Quote:
Originally Posted by bigrangy
If you had to pick, and for the purposes of this post, they cost the same, would you rather have Ferland or Byron?
I'd be torn myself. Both would be great fits. Probably go with Ferland.
|
I love Byron but it's Ferland:
- We don't need Byron's PKing as we have six-eight guys who can do it (Backlund/Lindholm/Ryan/Hathaway/Frolik/Jankowski/Bennett/Dube)
- Byron's a bit undersized so he would be a tough fit on a line with Ryan. On the flip side Ferland makes space for little guys and could be the difference maker that gets a guy like Mangiapane or Czarnik or Neal going. Ferland-Bennett-Neal anyone?
- Ferland's not Byron fast, but I wager he's still as fast as Bennett and Ryan in our bottom six. His speed is an asset to our bottom six just like his size is.
- Ferland is a flat out top tier 5v5 producer. He may not be Lindholm on special teams or defensively, but there is a serious case to be made that the Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland line at 5v5 was flat out elite and having that as a backup option could tilt a series if our current gop line gets contained or gameplanned for. People saying Ferland was just riding his linemates' coattails weren't watching the many things he brought to a very successful line.
- And finally while it gets overplayed as a narrative, there is no denying Ferland's physical game can change the momentum of a playoff series.
That said Byron would be a cool pickup too. Add some elite gamebreaking speed, but he would need to play with Bennett and Neal, not Ryan and Hathaway, just because you'd need a shooter on his line.
