Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * - 4 votes

Jason Garrison Signing Opinion


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
26 replies to this topic

#1 PR

PR

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 04

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:19 PM

Some quick thoughts on today’s signing of Jason Garrison by the Canucks. The Canucks already had a big hole in their D when Ehrhoff left that was never filled and really hurt the team this past season. With Salo and Rome leaving, and Edler’s terrible post-season – there are some big questions on D.

As we all know, Garrison signed for 6-years at an average of $4.6 million – which means about $27.6 million in total. It looks like Gillis was using Bieksa’s cap hit as a ceiling… Bieksa is at a $4.6 cap hit too. This is fairly common in the NHL – the Red Wings and Lidstrom’s salary are probably the most well-known case of a team using a previous contract as a bargaining chip (“Are you saying your better than NIKLAS LIDSTROM???”) but in a post-lockout salary cap world which has increased every year it’s probably an obsolete idea. And I’m sure players understand that salaries go up when the cap rises.

The cap went up over $6 million from last season – from $64 to $70 million. That’s basically a 10% increase. And you can see the effects on salaries today – Kuba for $4m, Wideman for $5.25, Allen for $3.5m, Salo $3.75m.

With Gillis presumably limiting himself to $4.6m per, he handcuffs himself into giving Garrison a longer contract. There were rumours that Garrison was asking for north of $5-6mil a season. For all the people against Luongo’s long contract – this is pretty much the same thing. Garrison’s already turning 28 in November, so this contract will take him past his peak. That being said, there’s three advantages for these long contracts: 1) reducing the cap hit 2)the fact that the cap will likely get bigger as the years go on, meaning the contract is relatively cheaper (as a percentage of the cap) and 3) there are loopholes to get out of bad contracts.

Although I am super-pumped that the Canucks actually did something on Free Agent Frenzy day *and* that it was signing a defenseman, the main reason I’m skeptical about this deal is because I think it quite the gamble. Jason Garrison played with Brian Campbell in the weakest division in the NHL. He’s a late bloomer, but how much of that is being paired with a great D-man like Campbell?
From watching videos on youtube, Garrison seems like a stiff skater – how well will he be able to handle the Canucks style of mobile D-men who form a 5-man unit for offense? Having Brian Campbell, an excellent smooth skater who can move the puck, as your partner sure can make up for a weakness in skating.

All that being said, I am all for a “go-for-it-now” strategy as the window is closing on this team to be contenders. That’s why I was so against the acquisition of Kassian. So I don’t mind the price and the term, but I’m scared that the player isn’t going to be able handle his end of the bargain and be a legit top-4 D-man on the Canucks.

One thing would make this signing awesome – if we picked up one Shea Weber. Then Garrison could play in the bottom pairing with a Tanev or Connauton – that would be great! Gillis, get on that!

#2 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:26 PM

So does every CDC member need to start their own Garrison signing opinion thread? Why not express this opinion in the original Garrison thread. Seems that's what everyone else is doing.

#3 CanucksFanMike

CanucksFanMike

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,632 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:27 PM

I think it was a really good signing. Our current D should be this:

K. Bieksa - D. Hamhuis
J. Garrison - A. Edler
C. Tanev - ???

I think letting go Rome and Salo really hurt our depth on D so we need to sign a few guys still.
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#4 Everybody Hates Raymond

Everybody Hates Raymond

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,608 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 11

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:28 PM

I've watched Garrison many times before - and the best I can explain him is as a mix of Ehrhoff, Hamhuis and Bieksa. His offensive style is incredibly similar to Ehrhoff (but his shot is much better), his solid defense is almost similar to that of Hammer (not as good, but still) and he throws the body and the gloves just as well as Juice (maybe better). I know this seems like a risky signing now - but give Garrison his chance. He'll impress, no doubt about it. I fully believe he can score more than his 16 goals last season playing on a powerplay with the Sedins, Kesler and Edler. I'm going bold here, but I say Garrison scores 20 to 25 goals this year. 60 points.

Bieksa - Hamhuis
Edler - Garrison
Tanev - Connauton/Alberts/Ballard

Seems pretty good. If we can ship off Ballard and lock up another cheap top 4 d to play with Tanev, our core is absolutely solid.


#5 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:37 PM

There is much of what you posted, OP, that i fully agree with.

I really do not know much of Garrison. There are some reliable scouting reports that i do take stock in, and everything that has been stated in the management camp points toward his signing, but really as far as addressing size on the blueline.

Aside from Mathieu Schnieder, Gillis has been pretty savvy with shoring the d-corps.

It IS a gamble. For all the reasons you mentioned. Aside from the $-tag, id much rather Garrison than Schultz.

If i were to read between the lines i could realistically predict with the blueline that what we have; have been given assignments to fit into different roles next season. It happened with Eddie last year. If they keep Bally (which given how much they have top spend now, he MUST be up for negotiations), id assume he would be called on to be a puck moving D.

Tanev has expressed the want to improve his shot, and Hammer is emerging as a utility d-man that can do it all, and Juice will be a 2 way guy.

I expect that there could be one more blueline move (given the current coaching staff being on record of enjoying the tactical advantage of a RH D-man), and failing that, they will certainly leave a spot for a rookie to fight for a spot.

IMO, from a quick glance, it seems like an overpayment, but for some very good reasons, as he may be risky, there could be some benefit and reward.

OP, really excellent post for discussion.

:)

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#6 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:39 PM

I've watched Garrison many times before - and the best I can explain him is as a mix of Ehrhoff, Hamhuis and Bieksa. His offensive style is incredibly similar to Ehrhoff (but his shot is much better), his solid defense is almost similar to that of Hammer (not as good, but still) and he throws the body and the gloves just as well as Juice (maybe better). I know this seems like a risky signing now - but give Garrison his chance. He'll impress, no doubt about it. I fully believe he can score more than his 16 goals last season playing on a powerplay with the Sedins, Kesler and Edler. I'm going bold here, but I say Garrison scores 20 to 25 goals this year. 60 points.

Bieksa - Hamhuis
Edler - Garrison
Tanev - Connauton/Alberts/Ballard

Seems pretty good. If we can ship off Ballard and lock up another cheap top 4 d to play with Tanev, our core is absolutely solid.


I agree, if i was to read between the tactical lines, that Bally must be up for sale.

And i agree with your assessment.

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#7 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,834 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:40 PM

There is much of what you posted, OP, that i fully agree with.

I really do not know much of Garrison. There are some reliable scouting reports that i do take stock in, and everything that has been stated in the management camp points toward his signing, but really as far as addressing size on the blueline.

Aside from Mathieu Schnieder, Gillis has been pretty savvy with shoring the d-corps.

It IS a gamble. For all the reasons you mentioned. Aside from the $-tag, id much rather Garrison than Schultz.

If i were to read between the lines i could realistically predict with the blueline that what we have; have been given assignments to fit into different roles next season. It happened with Eddie last year. If they keep Bally (which given how much they have top spend now, he MUST be up for negotiations), id assume he would be called on to be a puck moving D.

Tanev has expressed the want to improve his shot, and Hammer is emerging as a utility d-man that can do it all, and Juice will be a 2 way guy.

I expect that there could be one more blueline move (given the current coaching staff being on record of enjoying the tactical advantage of a RH D-man), and failing that, they will certainly leave a spot for a rookie to fight for a spot.

IMO, from a quick glance, it seems like an overpayment, but for some very good reasons, as he may be risky, there could be some benefit and reward.

OP, really excellent post for discussion.

:)


Signing M. Schneider was a great move by Gillis until MS decided to become an unprofessional diva and refuse to participate in skating drills and practices.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

11477626583_2368927097.jpg     49997_b70e6ae14ce1652fa11bd1dda624afd1.g   7649118508_ce3e8a74a1_o.jpg

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#8 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,834 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:41 PM

I've watched Garrison many times before - and the best I can explain him is as a mix of Ehrhoff, Hamhuis and Bieksa. His offensive style is incredibly similar to Ehrhoff (but his shot is much better), his solid defense is almost similar to that of Hammer (not as good, but still) and he throws the body and the gloves just as well as Juice (maybe better). I know this seems like a risky signing now - but give Garrison his chance. He'll impress, no doubt about it. I fully believe he can score more than his 16 goals last season playing on a powerplay with the Sedins, Kesler and Edler. I'm going bold here, but I say Garrison scores 20 to 25 goals this year. 60 points.

Bieksa - Hamhuis
Edler - Garrison
Tanev - Connauton/Alberts/Ballard

Seems pretty good. If we can ship off Ballard and lock up another cheap top 4 d to play with Tanev, our core is absolutely solid.


If you have Ballard and his $4.2 per year contract as a #8 behind Conn and Alberts then by far I'd say this is more of a problem for the team than a benefit.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

11477626583_2368927097.jpg     49997_b70e6ae14ce1652fa11bd1dda624afd1.g   7649118508_ce3e8a74a1_o.jpg

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#9 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:44 PM

Signing M. Schneider was a great move by Gillis until MS decided to become an unprofessional diva and refuse to participate in skating drills and practices.


Y'know, i was actually stoked on the onset about his signing (given the track record, and reliability, even with the onset of age), and all these stories were leaked about his self entitled BS with the team.

As he was a former client of Gillis, he had to have been mortified that Schnieder put himself above the core and not accept a role as support.

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#10 PR

PR

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 04

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:46 PM

So does every CDC member need to start their own Garrison signing opinion thread? Why not express this opinion in the original Garrison thread. Seems that's what everyone else is doing.


I'm just trying to generate quality discussion on the boards. The problem with those mass threads is that discussion is fragmented and gets lost in a huge thread. Plus all the posts like yours just lower the quality of the site. And now I am contributing to it haha. But anyway, the way to drown out the crappy posts is not be complaining about them, it's by generating real quality discussion - which I believe my OP does.

#11 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:47 PM

If you have Ballard and his $4.2 per year contract as a #8 behind Conn and Alberts then by far I'd say this is more of a problem for the team than a benefit.


Reliable depth is rad.

Reliable depth that makes Gilman work overtime is certainly taxing.

One thing ive somewhat enjoyed with Gillis' time here so far, is that he is very much attuned to every facet of dealing with agents and market needs. Surely his right and left hand men aid in his choices. Very methodical.

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#12 Bieksasangryface

Bieksasangryface

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 183 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 12

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:48 PM

Ballard is not behind Alberts. He is a slick skating poor mans brian campbell. I think a pairing of KB4 and Jay Garry would be a pretty solid PP/ Offensive situation pairing. Quit bashing ballard for his cap hit until after this season. Booth too. Canucks have an intense system in place. Takes a bit of time to gel.

#13 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:52 PM

Ballard is not behind Alberts. He is a slick skating poor mans brian campbell. I think a pairing of KB4 and Jay Garry would be a pretty solid PP/ Offensive situation pairing. Quit bashing ballard for his cap hit until after this season. Booth too. Canucks have an intense system in place. Takes a bit of time to gel.


Indeed.

Albie is the new Rome, quality depth.

Much of the fairweather fanbase fail to realize that the Canucks emergence as an offensive threat was activating the D on transition, consistently.

At a glance, those parts are there. And a healthy Bally can be an important part of that concept.

Given what has been spent, im wondering if Bally might be traded.

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#14 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,940 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:52 PM

Panthers fans didn't say many good things about Ballard, but most say Garrison is gonna be missed. Kuba is alright, but a lot older.
Posted Image

#15 Jaku

Jaku

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,186 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 08

Posted 01 July 2012 - 06:52 PM

I don't think that this is a terrible signing. Garrison has a relatively good defensive side to his game, 4.6M to play in Van isn't terrible! He was offered "Wideman money" according to Bob McKenzie to play in Vancouver. He was also reportedly asking for 5-6M, i think he'll be a good fill on the top 4. He plays physical, can drop the bomb from the point, and can play defensively.
R.I.P- #37 Rick Rypien, #28 Luc Bourdon, #38 Pavol Demitra Forever Canucks.
Posted Image
Credit to Khalifawiz501 for the Sig.
Posted ImageColorado Avalanche GM in CDC STHS Sim League

#16 menace

menace

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,241 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 09

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:00 PM

The scale for players moves upward at this time of year. I don't think there is hard feelings for players who are estblished to make the same as a newbie that is the nature of a sliding scale. I love that this kid wants to shine in his hometown.


#17 Samuel Påhlsson

Samuel Påhlsson

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • Joined: 29-February 12

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:09 PM

edit: wrong thread...

Edited by Samuel Pahlsson, 01 July 2012 - 07:09 PM.

SYvE9NH.gif


#18 Underachieving Hero of CDC

Underachieving Hero of CDC

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 875 posts
  • Joined: 12-February 11

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:12 PM

As of now, its an overpayment. On the other hand, there was definately a hole that needed to be plugged on our blueline and prices out there are high right now. Add onto that the fact that he's still got some upside and there were other teams out there offering him more and I think this could be a great move for the Canucks. At least I hope so.

#19 Vancanwincup

Vancanwincup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 541 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 12

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:21 PM

Some quick thoughts on today’s signing of Jason Garrison by the Canucks. The Canucks already had a big hole in their D when Ehrhoff left that was never filled and really hurt the team this past season. With Salo and Rome leaving, and Edler’s terrible post-season – there are some big questions on D.

As we all know, Garrison signed for 6-years at an average of $4.6 million – which means about $27.6 million in total. It looks like Gillis was using Bieksa’s cap hit as a ceiling… Bieksa is at a $4.6 cap hit too. This is fairly common in the NHL – the Red Wings and Lidstrom’s salary are probably the most well-known case of a team using a previous contract as a bargaining chip (“Are you saying your better than NIKLAS LIDSTROM???”) but in a post-lockout salary cap world which has increased every year it’s probably an obsolete idea. And I’m sure players understand that salaries go up when the cap rises.

The cap went up over $6 million from last season – from $64 to $70 million. That’s basically a 10% increase. And you can see the effects on salaries today – Kuba for $4m, Wideman for $5.25, Allen for $3.5m, Salo $3.75m.

With Gillis presumably limiting himself to $4.6m per, he handcuffs himself into giving Garrison a longer contract. There were rumours that Garrison was asking for north of $5-6mil a season. For all the people against Luongo’s long contract – this is pretty much the same thing. Garrison’s already turning 28 in November, so this contract will take him past his peak. That being said, there’s three advantages for these long contracts: 1) reducing the cap hit 2)the fact that the cap will likely get bigger as the years go on, meaning the contract is relatively cheaper (as a percentage of the cap) and 3) there are loopholes to get out of bad contracts.

Although I am super-pumped that the Canucks actually did something on Free Agent Frenzy day *and* that it was signing a defenseman, the main reason I’m skeptical about this deal is because I think it quite the gamble. Jason Garrison played with Brian Campbell in the weakest division in the NHL. He’s a late bloomer, but how much of that is being paired with a great D-man like Campbell?
From watching videos on youtube, Garrison seems like a stiff skater – how well will he be able to handle the Canucks style of mobile D-men who form a 5-man unit for offense? Having Brian Campbell, an excellent smooth skater who can move the puck, as your partner sure can make up for a weakness in skating.

All that being said, I am all for a “go-for-it-now” strategy as the window is closing on this team to be contenders. That’s why I was so against the acquisition of Kassian. So I don’t mind the price and the term, but I’m scared that the player isn’t going to be able handle his end of the bargain and be a legit top-4 D-man on the Canucks.

One thing would make this signing awesome – if we picked up one Shea Weber. Then Garrison could play in the bottom pairing with a Tanev or Connauton – that would be great! Gillis, get on that!


You have to remember in his second year he played with Weaver and was just as good defensively as this last year with Campbell.

#20 falcon45ca

falcon45ca

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Joined: 08-February 10

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:23 PM

Garrison’s already turning 28 in November, so this contract will take him past his peak.


Bieksa says hello. A guy in his thirties who put up career numbers this season. 28 is not old for a D-man, lots of D-men don't hit their peak til their late twenties and thirties. Chara also had a career high in pts. this season at the age of 35, Lidstrom was also in his mid-thirties when he posted 80 pts.

Overall I really like this deal. Garrison has got great size, moves the puck well, doesn't panic, has a fantastic shot, and he's a career +9 playing in Florida, a team who now has only 1 D-man that wasn't a minus player this season.

#21 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,995 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:29 PM

Garrison is a pretty physical. He's a good shot blocker. I thought 4+ was a bit of an overpayment. 5 and beyond was ridiculous. We got him about in between, so I'm quite satisfied. Hopefully he keeps up his offense though otherwise this deal will suck.
Posted Image

#22 Colinisacanuck

Colinisacanuck

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • Joined: 02-June 12

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:34 PM

I like this signing, but i'm not sold on the fact that he is a top 4 defencemen, and i dont even think that is a fact. The guy had a good season two years ago and a pretty good season last year. He was playing with bryan cambell which helps, but in vancouver he will be playing with Edler.

From what i've seen, looks like Garrison is a two-way defencemen, the guy can hit, skate, and put up points. He is only 26, so he and Edler can grow together. It is a bit of a gamble, and i would be surprised if Mike Gillis signed garrison without being sure that he is a top 4 dman. We will see though, PLUS, he can quarterback our powerplay, YES!!!

#23 Spankenstyne

Spankenstyne

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:51 PM

PR my friend it is a great signing. Mark my words you will quickly love the way this guy plays. Yes he played with Campbell, but now he will get the chance to play on an entirely better whole team, an elite team, a contender. He won't just have a Campbell but will get to play with a more high powered offense and on one of the best PP's in the league. He will impress.

#24 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,995 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 01 July 2012 - 07:54 PM

I like this signing, but i'm not sold on the fact that he is a top 4 defencemen, and i dont even think that is a fact. The guy had a good season two years ago and a pretty good season last year. He was playing with bryan cambell which helps, but in vancouver he will be playing with Edler.

From what i've seen, looks like Garrison is a two-way defencemen, the guy can hit, skate, and put up points. He is only 26, so he and Edler can grow together. It is a bit of a gamble, and i would be surprised if Mike Gillis signed garrison without being sure that he is a top 4 dman. We will see though, PLUS, he can quarterback our powerplay, YES!!!


Over 120+ hits and blocked shots per season over the last two years. I haven't seen him play but I'd say that indicates he's usually in pretty good position as well, defensively.
Posted Image

#25 bobopan

bobopan

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 05

Posted 01 July 2012 - 08:02 PM

The length is the only question mark for me, so hopefully the contract is front loaded. Otherwise cap hit is about best you could realistically hope for and we had a need for another top 4 guy. Im just curious as to what this will all mean for Ballard..

#26 rising_ego

rising_ego

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,895 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 08:08 PM

I respect this guy for putting his money where his mouth is, as a BC boy who was a fan of the Nucks, wanted to come here and sacrificed a bit to make it happen... unlike some kid who had the same mind set but spat on an entire province by going to our divisioin rivals instead.


#27 rising_ego

rising_ego

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,895 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 03

Posted 01 July 2012 - 08:16 PM

Liking this signing more and more, hopefully he uses his size more and can block shots... anything around 15gs is good enough for me. Offense is not a problem, its playing physical, and blocking shots than wins playoff hockey.

Only concern I have is we have 3 LHS and only 1 RHS in our top 4.





Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.