Canucks pass easily

so the difference between garland and granlund is just a 4th round pick now?

For this trade to work, Pittsburg would have to include their 2023 1st rounder, Edmonton's 2024 1st rounder, and Kyle Dubas.

Maybe. I think Granlund would fit their system better than Pits and it is one less year. Garland is a better player but not by a ton.

Garland isn't far from a buyout candidate. Sorry but he was paid to score goals, he had a really bad year doing that.

His 9.8 expected goals 5v5 was the same as ZAR and Nick Bonino, both of which who could be had at 1MM per.

Exactly!! You're correct, and because of that, Pittsburg should have to include BOTH their 2023 and 2024 1st rounders, plus Edmonton's 2024 1st rounder and Kyle Dubas.

Id want a better backup and the left side worries me a bit.

I think you're having a stroke. Please seek medical attention.

I like DeSmith. He is a fine backup.

I agree about the left side but sacrifices have to be made. I also don't think Dubas will trade the 1st for a top LHD and he said they won't get a big name in FA.

Garland is a far better player than Granlund. He’s way better offensively and defensively. The only thing Granlund is somewhat good at anymore is passing

Fine backup, but might need to be more then that if Campbell is the starter. I should have said a better 1B

They had about the same amount of expected goals (9.8 vs.9.1). Granlund is more physical. Garland draws more penalties. Garland is better defensively. Granlund is better on the PP.

I see them as quite similar. The difference is that I think Granlund would play more to the style of Van and Garland would be better in Pit.

Can't see the Hawks taking on two years of Rutta for a 5th. Hawks pass.

Canucks pass easily and it's not really close what's so ever

I don't think they would. I think they would eat cap and get a 3rd for him.

Why is that?
Garland is better: Drawing Penalties, Defensively
Granlund is better: Playing physically, the PP
They are about the same: scoring goals, generating takeaways

Did I misspeak or am I confused somewhere? If so, please correct me.

Garland is more effective 5on5, Garland also has a much higher Points share than Granlund, Garland is also younger and doing this with less ice time than Granlund. Conor Garlands TOI 15:07 average, Mikeal Granlund TOI 17:50 average, Garland has a higher Corsi and is getting less Ozone starts than Granlund, Garland can be effective up and down the line up, Granlund can not, he really struggled when he got to Pittsburg playing in a 3rd line role which is the same role he'd be in Vancouver, We need to be better Defensively so it makes no sense to move a guy that's better defensively for a guy that is more effective as a power play specialist. the fits just not here for Vancouver, also much prefer the Garland contract to Granlund.

Hawks got a 2nd at the start of this season to take Jason Dickinson, a center, w/ the same term and cap hit as Rutta. Why would they settle for a 5th in this deal? Easy, they wouldn't. Hawks pass.

So you mentioned a few stats. Namely: effectiveness 5v5, points share, ice time, corsi, zone starts, and Garlands linemates.

Expected Goals 5v5 were about the same. As was points per game when Granlund was a second line RW with Nashville (0.33 PPG to Garlands 0.38 PPG). So point wise I wouldn't say one was much more effective 5v5.

Points share, meaning points compared to team total points? Granlund was 4.4% of his teams points and Garland was 6.9%. But the Pens scored nearly 40 more points 5v5 compared to Van. It's not Granlund's fault his team is better.

Ice time was actually in favor of Garland, 1056 to 1021. Noe, Granlund played 2 less games so they are probably about even 5v5.

Their corsi numbers were also nearly identical at 49% to 48%.

Granlund started more in offensive, neutral, and defensive zone. Garland started more on the fly.

Garland was primarily with Miller and Horvat. After that was Aman, Joshua, and Boeser. It appears he started on the 2nd line but didn't produce and was dropped to the third line. He rarely played on the 1st line and never on the 4th line. Not really playing up and down the lineup.

Garland is better defensively but again, he is paid to score goals. Last year he did not do that.