Labanc's historical production (.51 p/gp) puts him at the very low end of 2nd liners or top end of 3rd liners whereas Barabanov's (.60) is solidly top 6. I personally think Barabanov is not only a better offensive player but is also a much more complete player in the other 2 zones. Labanc's defensive awareness is sub-par and he frequently fails on the break-out/zone clears.
He didn't do much this season because he scored at a sub-Bonino rate in the 21 games he played. Write that off if you will because it fits the narrative, but his most recent play is the best indicator of future performance. Not what he did 3 years ago.
A .09 points per game difference is meaningless when you consider one of them has sustained that level of production over 360 games while the other has barely played one full season, which also happens to have been the highest scoring NHL season since the early 90s. Labanc is also a much better goal scorer than Barabanov and every advanced metric disagrees with your opinion that he is worse defensively than Barabanov.
I'm not talking about what he did 3 years ago I'm talking about what he did last season when he was tied with Kane for 2nd on the team in 5v5 goals and 3rd in 5v5 points. Also Labanc's three most common linemates in those 21 games were Bonino, Nieto and Weatherby. No shit he didn't score. Let's see how Barabanov does playing with those guys.
At least in my eyes, Barabanov completes the Timo - Hertl - Bara line. That is a fully functional legit top line. If the Sharks are in the business of convincing us they’re “competing”, then roughly $3M AAV to complete that line makes a lot of sense. There is not many, if any at all, UFAs they could add that would accomplish that with 100% certainty (lol). They could spend more and perhaps get better results, but IMO there aren’t that many obvious options for the price, and historically the Sharks are much better at retaining their own UFAs than bringing in outside replacements via UFA.
I can definitely hear the arguments of small sample size, it’s only been a season and some change. However, when matched with Hertl and a power forward (Kane/Meier) he has been a very effective third piece. Additionally, he’s not 22, he isn’t going through growing pains, he’s more or less the player we all see.
With regards to Lebanc, a player I really like, he seems to be a solid foil to Barabanov, in the sense that, where Barabanov has quite clearly carved a place as the very effective Hertl and Meier/Kane third wheel - Lebanc has never looked comfortable or particularly effective when not centered by Thornton. There’s talent there, and it has been effective at the NHL level. But does this team have the other pieces to maximize it (or at least capitalize on it)? To me it seems murky, at best.
I don’t think Lebanc is a good fit for a tough minute top 6 line with Couture and whomever else they could put on that line. He definitely doesn’t fit with Meier and Hertl as well as Barabanov does. So then, does he do anything, or fit better with Bordeleau on the third line? To me, no.
Lebanc has been a decently productive player, when he has a fit on a line. I don’t think the Sharks are trending towards be able to provide a line that maximizes his contribution. There are very likely other teams that could. I would gladly take Barabanov at ~$3M for a few years, and trade Lebanc at something approaching his value with an eye towards using that value to fill another hole.
