View Single Post
02-21-2013, 03:31 AM
Join Date: Feb 2003
Originally Posted by
Nah, I think you made your final conclusion when you pushed his name for a buyout candidate in the GDT.
Question: How does a "marginal NHLer" get the 2nd toughest minutes on the team and still be a plus possession player?
Garrison's reads are slower than you would like, but I don't think his skating is a hindrance. He moves pretty well for his size. Choppy stride yes, but not a detriment. There's no poise in his game though, and that unsettles people. He "looks" worse than his results would indicate.
I think this move to the bottom pairing is just AV at his absolute worst. He needs to point at himself as a direct culprit to the way the team played the last game. Scapegoating others isn't going to move the attention away from himself.
AV is watching the same thing all of us are watching and is making a rational decision. Tanev is clearly outplaying Garrison and the move helps get Edler back on his best side. All AV wants to do is win hockey games.
Frankly I had no pre-determined opinion about Garrison. I am basing everything on what I am seeing. It seems to me, instead that many insisted before the season that Garrison was a great pick up. That he would be a solid top 4 player and real good on the PP. That he would be better than Salo and improve the team. To me, the evidence, to date, is that this is not true.
I appreciate that there was substance to those beliefs but it seems to me that people are so wedded to their original opinion that they are not open to looking at the situation free of that opinion. Instead the coaches get blamed, Bieksa get blamed, Hamhuis gets blamed, the system gets blames, the forwards get blamed and so on. ...
You say there is no poise in his game, that he makes slow reads but then get upset when others say the same thing and cite them as drawbacks. There are things about his game (and I would include his choppy, clunky skating) that are not good and prevent him from doing anything more, at the moment, than play in his own end.
As far as the buy out goes it has to be at least a consideration. If Garrison continues to play as he is, if continues to sink deeper down the depth chart, if there isn't a clear up tick in his game then the buy out option has to be on the table. This is no short term deal. This a very long term commitment and money involved is what you pay to a bona vide top 4 defenseman (especially under the new CBA). If the Canucks have made a mistake here it could be crippling. The buy out offers them a safety valve.
Right now any such decision is premature. But given Garrison's play to date there has to be apprehension about his contract. To say there isn't simply, to me, means you're burying your head in the sand.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by orcatown