Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Jason Garrison so far?


Go Go Canucks Go

Recommended Posts

Did I say he had a good game? No one on the team really had a good game, but hat should be obvious in a 8-3 loss. You haven't read my posts, just like you didn't read the recent posts before your original comment.

What I have been saying all along is Garrison is not that bad at all, especially when people are lauding Ballard with praise despite him not being quite that fantastic to warrant it. The whole D have been bad at times. Garrison has been better defensively than people give him credit for and his offence (what offence people should expect from him, not offence equalling what he put up last year, particularly goals) will come as he gets used to the team.

Back to the Tootoo goal, he didn't get around Garrison and he didn't have an easy shot. Since when is it a bad play to allow a weak shot from the outside edge of the ice down closer to the goal line? Those are shots teams are happy to let through in the hopes they get possession and can clear the zone. It's better than trying to force a block or rush the player and potentially let him inside you for a much improved scoring chance. Those are shots you get out of the way of, unlike Ballard when he tipped one of the later goals on a shot from inside the blue line as the puck was still being moved up ice.

As far as what Ballard and Luongo should have done on the Tootoo goal, that was sarcasm in response to you expecting Garrison to do more on a play he handled pretty well. Ballard and Luongo shouldn't have been expected to do any more on that goal than what they did, and about all you could expect Garrison to do more on would be to have body checked Tootoo as he entered the zone. Hardly an error to make the safe play and keep him outside, expecting a weak shot (which it was) and an easy save (which it wasn't after a fluke deflection).

I really hate to keep using Ballard in my examples, since I think he has been good this year, but people keep saying he's been our best D-man (or one of our best) and Garrison has been so bad. In reality they aren't very far apart in performance. It may even be reversed slightly, considering Garrison has better points and +/- (along with other stats I detailed earlier), all against better opponents.

How does tearing Ballard down raise Garrison up exactly? And again, not everything can be put neatly into a stat to be tracked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh you guys and your annoying facts and rules and stuff.

But at the end of the game, he was still even. So there.

regards,

G.

Even and absolutely atrocious defensively on at least 3 of Detroit's goals.

I know +/- is a difficult stat to comprehend, once again a simple concept goes over your head. Maybe try standing up while watching the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does tearing Ballard down raise Garrison up exactly? And again, not everything can be put neatly into a stat to be tracked.

I'm not sure where you get that from, nor where you're getting that I'm only looking at stats to draw conclusions. Just because I mention stats once at the end of a post doesn't mean that's all the post was based on.

I've said both that Garrison wasn't good last game, and that Ballard has been good this year. I also used the two as examples in how they both made mistakes last game but that also things that happened to result in goals also can't be pinned on them either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even and absolutely atrocious defensively on at least 3 of Detroit's goals.

Yup, so this one game makes Garrison a terrible signing? Your comments do nothing to support your position. You cherry pick one game, and base an analysis of an entire season which isn't even half over, on that one result.

I know +/- is a difficult stat to comprehend,

It's nice to see that you acknowledge your short comings in the area of comprehending how the +/- stat can be a misleading figure.

The results of the Detroit game do not change the analysis in my previous posts. Salo being on a higher scoring team gives him a much better chance at having a higher +/- stat, while Garrison being on an under-achieving offensive team will have a better chance at having a lower +/-. Further, Garrison's contribution to the Canucks looks to be paying off in higher team results, rather than Salo's higher offensive contribution is paying off for TB.

Let's try another +/- stat. Vancouver Canucks are +6. TB is 0. The Canucks also look to be in a much better position to improve on their +/- stat with the return of Kesler and Booth, and with Garrison and other Canucks starting to pick up theri scoring.

Maybe try standing up while watching the game.

I always stand while watching Canucks games. It helps me get a head start jumping on or off the band-wagon as it goes by...

regards,

G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Credit where credit is due. He scored a goal.

Still, more is expected in terms of offense.

lol you won't be happy even if he was our number 1 goal scorer.

By the way he is tied for 8th on our team for goals scored.

He is tied for 4th for +/-.

But his moneyball numbers suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garrison= Willie Mitchell

Flat footed Canadians adept at clearing the net and swinging effectively with a long tree branch.Defensive stalwarts but not counted on for a smooth first pass out or scoring.

Salo = Jyrke Lumme

Smooth skating Europeans that transition the play seamlessly,continuously creating offense while being responsible at both ends. Coveted D men.

You act as if we traded Salo for Garrison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...