Connor Garland - Superstar?

[havanablast21]

Any player who is dependent on others to hit their ceiling is not a superstar. He’s a very good player but not a superstar. Top line or not. Superstars drive their own lines. So simple answer, no… he’s not a superstar.

[ross10019]

Not a superstar, but good chance he becomes a star - and that means 30-35G 30-35A with a nice dose of SOG, PPPs.

[stevegamer]

I think Garland can get on PP1 this year, but not likely line 1 barring an injury. I don't see him replacing Boeser, and frankly Pettersson needs to improve in the dot to move Miller off line 1.

He's got star potential, but I don't see superstar potential.

[Palefa]

To me his floor is 55, his ceiling around 70, so likely something right in the middle.

[FrozenInferno]

To me his floor is 55, his ceiling around 70, so likely something right in the middle.

I like this range. Somewhere around 65pts in his first year on a new team would be a great start while he finds his footing and settles on a place in the lineup, with upside to go past 70 next year and beyond if he earns a consistent spot on the EP line.

[Axeman33]

I think he can be a good player but he's not a star or a superstar for that matter, no matter your definition. I see him in the 50-60pt range most seasons.

[ross10019]

I think he can be a good player but he's not a star or a superstar for that matter, no matter your definition. I see him in the 50-60pt range most seasons.

This will be an interesting thread to come back to! Why so low Axe? With this guy everything points that higher upside so I’m curious.

I’m particularly high because his skill set and affordable contract, when the chips fall next year and Canucks cannot re-sign both Boeser and Miller, put him in good position to be promoted to top line / PP1 next to Pettersson.

[Axeman33]

This will be an interesting thread to come back to! Why so low Axe? With this guy everything points that higher upside so I’m curious.

I’m particularly high because his skill set and affordable contract, when the chips fall next year and Canucks cannot re-sign both Boeser and Miller, put him in good position to be promoted to top line / PP1 next to Pettersson.

I usually tend to be more realistic in my expectations and enjoy to be pleasantly surprised when they outperform my expectations, if they do.

Long story short, he's a top six player but he's not a top line player in Vancouver right now. We dont even know if he's going to get PP1 time yet. I look at most 2nd line players and if they are getting 60ish points, I'd call them successful.

[Bubba55]

While nothing is impossible, I'm struggling to understand how a guy who was drafted in the 5th round, spent 2 full years and part of a 3rd in the AHL somehow morphs into a star NHL forward. Yes he had a good year last year, his previous year in the Desert was very average but now he goes to a new team and he is now a star, hell a superstar? Like others have said, this will be an interesting thread to circle back on, but if Garland can hit 60 pts I would consider that a good year for him. Sorry, just not sold at all on this guy suddenly becoming a star quality offensive force in the NHL, his Professional hockey career to date suggests otherwise IMO.

[ross10019]

I usually tend to be more realistic in my expectations and enjoy to be pleasantly surprised when they outperform my expectations, if they do.

Long story short, he's a top six player but he's not a top line player in Vancouver right now. We dont even know if he's going to get PP1 time yet. I look at most 2nd line players and if they are getting 60ish points, I'd call them successful.

Very fair, thx bud. Either way he’s going to be a pretty good keeper multicat winger.

BTW another point made by a Canucks buddy - Canucks may want to give Garland primo opportunity, and take some away from Miller, to avoid Miller putting up huge numbers in a contract year.

[ross10019]

While nothing is impossible, I'm struggling to understand how a guy who was drafted in the 5th round, spent 2 full years and part of a 3rd in the AHL somehow morphs into a star NHL forward. Yes he had a good year last year, his previous year in the Desert was very average but now he goes to a new team and he is now a star, hell a superstar? Like others have said, this will be an interesting thread to circle back on, but if Garland can hit 60 pts I would consider that a good year for him. Sorry, just not sold at all on this guy suddenly becoming a star quality offensive force in the NHL, his Professional hockey career to date suggests otherwise IMO.

Oh geez, where to begin.

Obviously Gallagher, great comparison, 5th rounder although spent only one season in the AHL.

Guys like Marchand, Point drafted late in the 3rd round - not as much time in the AHL.

Zetterberg and Datsyuk 7th and 6th round picks, but that’s legendary.

And that’s superstars, and i’m in no way comparing Garland to them, just making the point.

If you go just star or top 6 forwards, I could probably find lots more examples.

[FrozenInferno]

Wasn’t Kucherov a fourth or fifth rounder?

[Axeman33]

As someone who saw him play a lot in Junior, he was always an electric offensive player. He was small, and that no doubt hurt his draft status. That, and in my opinion, was a terrible defensive player. In Moncton, I am not even sure he could tell you who the goalie was because he never went back into his own end. He was a one way player in Junior. Thats why I didnt bother with him in any of my drafts. I felt his inability to play defensive hockey would keep him from ever reaching the NHL but clearly, like a lot of later round picks, he was able to prove me wrong. Good on him for getting here.

[CMSpiced]

Very fair, thx bud. Either way he’s going to be a pretty good keeper multicat winger.

BTW another point made by a Canucks buddy - Canucks may want to give Garland primo opportunity, and take some away from Miller, to avoid Miller putting up huge numbers in a contract year.

I think it is more realistic that Garland replace Boeser, and they put Boeser on Horvats wing. Top line would be Miller, EP, Garland, if the dont go the Lotto line route.

[ross10019]

As someone who saw him play a lot in Junior, he was always an electric offensive player. He was small, and that no doubt hurt his draft status. That, and in my opinion, was a terrible defensive player. In Moncton, I am not even sure he could tell you who the goalie was because he never went back into his own end. He was a one way player in Junior. Thats why I didnt bother with him in any of my drafts. I felt his inability to play defensive hockey would keep him from ever reaching the NHL but clearly, like a lot of later round picks, he was able to prove me wrong. Good on him for getting here.

Awesome observations, somehow I knew your views would be based on in-depth knowledge, hence my probing.