Prospect Info: Denis Gurianov - 12th Overall Pick, 2015

[BG44]

Theyll probably trade him, but he has had arguably the 4th best year amongst Stars forwards when looking at his salary. I posted it in the other thread, but hes on a nearly ~40 point pace and the only valid complaint is his goal scoring is down (largely due to misuse on the PP) and he isn't very consistent. His IQ issues haven't been near as noticeable this season and his playmaking skills have awoken Seguin finally. Tied for 2nd on the team in primary even strength assists. Not bad value for $2.5m. All this on a system that doesn't favor him and a coach that hates him. 13 points in his last 18 games.

Idk what yall expected from him, 60 points? 30 goals? He could probably get close on another team to 30 goals, but I thought we established already that he isn't gonna be a massive point producer? Based on his numbers this year id say we should be pleased. Like i said in the other thread, hes a low end 2nd liner paid like a 3rd liner

People irrationally stick to a narrative. It is what it is. For some reason, it escapes people that a guy can be useful and even effective at times while not living up to his draft position. Shockingly, you can even be rightfully disappointed and upset that Dallas' poor drafting passed on better talent and still manage to admit they ended up with a lesser Top 9 talent. Somehow that's Gurianov's fault and not the teams.

I still think there's a very strong possibility he gets traded just because of the salary cap. It largely depends on what happens with Pavelski and what player Dallas chooses to replace Klingberg. The perfect storm in terms of cutting salary would be adding Petry and retaining Pavelski. Robertson signing long-term vs. a bridge deal could have an impact as well. Ideally, you'd move Faksa first, but I wonder if Faksa's future is tied to Nill. There's just a part of me that has a hard time seeing Nill let him go. If Dallas has a new GM, I think Faksa's shot of getting moved likely increases.

The idea that he's somehow underperformed this current contract is absurd. Really, it's just not a good take. Suggesting he's a $1 to $2 million player is personal bias and not a fair opinion about the player.

 

[LT]

I’d be fine moving Gurianov in some kind of hockey deal. Also fine with keeping him if his contract is keep enough.

 

[Troy McClure]

I 100% agree. I know we all wanted more out of such a high pick but he is performing just fine for his contract.

I would hate to trade him while Bones is still the coach. I'd like to see what he can do with a new coach and system in place. If we trade him now, he probably improves his output on another team and we lose the trade.

Gurianov is one of the main reasons I want Bowness gone. I don't know if another coach can unlock a better player. Maybe not. But let's find out.

Look at what a new voice has done for Caufield in Montreal.

 

[BfantZ]

I think the big thing with gury is taking advantage of his speed . Monty seemed to get that out of him more . His rookie year it seemed like he had a breakaway/partial every period .

 

[BG44]

Gurianov is one of the main reasons I want Bowness gone. I don't know if another coach can unlock a better player. Maybe not. But let's find out.

Look at what a new voice has done for Caufield in Montreal.

Ever since Gaglardi spoke around the Zubov event, I've been more nervous about him. He's traditionally not been an overly involved owner, but yeah I've always been aware of the Hitch thing. That was the one very tangible example of his meddling. Gaglardi reiterated multiple times how this team is built, and he either fully supported or fully bought into the idea Nill had for this team. He has 3 likely immovable contracts in Benn, Seguin, and Lindell that amount to $25.15 million for 3 more seasons on top of $8.45 million to Heiskanen. He's going to add a major contract for Robertson this year even if it is a bridge, and there's potential he's about to pony up for Pavelski as well. Is he or is he not going to potentially agree to add Petry? That's something we'll have to see.

The amount of money invested in this team makes me nervous this is another cycle where he might be more forceful on who the next coach is based on how mediocre this team has been despite how much money he's dumped into it. If Hitchcock was his personal choice, the idea that he's not going to potentially want another old boys club coach seems pretty slim. Now ... Bones isn't a good head coach. I get that nearly anyone would be an improvement at this point. He's never shown an ability to succeed in this position outside of a unique situation in the bubble. I almost feel bad for the guy, but that's life. He's been a useful assistant coach that just didn't have the skill set of a head coach. Who would have guessed Boston called it that many years ago, but I think history has continually proven that GM was correct. Maybe another defensive-minded coach comes in here and has better results with a similar cast of players. I just worry that the situation you're talking about with a more modern coach isn't that much of a sure thing for Dallas next season.

Hopefully, Gaglardi does not pull another Hitchcock-type hiring. On the positive side, I think bringing in a guy like Greeley possibly suggests maybe he's moving towards a more modern approach and there's nothing to worry about. I don't think we'll really know until it actually happens.

 

[FirstRowUpperDeck]

Yes, the investments in this core came up a bit short, no doubt. The big problem is, I'm not sure Miro/Rope/Jason/Otter/Guri/Dellandria and other prospects actually scream "Cup contending core" any more than the last group. We got three very good to great players in the 2017 draft, and maybe few more later, but are they the level of the three in a row drafts of top 3 picks that PIT, CHI and others used to propel themselves to a Cup?

I think a lot of the assumptions about how Galardi thinks are nothing but that. It is just as likely that he learned his lesson from the Hitch hiring as he would be to direct yet another "Old Boys Coach." I mean, after Hitch, Monty was an NHL untested, young modern coach who also preached defense, but with a more opportunistic offensive side as well. If he was sober, he probably would have worked wonders, but we will never know.

 

[BG44]

Yes, the investments in this core came up a bit short, no doubt. The big problem is, I'm not sure Miro/Rope/Jason/Otter/Guri/Dellandria and other prospects actually scream "Cup contending core" any more than the last group. We got three very good to great players in the 2017 draft, and maybe few more later, but are they the level of the three in a row drafts of top 3 picks that PIT, CHI and others used to propel themselves to a Cup?

I think a lot of the assumptions about how Galardi thinks are nothing but that. It is just as likely that he learned his lesson from the Hitch hiring as he would be to direct yet another "Old Boys Coach." I mean, after Hitch, Monty was an NHL untested, young modern coach who also preached defense, but with a more opportunistic offensive side as well. If he was sober, he probably would have worked wonders, but we will never know.

It's not always popular to potentially give credit to Nill, but I look at Ruff and Montgomery as more Nill hirings and Hitchcock as Gaglardi. Nill may not even be making the decision so that has to be considered as well, but if it is Nill's decision (like I said someone may not like Nill but you can't say he's an idiot) I just don't see a guy that changed his drafting philosophy so drastically not understanding that the NHL team must eventually evolve to match those players as well. I'm not saying it's a certainty, but I wouldn't expect Nill's pick to be purely defensive.

It's kind of like what I said about Gaglardi ... it's hard to have a good feel. I think we're stuck just waiting to see what happens this time. So much is up in the air about the GM position, the coach position, do they sell, don't they, do they sign Pavelski. There are a ton of moving parts that it's hard to say this is the clearest, likely path of this team.

 

[Azzuri]

For a long time whenever Friedman was asked about Dallas, he would repeat the same quote from Nill about how being a good GM is "managing the owner."

I think Gaglardi is a lot more involved in a bad way than we think. And you can make an argument that Nill, for his faults, tempers some of his bad takes.

 

[Dynamite Time]

Gurianov isn’t a problem and I don’t mind his contract. I’m glad the Stars got rid of Cogliano, Comeau and Sekera it looks like. Now do the same with Faksa, Kero and Kiviranta.

Robertson - Hintz - Pavelski
Benn - Seguin - Gurianov
Damiani - Dellandrea - Peterson
Raffl - Glendening - xxx