Larsson vs Girgensons

[inkman]

It kinda surprises me how many are on the Girgensons side of the ledger. By all accounts Larsson is a better more effective NHL player but for whatever reason he's viewed negatively. Girgensons, who has been largely ineffective, gets tons of love. I'm guessing people just feel like Girgs will be better because of draft position and one season with some squirrely usage.

[Guest]

Z is big and fast, two things Larry isn't. Larry is also older and neither has really set the world on fire. Neither wins draws consistently. Neither scores consistently. If I had to choose, I'll go with younger faster and bigger. That said, if we move Sam to 3rd center, both are expendable, especially if they can be used to help our D depth.

[nfreeman]

I don't think there is any urgency to either keep or unload either of them. Neither has demonstrated that he needs to be kept or unloaded. Both are decent depth players. Larson is a better agitator, while Zemgus has a bit more skill. Neither has shown decent production. Both are capable of holding down a bottom six slot as long as they are cheap and until someone better comes along.

[ubkev]

Neither of them do anything for me.

[SwampD]

Neither of them do anything for me.

Yep.

[inkman]

I must smoke too much cheeb cuz Larsson csn play on my bottom 6 anytime.

[7+6=13]

I don't understand Girgensons.  He's very skilled with the puck, big, skates well with good speed and seems like an excellent teammate.  Yet he just doesn't do much.  I don't get it.  He has so many tools to be a very good player but doesn't produce. 

[Robviously]

Trade both.

[ubkev]

I don't understand Girgensons. He's very skilled with the puck, big, skates well with good speed and seems like an excellent teammate. Yet he just doesn't do much. I don't get it. He has so many tools to be a very good player but doesn't produce.

Yeah, he's not very good at hockey. This board fell in love with him because he blocked shots while down by 10 goals vs Russia at world Juniors, then he fluked a season and has sucked ever since.

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't understand Girgensons.  He's very skilled with the puck, big, skates well with good speed and seems like an excellent teammate.  Yet he just doesn't do much.  I don't get it.  He has so many tools to be a very good player but doesn't produce. 

 

Hockey sense and vision. 

[Drunkard]

No need to decide between the two. We should keep both because they are both young and cheap and provide depth and (most importantly) because we can't get anything of actual value for either of them. If you really want to focus on getting rid of players, we should be hoping that we can somehow con a team into taking Moulson or Gorges. Cap space will officially be at a premium once the new contracts for Eichel and Reinhart kick in for 2018-2019. At that point it'll be good to have cheap depth options.

[Samson's Flow]

I would prefer to keep both, as I feel like there are far more pressing roster issues than removing Larsson/Zemgus. When we get to the point when that is our top issue, then we are probably a pretty good team.

 

That said, I still see the potential and quality of Zemgus, and would prefer to keep him as I think he would be a factor in playoff hockey, where the physicality and speed get ramped up. I think he has been underutilized as a result of not having a distinct role on the team - sometimes he plays wing in a scoring line fill in, sometimes he is asked to play more physical checking line role, etc.

[Trettioåtta]

Both are useful depth. If I had to choose, maybe i'd lose Girgs. He seems like he could maybe do better with a clean start. There was talk of him being a gym rat when he arrived and the staff having to kick him out of the training facilities. You don't hear about that anymore, I wonder if he is coasting a bit.

[LGR4GM]

Larson is better than Zemgus. Still don't understand how Larson gets no respect around here.

[Trettioåtta]

Larson is better than Zemgus. Still don't understand how Larson gets no respect around here.

 

He hasn't played in a long time now, easy to forget really.

[LGR4GM]

They guy was the anchor on a 3rd line that played every team's top line. Larsson contributed and was effective. Zemgus was invisible.

[Sabel79]

They guy was the anchor on a 3rd line that played every team's top line. Larsson contributed and was effective. Zemgus was invisible.

Now, now. In fairness, they both contributed equally after Larsson's season-ending injury.

[TheAud]

       GP G   A   PM  SOG   S%  

ZG 80  11  14   22   131    8.20% Turns 24 next season

JL  80  10  12   35     98 10.10%  Will be 25 next season (+1.5 years vs. ZG)

 

Here are their career basic stats on an 80 game season (I know it's an 82 game season but everyone misses one or two games). 

ZG has slightly more offense, JL is a bit more of an agitator. ZG is 1.5 years younger.  I would have thought ZG's high shooting% in his second year would show up here but it's actually two points lower than Larsson. 

 

If forced to choose I'd prefer to keep Zemgus. He produces similarly to Johan but I feel he's been somewhat mis-used by Bylsma and still has some upside. Whereas despite popular opinion that the Gionta, Larsson, Foligno line was some great functioning 3rd line I thought they were terrible, constantly being out shot and pinned in their own end. So I can't get too excited about Larsson. 

Edited April 11, 2017 by Sakman

[Drunkard]

We'll keep Girgensons just for that sweet Latvian tourism money. The Harbor Center Hotel isn't gonna fill itself. Especially with DB running the team.

[LGR4GM]

       GP G   A   PM  SOG   S%  

ZG 80  11  14   22   131    8.20% Turns 24 next season

JL  80  10  12   35     98 10.10%  Will be 25 next season (+1.5 years vs. ZG)

 

Here are their career basic stats on an 80 game season (I know it's an 82 game season but everyone misses one or two games). 

ZG has slightly more offense, JL is a bit more of an agitator. ZG is 1.5 years younger.  I would have thought ZG's high shooting% in his second year would show up here but it's actually two points lower than Larsson. 

 

If forced to choose I'd prefer to keep Zemgus. He produces similarly to Johan but I feel he's been somewhat mis-used by Bylsma and still has some upside. Whereas despite popular opinion that the Gionta, Larsson, Foligno line was some great functioning 3rd line I thought they were terrible, constantly being out shot and pinned in their own end. So I can't get too excited about Larsson. 

But they produce just about the same and Larsson has shown he can be a shut-down type forward on a teams 3rd line. Zemgus has shown... not really much of anything in the past 2 years. If we aren't changing the coach, then I might trade Zemgus because he would be better off elsewhere. 

[Drunkard]

Who are we trading either of these guys for in this hypothetical situation? Are we swapping for some other team's 4th liners or possibly some prospects who have a chance to be 3rd or 4th liners or bottom pair guys? I don't see any team giving up anything of actual value for either of them.

[LGR4GM]

Who are we trading either of these guys for in this hypothetical situation? Are we swapping for some other team's 4th liners or possibly some prospects who have a chance to be 3rd or 4th liners or bottom pair guys? I don't see any team giving up anything of actual value for either of them.

You make them as part of a package for an up and coming defender. 

[qwksndmonster]

I still think we can salvage Zemgus as long as Bylsma is gone soon. I think he'll be an effective middle sixer for us. I agree with Liger that Larsson is clearly better right now. (Good to see you, man)

[LGR4GM]

I still think we can salvage Zemgus as long as Bylsma is gone soon. I think he'll be an effective middle sixer for us. I agree with Liger that Larsson is clearly better right now. (Good to see you, man)

Liger... yes that is what they use to call me. Liger the grey. I am Liger the White, and I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

Edited April 11, 2017 by LGR4GM

[qwksndmonster]

LOOKS LIKE LIGER'S BACK ON THE MENU BOYS