That Garland trade is awful 😂😂😂

If Boston wants Garland they have to give up at least one of Lysell or Carlo.

That is hysterical

I see no reason for the Canucks to consider that trade proposal. Would you trade Carlo for Poolman, Woo and a 3rd?

Sabres don't need Reilly. If they didn't take him literally for free today (just cleared waivers), why would they pay a 4th? Sabres left shot d- dahlin, power, Samuelsson, pilut, Bryson, clague.

This is awful, but that counter proposal is kinda insane.

A top 4 D or a top prospect for a top 6 forward is insane?

Canucks counter with Lockwood, Poolman and a 3rd for DeBrusk

If you’re just talking pure value, for lysell i guess I’m sort of with you. I think garland is more of a middle six guy, and his contract is just okay. For carlo, ya, we’re in insane territory.

But then if it’s going into specific fit, the whole thing is a bit off. In general I’m not a fan of people wanting to hoard prospects. Generally speaking, taking the known commodity is better. But with boston, probably not the case, given that they’re pretty starved for high end prospects with it basically just being lysell and lohrei. Then look at their roster, and with marchand, hall, pastrnak, and debrusk occupying the top six wing positions, all of a sudden garland is a bottom six guy in boston. Both assets you mentioned would leave a glaring hole in the organization.

Oh good, this post was definitely missing the super clever ridiculously hyperbolic counter proposal

He isn't a middle six guy. He is extremely good at 5v5. May be surprising, but Garland had more 5v5 points than every player on the Bruins not named Marchand and Pastrnak while getting third line minutes. He is also very good defensively.

Garland would have led 14 teams in ESP last year. He’s a first line winger on 5-5 that struggles on the PP. There’s very few (maybe 3-5) teams where Garland isn’t in the top 6, and even that’s stretching it

Agree with most of it however he was fourth on VAN F in 5-5 ice time share

We literally couldve got Foligno for free but said nah so why would we do this

Sabres decline

Garland is better than Debrusk and arguably Hall. He’s a great 5v5 producer who got very little PP time

Yes Garland is an underrated player but the Bruins need guys who score goals, and DeBrusk put up 6 more than Garland last year

Oh, fun. Let’s talk even strength points.

It’s pretty well documented that debrusk was in the dog house until 2022, and then his role changed pretty drastically. Likewise, it’s pretty well documented that the canucks (their fans won’t shut up about it) started playing far better once they got a new coach. That knuckles dude has barely stopped short of telling me the canucks actually were a playoff team last year. So, lets look at 22, and these three players even strength points, shall we?
Conor Garland - 10G - 19A - 29 points. Not bad! Third on the canucks actually.

Taylor Hall - 10G - 27A - 37P leading the bruins
Jake Debrusk - 20G - 12A - 32P

And debrusk just got better and better as the season went on. Since he got a top six role he led the team in even strength goal scoring. So, your assertion is a bit delusional.

🙄 the delusion in vancouver is approaching leafland territory.

Anyway, the bruins are certainly one of those teams. Duh.

Holy crap, did you think you could just sneak this gem in here and no one would notice? You completely made up that crap. The real number is seven, and its a pretty exclusive list:
Seattle
Philly
NYI
Montreal
Los Angelos
Columbus
Vegas.

What is this supposed to say? Are these the teams Garland wouldn’t be a top 6 winger on? Are these the teams he would be? Because he’d be a top 6 winger on all these teams but he’d also be top 6 on a lot more

You said garland would have led 14 teams in ESP. This was supposed to say that you completely made that figure up.

Genuine question- what did you use to find this? I can’t find anywhere with these stats

Statmuse.

Genuine question - how did you go about making up your numbers regarding how many teams Garland would have led in ESP?

My mad, I meant 5-5.

Conor Garland (according to moneypuck) would not have led 14 teams, he would have led 15 in 5-5 points.

Conor Garland had 47 5-5 points:

Anaheim (Terry, 43)
Arizona (Keller, 41)
Boston (Pasternak/Marchand, 43)
Buffalo* (Skinner, 47)
Carolina (Svechnikov, 38)
Columbus (Roslovic, 35)
Detroit* (Larkin, 47)
LA (Danault, 40) Side note, I was not expecting Danault
Montreal (Suzuki, 35)
NYI (Nelson, 36)
Ottawa (Tkachuk, 41)
Philadelphia (Tkachuk, 41)
Seattle (Gourde, 33)
Vegas (Stephenson, 41)
Winnipeg (Connor, 46)

* Conor garland would have been tied for team lead

Does ESP stand for something other than even strength points?