rates to be most of the story.
I see the merits to both sides here. Yes, acquiring players with different skillsets to those we already have is a very obvious route to improving this team, particularly players with the sort of skillsets that keep on giving when the playoffs roll around i.e. big. Look at the impact Rakell has had.
However, those players don't grow on trees, and Garland has given a very legit level of performance on two not so good teams now and with the sort of usage that indicates he doesn't need to be a focal point.
He wouldn't be a priority add but I'd still have him on my list. Particularly if he also forechecks very well, as we're pretty short on that.
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
That bastard would have to be a pretty rock solid 5v5 player to help this team more than Garland. Probably like Rakell level, the way he's playing now.
Are we talking about a ~5 mil AAV price range to replace Zucker? Who's a candidate then?
Before he left Arizona, he put up 39 points in 49 games. The season before that was also strong. This isn't new. I mean yeah coaches don't use him on PP1's and there's that weakness (if it checks out), but he wouldn't be used there here either so that's irrelevant.
The reason he's not scoring as much this year is because Boudreau put him on the 3rd line like we did with Kessel, to spread the depth. It's probably a mistake though. There's no evidence to suggest that Boeser should be ahead of him in the depth chart. They're using the guy with 28 ESP's last year when Garland had 49.
His Center is Sheldon Dries, a dude with 15 points in 74 games for the career.
No stat in isolation tells the whole story. I'll take the fairness of rates over raw points to derive takeaways from any day of the week though.
This is not middle six caliber 5v5 scoring in this league any way you slice it, rates or otherwise. Not even close. That's especially true considering 154 of his 266 games were for anemic Arizona. This is someone a coach would be happy with on L1.
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
Would prefer asking an Arizona or Nucks fan about him, but he basically defends like Heinen level (middling) and forechecks fiercely.
Shoots a f*** ton too. Doesn't score himself much but it creates a ton for linemates. I don't really care how it goes in the net.
Bottom line is this isn't a Heinen or Kapanen level player, and shouldn't be spoken of in those terms. He can help Malkin for sure.
I'm sorta against re-signing Zucker with what he'll demand. Players go from hero to zero one year to the next, like Letang and Rust this year. And I don't trust his ability to stay healthy as he gets older.
Garland is 26.
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
My mistake, I really thought you were talking about acquiring Garland for this season.
As a Zucker replacement for next season, hell yeah I'm game.
For this season I'd be looking for that bastard to help us in the playoffs. I haven't looked too far into who I'd recommend but perhaps Cousins or Khaira.
Still, regarding the scoring rates, someone on mediocre teams needs to score. That's why I'm not so big on them. What filters did you use on the NHL site to get Garland as number 1?
mpp9
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2010
- 32,617
- 5,074
I’m down to roll the dice on Boeser. Has his shortcomings, but has the most offensive upside of anyone we could reasonably acquire. RHS cannon for the PP which sorely needs a new weapon. Obviously cap would be the issue, but I wouldn’t be surprised if JR makes it feasible for us with some combo of retention/contract swap.
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
Bringing him this year would be amazing, but I don't even really consider it a possibility with this coach.
I can't see them trading Dumo until at least the deadline, and even that's a stretch. He'd have to be still AWFUL. Sullivan's too attached/loyal. They aren't prepared to trust Smith and aren't gonna choose Ruhwedel as his full time replacement either on his off-side.
NHL.com
No offense but I wouldn't want Khaira at all as a Zucker replacement. 71 points in 306 games isn't a top six player, regardless of playstyle.
Cousins has never eclipsed 27 points. Don't want him either in that role.
Malkin's gonna be 37. It has to be like it this year with Zuck. The left winger has to be able to handle some of the load when Geno isn't going.
Edit: Oh filters. I did last season to now, minimum 40 games and that above.
Last edited:
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
I'm not talking about Khaira or Cousins replacing Zucker. I'm talking about them enhancing our bottom six.
AuroraBorealis
Back-to-back hater
Sure, that can be done with the cap we'll have I think. They won't be demanding too much.
pistolpete11
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2013
- 12,000
- 11,027
Not to point out the obvious here, but Garland is a RW and the Pens have 2 $5M+ wingers signed for the next 5 years.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 26,065
- 25,277
Yeah, I kinda super don't want Garland. Smaller guy, decently skilled but streaky as shit and making a buncha money. Sounds like a nightmare.
ChaosAgent
Registered User
- May 8, 2018
- 18,581
- 12,633
Are we just on default "get wingerz" setting?
With Zucker playing great this is not the priority. The PP and defense are.
With Zucker playing great this is not the priority. The PP and defense are.
If I wanted to upgrade at RW and move Rust to third line, I’d choose P.Kane lol….plus, he’s old, one prerequisite for this team lol
Buddy Bizarre
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2021
- 6,435
- 4,612
pistolpete11
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2013
- 12,000
- 11,027
I'm not willing to even start going down the road of breaking up GCRa.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 26,065
- 25,277
Not that I'm itching to trade for a winger but I think being a bit skeptical of Zucker staying healthy and/or keeping up his strong play is also pretty valid.
I'm not really sure this team has the assets to make a trade of any significance, and I'm not really sure who they'd even target. That being said, I hope it doesn't end up being Garland. Really don't think very much of the dude and his contract sucks.
I'm not really sure this team has the assets to make a trade of any significance, and I'm not really sure who they'd even target. That being said, I hope it doesn't end up being Garland. Really don't think very much of the dude and his contract sucks.
- Status
