Thread: OT: Jason Garrison
View Single Post
02-21-2013, 05:09 AM
Ronning On Empty
Formerly BleachClean
Ronning On Empty's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,161
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
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.

You said it best with stating that any decision is premature. I would extend that to say the consideration is premature also. That's a logical thought process, not "burying one's head in the sand". But you made that call didn't you? After 13 games? In a game where the entire team looked like crap? Well done.

It's the judgement, not the description. You and I concur on how he looks, but not how it impacts his effectiveness. Then, after 13 games, a buyout gets thrown out as a legitimate option? Gimme a break.

Fans don't see the game like AV. That much is clear. We all may be watching the same game, but we read it differently. In a game where I thought AV had lost the plot, it's awfully easy for him to push the blame. We're 22 scoring chances against on Garrison? Hardly, but AV's first move so it must be right?

13 games orca, for you to consider buyout for Garrison. 13 games. A sample that also has him put up strong underlying numbers. There just isn't enough information here to go there, but you did.

Ronning On Empty is offline   Reply With Quote