On HNIC Hotstove Friedman just said that talks between FLA Panthers and Jason Garrison have gone cold. Garrison will be a UFA in the off season.
Could the Canucks be interested??? Hmmmmmm.....
Gillis should be interested, but the price could be high.
He's 6'2, 214lbs, is logging 23 min/game of ice time and is a plus 7 with Brian Campbell as a defensive partner. He's also playing the toughest minutes against the top lines of opposing teams. He's on the top unit of the PP and is their top PK defenseman.
He is only earning $625K now, but is a UFA this summer and will get a substantial raise.
There should be 29 GMs interested in Garrison. He would be a great addition but a costly one. Of course, the two GMs in question here have a very very good trading relationship.
Ummm, Ott plays 3min~ more than Raymond ATOI... He also plays all over the place - as Canucker has mentioned. You can bet that with a 3-4min drop in ice, lesser linemates on average, that that .02PPG gap will swing the other way.
Oh, and let's not forget that Kesler and Raymond have zero chemistry. Yet, you can't swap Raymond among the 1st and 2nd line like we have seen with Ott in DAL. Ribeiro is a better passer, and Benn is on par if not a better passer than Kesler is also.
So I believe you might be wrong. A straight career PPG comparison without context is meaningless. Otherwise, people would be saying Mike Richards is clearly better than Kesler offensively when we know that is not accurate.
Edit: Oh and stats aside, Raymond _looks_ better offensively, even though his conversion rate is porous and his chemistry with Kesler is non-existent.
To be fair, Raymond is about as good of proof as you need that "looking" great offensively means very little.
People always have alot of negative things to say about a player once they've played for a team for a full year and leave the team. You see all their flaws. And then to add to that, people overhype every player that could be coming to them.
Hes one dimensional, yes. He's a third liner making a smaller salary, they all have flaws. Torres was poor defensively so we used the many good defensive players we have in roles such as PK, etc and he was usually on a line with a couple other pretty decent defensive players, I dont think Torres cost this team at all. I think he played half decent and could be counted on for 15 goals. He also throws bone crushing hits that took out a top D man on chicago and made everybody constantly watch their backs. Its hard to go out there and do what you want when you have a wrecking ball circling.
While alot of people still like to believe Torres hit on Seabrook is what changed the series but i believe those people are conspiracy theorists
I highly doubt people here watch all of the Dallas games and are mainly going by stats and from games we've watched him in. To say hes this great defensive player because he plays on the PK is a bit of a stretch, hes better than Torres, doesn't say alot. Doesn't mean hes great. Im sure hes average or above average. He has the ability to play more positions, great, well when iron man henrik goes down or Lapierre/Kesler/Malhotra/Hodgson go down, then that might prove to be a bonus. But unless a couple centers go down, i dont think hes worth 2 million more. I also dont think its worth the hype of , omg this team has to go for him. This team is good. The best in the league. Its very well gritty enough. And it has enough forwards to go the distance. If we get him, great, hes a good player. I think he'd be slightly overpaid though. Just take my opinion for what it is. Arguing is pointless. I prefer to wait a year when everybody watches him on the team for a full season
Torres also notched 7 points in 23 games , was a + player and had a pretty good playoffs, in my opinion. Looking at Ott's numbers from 07, he had 3 points in 18 games and was a negative
While stats dont tell the whole story, to think hes worth 2 million more and should be this AMAZING addition is hyping it up a bit much. Ott is good for 30-35pts, lets calm down
I agree with you all, i am just trying to bring you back down to earth. It also ticks me off that most of the people that are probably hoping for Ott are the same players that were waving bye to Torres for half the salary
If you check out my post history, I was never a huge Torres fan. I was happy with what he brought to the team, but I've always seen nearly everyone in our top 9 as far superior players, and considered him our weakest player who wasn't some 4th line fill-in/grinder. When he left, I was pretty neutral about it either way but never saw him as a player we would miss much. And at the same time, I had no problem with paying a guy like Torres 1 million-- that might actually be underpayment, IMO-- Did many people ever complain about his contract?
In an ideal world, I would consider Ott a 2.5 million dollar player, and Torres more like 1.25, and yes, I would pay Ott that much far sooner than I would pay Torres that much. 2.9 might be very slight overpayment, but so little that considering our situation, it's a no-brainer, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmon
so what, he still was part of the 3rd line that was great throughout the playoffs.
If torres was so bad defensively, when did he get expose in the 20 + games of playoff hockey?
The fact that he can in one shift take out an opposing star player is not useless.
The second we lost hamhuis our chances of winning the cup decreased immensely.
Ott is the more complete player, but I argue torres can be more impactful.
If ott is a machine gun, torres is a hand grenade. It really depends on the situation.
If you look at the canucks current mix of players, we sure don't lack 2 way forwards that are good defensively and can Pk.
Kesler/burrows/raymond/higgins/lappy/manny/hansen all very good defensively and can pk well. (hell even sedins can pk)
Again Ott is good, but torres is not useless.
I did not say that Torres was useless. But he wasn't really valuable enough that him leaving created some sort of hole that we need to fill, IMO, since you or whoever I was quoting seemed to be implying that he was a key guy of some sort. During the season/that playoff run, I would have ranked our forwards as
There should be 29 GMs interested in Garrison. He would be a great addition but a costly one. Of course, the two GMs in question here have a very very good trading relationship.
This is big. Gillis and Tallon don't look to outdo one another.
Campbell is a left side dman I believe - does that mean Garrison plays primarily on the right side? I haven't watched a lot of Florida this season...
Garrision isn't likely a 15-20 goal defenseman going forward but he did play over 22:00 a night in his 1st full season and is over 23:00 a night this year. If the pro scouts like his game you have to take a serious run at him IMO - if he finds chemistry or plays well you take a chance and re-sign him. Wouldn't be too concerned he's a late bloomer.
Connauton, Alberts and a pick for Garrison? Not a bad return for Florida - Canucks bring in a physical dman that can score goals and log big minutes.
The point wasn't saying torres was a top 6 forward, so its pointless basing it on overall contribution like that. Ott wouldn't likely play in our top 6 anyways.
We are talking about which forward played well in the playoffs. Which is really why we want to acquire ott, is to gear up for a playoff run.
Purely on playoffs,
Last year our best forwards relative to their role were:
Kesler
Burrows
Lapierre
Torres
Hansen
Higgins
Raymond
Sedins
Sammy
Kesler/Burrows were our best forwards, and the 3rd line was strong throughout the playoffs.
Sedins were hit/miss, raymond/higgins were good at times. Higgins obviously was affected by the foot injury early.
Sammy was not much of a factor and was out early in the nashville series.
i fail to understand why a team sitting in 3rd position in their conference would trade a top-pairing d-man (garrison) when they have the cap space to sign him in the offseason
back on the steve ott rumours...he's basically raffi torres ver. 2.0 with a more expensive price tag, but i thought torres was a pretty valuable player for the canucks (aside from the seabrook debacle) and the canucks could use that element from somebody in their top-9 forwards
The point wasn't saying torres was a top 6 forward, so its pointless basing it on overall contribution like that. Ott wouldn't likely play in our top 6 anyways.
We are talking about which forward played well in the playoffs. Which is really why we want to acquire ott, is to gear up for a playoff run.
Purely on playoffs,
Last year our best forwards relative to their role were:
Kesler
Burrows
Lapierre
Torres
Hansen
Higgins
Raymond
Sedins
Sammy
Kesler/Burrows were our best forwards, and the 3rd line was strong throughout the playoffs.
Sedins were hit/miss, raymond/higgins were good at times. Higgins obviously was affected by the foot injury early.
Sammy was not much of a factor and was out early in the nashville series.
Malhotra-injured
I was basing it on all-around contribution, not just offensive stats. Purely for playoffs, I would still go
Burrows
Kesler
Hansen
Lapierre
Sedins (could be lower or higher depending on how much you factor in their one amazing series, and on how much we're handicapping lesser players based on role)
Higgins
Torres/Raymond
Sammy
I would give most of the credit for that great 3rd line almost entirely to Lapierre and Hansen playing out of their minds and carrying the play. That line was even better when Higgins was on it originally, and when he was moved up to Kesler's line, Torres did a solid job of keeping up and not disrupting Hansen/Lapierre's jam.
Don't get me wrong, I think Torres did a great job in the playoffs, but he wasn't all that different from the player he was in the regular season-- the occasional huge hit, the occasional huge goal, and nothing else other than that. Those key things he was good at were very nice contributions, and I would have been okay with him staying, but going into these playoffs, no part of me is going "Oh, if only we had Torres right now!" Ott would be without question a massive upgrade, IMO.
There was no ****ing way Torres was anywhere close to even being in the same realm as Hansen in the playoffs, let alone better, IMO. That one really makes me raise my eyebrow, and is one of the reasons why I think people overrated Torres sometimes.
Last edited by Shareefruck: 02-26-2012 at 12:22 AM.
Burrows
Kesler
Hansen
Lapierre
Higgins
Sedins
Torres
Raymond
Sammy
for the playoffs.
Sedins scored under ppg, were shutdown against nashville/boston.
In game 7 of the finals, we had 4 goals against and all 4 goals were scored against the twins.
twins had a subpar playoffs.
Higgins was on the 2nd line for the most part and only scored 8 pts in 25 games. (he was banged up)
Torres on the 3rd line, with little to no power play time had 7 pts, and offered much more physicality.
the 3rd line of torres/lappy/hansen were intact for most of the playoffs, how did you put lappy/hansen #3/4 and torres all the way down under higgins/sedins? whats your logic?
This is big. Gillis and Tallon don't look to outdo one another.
Campbell is a left side dman I believe - does that mean Garrison plays primarily on the right side? I haven't watched a lot of Florida this season...
Garrision isn't likely a 15-20 goal defenseman going forward but he did play over 22:00 a night in his 1st full season and is over 23:00 a night this year. If the pro scouts like his game you have to take a serious run at him IMO - if he finds chemistry or plays well you take a chance and re-sign him. Wouldn't be too concerned he's a late bloomer.
Connauton, Alberts and a pick for Garrison? Not a bad return for Florida - Canucks bring in a physical dman that can score goals and log big minutes.
To be honest, I haven't watched Florida much either.
However, from a quick check of some SBNation team sites (looking at the posted lineups from the Panthers' last few games), it looks like you're correct in assuming that Garrison has been playing on the right side on their top pairing (with Campbell on the left).
A quick check on ice-time on NHL.com also reveals Garrison averaging 23:37 TOI/G (2nd highest D), with special teams minutes that amount to playing 1st unit PK (2:49SHTOI/G, 2nd highest D) and 2nd unit PP (2:25 PPTOI/G, 3rd highest D).
I was thinking Garrison looked like an intriguing option when I assumed he played the left side (given he's a LH shot). Finding out that he's comfortable, and successful, playing on the right side raises the intrigue factor quite a bit.
Sedins scored under ppg, were shutdown against nashville/boston.
In game 7 of the finals, we had 4 goals against and all 4 goals were scored against the twins.
twins had a subpar playoffs.
Higgins was on the 2nd line for the most part and only scored 8 pts in 25 games. (he was banged up)
Torres on the 3rd line, with little to no power play time had 7 pts, and offered much more physicality.
the 3rd line of torres/lappy/hansen were intact for most of the playoffs, how did you put lappy/hansen #3/4 and torres all the way down under higgins/sedins? whats your logic?
Are you basing yours entirely on expectation/role? If a fourth liner did his job perfectly, could he be at the top of the list? I factored role/expectation in, but I didn't feel comfortable doing it too much. The Sedins may have struggled alot and played below their usual point totals, but they were still a helluva lot bigger reason for our success in the playoffs than some of our role-players. Does a 25 point 3rd liner deserve more praise than a 55 point 1st liner just because he's on the 3rd line (if they're equal in all other areas)?
The way I saw it, Burrows and Kesler were clearly our best forwards (until Kesler got injured at least). Raymond and Samuelsson were both pretty weak, although Raymond, as usual, is a great role player and made huge defensive contributions. Samuelsson was useless for the most part. Higgins was great for the most part. He was strong when he was on the 3rd line and he was strong on the 2nd line. I would argue the 8 points on the 2nd line vs. Torres' 7 points on the 3rd line isn't a fair comparison because the 3rd line was so much better than the second line, even in the offensive end. They may not have finished all their chances, but they sure seemed to generate more. What I mean is, I don't think being on the 2nd line was much of an advantage at all in terms of Higgins' likeliness of producing.
The Sedins were incredibly hit and miss, sometimes they were great, sometimes they were awful, and if we're talking purely on role/expectations, they would probably be 2nd last after Samuelsson, but I don't think that's fair, considering that they were still a much bigger reason we got so far than our 4th liners and such.
Point totals aren't everything when it comes to the 3rd line, IMO. The ebbs and flows that lead to the results matter just as much. To me, it's clear that Lapierre and Hansen were doing virtually all of the hard work that made that line successful-- backchecking, getting the puck out of their zone, bringing it in through the neutral zone, entering the offensive zone, mucking it up in the corners, winning puck battles, making plays, generating offense, creating chances by themselves, etc. They were fantastic at doing all of that. Torres helped out here and there supporting the board-work (although not as well as either of them), he would end up with great chances that the other two generated, and occasionally he would come up with a huge goal or a huge hit-- Other than that, it was all Hansen and Lapierre. They have similar point totals, but they don't tell the story, IMO. It's tough to even say that Torres was really that great offensively, because while all the other guys who had similar point totals were carrying the play, keeping the puck hemmed into the opposition end, and generating chances, Torres was sort of playing the role of cherry-picker (again, he mucked along the boards when he needed to, but he wasn't much of a factor aside from finishing/hitting, IMO). I would definitely argue that Lapierre, Hansen, Higgins, (maybe Raymond?) were noticeably better overall offensive players than Torres was in the playoffs, even with similar totals.
At the end of the day, I'd take the combination of defensive reliability, backchecking, forechecking, penalty killing, positioning, puck movement/transition, playmaking, puck protection, offensive attack, speed, physicality, and ability to win puck battles that nearly all of our other secondary role players contributed VERY easily over the one-dimensional hitting/finishing/boardwork that Torres contributed, and again, I liked Torres and appreciated these two things that he brought alot. I have no doubt that a team of these versions of Higgins', Hansen's, or Lapierre's would have faired better in the playoffs than a team consisting of Torres', which would have gotten demolished, IMO.
The Sedins were disappointing, but come'on-- they were responsible for doing so much more than Torres was.
Last edited by Shareefruck: 02-26-2012 at 01:27 AM.
Thanks for coming out tonight... Needed a good laugh.
To be fair, he's basing it on role/expectations. The Sedins should be pretty low considering that our role players all played well above expectation. Not sure it's all that fruitful or fair to do it that way though.
Garrison is relatively inexperienced. High goals, but low assists.
Playing on the panthers can inflate his point totals. As well, he won't get the same ice time in vancouver compared to Florida.
Lots of risk and so-so reward.
If he's the real deal you're looking at a top 4, right side partner for Edler. He will get similar icetime as in Florida, only easier minutes. I wouldn't necessarily say his point totals would go down either, going to a much better offensive club. With his shot, he'll find his way onto the PP...
Last season in 73 games he played over 22:00 a night, the toughest competition on defense, few offensive zone starts and was on the ice for the fewest goals against of any dman on the team. He also led the team in hits, led the defense in shots and was 2nd in blocked shots.
This season he's played fairly difficult minutes, again been on the ice for the fewest goals against of any dman, while posting big shot, goal, hit and blocked shot totals.
This is potentially a lot more than a 'so-so' reward IMO. Statistically, Garrison has been very good defensively over the past couple years. That's intriguing when you consider he leads NHL dmen in goals.
If Florida needs scoring, Raymond would have to be on the table for a player like this. As should Schroeder, Connauton, Rodin or our 1st IMO. If Gillis can't pry him out of Florida in the next couple days and Garrision doesn't re-sign, you need to find a way to get his rights at the draft. Wouldn't be surprised if he's right near the top of Gillis' wishlist right now.
If he's the real deal you're looking at a top 4, right side partner for Edler. He will get similar icetime as in Florida, only easier minutes. I wouldn't necessarily say his point totals would go down either, going to a much better offensive club. With his shot, he'll find his way onto the PP...
Last season in 73 games he played over 22:00 a night, the toughest competition on defense, few offensive zone starts and was on the ice for the fewest goals against of any dman on the team. He also led the team in hits, led the defense in shots and was 2nd in blocked shots.
This season he's played fairly difficult minutes, again been on the ice for the fewest goals against of any dman, while posting big shot, goal, hit and blocked shot totals.
This is potentially a lot more than a 'so-so' reward IMO. Statistically, Garrison has been very good defensively over the past couple years. That's intriguing when you consider he leads NHL dmen in goals.
If Florida needs scoring, Raymond would have to be on the table for a player like this. As should Schroeder, Connauton, Rodin or our 1st IMO. If Gillis can't pry him out of Florida in the next couple days and Garrision doesn't re-sign, you need to find a way to get his rights at the draft. Wouldn't be surprised if he's right near the top of Gillis' wishlist right now.
Sounds a lot like what I heard when we got Ballard...
If he's the real deal you're looking at a top 4, right side partner for Edler. He will get similar icetime as in Florida, only easier minutes. I wouldn't necessarily say his point totals would go down either, going to a much better offensive club. With his shot, he'll find his way onto the PP...
Last season in 73 games he played over 22:00 a night, the toughest competition on defense, few offensive zone starts and was on the ice for the fewest goals against of any dman on the team. He also led the team in hits, led the defense in shots and was 2nd in blocked shots.
This season he's played fairly difficult minutes, again been on the ice for the fewest goals against of any dman, while posting big shot, goal, hit and blocked shot totals.
This is potentially a lot more than a 'so-so' reward IMO. Statistically, Garrison has been very good defensively over the past couple years. That's intriguing when you consider he leads NHL dmen in goals.
If Florida needs scoring, Raymond would have to be on the table for a player like this. As should Schroeder, Connauton, Rodin or our 1st IMO. If Gillis can't pry him out of Florida in the next couple days and Garrision doesn't re-sign, you need to find a way to get his rights at the draft. Wouldn't be surprised if he's right near the top of Gillis' wishlist right now.
There's just no way they give up Garrison considering the contracts they handed out last year. How much could he possibly want? Really don't see them trading him.
Sounds a lot like what I heard when we got Ballard...
Ballard played the toughest minutes on Florida - the difference is he was on the ice for the most goals against/minute on defense. Garrison at the other end of the spectrum with the fewest goals against with tough minutes...
It's not like Florida can't turn out decent dmen. Boston plucked Dennis Seidenberg out of there for relatively cheap and he's been excellent in huge minutes for the Bruins.
Are we getting a Ballard or a Seidenberg? Statistically, it looks like it could be the latter.
Needed a good laugh.
