HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Notices

Gunnarsson vs. Franson- If you could only keep 1

View Poll Results: If you could only keep 1, who would you keep?
Gunnarsson 55 25.11%
Franson 164 74.89%
Voters: 219. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-22-2013, 12:17 AM
  #101
Duke Silver
Truce?
 
Duke Silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,764
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrophorus View Post
Wha? I see Franson's line as 4-25 for 29pts. He has NEVER finished with 16pts in his career.

In reality Franson matched his career high of 29pts this past season, while Gunnar has never surpassed 20.

Franson's previous 29pts came in 80 games.
Franson would have crushed his career high.

I didn't vote, couldn't choose.
You missed the "Even Strength" part.

I'm kind of worried about Gunnarsson's fragility. He's suffered elbow, hand, ankle, shoulder and hip injuries over the last 4 seasons. He's missed 31 games over the last 3 seasons (15% of his games).


Last edited by Duke Silver: 07-22-2013 at 12:28 AM.
Duke Silver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 12:28 AM
  #102
Wami
Chicken Lyfe'
 
Wami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 892
vCash: 292
Franson was beyond clutch in this past first round against Boston. He can be a game-changer and I think he has a point shot that the leafs have been missing for a while now. All I can picture is Don Cherry yelling "POINT, POINT, POINT" over and over again, and frankly Franson fits the bill to be our weapon from the blue line. The weapon that we wished we consistently had in Phaneuf.

Don't get me wrong, Gunnar is good, and probably the best thing about Gunnar is that you can go stretches of games without even noticing he was playing (which is exactly what you want from a defensive defenseman), but Franson has the potential to be what Gunnar is and so much more in my opinion.

Wami is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 04:47 AM
  #103
TheBlueJacket
Registered User
 
TheBlueJacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
Yes, Franson has elite size which he is not using (room to grow) and he is good offensively (only needs to work on the defensive zone, which is easier to learn) therefore Franson has more upside then Gunnarsson who 1) can't learn how to grow big unless they somehow manage to perfect genetic engineering and 2) he needs to learn how to score, which is probably the hardest skill to learn on the fly. Because of that, he has less upside and age doesn't matter.
The upside to large defensemen is that they can hit and clear traffic in front of the net, with the way gunnarsson plays he does not need to be big.

Defensive defensemen usually take longer to develop, with experience I believe Gunnarsson has as much if not more potential to become a big impact player as Franson.

How to play good defense is the hardest skill to learn on the fly, you can't teach it, defense is more of a natural skillset, you have to think fast, be aware, make decisions on the go, you have to know what to do and where to be. Unlike offense your mostly by yourself, it's 3 forwards vs 2 defenders.

How to score isn't really hard to learn. Just practice taking shots at the net and practice taking shots from to point to get rebounds. Besides if Gunnarsson has trouble learning to score, it does not matter cause the leafs can always pair him with an offensive partner and Defensemen are not relayed upon as much to score.

Considering how much patients, smarts and vision it takes to play good defensively, I think it is going to be easier for Gunnarsson to learn to play as good offensively as Franson than Franson to learn to play as good defensively as Gunnarsson

Too many people underestimate the importance of defense in hockey. At the end of the day, the Gunnarssons of the league are going to win you the games.

TheBlueJacket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 06:33 AM
  #104
Woodman19
#TeamBernier
 
Woodman19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlueJacket View Post
The upside to large defensemen is that they can hit and clear traffic in front of the net, with the way gunnarsson plays he does not need to be big.

Defensive defensemen usually take longer to develop, with experience I believe Gunnarsson has as much if not more potential to become a big impact player as Franson.

How to play good defense is the hardest skill to learn on the fly, you can't teach it, defense is more of a natural skillset, you have to think fast, be aware, make decisions on the go, you have to know what to do and where to be. Unlike offense your mostly by yourself, it's 3 forwards vs 2 defenders.

How to score isn't really hard to learn. Just practice taking shots at the net and practice taking shots from to point to get rebounds. Besides if Gunnarsson has trouble learning to score, it does not matter cause the leafs can always pair him with an offensive partner and Defensemen are not relayed upon as much to score.

Considering how much patients, smarts and vision it takes to play good defensively, I think it is going to be easier for Gunnarsson to learn to play as good offensively as Franson than Franson to learn to play as good defensively as Gunnarsson

Too many people underestimate the importance of defense in hockey. At the end of the day, the Gunnarssons of the league are going to win you the games.
Sorry, but learning how to play defense is something any player can do if they have dedication. That is why you see teams who lack skill employing the trap, because its far easier to get a less talented team to play great defense then it is for a team to suddenly excel at run and gun hockey and turn career 3rd and 4th liners into scorers.

I would be willing to wager you can find at least 50 players in the NHL to replace what Gunnasson brings to the table and perform at or above his level of play, you might find only 30ish guys to do that for Franson.

I would say to many people underestimate skill in hockey, afterall you need to score more goals then your opponent to win games. Why is there no 30 goal scorers sitting around waiting for work at this time of year but there are a ton of 4th line defense first guys who are?


Last edited by Woodman19: 07-22-2013 at 06:40 AM.
Woodman19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 07:15 AM
  #105
TheBlueJacket
Registered User
 
TheBlueJacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
@Woodman19 The trap is a strategy used by a team trying to protect a lead, where all players of a team chip in defensively, the trap gives the team using it a disadvantage offensively.

A player like Gunnersson is effective because he can be as effective as a team using a trap all by himself without giving the Leafs a disadvantage offensively.

What stay at home NHL caliber defenseman is sitting around waiting for work? If that was true I wouldn't be seeing some NHL teams having terrible rookie defensemen as their 3rd line.

TheBlueJacket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 08:49 AM
  #106
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penalty Kill Icing View Post
Both are a year apart (and at their current age, they are certainly not hockey prospects, but pro players). Yet, you conveniently expect one to have a steady career graph, while other continues to just get better?
It is convenient to cite potential when empirical evidence is unavailable.

My choice has unlimited potential, your choice not so much.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA3LN_8hjM8.

Vaive and Ludzik on collapse, and Phaneuf.
ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 08:59 AM
  #107
pooleboy
#buildthrewthedraft
 
pooleboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 5,627
vCash: 500
Franson easily, gunner is very good at defence but franson is big mobile and cn create offence

pooleboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:28 AM
  #108
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 27,730
vCash: 500
Not surprised the poll is so lopsided, Franson is better by a pretty good margin.

Franson does many things quite well and looks to be improving on the defensive side now that he has been playing more consistently.

Gunnar while not bad, doesn't really do anything well. He'd be a very good bottom pair that can step up to the 2nd pair if needed, like Berg was used in the day.

Currently neither is the answer to play with Phaneuf which is the Teams greatest need. Franson may get there, we know Gunnar can't.

ACC1224 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:29 AM
  #109
Wonder Dan
Fairies Wear Boots
 
Wonder Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 497
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Wonder Dan
You choose the player that has more upside and contributes at all aspects of the game. We all know which d-man out of the 2 has more upside.

Wonder Dan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:34 AM
  #110
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlueJacket View Post
Too many people underestimate the importance of defense in hockey. At the end of the day, the Gunnarssons of the league are going to win you the games.
LOL, just no. Gunnarsson is mediocre defensively, and worse with the puck on his stick. He's a top 4 fill-in at best.

Sypher04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:35 AM
  #111
Penalty Kill Icing*
Fire Carlyle
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,972
vCash: 140
Defensemen like Franson are dime a dozen for Leafs. We got quality forwards, and many better offensive defensemen than Franson. So, Franson's offense is redundant for us. Defensively? Not many are better than Gunnar.

This is not a draft that you take BPA. Leafs need is defense, and when the club asks a player to play injured through the season on top pairing; that shows how high does the coaching staff think of Gunnarsson; compared to a bottom pairing, PP specialist defensman.

As far as "a defensman with high potential" goes, looks like Leafs fans have found a new candidate in Franson, after years of "Schenn has untapped offensive potential".


PS: ^ The "medicore" Gunnarsson still plays better defense than team's half the blueliners, while playing injured.

Penalty Kill Icing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:36 AM
  #112
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,853
vCash: 500
Very, very easily Franson

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:38 AM
  #113
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penalty Kill Icing View Post
Defensemen like Franson are dime a dozen for Leafs. We got quality forwards, and many better offensive defensemen than Franson. So, Franson's offense is redundant for us. Defensively? Not many are better than Gunnar.

This is not a draft that you take BPA. Leafs need is defense, and when the club asks a player to play injured through the season on top pairing; that shows how high does the coaching staff think of Gunnarsson; compared to a bottom pairing, PP specialist defensman.

As far as "a defensman with high potential" goes, looks like Leafs fans have found a new candidate in Franson, after years of "Schenn has untapped offensive potential".


PS: ^ The "medicore" Gunnarsson still plays better defense than team's half the blueliners, while playing injured.
No he doesn't.. Gunnarsson was atrocious all year last year. The only time he showed any reason to even retain his RFA rights was the playoffs.

TieClark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:41 AM
  #114
BonMorrison
Sexy Back
 
BonMorrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penalty Kill Icing View Post
Defensemen like Franson are dime a dozen for Leafs. We got quality forwards, and many better offensive defensemen than Franson. So, Franson's offense is redundant for us. Defensively? Not many are better than Gunnar.

This is not a draft that you take BPA. Leafs need is defense, and when the club asks a player to play injured through the season on top pairing; that shows how high does the coaching staff think of Gunnarsson; compared to a bottom pairing, PP specialist defensman.

As far as "a defensman with high potential" goes, looks like Leafs fans have found a new candidate in Franson, after years of "Schenn has untapped offensive potential".


PS: ^ The "medicore" Gunnarsson still plays better defense than team's half the blueliners, while playing injured.
This (regarding Gunnar). Disagree on the Franson-potential point.

People keep saying "what you see is what you get" with Gunnar when he's actually been improving steadily each year we've had him. Hell, he was our 2nd best defenseman this year while injured - imagine how good he would've been at 100%. People rag on his secondary assist # - you know why he gets all those secondary assists? Because he is one of our best defenseman at holding the blue line and that led to goals. I'm tired of constantly explaining his value so I'll just summarize. Best first pass on our defensive core, only one that makes SHORT crisp passes to help our forwards break into the o-zone. Fantastic at holding the blue line. Underrated shot. Steadily improving every year. Our 2nd best defensive defenseman. When Gunnar sat, our team couldn't generate any offense because our defenseman kept making long bomb passes that exploded off our forwards sticks and led to turn overs. Gunnar is the only one that consistently carries it out of the zone and makes a short tape-to-tape pass.

BonMorrison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:43 AM
  #115
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penalty Kill Icing View Post
Defensemen like Franson are dime a dozen for Leafs. We got quality forwards, and many better offensive defensemen than Franson. So, Franson's offense is redundant for us. Defensively? Not many are better than Gunnar.

This is not a draft that you take BPA. Leafs need is defense, and when the club asks a player to play injured through the season on top pairing; that shows how high does the coaching staff think of Gunnarsson; compared to a bottom pairing, PP specialist defensman.

As far as "a defensman with high potential" goes, looks like Leafs fans have found a new candidate in Franson, after years of "Schenn has untapped offensive potential".


PS: ^ The "medicore" Gunnarsson still plays better defense than team's half the blueliners, while playing injured.
This post is ridiculous.

Of course Franson could have untapped offensive potential. He put up a career high points this year, in a 48-game shortened season. Given that Franson is an offensive defenseman, and pretty good one at that, while Luke Schenn was a defensive defenseman with limited offensive skill and a weak shot, it's not hard to see why you're comparison makes no sense.

Gunnarson played because, despite what people think, this organization has a serious lack of depth in it's defense and they couldn't afford for him to be out months after having surgery. If a defenseman went down, they'd be relying on AHL players who quite frankly haven't shown they are ready.

Gunnarsson isn't bad, per se, but he's far from reliable, and he lacks any real puck skills.

Sypher04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:50 AM
  #116
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonMorrison View Post
This (regarding Gunnar). Disagree on the Franson-potential point.

People keep saying "what you see is what you get" with Gunnar when he's actually been improving steadily each year we've had him. Hell, he was our 2nd best defenseman this year while injured - imagine how good he would've been at 100%. People rag on his secondary assist # - you know why he gets all those secondary assists? Because he is one of our best defenseman at holding the blue line and that led to goals. I'm tired of constantly explaining his value so I'll just summarize. Best first pass on our defensive core, only one that makes SHORT crisp passes to help our forwards break into the o-zone. Fantastic at holding the blue line. Underrated shot. Steadily improving every year. Our 2nd best defensive defenseman. When Gunnar sat, our team couldn't generate any offense because our defenseman kept making long bomb passes that exploded off our forwards sticks and led to turn overs. Gunnar is the only one that consistently carries it out of the zone and makes a short tape-to-tape pass.
I quite frankly disagree, completely.

Best first pass? no.
Short crisp passes? no.
Fantastic at holding the blueline? no.
Underrated shot? no, he breaks his stick more often than he gets a good shot.
our second best defenseman? no.

When gunnar sat it had no affect on our offense. He has no puck skills whatsoever.

I don't get where people see all this stuff. Carl Gunnarsson is a good bottom pairing defenseman, nothing more. He'll put up some points just because he's around (it'd be hard not to given the minutes he's been gifted), but he's mediocre with the puck, and his defensive ability is vastly overrated.

Unless of course, he plays like he did in the playoffs all the time. He's never shown any consistency at that level of play though.

Sypher04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:55 AM
  #117
Penalty Kill Icing*
Fire Carlyle
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,972
vCash: 140
^ And yet, multiple Leafs coaches continue to use him against best Quality of Opposition.

Even you agree that Leafs have poor depth of defensive defensemen and you say Gunnarsson gets to play that role because of that. In that scenario, it doesn't make much sense at all to let go of that defenseman, for an offensive defenseman when you have already got 3 others who will be better offensively by the end of the season.

Penalty Kill Icing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 09:57 AM
  #118
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penalty Kill Icing View Post
^ And yet, multiple Leafs coaches continue to use him against best Quality of Opposition.

Even you agree that Leafs have poor depth of defensive defensemen and you say Gunnarsson gets to play that role because of that. In that scenario, it doesn't make much sense at all to let go of that defenseman, for an offensive defenseman when you have already got 3 others who will be better offensively by the end of the season.
I never said he should go. Personnally, I see no reason why either will have to leave. Going forward though, I want Gunnarsson's role reduced significantly.

We've created our own problem here too with his contract negotiations. We've been playing the guy in basically the #2 spot for like the last 2 years, and now I assure you our management is saying that same things I am, that's he's not a top pairing guy, he's more of a top 4 on a good day, bottom pairing regularly kind of guy. It's hard to make that argument and expect the player to accept pay based on that. If Gunnarsson gets anything more than 2-2.5 he's overpaid by quite a bit.

Sypher04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 10:02 AM
  #119
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 27,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sypher04 View Post
I never said he should go. Personnally, I see no reason why either will have to leave. Going forward though, I want Gunnarsson's role reduced significantly.

We've created our own problem here too with his contract negotiations. We've been playing the guy in basically the #2 spot for like the last 2 years, and now I assure you our management is saying that same things I am, that's he's not a top pairing guy, he's more of a top 4 on a good day, bottom pairing regularly kind of guy. It's hard to make that argument and expect the player to accept pay based on that. If Gunnarsson gets anything more than 2-2.5 he's overpaid by quite a bit.
That's really what it comes down to. For the Team to be better he needs to be no where near the top pair, doesn't mean he has to be moved.

ACC1224 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 11:17 AM
  #120
Mikeyg
Smackin' haterz
 
Mikeyg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,966
vCash: 500
Franson didnt even file for arb so I hope that they are close on a long term deal for like 4 years

Mikeyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 11:26 AM
  #121
Porn*
Registered User
 
Porn*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In your nightmares
Country: Israel
Posts: 33,702
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Porn*
depends on a few things:

Contract negotiations
trade value


i'd aim to keep them both in all honesty :p

Porn* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 12:05 PM
  #122
McMykul
Registered User
 
McMykul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
This is a tough call, but I say Franson. He is still evolving and learning his defensive game under Carlyle, but he posesses a much more potent set of offensive skills than Gunnar. Plus he's got a rocket of a shot that actually HITS THE NET most times... cough cough Phaneuf cough cough...

McMykul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 12:20 PM
  #123
TheNorthFace
Mo and Willy
 
TheNorthFace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,156
vCash: 500
Franson easily. Much rarer skill-set. We also have players in our system that will probably be comparable to Gunnarson as soon as next season in Granberg and Percy.

TheNorthFace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 12:21 PM
  #124
SarcazemKadri
Registered User
 
SarcazemKadri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 740
vCash: 500
I voted Gunnarsson, he is much more important to this team. Franson may have more potential, but Gunnar is really one of the few that can actually play defense. Fransons offense could be replaced by Gardiner.

SarcazemKadri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2013, 02:04 PM
  #125
contour
Registered User
 
contour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,633
vCash: 500
Gunnarsson. i prefer reliability

contour is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:41 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.