HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Florida Panthers
Notices

Garrison or Luongo

View Poll Results: You must pick one - sign Garrison or add Luongo.
Add Luongo 29 42.65%
Re-sign Garrison (5 years - $25 million) 39 57.35%
Voters: 68. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-27-2012, 12:42 PM
  #26
FlaPnthrsPunk
Our Time Will Come
 
FlaPnthrsPunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Coconut Creek, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
Yellow flag.

From original post-

"You must pick one (none of the above is not an option for the purposes of this poll)."
Ah. Alright. Then, I'll go with Garrison. I'd rather see him in a Panthers sweater on the blueline on October 13th contract aside than Luongo in goal.

FlaPnthrsPunk is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 12:42 PM
  #27
Boothinator
@MrBoothinator
 
Boothinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,021
vCash: 50
Re - Signing Garrison for sure!

But in reality it is more likely that we will acquire Luongo

Boothinator is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 12:45 PM
  #28
RainingRats
Registered User
 
RainingRats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 9,974
vCash: 500
I think Garrison at 5x5 is probably being overpaid by a million a year right now. If he continues to bring the play he's brought and improves (he should as he gets into the prime of his career) I think it would be hard to say he's overpaid. He would be a much wiser investment than Roberto. I do not want Roberto.

RainingRats is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 12:55 PM
  #29
Erick
Registered User
 
Erick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Broward, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
who did you have in mind?
I have no idea what Kulikov is worth, exactly. He's definitely a young defenseman who's proven himself at this level, although I think his progression has been rather disappointing.

Either way, Edmonton is loaded with young, talented forwards. Edmonton is also in desperate need of a defenseman, especially a young one like Kulikov to build their D-core; Kuli would be their #1.

As for Garrison, I'd give him the 5/25. I wouldn't expect 16 goals again, but I don't think he's a fluke at all. He developed confidence in his shot this year. There's no doubt that his shot is amazing; he was getting it by goalies without screens this year.

He's an asset on the powerplay (remember, we already lost Samuelsson...PP was a big reason for our success last year), and he's also one of the few (basically just him and Weaver), I have confidence in on the PK.
I feel like Garrison is our steadiest D-man and has been for two years now. If we don't pay him, we'll just be paying someone else to replace his minutes and that someone else isn't going to be as good as him, anyway.

JMO

Erick is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 12:59 PM
  #30
angry_treefrog
Moderator
T63813A
 
angry_treefrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canary Islands
Posts: 6,471
vCash: 500
I worry about our goaltending.

Remember last pre-season when we were all worried about our goaltending? It was going to be a weakness. Remember?

Well, Theodore & Clemmensen exceeded expectations and that "weakness" became a strength. Result: playoffs.

If the organization feels Markstrom isn't ready and they resign Clemmer, are you willing to gamble next season on Theodore & Clemmensen exceeding expectations again?

Luongo's contract is suboptimal from a salary standpoint, but it's balanced by the fact that he should not cost much in the way of future assets to acquire.

__________________




angry_treefrog is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:04 PM
  #31
MillarWithASave
HUBY DOOBY SHUTUP
 
MillarWithASave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Melbourne, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 4,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
I worry about our goaltending.

Remember last pre-season when we were all worried about our goaltending? It was going to be a weakness. Remember?

Well, Theodore & Clemmensen exceeded expectations and that "weakness" became a strength. Result: playoffs.

If the organization feels Markstrom isn't ready and they resign Clemmer, are you willing to gamble next season on Theodore & Clemmensen exceeding expectations again?

Luongo's contract is suboptimal from a salary standpoint, but it's balanced by the fact that he should not cost much in the way of future assets to acquire.
I'm just worried Theodore won't be able to handle another full season like he did last year. He is a pretty good goalie, and I think he would do just fine. But what happens if he falls through and doesn't do too well. Luongo will be a help, I think he will give us that security that Clemmer doesn't give us, as Theodore would most likely be our back up if Luo comes in. I'm still on the fence about getting Luo but it won't be the worst things to happen if we do.

MillarWithASave is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:11 PM
  #32
Desert Panther
Resident Lurker
 
Desert Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Frisco, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MillarWithASave View Post
I'm just worried Theodore won't be able to handle another full season like he did last year. He is a pretty good goalie, and I think he would do just fine. But what happens if he falls through and doesn't do too well. Luongo will be a help, I think he will give us that security that Clemmer doesn't give us, as Theodore would most likely be our back up if Luo comes in. I'm still on the fence about getting Luo but it won't be the worst things to happen if we do.
I'd almost have to think that Theo would be part of the return going the other way. I know Santos is saying Markstrom needs another year in the A, but Reboundo isn't going to play less than 60-65 games and I'm sure Theo wouldn't be content (after proving himself still capable) to play only 20. Resigning Clemmer is a possibility, but remember he also had to the notion of playing more than 20 games after backing up Brodeur all those years in NJ.

Desert Panther is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:17 PM
  #33
angry_treefrog
Moderator
T63813A
 
angry_treefrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canary Islands
Posts: 6,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Panther View Post
I'd almost have to think that Theo would be part of the return going the other way. I know Santos is saying Markstrom needs another year in the A, but Reboundo isn't going to play less than 60-65 games and I'm sure Theo wouldn't be content (after proving himself still capable) to play only 20. Resigning Clemmer is a possibility, but remember he also had to the notion of playing more than 20 games after backing up Brodeur all those years in NJ.
What makes you think he'd play more in Vancouver?

I could see him perhaps getting traded to Toronto, but I doubt he'd want to go there.

angry_treefrog is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:20 PM
  #34
Desert Panther
Resident Lurker
 
Desert Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Frisco, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
What makes you think he'd play more in Vancouver?

I could see him perhaps getting traded to Toronto, but I doubt he'd want to go there.
Because Schneider hasn't shown yet that he can handle that heavy a load. Theo likely wouldn't the starter, but it would likely be more of a 50-32 split than 62-20 and Theo would be a good mentor for Schneider as well.

Frankly, I'm in the camp of "we don't need Reboundo." Let Toronto take that contract and what will end up being diminishing skills.

Desert Panther is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:33 PM
  #35
Georgia Panther
Registered User
 
Georgia Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BufordGA/FranklinNC
Posts: 4,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
What makes you think he'd play more in Vancouver?

I could see him perhaps getting traded to Toronto, but I doubt he'd want to go there.
Theo=no trade clause=has said he plans to retire when his Florida days are over=no way Jose for Vancouver

Georgia Panther is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:35 PM
  #36
angry_treefrog
Moderator
T63813A
 
angry_treefrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canary Islands
Posts: 6,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Georgia Panther View Post
Theo=no trade clause=has said he plans to retire when his Florida days are over=no way Jose for Vancouver
Yes, like I said, I can't see him agreeing to a trade to Toronto.

Him going to Vancouver makes a little more sense, but the Panthers would still need to sign another goaltender, which would defeat the purpose.

angry_treefrog is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 01:36 PM
  #37
Erick
Registered User
 
Erick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Broward, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
I worry about our goaltending.

Remember last pre-season when we were all worried about our goaltending? It was going to be a weakness. Remember?

Well, Theodore & Clemmensen exceeded expectations and that "weakness" became a strength. Result: playoffs.

If the organization feels Markstrom isn't ready and they resign Clemmer, are you willing to gamble next season on Theodore & Clemmensen exceeding expectations again?

Luongo's contract is suboptimal from a salary standpoint, but it's balanced by the fact that he should not cost much in the way of future assets to acquire.
With a better offense, yes.
That's why I mentioned the Kulikov thing.

For what it's worth, I've been for acquiring Luongo, for the same reasons you stated.

Erick is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 02:04 PM
  #38
Holy Jokinen
Registered User
 
Holy Jokinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tampa/Boca
Country: United States
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Re-sign Garrison.

If our current team stays together (which it mostly will + Hubs and Howden possibly) i have no big qualms with our goalie situation. We've definitely got a pretty good situation there. Not great, not elite, but good enough to make the playoffs, even if it was by the skin of our teeth. However, if we lose Garrison we will have a GAPING hole on the back end. Not necessarily in terms of filling that spot even strength, cause i think Guds and Kuli are growing up very nicely, but in terms of having a booming shot on the PP. Having a threat at the point on the PP is HUGE. It takes a huge load off of the forwards who work down low, and really spreads the D out by forcing them to respect the blueline. Living with a Rangers fan really showed me what we have in Garrison. All he would do is harp on and on about how the Rangers have no respectable shot from the point, and really, it's no wonder they were 23rd on the PP while we sat in 7th.

I tend to think of it this way. If we "lose" Luongo, we still have Theo. If we lose Garrison, we just have a giant hole on the powerplay, and not many options to replace it.

Holy Jokinen is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 02:24 PM
  #39
Erick
Registered User
 
Erick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Broward, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 11,586
vCash: 500
After the contract Calgary gave Dennis ****ing Wideman, Garrison and his agent must be smiling a lot today.

Erick is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 02:40 PM
  #40
M4k4
Registered User
 
M4k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Posts: 83
vCash: 500
Neither.

Both are too expensive and not worth it imo.



Edit: If I had to choose, I would re-sign Garrison.

M4k4 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 02:46 PM
  #41
CHGoalie27
GWAAARRRRRRR
 
CHGoalie27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SoFLA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,402
vCash: 500
Easy choice, Garrison is the meaning of consistent IMO.

CHGoalie27 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 02:57 PM
  #42
SoupyFIN
Moderator
Lu ♥
 
SoupyFIN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Finland
Posts: 20,096
vCash: 50
Garrison is going to change his 5x5 demand to 6x6 after he heard what Wideman got.

No thanks.

SoupyFIN is online now  
Old
06-27-2012, 03:03 PM
  #43
Boothinator
@MrBoothinator
 
Boothinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,021
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoupyFIN View Post
Garrison is going to change his 5x5 demand to 6x6 after he heard what Wideman got.

No thanks.
Not sure but this might have happened because the Salary Cap has been set for 70 million next season, 6 more than this.

Boothinator is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 03:13 PM
  #44
PanthersHockey1
Avs Bandwagon
 
PanthersHockey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UF & Boca Raton
Country: United States
Posts: 5,488
vCash: 500
Garrison and the number 5 should not be in the same sentence. Luongo.

PanthersHockey1 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 04:28 PM
  #45
Pantherfan12
Registered User
 
Pantherfan12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sunrise,Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 1,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Jokinen View Post
Re-sign Garrison.

If our current team stays together (which it mostly will + Hubs and Howden possibly) i have no big qualms with our goalie situation. We've definitely got a pretty good situation there. Not great, not elite, but good enough to make the playoffs, even if it was by the skin of our teeth. However, if we lose Garrison we will have a GAPING hole on the back end. Not necessarily in terms of filling that spot even strength, cause i think Guds and Kuli are growing up very nicely, but in terms of having a booming shot on the PP. Having a threat at the point on the PP is HUGE. It takes a huge load off of the forwards who work down low, and really spreads the D out by forcing them to respect the blueline. Living with a Rangers fan really showed me what we have in Garrison. All he would do is harp on and on about how the Rangers have no respectable shot from the point, and really, it's no wonder they were 23rd on the PP while we sat in 7th.

I tend to think of it this way. If we "lose" Luongo, we still have Theo. If we lose Garrison, we just have a giant hole on the powerplay, and not many options to replace it.
We can bring back Olli...... He was pretty consistant for us on the PP, although not sure what his numbers are now. We all love Garrison but it really is up to him, not Tallon. Garrison exploded this past season,but I for one, think it was due to Campbell. This is his first season like that and I don't think he's earned 5x5 just yet. He could be a one-hit wonder and I don't think he should be paid that extreme.

It is a tough call though, but I would go with Luongo. Luongo has proven to be an Elite goaltender in the league for more than one season (regardless of what people may think). While Garrison had a tremendous year, it was only once and no one knows if he can repeat. It's a ton of money to lock up in one player, but it's an elite goaltender who is an improvement to our team. If we don't get him, I won't cry as long as Tallon spends money upgrading our team, but if we do get him at least we'll have an elite goalie. I do hope, however, that Tallon does upgrade this team because Washington has gotten better as well as Caro. I am not sure if Tampa's goaltending situation has made them better or not, but we need to continue to improve to be competitive and defend our SE divison title.

Pantherfan12 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 04:43 PM
  #46
MillarWithASave
HUBY DOOBY SHUTUP
 
MillarWithASave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Melbourne, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 4,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick View Post
With a better offense, yes.
That's why I mentioned the Kulikov thing.

For what it's worth, I've been for acquiring Luongo, for the same reasons you stated.
Trading Kulikov for one of Eberle, Hall, Nugent-Hopkins, or Yakupov?

Probably like to see Nugent-Hopkins or Eberle. But then again what is Kulikov ACTUALLY worth? Don't think it would be 1-1 trade for any of those guys.

MillarWithASave is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 06:06 PM
  #47
Mogo
(╯□)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Mogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 813
Ugh Calgary.. sheesh.. That much for Wideman. Yikes

Mogo is online now  
Old
06-27-2012, 06:31 PM
  #48
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by angry_treefrog View Post
Yes, like I said, I can't see him agreeing to a trade to Toronto.

Him going to Vancouver makes a little more sense, but the Panthers would still need to sign another goaltender, which would defeat the purpose.
Theodore isn't going anywhere. Why would he want to go to Toronto? He signed a NTC to make sure there was no chance of him getting traded to a disaster team like the Leafs. If Theo plays the way he did last year, Loungo better be on his toes because he'll be riding the pine the same way he did in Vancouver.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 06:33 PM
  #49
nhlfan9191
Registered User
 
nhlfan9191's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Saskatoon, Sk
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mogo View Post
Ugh Calgary.. sheesh.. That much for Wideman. Yikes
That may very well set the market price for Garrison unfortunately.

nhlfan9191 is offline  
Old
06-27-2012, 06:52 PM
  #50
AwesomePanthers
Go Quacks!
 
AwesomePanthers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Norway
Posts: 8,612
vCash: 500
Rufuse to vote, because I can't decide. Would be way to much for Garrison, he's starting to get overrated imo. Lou is still a very good goalie, but comes with a brutal contract. I can't make up my mind.

AwesomePanthers is online now  
Closed Thread

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 04:45 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.