zombieksa Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Many of you know that have acquired Jason Garrison as a means to find Edler a partner for the season. Edler has only played well with two players over the last few seasons, Ehrhoff and Salo, both of whom are no longer on the team. My question is this: Hypothetically if Garrison shows little chemistry with Edler, but actually players really well with Ballard what does this mean for Edler and Ballard's future with the team? I think this is a distinct possibility as Ballard showed strong play in Florida before coming here and Garrisons strong defensive play could match well with Ballard's fast skating and puck moving skills. Does Edler become a trade chip? Does Edler become a 3rd pairing D man with Tanev, most likely effecting his desire to want to re-sign with the team? Ballard has had two maligned seasons with the Canucks, but bringing in fresh blood to partner with him could change that. If he plays really well with Garrison, it means we have 2 top pairings that are signed for a minimum of 3 seasons. Thoughts? Edit: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KING ALBERTS Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 If Ballard and Garrison click, it's one of those good problems to have when sorting out ice time. Edler is always going to get 1st PP time so it's not as if he'll be hurting that much for ice time. Probably too soon to be counting Edler as a trading chip though, it is assuming a lot that both Garrison and Ballard will out-perform Edler 5-5. The way Edler played in the playoffs this year it's not a huge stretch though. Heh, and other part of me wants to say, if Edler wants a big payday. It shouldn't matter who he plays with, Edler should be making his partner look good...not vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 enough with the hypothetical, we'll see what really happens. If Ballard can play with Garrison and benefit as the set-up man to Jason's bomb then it would be great to have him (Keith) become a Top 4 guy again. However, that shouldn't affect Ed's role, as he's still coming into his own as the #1, and I don't believe that he will be challenged (again, we'll see). However, if it does happen I'm fine with Hammer - Bieksa (shutdown pair, works) Ballard - Garrison (Ballard's style is similar to Campbell's; this could work, as it also allows for one heavy bomb on each pairing to be set up by a puck moving defenseman, in the 3rd pairing's case Tanev can saucer one to Ed to smash on goal) Ed - Tanev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancouvercanucks#1 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Edler will never be put o the third pairing. He consistently racks up the most minutes on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
needtogetswole Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 DILEMMA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 maybe if ballard and garrison click trade edler and luongo together we could get so much for those players bieksa hamhuis ballard garrison tanev alberts sauve/kconn enough with the hypothetical, we'll see what really happens. If Ballard can play with Garrison and benefit as the set-up man to Jason's bomb then it would be great to have him (Keith) become a Top 4 guy again. However, that shouldn't affect Ed's role, as he's still coming into his own as the #1, and I don't believe that he will be challenged (again, we'll see). However, if it does happen I'm fine with Hammer - Bieksa (shutdown pair, works) Ballard - Garrison (Ballard's style is similar to Campbell's; this could work, as it also allows for one heavy bomb on each pairing to be set up by a puck moving defenseman, in the 3rd pairing's case Tanev can saucer one to Ed to smash on goal) Ed - Tanev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I probably wouldn't worry too much about this until at least the quarter pole of the season. Chemistry can be developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 enough with the hypothetical, we'll see what really happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singing chef Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Dilemna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Wow. Spelled Dilemma wrong.. -1 for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Gunn Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Garrison was paired with Campbell on the PK and both are lefties. Not sure if Garrison was normally paired with Campbell or Weaver 5 on 5. Weavers a rightie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I could see Garrison and Ballard fitting nicely together - one is a stay at home, physical defenceman and the other is a smooth skating, smaller offensive guy. Both played together quite a bit in Florida so they're already accustomed to each others game. If Garrison does suit Ballard better, it just means we have 3 great pairings. I didn't think Edler had good chemistry with Salo actually, not like he had with Ohlund back in the day. Edler needs a big physical shutdown guy like Garrison so theoretically it'll work perfectly, but if it doesn't here's our much more even lineup: Hamhuis - Bieksa (22 minutes each) Edler - Tanev/Alberts (23 minutes for Edler, 18 minutes for Tanev/Alberts) Garrison - Ballard (20 minutes for Garrison, 17 minutes for Ballard) Of course we should add another defenceman like Kubina or Vandemeer, or even Jurcina who would be an upgrade over Tanev, but either way our defence is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rawkdrummer Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Suter's gone! There's trouble in Nashville and Poile their GM isn't happy but he screwed up. Now he needs to think about signing Shea Weber long term or risk losing him and getting what he got for Suter... NOTHING! If Weber decides he wants out of Nashville, then they've lost their top pairing and will at the very least need 2 more top 4 d-men. We could trade Edler and Ballard, the 2 D-men they need at this point plus... a pick, a prospect or Raymond, whatever it takes. We'll have enough cap space to sign Weber to a descent contract by trading those 2 d-men but we'll still need to find another descent d-man for some depth (Lu trade?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Garrison played the left side in Florida with Weaver and Campbell. That's not to say he can't play the right side. He can. And Edler can play both sides as well. What we'll have is a hybrid defensive pair. (Or something that doesn't work at all, and that would be a shame.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazysl Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 This will blow your mind, what if ballard and garrison click, and tanev has a breakout season and edler has a noris season.... Then we will have 3 great d lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 This will blow your mind, what if ballard and garrison click, and tanev has a breakout season and edler has a noris season.... Then we will have 3 great d lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABurrows14 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Suter's gone! There's trouble in Nashville and Poile their GM isn't happy but he screwed up. Now he needs to think about signing Shea Weber long term or risk losing him and getting what he got for Suter... NOTHING! If Weber decides he wants out of Nashville, then they've lost their top pairing and will at the very least need 2 more top 4 d-men. We could trade Edler and Ballard, the 2 D-men they need at this point plus... a pick, a prospect or Raymond, whatever it takes. We'll have enough cap space to sign Weber to a descent contract by trading those 2 d-men but we'll still need to find another descent d-man for some depth (Lu trade?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABurrows14 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 If Weber wants to sign in Van (ie the assumption you're making given we make a trade for him and he's a ufa next year)...then why would you trade Edler and Ballard? Makes no sense. Pick him up for nothing (no players) next year and figure out the cap issues then. Don't really understand all these suggestions of trading for Weber now, we have a good team, and while trading Edler while getting Weber is an upgrade, why wouldn't you want Weber paired with Edler? Your suggestion is a bit silly and very stupid asset mgmt by MG if he pulls that, which I know he wont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I could see Garrison and Ballard fitting nicely together - one is a stay at home, physical defenceman and the other is a smooth skating, smaller offensive guy. Both played together quite a bit in Florida so they're already accustomed to each others game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.