Location: why bitch about no new blogs, when all you're going to do is post the same, tired stuff day after da, NY Joined: 07.16.2011
Apr 14 @ 3:05 PM ET
larsson makes the lioneater a pu$$y - homiedclown
Disagree. Yes, 28 had a rough year....looked like he was out of place, not confident, playing wrong role......, I don't know why his year got sucky from but something was wrong. But I don't think you make a 21 year old former 1st rounder who has already scored 20 in the nhl expendable because Larsson had a decent second half. Larsson was a train wreck until Christmas, then started playing well.
They both do some of the same things but Gus has more upside, has more games under his belt, and I would say he should be our 3C going forward, unless he is trade bait.
Location: you don't need an ignore button to ignore someone., CA Joined: 02.22.2007
Apr 14 @ 3:29 PM ET
Disagree. Yes, 28 had a rough year....looked like he was out of place, not confident, playing wrong role......, I don't know why his year got sucky from but something was wrong. But I don't think you make a 21 year old former 1st rounder who has already scored 20 in the nhl expendable because Larsson had a decent second half. Larsson was a train wreck until Christmas, then started playing well.
They both do some of the same things but Gus has more upside, has more games under his belt, and I would say he should be our 3C going forward, unless he is trade bait. - LandlordTom
there's definitely many players that still need to prove they can play the same game every night and Girgensons is not the only one.
GMTM has some decisions to make regarding contracts and next years roster.
All I know is that it's going to be different.
As someone said earlier, this current team with a few additions should be pushing for the playoffs next year based on the second half of the season.
I hope thats the case.
I can definitely see Girgensons take Giontas place if he can hang in there for one more year being a spare part.
Having 2 centers on your 3rd line is never a bad thing for Defensive zone face-offs.
Location: why bitch about no new blogs, when all you're going to do is post the same, tired stuff day after da, NY Joined: 07.16.2011
Apr 14 @ 3:40 PM ET
there's definitely many players that still need to prove they can play the same game every night and Girgensons is not the only one.
GMTM has some decisions to make regarding contracts and next years roster.
All I know is that it's going to be different.
As someone said earlier, this current team with a few additions should be pushing for the playoffs next year based on the second half of the season.
I hope thats the case.
I can definitely see Girgensons take Giontas place if he can hang in there for one more year being a spare part.
Having 2 centers on your 3rd line is never a bad thing for Defensive zone face-offs. - seedy
I hope he finds his place...prolly not top 6 but he is a good bottom six on just about anyone's team.
I hope he finds his place...prolly not top 6 but he is a good bottom six on just about anyone's team. - LandlordTom
Agreed. Bottom 6 players have their roles and if they do them well your team is better for it. So if we can keep him for that then I'm happy. If he ends up wanting too much money for that role, wants a role higher up, or we have a chance to get a good return for him then I'm good moving him too. But I don't consider him a need to move player.
Only reason I don't see Girgs on the 4th even if we bring someone in is the way Bylsma has talked about and put him in the line up he thinks he can play offense. Was some of that because we had injuries and not enough to 6 guys? Sure. But I can 100% see Bylsma starting Girgensons with Eichel next year.
And on Yandle, he looked absolutely dreadful yesterday on the SH goal for the Penguins. No thanks on him at all. Old, expensive, overrated. - Zschalberg
Well Ennis is definitely in the top6 ahead of Girgs, so if we bring in Stamkos (or whoever), then Girgs is either down on the 4th line or he replaces someone on that 3rd line
Barring a trade though, if guess Foligno-Larsson-Gionta at least start the season together
Only reason I don't see Girgs on the 4th even if we bring someone in is the way Bylsma has talked about and put him in the line up he thinks he can play offense. Was some of that because we had injuries and not enough to 6 guys? Sure. But I can 100% see Bylsma starting Girgensons with Eichel next year.
And on Yandle, he looked absolutely dreadful yesterday on the SH goal for the Penguins. No thanks on him at all. Old, expensive, overrated. - Zschalberg
I've been saying for a while now that signing Yandle would be a mistake
Not that he's bad, he just isn't a top pair guy
And even if he'd a free to a 4/5year deal, he'll still cost at least 6mil per season
If we have to, I'd rather keep Gorges there for now until they feel McCabe earns a shot
Next offseason teams will really be scrambling with the expansion draft, so maybe we've gotta wait till then to get Risto his partner
Well Ennis is definitely in the top6 ahead of Girgs, so if we bring in Stamkos (or whoever), then Girgs is either down on the 4th line or he replaces someone on that 3rd line Barring a trade though, if guess Foligno-Larsson-Gionta at least start the season together - jdfitz77
I agree. How long they last together is the question then. A lot of times lines that work one year don't translate with the same results the next year.
Also, can Gionta keep it up? I was surprised with how well he was doing especially at the end of the year, so if he keeps playing at that level then it'll help on the scoreboard. I'm going to look, but I'd wager that he started to start doing better once his minutes were lower in the 2nd half of the season.
I agree with you, also if your putting him on the 4th becomes a massive waste, what you could get for him in a trade would be greatly more valuable then having him on the 4th - hubie
What exactly do u think we can get for Girgs in a trade?
MAYBE, a 2nd rounder
F that
Gionta is gone after next year, so that'll put him right back in the top9
Or possibly someone gets hurt or just isn't playing all that well & he gets a shot sooner
I'm not just gonna dump him though
He's got little trade value right now
I agree. How long they last together is the question then. A lot of times lines that work one year don't translate with the same results the next year.
Also, can Gionta keep it up? I was surprised with how well he was doing especially at the end of the year, so if he keeps playing at that level then it'll help on the scoreboard. I'm going to look, but I'd wager that he started to start doing better once his minutes were lower in the 2nd half of the season. - Zschalberg
True
I wouldn't be surprised if Girgs time on the 4th line is short lived
Just seems like things are setting up for it to at least start that way
True
I wouldn't be surprised if Girgs time on the 4th line is short lived
Just seems like things are setting up for it to at least start that way - jdfitz77
Time for fun Stats, Mike, feel free to steal these:
Gionta played 79 games.
Game 1 - 10: Avg TOI: 18:39____3 points Game 11 - 20: Avg TOI: 19:15___3 points Game 21 - 30: Avg TOI: 18:38___3 points Game 31 - 40: Avg TOI: 15:45___3 points Game 41 - 50: Avg TOI: 17:45___3 points Game 51 - 60: Avg TOI: 16:32___3 points Game 61 - 70: Avg TOI: 17:46___6 points Game 71 - 79: Avg TOI: 17:25___6 points
The man is nothing if not consistent. Lower minutes don't exactly mean better points, but he did go down from 18-19 minutes to a much more manageable 17-17:30 per night
Location: We need a You're an Ass button, NY Joined: 09.07.2006
Apr 14 @ 4:49 PM ET
Time for fun Stats, Mike, feel free to steal these:
Gionta played 79 games.
Game 1 - 10: Avg TOI: 18:39____3 points Game 11 - 20: Avg TOI: 19:15___3 points Game 21 - 30: Avg TOI: 18:38___3 points Game 31 - 40: Avg TOI: 15:45___3 points Game 41 - 50: Avg TOI: 17:45___3 points Game 51 - 60: Avg TOI: 16:32___3 points Game 61 - 70: Avg TOI: 17:46___6 points Game 71 - 79: Avg TOI: 17:25___6 points
The man is nothing if not consistent. Lower minutes don't exactly mean better points, but he did go down from 18-19 minutes to a much more manageable 17-17:30 per night - Zschalberg
But ...But from game 31-60 was less than that and only 3pts.
But ...But from game 31-60 was less than that and only 3pts. - cabin
Like I said, in his case less minutes didn't exactly equal more points like I thought it might. I guess the argument could be made that he was more effective and scoring more per minute, though
In reality, the only thing that really shows me is that Bylsma started playing him the amount of minutes you would expect a capable veteran of his years to play rather than 21-22 minutes.
Location: We need a You're an Ass button, NY Joined: 09.07.2006
Apr 14 @ 4:57 PM ET
Like I said, in his case less minutes didn't exactly equal more points like I thought it might. I guess the argument could be made that he was more effective and scoring more per minute, though
In reality, the only thing that really shows me is that Bylsma started playing him the amount of minutes you would expect a capable veteran of his years to play rather than 21-22 minutes. - Zschalberg
Don't mind him playing like that as long as he is effective . And not taking a player that might be better vs said opponent .