Archived

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

Go Go Canucks Go

Jason Garrison so far?

973 posts in this topic

Are you kidding me???? Do you follow the NHL or do you just like to troll the CDC???

The market for Dmen in the NHL are at all time high right now! Garrison could have gotten a lot more from a multiple number of teams if he wanted to test the waters.... at $4.6M, you have to be an idiot to believe it's not a discount. There are more teams in need of a top 4 D than any other position and plenty of those signed top 4 D are awful....and getting paid a lot more than $4.6!

Of course he 'cashed in' considering what his salary was before....but that doesn't mean it wasn't a discount :picard:

Your posts are usually ridiculous and consistently antagonizing, but sometimes....just sometimes....there is a valid argument in there somewhere. You have been proven wrong with your theories on numerous occasions and you still stand your ground to try and argue your points (**slow clap**).

I had a friend who had similar traits, when we would go out....he would approach every girl in the bar, he gets turned down and laughed at lots....but he does eventually find a hit after multiple misses. He has grown to accept humiliation and making bad judgements due to the regularity of being turned down...his lust just overwhelms him and he considers .01% as good enough odds to endure it. He's horny and I can understand his motivation...

I just don't understand yours? What satisfaction do you get in trolling like this? Your odds on being correct are similar to his....yet you still troll CDC? I can only assume your pants are around your ankles when you get the one theory correct.... Is it worth it?

4.6 for 6 years was not a discount in any way

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that was a disproportionate response.

I generally don't agree with ES often, but I can usually see where he is coming from, and can definitely understand this one. 4.6 isn't a bad cap hit for a shorter term deal and I'm sure he could have gotten more elsewhere, but he wouldn't have been given 6 years elsewhere. Yes, that's the price you pay in a market that isn't offering a whole lot of D-men, but in situations like this (a 27 year old D-man coming out of nowhere and having 1 "good" season [16 goals and 33 points in 77 really isn't that great] on a Florida D-line that doesn't really have anywhere else to go for offence) you pay high short term and give them a chance to prove that it wasn't a fluke. 4.6 is too much for 6 years for an unproven player. It could pay off huge, but if I were a betting man I'd say it won't.

ES seems to be very specific with his comments, so if he is talking about the length of the contract that he should have specified. I don't think he is...

Regardless, you think that no team would have offered him 6 years? ...you think Philly, Detroit, Edmonton, etc would have balked on the signing for Garrison because it was 6 years? :picard:

And I'm tired of people saying he had "1 good season"! Sure, he had one good season for points....but we needed a big D man like Garrison who can play the shutdown role. His goal scoring and puck moving abilities is a bonus! Let's see...he's a great shutdown Dman with size who can move the puck AND we now know (from last year when they first tried him in this role) that Garrison also has a boomer of a shot and can put up points.... he has not played 4 years in the NHL by fluke!

He actually possesses all the components that the Nucks and every other team in the NHL needs.... size, skill, can play both sides, can play a great shutdown role AND he can score!

YES, $4.6 is a discount and he would have received 6 years + more money elsewhere.....

TBH, I couldn't care less about his goal totals. As long as he hits, moves bodies and can play the shutdown role than he is more than worth $4.6 mill for 6 years....

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name the defenseman that right now is leading the team in +/-?

Garrison

Who has one shot on goal less than Bieksa?

Garrison

Let's compare Ballard and Garrison shall we?

Ballard: $4.2 million, 0 points, +5, has had a rookie bail him out on numerous occasions. Ballard is supposed to also be an "offensive defenseman", yet he has 8 shots.

Garrison: $4.6 million, 2 points, +7, 17 shots, yes he's made some mistakes but he's on a new team, recovered from injury, in a shortened season with little practise time, and effectively a long weekend for a training camp.

I'll cut Garrison some slack. Ballard not so much, but at least he's effective with Tanev.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ES seems to be very specific with his comments, so if he is talking about the length of the contract that he should have specified. I don't think he is...

Regardless, you think that no team would have offered him 6 years? ...you think Philly, Detroit, Edmonton, etc would have balked on the signing for Garrison because it was 6 years? :picard:

And I'm tired of people saying he had "1 good season"! Sure, he had one good season for points....but we needed a big D man like Garrison who can play the shutdown role. His goal scoring and puck moving abilities is a bonus! Let's see...he's a great shutdown Dman with size who can move the puck AND we now know (from last year when they first tried him in this role) that Garrison also has a boomer of a shot and can put up points.... he has not played 4 years in the NHL by fluke!

He actually possesses all the components that the Nucks and every other team in the NHL needs.... size, skill, can play both sides, can play a great shutdown role AND he can score!

YES, $4.6 is a discount and he would have received 6 years + more money elsewhere.....

TBH, I couldn't care less about his goal totals. As long as he hits, moves bodies and can play the shutdown role than he is more than worth $4.6 mill for 6 years....

The two best shutdown D in the league make 3.5 and 3.4, so if you're happy with him not producing points at 4.6 when he can't hold a defensive candle to Mitchell or Scuderi then it's a good thing you're not a GM, because you'd find yourself in cap trouble extremely fast. If this is his offensive output than he's not worth 4.6, regardless of how well he plays defence and hits.

I believe other GMs may have offered him 6+ years, but I highly doubt it was at that price. I doubt he got offered over 4 once he hit 5 years with anyone else.

I'm not saying it's a bad move right now, if you get a 33 point (82 game schedule), solid defensively Garrison, then he's worth the 4.6 and maybe even more, but the fact is he has not proven that that's what he can do regularly. You just don't commit to a player at that price with that term because of 1 good season in the salary cap world. I'm not bashing Garrison here, I don't think he's a bad player, I am questioning the management team who gave him that amount of money based on what is really a small sample size of games, it's a huge risk and it could very easily be comparable to Ballard's contract in 2-3 years. Hell, if he continues to produce at 0.18 PPG for this year and the next then Gillis has received an extremely lucky get out of jail free card with the second buyout next season, and I guarantee you that nobody will step up and use his defensive play to defend him when Gillis uses that card. Because you don't pay strictly defensive players 4.6 million dollars a year.

Oh and just for the record:

The concept of risk is not one that's well understood around these parts. What's risky is not a 2-year commitment at a pretty low cap hit to a well-established vet like Sami Salo, but a 6-year commitment to an unestablished guy like Jason Garrison who came out of nowhere to be a PP force last year, scoring 17 goals.

And to say that he made a "very big hometown discount"...get serious. He got 6 years at $4.6M per, and he's Jason Garrison. What do you honestly think gave up? Maybe an extra $100K per year to go play in Long Island? The guy absolutely cashed in.

All he talked about was length of the contract. That was the argument he made. If you would have read what he was saying rather than automatically assuming King of the ES made a post that you probably disagree with than you might have noticed it. Instead you just decided to insult him and, I can only assume, sat and waited for the +1's to roll in. It restores my faith in these boards a little bit that you have yet to receive any.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I blame Garrison for a large part of the loss tonight. This guy was brutal tonight...

Terrible defensive coverage, many blown assignments, couldnt clear the puck and would turn it over constantly. No physical presence and weak in board battles/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has been pretty bad, same with Hamhuis both are playing like crap

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Took penalties and got away with some too. Could have been at least 3 minors for Mr. Garrison

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup... Garrison sucks. More than 1/4 of the way through the season, and this guy has been nothing but absolute garbage.

His shot? Non-existent, and completely inaccurate.

His hits? What hits?

His defensive play? HORRIBLE.

So why did we sign him? WHY THE HELL does he make this kind of money? And we think Ballard is who we have to buy out this off-season?

Sorry to say, Garrison is a bust. J-Bo 2.0. Thank god for the quick fix that is buyouts.

Thanks for nothing, Garrison.

EDIT: oh, and PLAY SOME DISCIPLINED ****ING HOCKEY, DUDE!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I blame Garrison for a large part of the loss tonight. This guy was brutal tonight...

Terrible defensive coverage, many blown assignments, couldnt clear the puck and would turn it over constantly. No physical presence and weak in board battles/

He was on the ice for 1 goal against which had nothing to do with him ...
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All around terrible. This includes 1 meaningless penalty per game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup... Garrison sucks. More than 1/4 of the way through the season, and this guy has been nothing but absolute garbage.

His shot? Non-existent, and completely inaccurate.

His hits? What hits?

His defensive play? HORRIBLE.

So why did we sign him? WHY THE HELL does he make this kind of money? And we think Ballard is who we have to buy out this off-season?

Sorry to say, Garrison is a bust. J-Bo 2.0. Thank god for the quick fix that is buyouts.

Thanks for nothing, Garrison.

EDIT: oh, and PLAY SOME DISCIPLINED ****ING HOCKEY, DUDE!

Are you done....

You've earned this.

tumblr_md95uagwKT1qck737.gif

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're essentially using the cap we got from Salo/Ehrhoff for this guy. He doesn't replace one, let alone both. I wish MG would have just realized how important Ehrhoff was to this team and singed him instead of being a dumb frack and letting him walk.

The only proof you need for Ehrhoff's importance to the team's offence is this; the only two seasons he played for the Canucks, a Sedin lead the league in points. Without him, both Sedins played a PPG before and after his departure.

MG chose Booth over Ehrhoff and boy didn't that work out? Biggest mistake of his career right now. MG 's knowledge about the defense position is very weak with the way he has handled it. Got a great asset who performed great and failed to lock him up and signed a string of mediocre guys (Ballard, Garrsion).

MG should give control of the defense core to someone else, he can't do it.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's compare Ballard and Garrison shall we?

Ballard: $4.2 million, 0 points, +5, has had a rookie bail him out on numerous occasions. Ballard is supposed to also be an "offensive defenseman", yet he has 8 shots.

Garrison: $4.6 million, 2 points, +7, 17 shots, yes he's made some mistakes but he's on a new team, recovered from injury, in a shortened season with little practise time, and effectively a long weekend for a training camp.

I'll cut Garrison some slack. Ballard not so much, but at least he's effective with Tanev.

I will cut Garrison some slack,as well as it is early.

However,Ballard/Tanev look really good this year and Garrison is hardly a fan favourite because Gillis did not replace Salo.

Edler is flopping around with no Sami.

The D did not have their long time anchor in Sami and floundered early.

The D positions were all screwed up and then they mixed them up again as they were so badly out of kilter.

Back to Ballard:

He is not in a position to pad his stats as an offensive D man.He plays third pairing and gets no PP time.

Keith averages 16 minutes per night,has ten shots on goal and is a +5 .

Jason averages 20-24 minutes each night,has 19 shots on net and is a +7.

Remember that Jason's stats are padded with his PP time in the first five games or so.

I like Garrison for his defensive game.He style is more Willie Mitchell than Keith Ballard.

Ballard has skills/attributes that Jason does not have and vice-versa.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're essentially using the cap we got from Salo/Ehrhoff for this guy. He doesn't replace one, let alone both. I wish MG would have just realized how important Ehrhoff was to this team and singed him instead of being a dumb frack and letting him walk.

The only proof you need for Ehrhoff's importance to the team's offence is this; the only two seasons he played for the Canucks, a Sedin lead the league in points. Without him, both Sedins played a PPG before and after his departure.

MG chose Booth over Ehrhoff and boy didn't that work out? Biggest mistake of his career right now. MG 's knowledge about the defense position is very weak with the way he has handled it. Got a great asset who performed great and failed to lock him up and signed a string of mediocre guys (Ballard, Garrsion).

MG should give control of the defense core to someone else, he can't do it.

Gillis has made large mistakes on D since taking the helm.I agree with your views.

Gilis was an offensive forward and has no interest in D and his placements have been suspect.

He needs help and is not addressing his failures.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're essentially using the cap we got from Salo/Ehrhoff for this guy. He doesn't replace one, let alone both. I wish MG would have just realized how important Ehrhoff was to this team and singed him instead of being a dumb frack and letting him walk.

The only proof you need for Ehrhoff's importance to the team's offence is this; the only two seasons he played for the Canucks, a Sedin lead the league in points. Without him, both Sedins played a PPG before and after his departure.

MG chose Booth over Ehrhoff and boy didn't that work out? Biggest mistake of his career right now. MG 's knowledge about the defense position is very weak with the way he has handled it. Got a great asset who performed great and failed to lock him up and signed a string of mediocre guys (Ballard, Garrsion).

MG should give control of the defense core to someone else, he can't do it.

Ehrhoff - 40 million over 10 years.

Salo - 7.5 million, 2 years, 35+ contract.

7.75 million cap hit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will cut Garrison some slack,as well as it is early.

However,Ballard/Tanev look really good this year and Garrison is hardly a fan favourite because Gillis did not replace Salo.

Edler is flopping around with no Sami.

The D did not have their long time anchor in Sami and floundered early.

The D positions were all screwed up and then they mixed them up again as they were so badly out of kilter.

Back to Ballard:

He is not in a position to pad his stats as an offensive D man.He plays third pairing and gets no PP time.

Keith averages 16 minutes per night,has ten shots on goal and is a +5 .

Jason averages 20-24 minutes each night,has 19 shots on net and is a +7.

Remember that Jason's stats are padded with his PP time in the first five games or so.

I like Garrison for his defensive game.He style is more Willie Mitchell than Keith Ballard.

Ballard has skills/attributes that Jason does not have and vice-versa.

Seriously comparing Garrison to Willie?

Not hating on Garrison - I think/hope he'll come right but;

So far he's been the furthest example away from Willie Mitchell. He can't protect the puck and loses battles to guys like Granlund. Mitchell would tear JaGar apart at least right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.