Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Wideman vs Garrison


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

Poll: Which contract is better? (142 member(s) have cast votes)

Which contract is better?

  1. Widemann (11 votes [7.75%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.75%

  2. Garrison (131 votes [92.25%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 92.25%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 babych

babych

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,110 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 08

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:08 PM

Here are 2 pretty similar defensemen. Given everything we've seen up until now (games played, points, etc), which contract do you like better?

Garrison - 6 years with a cap hit of $4.6 million. He is 6'2" 218 and had a career year of 16 goals and 33 points last year. 27 years old 190 games played.

Wideman - 5 years with a cap hit of $5.25 million. He is 6'0" 200 and routinely gets between 30-50 points. 29 years old 535 games played.

Also, you should factor in the fact that Calgary traded for Wideman.

Edit - I get that neither player has yet to play a game for his respective team. I'd like to see the initial feedback and then compare that to the feedback 1-2 years from now.

Edited by babych, 02 July 2012 - 05:36 PM.

  • 0
QUOTE
(shiznak@Jun 17 2008, 08:00 PM)
Kesler was lucky to score 20 this year since the injury to Morrison allowed him to do so.

I doubt Kesler would ever break 15 goals in his career again.

#2 Ghewlash

Ghewlash

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  • Joined: 01-January 09

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:12 PM

I don't think either are particularly great, but then again my valuations lag behind the crazy inflation we are seeing in the NHL.

Edited by Ghewlash, 02 July 2012 - 05:40 PM.

  • 0

#3 Tiburon

Tiburon

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,406 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 06

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:14 PM

Always liked Wideman's play

Garrison, honestly only heard about him after this year. Haven't actually seen him play.

At this point I'll go with Wideman
  • 0
Posted Image

#4 ButterBean

ButterBean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 09

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:15 PM

I'd say Garrison. More well rounded, younger, lower cap hit. Given a good opportunity on the Canucks I think Garrison is capable of putting up close to Wideman's point totals and he's more of a finisher/goal scorer.
  • 3

#5 Niloc009

Niloc009

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,730 posts
  • Joined: 12-October 09

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:18 PM

Don't forget that Wideman has an NTC
  • 0

Posted Image


STHS Hockey League - Brooklyn Beavers GM


#6 Samuel Påhlsson

Samuel Påhlsson

    Comets Star

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

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:20 PM

*
POPULAR

They're nothing a like, Wideman can't play defense.

Edited by Samuel Pahlsson, 02 July 2012 - 05:21 PM.

  • 9

SYvE9NH.gif


#7 Canucks_fo_life

Canucks_fo_life

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,568 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 06

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:22 PM

Garrison by a mile, killer shot, and a big body. 4.6 mill at a hometown discount as well.
  • 2
I rather lose with the Canucks, than win with any other team

This is OUR year

GO CANUCKS GOOOOOO!!!!!!!

#8 Dion Phaneuf

Dion Phaneuf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 12

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:28 PM

Wideman's contract is a lot safer but he got overpaid by about a mil while the Garrison contract is a gamble considering he just had a career year. Garrison was also grossly overpaid by a mil if not more but that does tend to happen to players coming off a career year.

The Flames got a proven veteran while the Canucks got a unproven potential top 4 defencemen.
* He still has a lot to prove, 1 good year isn't enough to be considered a top 4 lock

TBH I don't like either deal but if Garrison can show that he isn't a one year show, he will be the better contract. Wideman is on the better contract as we know what he can do...
* We can make assumptions (Bouwmeester x2) but you cannot deny the fact that Wideman is the safer contract.

* Both contracts will probably be "steals" in a few years given the bigger paydays every other July 1st..:lol:
^ Assuming they both live up to their contracts

My guess is that Wideman will be solid in Calgary but his point production will go down to around 35 points. I believe that Garrison will gel with the team and chip-in about 30 points while being a defensive specialist. Overall, I don't think either team will be crying and whining about these contracts this time next year.

* Calgary made a mistake by giving out another clause, we can dump Garrison if he busts
* I don't mind Garrison but I'm not a fan of the contract (term) given the HUGE risk. That is all.

Edited by A1 CANUCK, 02 July 2012 - 05:30 PM.

  • 0

gallery_47851_23_84084.png

medium.png - CDCGML 483288048.png - EHL medium.png - STHS medium.png - CDCFL


#9 EDLER.IS.BEAST

EDLER.IS.BEAST

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,310 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:28 PM

They're nothing a like, Wideman can't play defense.


This.
  • 0

#10 Hafizzle

Hafizzle

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,700 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 08

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:33 PM

You can't really compare them as their game isn't even remotely similar.
  • 0

#11 bd71

bd71

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 708 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:34 PM

Wideman is way more proven than Garrison. Garrison looks to have a more complete game.

Both contracts are equally high. Garrison I think will have more success but for such a small sample it is an amazingly high deal. He is up with Hamhuis and Bieksa with nowhere near the career success those two have had.

Look at Ballard. He received almost the exact same contract as Garrison three years ago from the Panthers after a similar great year. 6 years for 4.2 as opposed to 4.6. Lets hope Garrison turns out better. Maybe Tallon learned from past organizational mistakes?

Both contracts I think are incredibly risky.
  • 0

#12 dorrcoq

dorrcoq

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,037 posts
  • Joined: 12-September 05

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:37 PM

we can dump Garrison if he busts


Yeah, because teams line up to take high salaried busts off our hands.
  • 0

#13 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68,982 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:38 PM

Garrison's contract. Nothing better than taking a hometown discount.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#14 Phamda

Phamda

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:38 PM

Wideman's contract is a lot safer but he got overpaid by about a mil while the Garrison contract is a gamble considering he just had a career year. Garrison was also grossly overpaid by a mil if not more but that does tend to happen to players coming off a career year.

The Flames got a proven veteran while the Canucks got a unproven potential top 4 defencemen.
* He still has a lot to prove, 1 good year isn't enough to be considered a top 4 lock

TBH I don't like either deal but if Garrison can show that he isn't a one year show, he will be the better contract. Wideman is on the better contract as we know what he can do...
* We can make assumptions (Bouwmeester x2) but you cannot deny the fact that Wideman is the safer contract.

* Both contracts will probably be "steals" in a few years given the bigger paydays every other July 1st..:lol:
^ Assuming they both live up to their contracts

My guess is that Wideman will be solid in Calgary but his point production will go down to around 35 points. I believe that Garrison will gel with the team and chip-in about 30 points while being a defensive specialist. Overall, I don't think either team will be crying and whining about these contracts this time next year.

* I don't mind Garrison but I'm not a fan of the contract (term) given the HUGE risk. That is all.


Flames D more proven than Canucks D? Not sure how you gauge "proven" bit lets say you're going of playoff games. bouwmeester AND Giordano have not played a single NHL playoff game, while Sarich has 57 and Wideman has played 44. While on the Canucks side, every meber of our top 4 has played in the playoffs. Garrison has 7, Edler has 55, Bieksa has 61 and Hamhuis has 52.
  • 0

#15 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,575 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:41 PM

Wideman is pretty awful defensively, so if both struggle offensively, at least Garrison would still be effective.
Except it is more likely Wideman will keep up a 30-40 point pace than Garrison.

Edited by Jagermeister, 02 July 2012 - 05:42 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#16 Dion Phaneuf

Dion Phaneuf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts
  • Joined: 05-May 12

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:43 PM

Flames D more proven than Canucks D? Not sure how you gauge "proven" bit lets say you're going of playoff games. bouwmeester AND Giordano have not played a single NHL playoff game, while Sarich has 57 and Wideman has played 44. While on the Canucks side, every meber of our top 4 has played in the playoffs. Garrison has 7, Edler has 55, Bieksa has 61 and Hamhuis has 52.


NO ! I meant Wideman is more proven than Garrison. LOL
  • 0

gallery_47851_23_84084.png

medium.png - CDCGML 483288048.png - EHL medium.png - STHS medium.png - CDCFL


#17 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,882 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:45 PM

Also should factor in Garrison had a career year playing along side Brian Campbell who set Garrison up for a lot of goals, who will set up Garrison in Vancouver?
  • 0

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#18 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:46 PM

Garrison's first year, he was used as primarily a shut-down defenseman. He has great possession numbers. He's played against the opposing team's top players consistently.

Wideman is not any of those above. Wideman does have better offensive skills in that he can be relied on to produce 35+ points. Garrison's contribution offensively or on the PP is limited to his booming shot, but his shot percentage is really unsustainable. It's unlikely that he repeats his 16 goal season.

More realistically, Garrison will give us 10-15 goals if he has a good year. He will be rock solid on defense. But most importantly, he is VERSATILE, which the canucks have lacked for some time. This means that he can play either on the left side or the right side (next to Edler). Only person who was able to play both sides of the ice last few seasons was Rome.

4.6M in a 70M cap is more like 3.5M a couple of years ago. This is a great signing by MG. Given how much the cap rose, Garrison's cap (percentage wise) is actually lower than Bieksa's or Hamhuis'.

Wideman on the other than is very one dimensional. So yeah it's ludicrous that anyone would think Wideman is a better player or even funnier that his contract is better than Garrison's. Given how Salo got 3.85M, this one is a steal.
  • 2

#19 Phamda

Phamda

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:47 PM

NO ! I meant Wideman is more proven than Garrison. LOL


Ah! Totally my bad. Reading fail.

Wideman is proven offensively and proven he fails defensively.

Garrison is proven defensively, whilr a quedtion mark offensively.

So ... Debatable Xd
  • 0

#20 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,882 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:47 PM


  • 0

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#21 swedishdomination

swedishdomination

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,529 posts
  • Joined: 08-August 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:50 PM

*
POPULAR

Also should factor in Garrison had a career year playing along side Brian Campbell who set Garrison up for a lot of goals, who will set up Garrison in Vancouver?


Sedins and Edler
  • 12

Posted Image

Credit to 7thman for the sig


#22 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:54 PM

They are both overpaid but Wideman's contract is safer by a country mile. He has a proven history and track record. You know what you are getting with Wideman. Garrison had a career year and hit the jack pot.

The 6 year term on Garrison's contract is risky but he will be tradeable after 4 years of his front loaded contract.
  • 0

#23 ChuckNORRIS4Cup

ChuckNORRIS4Cup

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,882 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 05:55 PM

Sedins and Edler


Sedins ya maybe, but who says he plays with the Sedins on the top line or let a lone on the PP? Edler likes to shoot though, so that probably won't work out to well.
  • 0

Eh8NO.jpg

Trevor Linden Quote Nov. 29th 2012 [Asked if he would return to the game?]
"The game has been with me for a long time, if the right opportunity came about, you never know"


#24 falcon45ca

falcon45ca

    Comets Prospect

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

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:00 PM

Wideman is a career -39. I thought the Flames already had an offensive D-man who cost them goals-against & got rid of him a few years ago...Phaneuf ring a bell?

I do not see any value in a D-man who is a defensive liability. Bad signing by the Flames, Kipper is going to be busy enough as it is playing 70-75 games. He's going to get peppered next season, I'll wager he has well over 2K shots-against.
  • 1

#25 The Kassassin Train

The Kassassin Train

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,106 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 05

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:03 PM

I'm really surprised Garrison doesn't have a NMC or a NTC. This is a huge plus on his contract. MG got it again.
  • 0

The key difference is that Sopel can fill in for Seabrook and Campbell just fine. Bieksa, he is garbage so in that sense he is like the worst defenseman in the league.


When Cody (Hodgson) gets older, he might be better than Datsyuk.


Let's not push this guy (Kassian). He's still immature, and if he fails on the 2nd line it's because he isn't ready. Some guys really need years to develop, it's how well and how fast players adapt to the game. In my opinion, I'd rather have Horvat getting 2nd line minutes. He will start off on the 3rd line next season but I see him making the transition, being a great compliment to whoever plays his wings.

At this point, I don't see Kassian fitting in to any role other than a 3rd. If players like Kassian start getting 2nd line minutes then we just stay inconsistent as a team.


The idiocy on CDC....

#26 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:06 PM

Sedins ya maybe, but who says he plays with the Sedins on the top line or let a lone on the PP? Edler likes to shoot though, so that probably won't work out to well.


Edler had to play Ehrhoff's role last season - his shot total (granted he played more games) almost doubled last year. And why not, Edler has a great shot. So does Garrison. Now teams will have to respect both points. More plus for our PP.

Not to mention, all we need from Garrison on the PP is to have that shot handy. He does not need to quarterback it or we don't have to rely on him. I think what he's trying to get at is that our PP improves with this guy's shot. He won't replicate his 16 goal season. But as long as our PP gets better than the 2nd half of last season, I'll be happy.
  • 0

#27 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:09 PM

They are both overpaid but Wideman's contract is safer by a country mile. He has a proven history and track record. You know what you are getting with Wideman. Garrison had a career year and hit the jack pot.

The 6 year term on Garrison's contract is risky but he will be tradeable after 4 years of his front loaded contract.


So you would rather sign a guy with a proven record of defensive liability over a guy who's played well given his tough minutes against other team's top guys, because he's only been in the league for two seasons. You and Feaster think alike.
  • 0

#28 Phamda

Phamda

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 11

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:16 PM

Sedins ya maybe, but who says he plays with the Sedins on the top line or let a lone on the PP? Edler likes to shoot though, so that probably won't work out to well.


Edler was more of a passer than a shooter or a inbetween guy until this year IMO. Since entering the league Edler has had 10, 124, 145, 161 and 121 shot seasons until his 228 shots last year. And his career high came because the Canucks forced him to shoot more because they had lost Ehrhoff's 209 shots from the previous season.

Shoot-first defenders usually range around the 190+ shots a season ( P.K Subban) the inbetween guys(passers and shooters) are usually 131-189 shots a season (Ryan Suter) and pass first (Brian Campbell/Tomas Kaberle) are 130 and less a season.

Edler inspite of his wild incosistencies is a pretty adaptable in every aspect Of his game. He can be the shutdown/stay athome guy on a pairing or the offensive guy, he just isnt able to do both at the same time. He can have great stick position or land big body checks. He can set-up or he can shoot. He just can't do both of anything at the same time hahaha. Hopefully with Garrison Edler can settle into a set-up guy to set the G52 bombs.
  • 1

#29 D.Doughty

D.Doughty

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,013 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 12

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:32 PM

Garrison is a bad signing. Unproven. Should not be worth 4.6

All he does is shoot pucks t'd up by mccabe
  • 0

#30 CCCP

CCCP

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 02 July 2012 - 06:46 PM

At least we have some hopes with Garrison. You never know. Could be anything.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.