Monty Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 What worries me about Garrison is what has worried me about all Panthers players, their number seemed to have been skewed playing in their division. I know it may just be a coincidence, but Frolik, Olli Jokinen, Keith Ballard, and David Booth all had significant dropoff in their production when leaving Florida. Does that mean that this trend will continue with Garrison. Nobody knows. I'm just not sold on Garrison, and I watched a fair amount of Panthers games this year, three of those live against the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 What worries me about Garrison is what has worried me about all Panthers players, their number seemed to have been skewed playing in their division. I know it may just be a coincidence, but Frolik, Olli Jokinen, Keith Ballard, and David Booth all had significant dropoff in their production when leaving Florida. Does that mean that this trend will continue with Garrison. Nobody knows. I'm just not sold on Garrison, and I watched a fair amount of Panthers games this year, three of those live against the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnarbot Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Unless Campbell is comin too don't bother. It's no coincidence that he had a good year the same season Campbell got traded there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Grabner seemed to do pretty good when he left Florida? But seriously, like with Grabner, 3rd line talents playing 2knd line, 2knd line talents playing on the PP and first line because the balance of the team had been weak... Pumps up your #'s, very simple. Maybe this year and this player is different? Florida was a credible team and Garrison has the physical tools and big shot. What worries me about Garrison is what has worried me about all Panthers players, their number seemed to have been skewed playing in their division. I know it may just be a coincidence, but Frolik, Olli Jokinen, Keith Ballard, and David Booth all had significant dropoff in their production when leaving Florida. Does that mean that this trend will continue with Garrison. Nobody knows. I'm just not sold on Garrison, and I watched a fair amount of Panthers games this year, three of those live against the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Unless Campbell is comin too don't bother. It's no coincidence that he had a good year the same season Campbell got traded there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Swansons Moustache Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Unless Campbell is comin too don't bother. It's no coincidence that he had a good year the same season Campbell got traded there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunningWild Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Unless Campbell is comin too don't bother. It's no coincidence that he had a good year the same season Campbell got traded there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I think Gillis and a lot of GM's are aware of Garrison's situation in Florida. Why he had such a great season out of the blue. That being said, it might not stop a team from overpaying him. As usual, the UFA market is paper-thin. Perhaps with Tanev's development into the top-4 and with Gragnani, we've already handled our defensive depth. The work is in improving on what we already have, not adding depth. We had a TON of depth. Didn't help. Cheers. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I think Gillis and a lot of GM's are aware of Garrison's situation in Florida. Why he had such a great season out of the blue. That being said, it might not stop a team from overpaying him. As usual, the UFA market is paper-thin. Perhaps with Tanev's development into the top-4 and with Gragnani, we've already handled our defensive depth. The work is in improving on what we already have, not adding depth. We had a TON of depth. Didn't help. Cheers. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttock Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Dobber's take on Garrison. Not good. I kindof agree that this guy just came outta nowhere. Would he have 'broken out' if not for Campbell, Jovo, and the SE division? We've seen guys like this before recently. Anton Babchuk? Keith Ballard? Put them in a different division and watch their numbers DIVE. Cheers. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Realistically, I just don't see Garrison signing with the Canucks; for the sole reason that another team will overpay for his services. At best, he's a $2.5 million per year player. However, I see a team (much in the same as Columbus last year) who is in desperate need of bolstering their blueline, paying Garrison around $3.5 million for him to come play top 4 minutes. I can see Toronto, San Jose, Minnesota, Anaheim, and the Islanders making a strong play for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 No, two years ago we had a ton of depth. This season I could tell we needed another D-man from the start. We need one more top 4 D-man to replace Ehrhoff, which we didn't do last season. Then we need Salo to re-sign at a reasonable price. Then we have: Hamhuis Bieksa Edler UFA Ballard Tanev Salo, Alberts That is a ton of depth. Whether we get Garrison, Wideman, Allen, Suter, or someone else. It doesn't matter, but we need one more defenceman that can play top 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttock Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Realistically, I just don't see Garrison signing with the Canucks; for the sole reason that another team will overpay for his services. At best, he's a $2.5 million per year player. However, I see a team (much in the same as Columbus last year) who is in desperate need of bolstering their blueline, paying Garrison around $3.5 million for him to come play top 4 minutes. I can see Toronto, San Jose, Minnesota, Anaheim, and the Islanders making a strong play for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Hockey Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Is he much of a fighter? I know today's NHL there is less and less situations of pugilism, but it's always a bonus if a guy can drop the gloves when needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 I think Gillis and a lot of GM's are aware of Garrison's situation in Florida. Why he had such a great season out of the blue. That being said, it might not stop a team from overpaying him. As usual, the UFA market is paper-thin. Perhaps with Tanev's development into the top-4 and with Gragnani, we've already handled our defensive depth. The work is in improving on what we already have, not adding depth. We had a TON of depth. Didn't help. Cheers. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Don't expect the Canucks to be too eager on putting 4-5mill on this guy, which is what he wants. It's going to take a home town discount and a miss on getting Suter to get this guy so doesn't seem the most likely thing to go down this summer with the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 If he is willing to take a pay cut to play in his hometown and on a winning team, I say snag him. 3.5 seem reasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Swansons Moustache Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 If he is willing to take a pay cut to play in his hometown and on a winning team, I say snag him. 3.5 seem reasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I think a pairing of Jackman - Garrison could do really well for the organization. Veteran Shutdown D - Breakout Two-way D, sounds like a seconding coming of Hamhuis - Beiksa only double the BC power. Hamhuis - Bieksa Edler - Tanev Jackman - Garrison Give each pairing 18-22 minutes and have one of the most well rested defense corps. in the league. Edler - Garrison 1st PP Hamhuis - Bieksa 2nd PP all but Edler on the PK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I question many who are putting Tanev in as a top 4. Don't see that. He is a smart hockey player but he is small and physical play will beat him. Smarter for him to play bottom pairing and gain experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.