Larsson vs Girgensons

[WildCard]

Interested to see everyone's take on who we should keep, and how we should lose the one we don't keep; expansion, trade, FA? Which player is better anyhow?

 

I'd like to keep Girgs and trade Larsson

[sabills]

Trade whichever one gets me more back, they're both replacement level players.

 

That said, I still hold out hope that Girgensons comes back from the dead under a different coach. He certainly has the higher ceiling of the two.

[TrueBlueGED]

Keep both unless some team places an unexpectedly high value on either in a trade. They're cheap, valuable depth.

Edited April 7, 2017 by TrueBlueGED

[Two or less]

Trade whichever one gets me more back, they're both replacement level players.

 

That said, I still hold out hope that Girgensons comes back from the dead under a different coach. He certainly has the higher ceiling of the two.

 

I don't think Girgensons has a higher ceiling then Larsson.

 

I like the game Larsson brings to the team. Plays smart, holds puck well and possession, is in good spots, is a good defensive forward, several times this season he was out against opponent top lines, including against McDavid.

 

To me, Girgensons doesn't really bring much to the team at all.

[mjd1001]

If I have to choose, I"d say keep Larsson.

 

Despite the higher drafted position, Larrson has shown to me to be the better overall hockey player.  He has been trusted to be the 'go to' guy to check the other teams top line.  In the past calendar year...he has been the center of the line that...while not the most talented, has LOOKED to be the best line on the ice at times (Larrson, Gionta, and Foligno), and over the last 2 years (since tanking has ended and winning has been the goal) has 16 goals in 110 games (12 goals per 82).

 

Girgensons hasn't shown at all to be a guy who can center a 3rd or 4th line with the job of shutting down the opponents top line...and over the past 2 years (since the 'tank' ended) he has 14 goals in 143 games (much worse than Larssons)

 

With Larsson, you get more offense (its not a lot, but indeed more) and a player that can be trusted a lot more in defensive situations (something that both of them are likely to need to do)

[pastajoe]

Girgs is a better all-around player and more versatile. He brings a level of grit and offense (when with decent line mates) more than Larsson, who is more one-dimensional. Rodrigues can replace Larsson with more speed.

[Two or less]

Girgs is a better all-around player and more versatile. He brings a level of grit and offense (when with decent line mates) more than Larsson, who is more one-dimensional. Rodrigues can replace Larsson with more speed.

 

What offense?

[dudacek]

I like both. Girgensons has a higher ceiling. Larsson is a better player right now.

One will be gone this summer in a trade for a defenceman - young, cheap, versatile with upside; they have value. But we don't need both.

Edited April 7, 2017 by dudacek

[pastajoe]

What offense?

He's faster, a better forechecker who causes turnovers, and good at puck protection. There's more to offense than just points, it's also keeping the puck in their zone.

[Two or less]

He's faster, a better forechecker who causes turnovers, and good at puck protection. There's more to offense than just points, it's also keeping the puck in their zone.

 

I understand, but i just don't see it. He was this ultra-competitive guy when he came in which was awesome but i just don't think he has the skill you're talking about. He may be faster, but i am not sure he's better then Larsson in anything else other then playing a more physical game. Only good season hes had was 14-15 when he had this ridiculous crazy unsustainable shooting %.

[sabills]

I don't think Girgensons has a higher ceiling then Larsson.

 

I like the game Larsson brings to the team. Plays smart, holds puck well and possession, is in good spots, is a good defensive forward, several times this season he was out against opponent top lines, including against McDavid.

 

To me, Girgensons doesn't really bring much to the team at all.

 

He hasn't the last two years under DB. I'm not saying that will magically go away under a new coach, but if it DID and he becomes a ~20 goal/~40 point scorer like it once seemed he could be then thats a higher ceiling than I picture for Larsson, who will be a 3/4 line center until he retires.

 

I agree about the rest of your points on Larsson, however.

[TrueBlueGED]

He hasn't the last two years under DB. I'm not saying that will magically go away under a new coach, but if it DID and he becomes a ~20 goal/~40 point scorer like it once seemed he could be then thats a higher ceiling than I picture for Larsson, who will be a 3/4 line center until he retires.

 

I agree about the rest of your points on Larsson, however.

Zemgus is never going to be that guy without top line and top PP minutes. His underlying numbers from that season everyone so fondly remembers are almost identical: scoring rates, possession, the whole nine yards. Difference? He was on the top PP unit, got more ice time, and had a lucky shooting percentage spike 5 points over his career average.

 

That's a role he's never going to have again. Not on a good team, anyway.

[Taro T]

They're both cheap & could anchor the 4th line for a long time.

 

Keep 'em both unless they are required in a trade for the D the Sabres need.

 

Would probably keep Girgensons over Larsson as Larsson might decide to head back to Sweden if he can't get off the 4th line. Don't see that as a credible threat from Z. Larsson (at least in Bylsma-world) fills the checking/energy line C role better than Z & is better on the pk IMHO, but Z could more readily fill in on a wing in the top 9 & on the pp.

 

They're both similar in quality of play. If no fear of Larry walking, would base the decision on what other pieces get moved & which skillset is more lacking in the rest of the squad.

[qwksndmonster]

Por que no los dos?

[dudacek]

Zemgus is never going to be that guy without top line and top PP minutes. His underlying numbers from that season everyone so fondly remembers are almost identical: scoring rates, possession, the whole nine yards. Difference? He was on the top PP unit, got more ice time, and had a lucky shooting percentage spike 5 points over his career average.

That's a role he's never going to have again. Not on a good team, anyway.

Not disputing your overall point, but Girgensons production on the PP in his 1st line centre year was abysmal - a goal and three assists.

[TrueBlueGED]

Not disputing your overall point, but Girgensons production on the PP in his 1st line centre year was abysmal - a goal and three assists.

Fair enough. This is what happens when you're too lazy to look up specifics.

 

Though, wouldn't that be like a 2500% boost to his total points this year? Okay, it's possible I inflated that by a few zeros :p

[ubkev]

Fair enough. This is what happens when you're too lazy to look up specifics.

 

Though, wouldn't that be like a 2500% boost to his total points this year? Okay, it's possible I inflated that by a few zeros :p

I don't think you did. Sounds about right to me.

[Guest]

Both are expendable, especially if we commit to Sam as the 3rd center. We need a 4th line center who can win draws and lead the PK and neither has those skills. Big Z has some skill, size and speed and would be a good depth checking forward, but I don't see much value beyond that. I agree with Duda that Erod gives us more then Larsson.

[DarthEbriate]

I love Zemgus' name and nickname. But overall our forwards are easy to play against. Kane, Foligno, and Larsson are only folks who seem to routinely stir the pot. DLo, too, but I think he's about to lose his spot, no matter that GMTM traded for him. (Perhaps Carrier will agitate more going forward.)

 

I go Larsson, as long as he continues to embrace the 3C/4C role, with Rodrigues or a PK/FO specialist as the other. I also believe Reinhart should become 2C and O'Reilly 3C in a perfect future world, but next season is not that season.

 

Stir the pot! Soup's on, Johan.

[Weave]

Both bottom 6ers.  Yawn.

[Huckleberry]

larsson for the reasons Briere48 stated, depending how he recovers from injury

[JohnRobertEichel]

Interested to see everyone's take on who we should keep, and how we should lose the one we don't keep; expansion, trade, FA? Which player is better anyhow?

 

I'd like to keep Girgs and trade Larsson

 

I prefer Girgensons to Larsson, but I'd like to keep both for a while longer if possible. I'm also not opposed to trading either one for the help on defense that is sorely needed. I think both still have upside that a different head coach could tap into, and I definitely don't want to lose either for free in the expansion draft or through free agency.

[Sabre fan]

6 of one and a half dozen of the other...whatever, either is okay but we have a load of young talent that can easily play on the 4th line and maybe even ahead of these guys. neither will fetch much in a trade either... obviously any trade to get a defenseman is all that maters about now

[bob_sauve28]

I don't think Girgensons has a higher ceiling then Larsson.

 

I like the game Larsson brings to the team. Plays smart, holds puck well and possession, is in good spots, is a good defensive forward, several times this season he was out against opponent top lines, including against McDavid.

 

To me, Girgensons doesn't really bring much to the team at all.

I agree. And with so much young talent at forward one or both might be pushed out soon anyways

[French Collection]

I like Larry more but would not mind either.

Gus may have more upside but Larry seems to embrace the role. Larry may feel different if it was 4C if Sam moves to 3C.

As stated earlier, Asplund, Pu, Estephan and Malone could be pressing for a job in a few years.

One aspect of Pu's game that could really help is faceoffs. I believe he is near the top in the OHL. Hope this skill transfers to his pro game.