Thread: OT: Jason Garrison
View Single Post
02-21-2013, 03:07 PM
Registered User
medgett's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 563
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Medgett, if it's logical to point out that Garrison is a buyout candidate this early in the game, if he continues as is, is it just as logical to say the same thing about Hamuis or Bieksa? Both of whom have played brutal hockey for the start of the season?

I mean, if we are watching every player with clean eyes, as Orca claims he is, why did he not list Hamhuis of Bieksa as potential buyout options? Could there be a bias here?

It's funny, he claims some are married to their opinion and have their collective heads stuck in the sand about Garrison, yet you can spot the clear bias in his evaluation. He is unwittingly granting the old hands a free pass and goin after the easiest target. Because he doesn't have the history here. Yet, to my eye, he's been a shade or more better than Hamhuis or Bieksa. Where's the balance? Where's the patience?
I don't really think this is true. It may be confusing the point to go into this, but if we actually look at the games of Bieksa and Hamhuis, IMO they've started to turn it around. It seems that defensemen took a lot longer to get going than forwards after the lockout and they struggled as a unit initially. I actually did have some concern for Bieksa very early on as some of the nonchalant and lackadaisacal play that nearly led to his being traded away in 2009 had seemed to creep back into his game. That said, when he's on, he skates exceptionally well, he's physical and he stays right with the play up and down the ice. This is more of the player I've seen after a slow start, although in the Chicago game its as though he forgot that breakaways against are a bad thing. Still, he has 4 goals and 6 points in his last 7 games and is a plus 6 over that stretch. Hamhuis obviously doesn't show up in the same ways as Bieksa and many point to his -2 rating as being unacceptable for a supposedly stalwart stay at home defenseman. If we dig a little deeper, we see that he was -3 through the first three games of the year and since then has been a minus in only 2 games since. He's a +1 through that stretch of his last 12 games which isn't bad since he gets the toughest assignments each game. Any struggles he's had since I'd be more inclined to chalk up to the 'good eddy, bad eddy' personality of his partner. Edler is actually the only other defenseman that I'd say is not meeting expectations right now.

Similarly, he's coming off the huge extension and is expected to produce somewhat offensively. The struggle with Edler is and always will be consistency though, not ability. His good moments are great and although its infuriating to watch him fumble the puck out over the line on the PP or make a terrible read on a pinch, he gives you reasons on an almost nightly basis as to why he has the contract he does. Looking at the blue line as a unit, Bieksa and Hamhuis are clearly rounding into form, Edler is still inconsistent and this is perhaps part of the reason to put him with Tanev, who along with Ballard, have clearly exceeded expectations. Garrison is the only one to this point who hasn't shown marked improvement since the start of the year and doesn't have a body of work built up to give him credibility IMO. Again, as I said previously, there are perfectly logical explanaitons provided for this, but until his play turns around, it is a concern.

medgett is offline   Reply With Quote