Speculation: Roster Speculation: Part XVI (Off-Season Madness)

[Sabre Dance]

Want to take explicit temperature around here. Eighteen months ago folks were starting threads about whether Girgensons was a future 1C in the mold of Bergeron. Now he seems to be thrown into trade proposals with increasing regularity, giving me the sense that his last season has seriously soured folks on his future. What do folks see for his prime years?

Personally, I see a guy who can play C on either of the lines 2-3 in a pinch, and is most valuable given our roster makeup as a 50 point, two-way winger with good work ethic and leadership ability. I think his value to the average team is a top ten pick in a good draft year.

Obviously, he didn't hit those marks last year. But ever since he's been in the organization, everyone has talked about how his work ethic is infectious and his ceiling is pretty high because of it. I do expect him to bounce back with a flourish, and I love having more guys like him shaping team culture.

Thoughts?

If McCabe is a 25 minute top pair LHD...

This whole Girgensons being a 50 point two-way forward is fantasy.

But I do think we underestimate his value in the league. Girgensons should be able to interest a team with multiple young defensemen and a need for young forwards.

 

[Beerz]

So when are we projecting the Expansion Draft to take place since we are projecting Jack and Sam will be exempt..

 

[truthbluth]

So when are we projecting the Expansion Draft to take place since we are projecting Jack and Sam will be exempt..

2017 is what I've seen suggested. If it's 2018, that's a whole different story.

 

[truthbluth]

Based on how I think Murray views the players I would say both Ennis and Foligno would be ahead of Larsson.

I'm curious why you think that. Maybe a year ago I'd see that, but Murray had nothing but praise for JL at the end of the season.

 

[Beerz]

I'm curious why you think that. Maybe a year ago I'd see that, but Murray had nothing but praise for JL at the end of the season.

I must of missed the praise at end of season. Maybe he feels differently but I never felt he was all that high on him.

The 1 year contract speaks to both sides not having the strongest confidence on either side.

 

[HogtownSabresfan]

This whole Girgensons being a 50 point two-way forward is fantasy.

Based on what? He's all of 22 and looks pretty string on puck. I'd 50 might be upper limit. Hs regression is concerning for sure. Disco Dan didn't like him and he was Teddy D's golden boy -- there's a middle ground for him. These are the guys that win you cups too. I love Zemgus. He's no superstar but he's battler. I don't want him traded.

 

[Sabre Dance]

Based on what? He's all of 22 and looks pretty string on puck. I'd 50 might be upper limit. Hs regression is concerning for sure. Disco Dan didn't like him and he was Teddy D's golden boy -- there's a middle ground for him. These are the guys that win you cups too. I love Zemgus. He's no superstar but he's battler. I don't want him traded.

I like Zemgus also. 35 point two-way player is more realistic. 15-20 goals and 15-20 assists.

50 is fantasy at this point.

 

[Jame]

Based on how I think Murray views the players I would say both Ennis and Foligno would be ahead of Larsson.

Do you think Murray's views of players is set in stone from some point in the past?

Protecting concusionnis is flat out dumb until he proves otherwise

Given that the scenario here included traded Girgs, protecting Larsson is clearly the logical option.

 

[Beerz]

Do you think Murray's views of players is set in stone from some point in the past?

Protecting concusionnis is flat out dumb until he proves otherwise

Given that the scenario here included traded Girgs, protecting Larsson is clearly the logical option.

DO I think his views are set in stone? No.

Protecting a concussed Ennis is dumb but I'm going off Ennis returning to normal Ennis.. warts and all. I think Murray would protect him easily over Larsson.

The scenario had Girgensons as one of the protected not a traded Girgensons and even if he were traded I would assume the person traded for would be ahead of Larsson.

 

[Matt Ress]

DO I think his views are set in stone? No.

Protecting a concussed Ennis is dumb but I'm going off Ennis returning to normal Ennis.. warts and all. I think Murray would protect him easily over Larsson.

The scenario had Girgensons as one of the protected not a traded Girgensons and even if he were traded I would assume the person traded for would be ahead of Larsson.

That does make sense.

 

[Heraldic]

Larsson wouldn't be protected in that scenario

The deal Larsson got actually makes him a really good trade piece for following reasons:

1) his cap hit is basically ELC amount, and even if buried in AHL it doesn't leave any cap.

2) Only one year deal gives plenty of flexibility to the other team - they get a full season to see how Larsson does, and if they don't like what they are seeing, they don't have to offer any extension (saving a contract spot). And if they like what they're seeing, they still have 3 RFA years left to operate.

***

There seems to be some kind of narrative that Larsson is already a key piece in a contender team. While in fact he just signed basically one year qualifying offer right after the season. This talk that signing one year qualifying offer two months before the offersheet period starts would be something that Larsson or his agent wanted, is absolutely ridiculous.

While I see him having potential to be a really good possession driven shut-down bottom-6 center, the fact is that he hasn't really worked out in NHL in any other position than as a center, and he has played about 35 games in the role that he is expected to make a career (top-6 future seems pretty unlikely atm). And those games he played on a line where every piece was working. How would he had managed if played with Moulson and Deslauriers instead? Because that's what you wanna know.

***

I personally rather see neither of Larsson or Girgensons being traded. But if it actually is the only way (which I don't think it is) to get the LHD, of course you have to do it. That presumption is just pretty lofty IMO.

 

[TehDoak]

Want to take explicit temperature around here. Eighteen months ago folks were starting threads about whether Girgensons was a future 1C in the mold of Bergeron. Now he seems to be thrown into trade proposals with increasing regularity, giving me the sense that his last season has seriously soured folks on his future. What do folks see for his prime years?

Personally, I see a guy who can play C on either of the lines 2-3 in a pinch, and is most valuable given our roster makeup as a 50 point, two-way winger with good work ethic and leadership ability. I think his value to the average team is a top ten pick in a good draft year.

Obviously, he didn't hit those marks last year. But ever since he's been in the organization, everyone has talked about how his work ethic is infectious and his ceiling is pretty high because of it. I do expect him to bounce back with a flourish, and I love having more guys like him shaping team culture.

Thoughts?

It's really a matter of shiny new toy symptom. If Girgs went to college instead of jumping right to the AHL (then being put in the NHL too early), he'd be our top prospect by far. he went from being our #1 all situations center last year to struggling to get top 6 minutes. He needs to get into a settled role, much like Larsson did this year.

 

[Heraldic]

It's really a matter of shiny new toy symptom. If Girgs went to college instead of jumping right to the AHL (then being put in the NHL too early), he'd be our top prospect by far. he went from being our #1 all situations center last year to struggling to get top 6 minutes. He needs to get into a settled role, much like Larsson did this year.

Regarding Girgs we learned IMO, that he can be a very efficient shutdown center (his possession and GA numbers were absolutely great on that role) with not so great wingers (Moulson and Gionta (he wasn't playing that well at the start of the season)) and that he can support offensively (and defensively) a high-end center (Eichel. Eichel's GA and GF numbers were clearly better with Girgs than without him or with anyone else specifically).

IMO Girgs had least impact when he was playing as a winger with not that skilled linemates. He's not able to drive offense, and if no one is on his line, that line just won't drive offense (and Girgs cannot support the line's offensive game), and as a winger you cannot have that much impact defensively as you can as a center.

I think the biggest problems with Girgs was that he seemingly wasn't at all calm or relaxed with the puck and he lacked confidence. While he was able to support Eichel offensively, you just didn't expect him to make plays like he did against Kronwall and Subban the previous seasons.

Girgs getting a settled role most likely would help him, but I think he will play changing roles depending on the injuries etc.

***

Overall I have noticed that the fact we haven't been in the playoffs in half a decade, is obvious here. People are pretty eager to get rid of guys whose importance are most significant in playoffs. And at the same time people are pretty eager to bring in guys whose importance lessen during playoffs (soft scoring wingers, soft puck movers on blueline etc).

I do think we need a bit of mix of everything, but you simply don't trade away (unless it's absolutely necessary) pieces that have their most importance in playoffs to get the other type of pieces.

 

[truthbluth]

Regarding Girgs we learned IMO, that he can be a very efficient shutdown center (his possession and GA numbers were absolutely great on that role) with not so great wingers (Moulson and Gionta (he wasn't playing that well at the start of the season)) and that he can support offensively (and defensively) a high-end center (Eichel. Eichel's GA and GF numbers were clearly better with Girgs than without him or with anyone else specifically).

IMO Girgs had least impact when he was playing as a winger with not that skilled linemates. He's not able to drive offense, and if no one is on his line, that line just won't drive offense (and Girgs cannot support the line's offensive game), and as a winger you cannot have that much impact defensively as you can as a center.

I think the biggest problems with Girgs was that he seemingly wasn't at all calm or relaxed with the puck and he lacked confidence. While he was able to support Eichel offensively, you just didn't expect him to make plays like he did against Kronwall and Subban the previous seasons.

Girgs getting a settled role most likely would help him, but I think he will play changing roles depending on the injuries etc.

***

Overall I have noticed that the fact we haven't been in the playoffs in half a decade, is obvious here. People are pretty eager to get rid of guys whose importance are most significant in playoffs. And at the same time people are pretty eager to bring in guys whose importance lessen during playoffs (soft scoring wingers, soft puck movers on blueline etc).

I do think we need a bit of mix of everything, but you simply don't trade away (unless it's absolutely necessary) pieces that have their most importance in playoffs to get the other type of pieces.

The bolded doesn't seem true. The difference between success and failure in the playoffs seems to, in some part, be predicated on the play of PMDs. Softness appears to be mostly irrelevant in this regard.

As far as I'm concerned, once you have your centers, skilled D should be the focus.

 

[Jame]

There seems to be some kind of narrative that Larsson is already a key piece in a contender team. While in fact he just signed basically one year qualifying offer right after the season. This talk that signing one year qualifying offer two months before the offersheet period starts would be something that Larsson or his agent wanted, is absolutely ridiculous.

Of course it was something they wanted... That's why they signed it

While I see him having potential to be a really good possession driven shut-down bottom-6 center, the fact is that he hasn't really worked out in NHL in any other position than as a center, and he has played about 35 games in the role that he is expected to make a career (top-6 future seems pretty unlikely atm). And those games he played on a line where every piece was working. How would he had managed if played with Moulson and Deslauriers instead? Because that's what you wanna know.

why is that what I wanna know?

 

[krt88]

Gotta to say I am super excited to see what Tim Murray can pull off this summer. He certainly seems to have been spot on in most of his trades. Seems like he over paid in the Kane deal and the jury is still out on Lehner but he killed the ROR trade and how he was able to fleese Minnesota out of a second round pick in 2017 for Chris Stewart, I'll never know. The Wild gave up a 2nd for a guy who played a total of 20 games for them. Michal Neuvirth for Johnson and a 3rd was pretty good too. Neuvirth was in Phily this year and Johnson was fantastic for us.

He's likely gonna try something bold to push this team forward, should be fun to watch.

 

[Man of Principles]

I would lose sleep over Larsson getting taken from us in an expansion draft. I would protect him before I ever protected Ennis or Foligno.

 

[Rowley Birkin]

I would lose sleep over Larsson getting taken from us in an expansion draft. I would protect him before I ever protected Ennis or Foligno.

Totally agree with this.

Larsson is very under rated on this forum. Ennis gets exposed before both Larsson & Foligno IMO.

 

[Onslow]

I would lose sleep over Larsson getting taken from us in an expansion draft. I would protect him before I ever protected Ennis or Foligno.

Yep. Larsson is a key part of the team IMO.

I look at expansion as a convenient opportunity to get rid of guys like Ennis and Moulson.

 

[SabresFanNorthPortFL]

Let's be honest here, if all that we lost in the expansion draft was Ennis, where do we sign up?

I'm sure GMTM feels the same way....higher cap hit and doesn't fit his type of team

 

[stokes84]

Totally agree with this.

Larsson is very under rated on this forum. Ennis gets exposed before both Larsson & Foligno IMO.

If there has ever been a player that gets undeserved praise...

But seriously, how can anyone lose sleep over losing any of these players? They are all replaceable and upgradable.

 

[Jame]

I love how polarizing Larsson is simply because so many people love his game and jumped on board early, while praising him over the other sides favorites (Ennis, Girgs).

Can't wait to see the change in season 3

 

[joshjull]

I love how polarizing Larsson is simply because so many people love his game and jumped on board early, while praising him over the other sides favorites (Ennis, Girgs).

Can't wait to see the change in season 3

I love Larsson and Girgs and don't really have an issue with Ennis. Not sure why it has to be a mutually exclusive thing.

Its not shocking you love how polarizing you think Larsson is though. This was your creation from last offseason when you decided in your arguments to pit Larsson vs Girgs out of the blue. You spent a lot of energy encouraging it.

 

[Jame]

I love Larsson and Girgs and don't really have an issue with Ennis. Not sure why it has to be a mutually exclusive thing.

It's not a mutually exclusive thing, but it does exist.

You don't have any issues with Ennis? lol ok.

Its not shocking you love how polarizing you think Larsson is though. This was your creation from last offseason when you decided in your arguments to pit Larsson vs Girgs out of the blue. You spent a lot of energy encouraging it.

You mean I created a debate that then played out in the season?
You're welcome

 

[OkimLom]

I love Larsson and Girgs and don't really have an issue with Ennis. Not sure why it has to be a mutually exclusive thing.

Its not shocking you love how polarizing you think Larsson is though. This was your creation from last offseason when you decided in your arguments to pit Larsson vs Girgs out of the blue. You spent a lot of energy encouraging it.

I think it's funny that any comparison of any players comes down to having or the other eventually on these boards. I understand where it comes from, but with a few of those that tend to lean on the hyperbole side, it could get really outrageous. At the end of the day you, in the context of Girgs vs Larsson, you need both guys, and both guys bring you games to the team that has a positive influence on the team.