Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

babych

Wideman vs Garrison

Which contract is better?   142 members have voted

  1. 1. Which contract is better?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

60 posts in this topic

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that Wideman has an NTC

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garrison by a mile, killer shot, and a big body. 4.6 mill at a hometown discount as well.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we can dump Garrison if he busts

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.