Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 16 votes

Jason Garrison so far?


  • Please log in to reply
972 replies to this topic

#241 gaydar

gaydar

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 179 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:36 AM

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

#242 nuck luck

nuck luck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 670 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 11

Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:52 AM

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

#243 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,980 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:03 PM

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
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#244 Kyosama

Kyosama

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:39 PM

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

#245 The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Joined: 18-May 07

Posted 15 February 2013 - 10:46 PM

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/

Edited by The Dark Knight, 15 February 2013 - 10:49 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


#246 MrsCanuck

MrsCanuck

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,629 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 09

Posted 15 February 2013 - 10:53 PM

He was horrifying tonight..
  • 1
Posted Image

#247 Bertuzzipunch

Bertuzzipunch

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 956 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 09

Posted 15 February 2013 - 11:07 PM

He has been pretty bad, same with Hamhuis both are playing like crap
  • 0

Posted Image


#248 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,732 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 15 February 2013 - 11:13 PM

Another solid game for Garry.
  • 0

#249 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 16 February 2013 - 12:34 AM

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

Edited by gushybear, 16 February 2013 - 12:34 AM.

  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#250 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:58 AM

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!

Edited by Joe_Shmo, 16 February 2013 - 01:59 AM.

  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#251 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,967 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 02:08 AM

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

#252 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 02:12 AM

All around terrible. This includes 1 meaningless penalty per game.
  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#253 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,732 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 17 February 2013 - 03:52 PM

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.

Posted Image
  • 0

#254 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,732 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 17 February 2013 - 03:55 PM

*
POPULAR

Jason Garrison
13gp
1 Goal
1 Assist
+7

Shea Weber
15gp
1 Goal
2 Assists
Even rating


GARRISON > WEBER AT half the price!!! See I can do it tooo!!!
  • 7

#255 Bossy

Bossy

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 187 posts
  • Joined: 21-October 09

Posted 17 February 2013 - 04:21 PM

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

#256 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,488 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 17 February 2013 - 06:13 PM

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

#257 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,488 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 17 February 2013 - 06:16 PM

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

#258 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,700 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 17 February 2013 - 06:28 PM

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

#259 RAMBUTANS

RAMBUTANS

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,410 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 06

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:05 PM

Lp
  • 0
Mr. Reputable of the HFBoards

#260 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,590 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:28 PM

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.

Edited by riffraff, 17 February 2013 - 07:32 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#261 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 17 February 2013 - 07:54 PM

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.


Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#262 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,590 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 17 February 2013 - 09:20 PM

Posted Image


Oh c'mon giffmaster! Surely you can decipher my lazy fragmented script.
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#263 Mclean1

Mclean1

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 222 posts
  • Joined: 01-November 05

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:14 PM

Garrison=Sopel

reason out of position and can't hit the net with a shot if his life depended on it.
  • 0

#264 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,572 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:36 PM

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.


I totally agree with you bro. Losing Ehrhoff effected the teams overall powerplay and offence. Without him, I don't think either Sedin would have captured a Art Ross. Just like how WAyne Gretzky relied on Coffey's end to end offensive rushes and skill, this team really depended on Ehrhoffs. I was very sad from the day we lost Ehrhoff

IN the last 2 seasons we lost Ehrhoff followed by Salo, replaced by Garrison and Tanev (Promotion from within).

I'm looking at this summers UFA list, wow, what a terrible list for defencemens. Next years look much much better.
  • 0

Players Nikolaj Ehlers have been compared too by the fan base of the Vancouver Canucks.

 

1 Pavel Bure

2 Markus Naslund

3 Nathan Mackkinon

4 Jonathan Drouin.

5 Jonathan Tavares

 

http://bleacherrepor...d-top-prospects

combine results.  Ehlers 5'11 162 lbs of solid rock.  


#265 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,286 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:39 PM

Has any team struggled to find consistent D-pairings in the past 4 or 5 years more than the Canucks?

Even with guys like Ohlund, Salo, Mitchell, and Ehrhoff, this team constantly melted down on D at times, especially in the playoffs.

Guess who's responsible for the D? Bowness. The only reason he's the assistant coach is because he comes as a package deal with AV.

The only consistent pair he's managed to form is Ballard and Tanev.

Edited by DeNiro, 17 February 2013 - 10:40 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#266 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,974 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:44 PM

He has certainly been a dud.

People will continue to give him more time. But how much more? Another 10 games? 20 games? How will they try to justify his lack of production? He's not suddenly going to find his game right before the playoffs and quarterback that PP.
  • 0
Posted Image

#267 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,286 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:49 PM

He has certainly been a dud.

People will continue to give him more time. But how much more? Another 10 games? 20 games? How will they try to justify his lack of production? He's not suddenly going to find his game right before the playoffs and quarterback that PP.


Except he scored pretty much all of his goals in the first half of last season, and didn't score any in the second half. So he has shown he is a player that gets his goals in giant bunches.

If his scoring comes in the second half, who cares? It's about how you finish not how you start.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#268 TheEhrhoffEffect

TheEhrhoffEffect

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,157 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 06

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:53 PM

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.

I've been saying this stuff since 2011. People are finally realizing this. Ehrhoff took the Sedins to the next level, just like how the Sedins did the same thing to Ehrhoff. Losing Ehrhoff was huge, especially since they haven't replaced him yet. The Sedins will never be 100 pt players in this league again.

Edited by TheEhrhoffEffect, 17 February 2013 - 10:56 PM.

  • 0

#269 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,974 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:55 PM

Except he scored pretty much all of his goals in the first half of last season, and didn't score any in the second half. So he has shown he is a player that gets his goals in giant bunches.

If his scoring comes in the second half, who cares? It's about how you finish not how you start.


Well, that's good. A fat contract based on 40 games.

I care. Consistency is what should count. If scoring in bunches is what counts then Kesler's performance against Nashville should negate how much he sucked against the Bruins. Same with the twins against the Sharks only to blow chunks against the Bruins as well.
  • 0
Posted Image

#270 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,286 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 17 February 2013 - 10:56 PM

I can't believe how many times posters on here continue to make snap judgements only to be proven wrong.

You wait for one bad game to say "I told you so". And then as soon as Garrison starts producing on the PP, you'll just disappear, and find another player to rag on.
  • 1

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"





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.