HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

So... No Extension for Edler..?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-02-2012, 03:36 PM
  #351
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I was kind of musing on this the other day: Which will help this team more: Garrison or Ehrhoff? Essentially, this is the swap.
Would be nice to essentially "roll" with three pairings much like some teams "roll" with three/four forward lines. Makes for a fresher roster come playoff time.

(eg., have both guys instead of one or the other)

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 03:37 PM
  #352
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
We know that when Edler had a legit right-side partner in Ehrhoff, both excelled offensively. But perhaps Garrison will provide more balance? The key is still the chemistry between the two. I think Garrison is smart enough to play alongside Edler, but then I also thought the same of Salo... That didn't work out so well.
I'll be surprised if Garrison doesn't put up 40 points playing with Edler and getting first PP duty, plus he's going to be significantly better defensively than Ehrhoff. It's not hard to imagine that being an upgrade and Gillis didn't have to break the bank.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 03:39 PM
  #353
mriswith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
We have great contracts up and down the lineup, Gillis cap plan has been a great success.

If we sign Ehrhoff for 5.5m then we don't get Garrison for 4.6m, and Garrison might turn out to be the better player.
Gillis' cap plan has been a great success so far. Assuming Garrison is able to gel with Edler and Edler re-signs and we keep our salary structure, then it was a huge success. But if it causes Edler to walk, the loss of him and Ehrhoff is enough to transform what was previously a strength into a weakness. It's really, really difficult to replace top-end talent like Edler through free agency, and impossible to do while keeping the current salary structure anyways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I was kind of musing on this the other day: Which will help this team more: Garrison or Ehrhoff? Essentially, this is the swap.


We know that when Edler had a legit right-side partner in Ehrhoff, both excelled offensively. But perhaps Garrison will provide more balance? The key is still the chemistry between the two. I think Garrison is smart enough to play alongside Edler, but then I also thought the same of Salo... That didn't work out so well.


In fairness, Salo was a shade of his former self, so all things weren't equal. Interesting question nonetheless.
I really hope Garrison works out, but it was risky to let Ehrhoff walk. If we hadn't managed to sign Garrison, we'd be stuck with the dreadful Edler-Bieksa pairing that AV seemed to love near the end of the season. And even now we don't know if Garrison will work with Edler. Ehrhoff complimented Edler really well, but Garrison plays a very different style.

mriswith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 03:50 PM
  #354
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schism View Post
It's really, really difficult to replace top-end talent like Edler through free agency, and impossible to do while keeping the current salary structure anyways.
The same thing was said when Gillis let Ehrhoff walk...and now we have Garrison. Gillis has huge balls, way more than me. I probably would have paid Ehrhoff. You have to give Gillis credit though, he's sticking to it and it's paying off.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 03:52 PM
  #355
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I think Garrison is smart enough to play alongside Edler, but then I also thought the same of Salo... That didn't work out so well.

In fairness, Salo was a shade of his former self, so all things weren't equal. Interesting question nonetheless.
Like you said, Salo was a shadow of the player he'd been a few years ago - no question he has the smarts to play alongside anyone in the league but his body simply can't keep up.

If Garrison does not work out on Edler's right side it'll likely be for very different reasons (unless he has a Keith Ballard like run of luck with injuries).

Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I agree with this. And despite my assessment of Edler which (for whatever reason people disagree with) I have always maintained that we should sign him to numbers that you mention above.
This is the funny thing about this debate, I think most people's "walk away" number is within about half a million of most other people.. pretty close in terms of the salaries high end players get.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Would be nice to essentially "roll" with three pairings much like some teams "roll" with three/four forward lines. Makes for a fresher roster come playoff time.

(eg., have both guys instead of one or the other)
Well, sure. But given the price points those two players were likely to end up at (I still see Ehrhoff's $4m cap hit as a peculiar outcome and don't think it would have been possible here) I think that comes at the long term expense of having all three of Bieksa, Hamhuis and Edler.

And anyway if we had Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler, Ehrhoff, Ballard and Tanev all in the organization heading into this offseason is there any chance we could have signed Garrison? Leaving money on the table to sign with the team you want is one thing, but doing so and having a really poor shot at a top four role as well? That would be an awful career move for JG.

dave babych returns is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 04:09 PM
  #356
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Players can regress at any time, you just hope that if they do you aren't also paying them for potential they never reached.
What is the sound of one hand clapping?

craigcaulks* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 04:27 PM
  #357
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
Like you said, Salo was a shadow of the player he'd been a few years ago - no question he has the smarts to play alongside anyone in the league but his body simply can't keep up.

If Garrison does not work out on Edler's right side it'll likely be for very different reasons (unless he has a Keith Ballard like run of luck with injuries).



This is the funny thing about this debate, I think most people's "walk away" number is within about half a million of most other people.. pretty close in terms of the salaries high end players get.



Well, sure. But given the price points those two players were likely to end up at (I still see Ehrhoff's $4m cap hit as a peculiar outcome and don't think it would have been possible here) I think that comes at the long term expense of having all three of Bieksa, Hamhuis and Edler.

And anyway if we had Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler, Ehrhoff, Ballard and Tanev all in the organization heading into this offseason is there any chance we could have signed Garrison? Leaving money on the table to sign with the team you want is one thing, but doing so and having a really poor shot at a top four role as well? That would be an awful career move for JG.

Agreed. I doubt Garrison signs here with that scenario. Or if the team would want to sign him, given contracts already on the team/roles. That's why I see it as an either or debate, instead of having both.


I think Garrison has the potential to be exactly what Edler needs both offensively and especially defensively. His shot takes attention away from Edler, and his defense is superb (per advanced stats). With Ehrhoff, the pairing was fragile defensively, but great offensively. With Garrison, it stands to be good at both ends (although still not as good offensively as it would be with Ehrhoff). Ill take that trade off any day.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 04:32 PM
  #358
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I'll be surprised if Garrison doesn't put up 40 points playing with Edler and getting first PP duty, plus he's going to be significantly better defensively than Ehrhoff. It's not hard to imagine that being an upgrade and Gillis didn't have to break the bank.

Yes. Really its a signing that fits exactly what this team needs. Perhaps also exactly what Edler needs.


On top of that Gillis sends a message. Buy in, or your out. Buy in, and you'll be a key player on a winning team. Buy in, and keep the culture of the team intact.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 04:45 PM
  #359
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,229
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post

This is the funny thing about this debate, I think most people's "walk away" number is within about half a million of most other people.. pretty close in terms of the salaries high end players get.
You're right, it is quite amusing. This is one of the hottest debates the past couple weeks with two sides that just aren't agreeing, yet the dollars we're arguing over aren't that far apart. Hell in my case I've argued opposite views on Edler yet come up with the same figure of what we think he should be paid.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 05:06 PM
  #360
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
The same thing was said when Gillis let Ehrhoff walk...and now we have Garrison. Gillis has huge balls, way more than me. I probably would have paid Ehrhoff. You have to give Gillis credit though, he's sticking to it and it's paying off.
The biggest reason we have Garrison (and so cheap) is because he is a BC boy with a connection to the team (MayRay). Could you imagine if we didn't get Garrison? We would still be missing that top 4 dman & I don't think Gillis would have overpaid a UFA to fill that.... however in the Luongo trade who knows?!?!

You're right Gillis does have balls & sometimes it really backfires. Gillis could have just dumped Ballard & kept Ehrhoff in reality.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 05:25 PM
  #361
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
The biggest reason we have Garrison (and so cheap) is because he is a BC boy with a connection to the team (MayRay). Could you imagine if we didn't get Garrison? We would still be missing that top 4 dman & I don't think Gillis would have overpaid a UFA to fill that.... however in the Luongo trade who knows?!?!

You're right Gillis does have balls & sometimes it really backfires. Gillis could have just dumped Ballard & kept Ehrhoff in reality.


Keeping/leaving Ehrhoff came down to his contract. He wanted more, Gillis didn't budge, and then he was shipped out. It had nothing to do with Ballard IMO. Ehrhoff at 5m+ was a non-starter for Gillis.



Yes, agree that getting Garrison was huge. Without him, Gillis likely targets an NHL dman in trade. It changed his needs in a big way... Too bad Shultz didn't follow.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 05:29 PM
  #362
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,359
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine17 View Post
The biggest reason we have Garrison (and so cheap) is because he is a BC boy with a connection to the team (MayRay). Could you imagine if we didn't get Garrison? We would still be missing that top 4 dman & I don't think Gillis would have overpaid a UFA to fill that.... however in the Luongo trade who knows?!?!

You're right Gillis does have balls & sometimes it really backfires. Gillis could have just dumped Ballard & kept Ehrhoff in reality.
True but we didn't know we were getting Garrison back then, in hindsight I'd take the Hoff at $5m over Ballard. We still had Salo-Bieksa-Tanev (+ continuing conversion attempt on Ballard) for the right side.

It would also have ruled us out of the Schultz sweepstakes before it began (Hoff/Bieksa/Tanev on the right, assuming he was even on Gillis's radar.

The real reason was the big prize - Weber. We were in there trying to get him until Philly screwed things up. It feels like that is what Gillis was planning for when we let Ehrhoff go. Either Bieksa or the Hoff for the second pairing - I we had Weber I'd probably take the Hoff over Bieksa - without Weber I'd take Bieksa. Ballard could always have been moved if we got Weber and Garrison.

I can always dream of what might have been in hindsight (Edler-Weber, Hamhuis-Hoff, Garrison-Tanev).

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 05:42 PM
  #363
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
True but we didn't know we were getting Garrison back then, in hindsight I'd take the Hoff at $5m over Ballard. We still had Salo-Bieksa-Tanev (+ continuing conversion attempt on Ballard) for the right side.

It would also have ruled us out of the Schultz sweepstakes before it began (Hoff/Bieksa/Tanev on the right, assuming he was even on Gillis's radar.

The real reason was the big prize - Weber. We were in there trying to get him until Philly screwed things up. It feels like that is what Gillis was planning for when we let Ehrhoff go. Either Bieksa or the Hoff for the second pairing - I we had Weber I'd probably take the Hoff over Bieksa - without Weber I'd take Bieksa. Ballard could always have been moved if we got Weber and Garrison.

I can always dream of what might have been in hindsight (Edler-Weber, Hamhuis-Hoff, Garrison-Tanev).
I agree about Weber & for some reason I forgot about that.

When I was writing my post I was dreaming of a D like this:

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Ehrhoff
Garrison - Tanev


Scottrockztheworld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 08:52 PM
  #364
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
On top of that Gillis sends a message. Buy in, or your out. Buy in, and you'll be a key player on a winning team. Buy in, and keep the culture of the team intact.
I've bought in, every player but Ehrhoff has bought in, HF isn't buying it

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 11:00 PM
  #365
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I've bought in, every player but Ehrhoff has bought in, HF isn't buying it
HF isn't a real winner, time to ship it out.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-02-2012, 11:32 PM
  #366
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,229
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
So apparently just EV points matter now? That puts Edler back on the Bieksa cap. I think?

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 09:03 AM
  #367
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
So apparently just EV points matter now? That puts Edler back on the Bieksa cap. I think?
Bieksa had 19 even-strength points in his contract season. Edler had 27 this past season.

Care to move your goalposts some more?

kanuck87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 09:35 AM
  #368
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,229
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanuck87 View Post
Bieksa had 19 even-strength points in his contract season. Edler had 27 this past season.

Care to move your goalposts some more?
Bieksa also had a huge playoffs though, which definitely factored into him receiving a little more than probably any of us expected.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 09:51 AM
  #369
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I'll be surprised if Garrison doesn't put up 40 points playing with Edler and getting first PP duty, plus he's going to be significantly better defensively than Ehrhoff. It's not hard to imagine that being an upgrade and Gillis didn't have to break the bank.
I'm wondering if Garrison will get consistant PP time on the 1st unit. I know it seemed to work when Ehrhoff was here, but that would give us two left shots from the point. Since Henrik runs the PP from the right half boards, it will be very difficult for us to bang off one timers without a right hand shot on the right point. Personally, I'd experiment some more with using Kesler on the right point with Kassian potentially in front of the net. Burrows would be another option for net prescence, but I'd rather a right handed shot.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 11:37 AM
  #370
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
I'm wondering if Garrison will get consistant PP time on the 1st unit. I know it seemed to work when Ehrhoff was here, but that would give us two left shots from the point. Since Henrik runs the PP from the right half boards, it will be very difficult for us to bang off one timers without a right hand shot on the right point. Personally, I'd experiment some more with using Kesler on the right point with Kassian potentially in front of the net. Burrows would be another option for net prescence, but I'd rather a right handed shot.
If Garrison's shot is as good as advertised he'll be a big benefit to the twins on the PP. Having to respect the point spreads out the D and opens up those seams the twins like to attack. It's hard to say for sure until you see it in action, but I think he'll earn that spot. Garrison is better offensively than he's getting credit for I think.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:15 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.