[Report] Canucks wont ask Alex Edler to waive NTC

[nuckster33]

and yet, garrison's shooting % this year was a pathetic 3.9%, compared to 7.7% and 6.7% for ehrhoff in 09/10 and 10/11 respectively.

this wide discrepancy explains why it seemed like garrison hit the net much less frequently. in reality, while his shot hit the net just as much, it was far less dangerous this season.

I think my point about forwards creating traffic has alot to do with Defensemen's shooting percentage as well.

As you may or may no realize, most goalies in the NHL will stop most point shots if they can pick them up visually relatively early.

When screened, or having to change their position to see the shooting lane (have to look around players and move), this is often when a shot from the point will find a way in.

Not many players, including even Chara, Weber and Subban are able to simply wind up from the point and hammer it home when the goalie sees it. It's a combination of getting it on net, putting it in a tough spot (which is often dictated by the defenders and if they are filling the shooting lanes) and traffic. This is also why, soft shots will often find a way in, and not the big Garrison bomb's. If the goalie can see it, most of the time from that distance, he will stop it.

If the defender is getting shots through traffic, which clearly based off Baggins's stats, our guys surprisingly are, and are better than that of many league leaders in defensive scoring, the only other rational explanation is, the goalies are obviously seeing the puck early.

If the goalies are seeing the puck early, logic tells us, our forwards are not getting to the hard spots and creating traffic and screening.

In addition, given we had our lowest scoring group in history last year (or close to it), again logic says, our players are not going to the hard areas to score. We all know, the cliche 'greasy goal' is often what it takes right? Greasy goals come from traffic.

Based on that, its pretty obvious our defensive group was not an issue in terms of our offense last year. It was our forwards, who also played very poorly in our own end.

Given the above, if we get 6 and 10 this year, I'd love to see us grab both Nylander and Ritchie/Virtanen as I do think last year is showing we do need guys with the size who can get to the net (if 2011 didn't show us and and LA didn't), and that they are ALWAYS VALUABLE, no matter what era we're in.

[Boudrias]

Bush looks excited in that video.

Seriously, when the shoes start flying who do you want backing you up George W or Obammer?

[Azzy Mahmood]

Seriously, when the shoes start flying who do you want backing you up George W or Obammer?

Bush. He'd admit he has no exit strategy but wants to win, while Obama would give you an exit strategy then change it when he lost control of the situation.

[TheXFactor]

I don't really know how to reply to the posters defending Garrison. Just because hes "not bad" at hitting the net does NOT mean hes good at it. Frankly I was under the impression that he was brought into the team for that very purpose whereas Hamhuis, Bieksa, and Edler were meant for different purposes. Regardless his ability to hit the net isn't good enough.

[Angry Goose]

Yet the past statistics show otherwise. Other than his partial rookie season, where he scored 1 goal on 10 shots, Edler has a career high scoring percentage of 7.1%. The only time he's been above 7% since that partial season. The fact that Garrison has seasons at 8.3%, 8.5% and 9.5% would indicate he actually has the more accurate shot. Edlers career shooting percentage is 5.4% to Garrisons 6.5% but you're certainly welcome to believe what you want.

Edler should be better at reading off the Sedins as he's had years of playing behind them while Garrison has had rather limited time behind them. Given the way Edler has played the past two seasons he may be the one better suited to the 2nd pp unit where he's less likely to get burned on a bad pinch and has the oppositions 2nd unit defending against his shot.

Do you think Linden and Benning evaluate players solely on stats? Of course not. Your over emphasizing their importance here. I don't care about only getting shots "on net". Edler can pick the top corners well whereas Garrison keeps the majority of his shots mid to low. And Edler can shoot well from the slot or closer whereas Garrison doesn't seem to shoot well in close. Anyone watching them play can see that.

[Baggins]

Do you think Linden and Benning evaluate players solely on stats? Of course not. Your over emphasizing their importance here. I don't care about only getting shots "on net". Edler can pick the top corners well whereas Garrison keeps the majority of his shots mid to low. And Edler can shoot well from the slot or closer whereas Garrison doesn't seem to shoot well in close. Anyone watching them play can see that.

Solely on stats no. But ignoring stats would be foolish. Nor are any of us Benning or Linden. I'll take stats over the clouded opinions on this board without a second thought. The numbers don't lie. So are you attempting to dispute a higher percentage of Garrisons shots have actually gone in than Edlers? I'm not sure about your schooling but I was taught 6.5% is higher than 5.4%.

No Garrison doesn't tend to wander in deep nearly as often as Edler. But then he's not typically the d-man causing a 2 on 1 either. Personally I could give a rats tush where they shoot from or where the puck enters the net as long as it goes in. The numbers indicate Garrison has put it in the net more often than Edler per 100 shots on goal in their respective careers. End of story.

[Canada Hockey Place]

Shooting % for D doesn't mean much. Usually just means the power play units aren't doing too well.

From the point, you need teammates to make space, clear the lane,create traffic in front of the goalie and pass you the puck.

Additionally, most point shots are set plays for deflections. If it's deflected by a team mate, the shooter gets an assist but the shot doesn't improve shooting %.

But if you've seen a hockey game before I would assume you would already know that.

[elvis15]

If you're trying to evaluate players based on who hit the net more or scored more, then it does mean a fair amount. Certainly if people want to slag Garrison but not Edler (or whoever) but fail to base that in reality then that's their own issue.

[Hugor Hill]

[Angry Goose]

Shooting % for D doesn't mean much. Usually just means the power play units aren't doing too well.

From the point, you need teammates to make space, clear the lane,create traffic in front of the goalie and pass you the puck.

Additionally, most point shots are set plays for deflections. If it's deflected by a team mate, the shooter gets an assist but the shot doesn't improve shooting %.

But if you've seen a hockey game before I would assume you would already know that.

Sorry but trying to contextualize the stats for Baggins isn't going to work. He's a numbers guy, that's it.

[Angry Goose]

http://youtu.be/RSzjp3V2z-M

[Jetliner]

under the right coach edler can be a dominant player. lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say that his crap performance last yr was mainly torts fault and givr him another chance before shipping him off for prospects and letting a 50 pt dman go

[kassquatch]

Their not asking. Their telling.

[spur1]

The last guy I trade on this team is Edler.......I mean like hello.....is TO trading Phgoof a 7 mil....edler is a steal.

The difference is that Edler is not a pylon like Phgoof

[SlickCanuck]

Good. I like Edler. In fact, I like most of the core. IMO, only minor trades need be done. Maybe try to reacquire Raffi Torres. Loved his spunk!