Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion: Yanni Gourde

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Max McBolt said:
I understand and agree to the idea behind your post on a lot of levels.
The importance of contracts off less valuable assets in relation to the potential consequences on more valuable assets like Cirelli and Sergachev.
Great point.

I also agree, to some extent that point production is important in relation to living up to a contract for a forward.
It is also important to take usage into consideration.
Gourde for example has been trusted into being the 3rd C in Point’s absence.
That role is much harder than 2nd line winger.
The coaching staff felt more confortable with Gourde there instead of Johnson.
I don’t think it’s fair to judge Gourde on point production when he started the season playing at a position he is not used to play in the NHL.
It would also not be fair to compare Gourde and Johnson solely based on point production to compare their value to the team.

So where I disagree with the previous contract analysis is putting the blame of said situation only on Gourde’s contract.

Palat
Johnson
Killorn
Gourde
Miller

Those 5 players were roughly making the same amount of money.
It’s a good base to use when comparing them an judging how much value they bring to the team.

Miller has been traded for a $5 Millions relief.

Now if I were to rank the 4 players left as of the value they bring to the team today at roughly the same salary it would go as follow :

1. Palat
2. Gourde
3. Johnson
4. Killorn

Cirelli and Sergachev are definitively more important to this team than any of the aforementioned 4 players (or 5 including Miller).

If Gourde is not worth $5 Millions, then Johnson and Killorn are also not worth their money, and I would look at trading their contracts before trading Gourde’s contract.
The inability to move Gourde’s contract should not be the problem when you have lesser players on the team with roughly the same contract.
Click to expand...

A very well thought out reply, some of which I agree with and some of which I don’t.

For starters you can’t judge a decision in retrospect, with the advantage of information that you didn’t have and couldn’t have had at the time of the decision. All you can do is look at the information you had available to you at the time, along with the inferences you reasonably could have been expected to make, and judge the decision based on those factors. When Johnson and Palat signed their current contracts they were seen as either core or at the very least near-core players, and we had not yet assembled a collection of greater talent that we knew we would have a difficult time paying; as such giving them those contracts and full NTCs was reasonable. Killorn and Gourde, on the other hand, were never anything more than complementary players, and they signed their deals at times when we knew we had more important players to extend. Those were mistakes from the moment they happened, while Palat’s and Johnson’s deals at least made sense at the time.

Second, even aside from their contracts I disagree with your ranking of those four players. I agree with Killorn at the bottom, and a healthy and productive Palat can make a strong case for the top spot, though until the start of this season we hadn’t seen that version of him in years and it remains to be seen how long we’ll continue to see it. But Johnson is one of our top even strength goal scorers - a skill set we are short on and cannot easily replicate, while Gourde’s defensive abilities are more easily (and cheaply) replaced. Gourde also has not been very effective in the postseason while Johnson has with the exception of the Columbus debacle. So I would argue that Johnson deserves the top spot until Palat shows that he can stay healthy and productive, and that Gourde belongs after them and above Killorn.

Finally, none of that ultimately matters because the question is not who do we most wish we could move to free up cap space - it’s what poor decision(s) will cost us next summer. Yes, Killorn’s contract was a mistake, and yes we should try to move him before Gourde - and we will try, because he is the only one of the four who will not have a full NTC next summer. But even if we can somehow clear Killorn’s entire contract without taking any salary back (an unlikely proposition to say the least), that still won’t be enough to afford everyone. And while we haven’t had the ability to move Palat or Johnson, we DID have the ability to move Gourde up until July 1st of this year. So we screwed up twice with Gourde: when we gave him that contract and again when we chose not to free ourselves of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JFleegs
AndreRoy said:
A very well thought out reply, some of which I agree with and some of which I don’t.

For starters you can’t judge a decision in retrospect, with the advantage of information that you didn’t have and couldn’t have had at the time of the decision. All you can do is look at the information you had available to you at the time, along with the inferences you reasonably could have been expected to make, and judge the decision based on those factors. When Johnson and Palat signed their current contracts they were seen as either core or at the very least near-core players, and we had not yet assembled a collection of greater talent that we knew we would have a difficult time paying; as such giving them those contracts and full NTCs was reasonable. Killorn and Gourde, on the other hand, were never anything more than complementary players, and they signed their deals at times when we knew we had more important players to extend. Those were mistakes from the moment they happened, while Palat’s and Johnson’s deals at least made sense at the time.

Second, even aside from their contracts I disagree with your ranking of those four players. I agree with Killorn at the bottom, and a healthy and productive Palat can make a strong case for the top spot, though until the start of this season we hadn’t seen that version of him in years and it remains to be seen how long we’ll continue to see it. But Johnson is one of our top even strength goal scorers - a skill set we are short on and cannot easily replicate, while Gourde’s defensive abilities are more easily (and cheaply) replaced. Gourde also has not been very effective in the postseason while Johnson has with the exception of the Columbus debacle. So I would argue that Johnson deserves the top spot until Palat shows that he can stay healthy and productive, and that Gourde belongs after them and above Killorn.

Finally, none of that ultimately matters because the question is not who do we most wish we could move to free up cap space - it’s what poor decision(s) will cost us next summer. Yes, Killorn’s contract was a mistake, and yes we should try to move him before Gourde - and we will try, because he is the only one of the four who will not have a full NTC next summer. But even if we can somehow clear Killorn’s entire contract without taking any salary back (an unlikely proposition to say the least), that still won’t be enough to afford everyone. And while we haven’t had the ability to move Palat or Johnson, we DID have the ability to move Gourde up until July 1st of this year. So we screwed up twice with Gourde: when we gave him that contract and again when we chose not to free ourselves of it.
Click to expand...

Very good post.

Cheers brother
 
AndreRoy said:
A very well thought out reply, some of which I agree with and some of which I don’t.

For starters you can’t judge a decision in retrospect, with the advantage of information that you didn’t have and couldn’t have had at the time of the decision. All you can do is look at the information you had available to you at the time, along with the inferences you reasonably could have been expected to make, and judge the decision based on those factors. When Johnson and Palat signed their current contracts they were seen as either core or at the very least near-core players, and we had not yet assembled a collection of greater talent that we knew we would have a difficult time paying; as such giving them those contracts and full NTCs was reasonable. Killorn and Gourde, on the other hand, were never anything more than complementary players, and they signed their deals at times when we knew we had more important players to extend. Those were mistakes from the moment they happened, while Palat’s and Johnson’s deals at least made sense at the time.

Second, even aside from their contracts I disagree with your ranking of those four players. I agree with Killorn at the bottom, and a healthy and productive Palat can make a strong case for the top spot, though until the start of this season we hadn’t seen that version of him in years and it remains to be seen how long we’ll continue to see it. But Johnson is one of our top even strength goal scorers - a skill set we are short on and cannot easily replicate, while Gourde’s defensive abilities are more easily (and cheaply) replaced. Gourde also has not been very effective in the postseason while Johnson has with the exception of the Columbus debacle. So I would argue that Johnson deserves the top spot until Palat shows that he can stay healthy and productive, and that Gourde belongs after them and above Killorn.

Finally, none of that ultimately matters because the question is not who do we most wish we could move to free up cap space - it’s what poor decision(s) will cost us next summer. Yes, Killorn’s contract was a mistake, and yes we should try to move him before Gourde - and we will try, because he is the only one of the four who will not have a full NTC next summer. But even if we can somehow clear Killorn’s entire contract without taking any salary back (an unlikely proposition to say the least), that still won’t be enough to afford everyone. And while we haven’t had the ability to move Palat or Johnson, we DID have the ability to move Gourde up until July 1st of this year. So we screwed up twice with Gourde: when we gave him that contract and again when we chose not to free ourselves of it.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with much in this post. When Johnson signed his contract Point just finished his rookie year and only had 5 less points than Johnson. We still had Stamkos and now Point looking like a better long term 2C, so why did we still think he was core or near core? He was looking like a 3C, why did we give a 3C seven years and 5M? The only thing I can think is they were worried about Stamkos health and their ability to resign him. To me a 3C isn't core. Yet you say when Killorn was signed he was a complimentary piece and it was a mistake. When Killorn was signed he was our 2nd line LW and 4th highest scorer that year. We had Drouin in the system but that was the time things were Rocky with him. Killorn also showed much more consistency than either Johnson or Palat who were up and down with their production.

When Gourde was signed he was our 2nd line RW, just finished 4th in scoring on the team and we didn't have a RW replacement in the system. I fail to see how both those guys contracts were a mistake as they were coming off better seasons than Johnson and Palat were when they signed? Killorn is more than fine at 4.45, he is a consistent 40 point defensively sound winger. Gourde isn't a 60 point player but he isn't signed as one, he's signed for 5.17, if he puts up 48 again that's still not a bad deal, I expect him to be a 50-55 point player. The only bad deal out of the 4 is Johnson because we had Point already showing promise as well as good C prospects like Howden and Cirelli in the system. We really haven't had too many top 6 looking wingers. Lastly just because these guys have a NTC doesn't mean they can't be moved. There are other states that are tax free if your worried about them losing some money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Max McBolt
Vasilevskiy said:
I dunno, Killer's contract doesn't seem so bad nowadays and we know what he will bring every year both in RS and playoffs, I would trade Gourde before him easily
Click to expand...

How does Killorn "bring it" more than Gourde who outproduces him every year? Gourde has produced 25 more points than Killorn the last 2 years and only makes 700k more.

Where is this narrative coming from? For a 700k difference you take the better, younger, more productive player easily.
 
Sky04 said:
How does Killorn "bring it" more than Gourde who outproduces him every year? Gourde has produced 25 more points than Killorn the last 2 years and only makes 700k more.

Where is this narrative coming from? For a 700k difference you take the better, younger, more productive player easily.
Click to expand...

Production isn't everything. McDonagh brings it more than Hedman every night but he doesn't come close to Hedman in production. How many games so far this year has Kucherov been on? One maybe two. How many games has Killorn been off? One maybe two. With Killorn you're paying for consistency every game, you know you'll get a solid 15 minutes out of him, you can put him on any line with any linemates and he'll do his thing. For 700k I prefer Gourde because he can score more but I have no issue with Killorn at his price either.
 
Killorn is playing good hockey right now.
He brings it every night and is very effective into his role.
It's very hard to say anything against the guy and what he brings to the team.

With that being said, I can't see any GMs in the league take him over Gourde if given the choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CupsOverCash, JAY7791 and Whoshattenkirkshoes
Sky04 said:
How does Killorn "bring it" more than Gourde who outproduces him every year? Gourde has produced 25 more points than Killorn the last 2 years and only makes 700k more.

Where is this narrative coming from? For a 700k difference you take the better, younger, more productive player easily.
Click to expand...

I personally would rather have Killorn on the Ice in the playoffs as apposed to Gourde. Forget "production"
 
  • Like
Reactions: CupsOverCash and JAY7791
Whoshattenkirkshoes said:
I personally would rather have Killorn on the Ice in the playoffs as apposed to Gourde. Forget "production"
Click to expand...

If they're scoring at similar rate as they have the last couple playoffs, Gourde is the more effective player and less prone to dumb penalties like Killorn.
 
Sky04 said:
If they're scoring at similar rate as they have the last couple playoffs, Gourde is the more effective player and less prone to dumb penalties like Killorn.
Click to expand...

Killorn is better defensively, a better leader and a smarter player. He also has great chemistry with Cirelli.
I’d say killorn is WAY more effective in the playoffs then Gourde is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAY7791 and Kusic
JoVel said:
Do you think Stamkos is the best leader on this team?
Click to expand...
That's a good question. What makes a good leader? Age and experience? He's the 7th oldest player on the team (crazy right?) - behind McElhinney, Coburn, Maroon, Shattenkirk, McDonagh and Killorn. He has the 2nd most NHL career games (754) behind only Coburn (932) on the team. The only player on the team that has won the Cup before is Maroon.

Is it performance and leading by example? Stamkos is known for having worked with Gary Roberts. His program is known to be one of the most demanding. Not only the workouts but it also requires to stay on a strict diet. Stamkos has won several trophies and awards in his career (2x Rocket, 6x All Star among others). He's battled through several injuries that could've ended his career (broken tibia, blood clot) and yet he finished last season at a career high 98 points. Playoffs though? Eh. His team has gone deep several times but not exactly because of him. In over 70 playoff games he has a 0.76 PPG average, nowhere near close to his 1.03 PPG pace during the reg.

Personality? Hard to judge. He's obviously grown comfortable with the media and giving interviews, appearing at charity events and so on. He's well-spoken, friendly, calm. Not exactly the type of guy you'd imagine giving a booming motivational speech in the locker room.

But who are the alternatives? Hedman is even more calm, almost shy in interviews. Not a man of many words. Kucherov even more so plus he has a history of snapping in the most selfish ways possible when the going gets tough. Not exactly what you'd want out of your leaders or captain, right?

This has also been a concern for a while now with this team since the departures of Vinny and Marty. The current players, they are all kinda shy and kinda calm. You rarely see them communicate on the bench when things are going wrong. No discussion, no advice, no cheering on the crew on the ice. Often times it's just about sending a positive message but nobody does it. They rather sulk in quiet and stare into space until their next shift. "Hopefully the game ends soon."

Yzerman, the longest serving captain in NHL history with three Stanley Cup wins under his belt, was calm and collected too. But he was arguably the most complete player on his team who just lead by example, limping on one leg through OT and scoring the deciding goal against St. Louis for example. Nobody would question him and his word. He also had a good leadership supporting cast in Shanahan, Lidstrom, Larionov et al.

Honestly, I don't have an answer to your question. I think there are many better leaders - but on other teams. Though, I'm not so sure that there's anybody better than Stamkos on the Lightning.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Major4Boarding
LOL at the fact an argument is being made Gourde is more effective in the playoffs than Killorn. Killorn comes up with big goals and plays. I think Killorn has gotten better over the last couple years as well. As for the contract discussion, I don't think any of them are bad considering palat is back. Johnson had almost 30 es goals last season, can play all 3 forward spots, 5 mill seems good to me.
 
When it comes to keeping cirelli and sergachev over Johnson Palat Killorn and Gourde we just need to say "who you want and what will you give us?" And take the best offer. All four could be made available for the right price. Let the other teams needs determine who they want and therefore raise the cost of what they'll pay.

They're all solid pieces that have value. But we need to keep young and up-and-coming less expensive pieces for their less expensive years whenever possible... Unless they make themselves unexpendable like point kuch etc. Which we know none of those four will do at this point.
 
How is Gourde's playoff record better than Killorn's? Gourde has appeared in two playoffs with 2-5-7 in 17 (1 GWG) and 1-0-1 in 4. In the same time frame Killorn had 5-2-7 in 17 (1 GWG) and also 1-0-1 in 4 (1 SHG). If anything they have produced the same amount of points while Killorn has scored 3 more goals. Gourde played top-6 though while Killorn played top-9 and PK.

The playoff runs before, Killorn had 1-1-2 in 4, 9-9-18 in 26 and 5-8-13 in 17. Well over his usual 0.5 PPG.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whoshattenkirkshoes
As far as regular season players, none of the contracts for Gourde, TJ, Killorn and Palat are really that bad. Collectively, you cant keep all of them at those prices as you sign younger players like Point, Vasy and Kuch to large contracts. As this team wants to make an impact in the playoffs, I value those players more that can or have had playoff impacts. Killorn has played well and so has Tyler Johnson. Gourde because of his size on a team already lacking this is a top candidate to be moved on from. I will wait and see on Palat. I fear that we are seeing fools gold in these first few weeks and he will get hurt and regress back to what we saw last few years. If Palat has a reasonably good year and has trade value in off season, I do what I can to possibly move him as well as Gourde! I keep TJ and Killorn.
 
Rschmitz said:
Because Stammer is someone we have no choice but to cope with
Click to expand...

Well if Gourde wants to he can force us to cope with him for 3 more years too. So no real sense in talking about trading him, might as well just focus on who might be on Killorns trade list and what we might get for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom