The Armchair GM Thread - LII
View Single Post
10-16-2013, 05:54 PM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Originally Posted by
Better at what? Defending? If there is a distinct difference, does it make up for the advantage he has offensively on his off-side? It's a trade off. Really, I have no issue with Garrison on the right, I'm even starting to prefer it. As a result, my preference would be to place him on that side and retain Edler and Hamhuis, both playing on the left.
Yeah, i think Garrison has shown that he's capable of playing on his 'off' side quite well, without too much of an appreciable dropoff.
Personally, i really like the idea of 3 balanced pairs with Hamhuis, Edler, and Garrison each anchoring the left side of a pairing alongside Bieksa, Tanev, Corrado on the right. But realistically...as long as Tortorella is the coach here, i think he's going to prefer to load up the top-4 and really lean on those guys. So we're basically locked into our top-4 for the foreseeable future, as long as Torts is here with long term NTC contracts for:
In some configuration or other. Those are the 4 guys.
And i'm not going to say that makes one of Tanev or Corrado 'expendable', but it might make them a bit of a luxury if we're looking for an 'area of strength' to trade from for bonafide top-6 help. Whether that's the best option, i guess depends on whether you think Shinkaruk/Jensen/Horvat have the potential to play as real dynamic front line forwards, providing a spark to the top-6 any time in the very near future. And whether you see a real place for both Corrado AND Tanev to get any meaningful minutes on the same NHL team next year.
If Tanev was the piece it took for us to bring in a top-6 player like Stastny, i'd be willing to part with him. Obviously not happily, but it's the old adage, 'you've gotta give to get'. And Tanev is a piece that is
replaceable from within (Corrado) without too much dropoff, ie. Not creating a new hole to fill another.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by biturbo19