L'Orange Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Well, you can't have EVERY big fish in the water. Edler - Suter Hamhuis - Garrison Tanev - Allen Much better chance of seeing that blue line then the before proposed one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Liszt Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 That also is a stellar blueline, with the exception of Edler. He's not a top defenseman in my mind. Dan Hamhuis is leagues ahead of Edler. I'd switch Edler to play with Garrison. Edler will look like a carebear to Suter after playing with a beast like Weber. Why not him? Hamhuis-Weber Ballard-Bieksa Allen-Tanev Try getting through that shizzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L'Orange Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 That 2nd pairing would be easy to get through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Liszt Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Pray tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L'Orange Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Switch Allen and Ballard, then all is well. Hamhuis Weber Allen Bieksa Ballard Tanev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Allen >> Garrison. We have enough points on the back end. What we don't have is a big mean stay at home defenseman. Would rather see: Hamhuis Bieksa Edler Allen Ballard Tanev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 That also is a stellar blueline, with the exception of Edler. He's not a top defenseman in my mind. Dan Hamhuis is leagues ahead of Edler. I'd switch Edler to play with Garrison. Edler will look like a carebear to Suter after playing with a beast like Weber. Why not him? Hamhuis-Weber Ballard-Bieksa Allen-Tanev Try getting through that shizzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyBernard Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 He's 6'5" 226. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 This is where you are wrong. The way our team is built, we need 4 puck moving D-men in our top 4. We need mobile defenseman that have the ability to make great first passes, be able to qb a PP and be responsible in the defensive zone. We need a 2 way d-man to replace Salo. The fact that we lost Ehrhoff really impacted our PP and caused Hamhuis and Bieksa to shoulder the load and in turn be worse defensively. Garrison is what this team needs, not a slow defender like Allen that doesn't have any offense. If our team played like the Kings, I would agree with you about getting Allen but we need a big mobile defenseman. Too bad we can't get Weber right now, he would be the perfect player on this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Swansons Moustache Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I'd prefer Garrison over Allen he's younger and more well rounded but still a bit unproven. I wouldnt mind if Gillis signed Allen or even managed to sign both which maybe unlikely with Gillis wanting to keep a spot free for Weber next year. If he did sign Allen it would balance out the D and give some nastiness and size, we only really have Alberts and he's not in Allens league. We've needed a big crease clearing Dman for awhile now, cheaper options would be Carkner, Bickel, Brookbank and Jurcina off the top of my head, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PavelsElbow Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Tanev has paid his dues. He should be part of the line-up full time now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nd84 Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Would be a great addition to our team. I think as long as Ballard's here we take him on 1-year deal worth 3.25-3..5 million If the team decides to trade Ballard then I think it can become a longer term contract Garrison would be a great acquisition too but my hopes are for Luongo to be traded for a young defenseman with promise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tru_Knyte Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Would be an upgrade on Rome for our depth on D. Could also see him used with Edler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Wanted him at the trade deadline Would still love to have him now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliboy Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 improve his beer league shot and THEN he can be in the lineup fulltime. Just cause he has "paid his dues" doesnt mean hes good enough or that we shouldnt get someone better. B Allen all day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L'Orange Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 4 puck moving d-men in the top 4 suggests that you haven't learned anything over the past 4 seasons of CUP play with the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L'Orange Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 I'd prefer Garrison over Allen he's younger and more well rounded but still a bit unproven. I wouldnt mind if Gillis signed Allen or even managed to sign both which maybe unlikely with Gillis wanting to keep a spot free for Weber next year. If he did sign Allen it would balance out the D and give some nastiness and size, we only really have Alberts and he's not in Allens league. We've needed a big crease clearing Dman for awhile now, cheaper options would be Carkner, Bickel, Brookbank and Jurcina off the top of my head, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 If we sign Allen you can say goodbye to Chris Tanev (back to the minors you go). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Allen currently has proven more than Garrison, who only has one year of success. That doesn't mean Garrison won't be more valuable, but just that he isn't quite yet. The only thing Garrison is an outright improvement on over Allen at this point is offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Swansons Moustache Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 I disagree mainly because Garrison is just as solid in his own end. This year he has shown that he has a bit more offense in his game but he was solid defensively last year as well. Simply put I love the way he plays, if you want Allen you can have him, we will take Garrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.