Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * - 54 votes

Kevin Bieksa you are really...


  • Please log in to reply
9842 replies to this topic

#5131 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,078 posts
  • Joined: 22-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:33 AM

I posted this suggestion on the VAN/NYI trade rumour thread...


A wild out-of-the box suggestion.


When Salo gets off the LTIR. VAN trades Bieksa to NYI for a 3rd. At trade deadline...NYI trades Bieksa back to VAN for a 2nd. Not sure how the cap works cuz we've all seen how a 4M player at the start of the season becomes a 2M player at trade deadline.

So basically VAN trades a 2nd for a 3rd for NYI help with the cap.

Again...not sure if this can work (need the resident CDC capologist to take a look at it).


The main reason it wouldn't work is because the Nuck's would still have that overpriced, lightweight, mistake prone, turnover machine Bieksa.
  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5132 themcdeal

themcdeal

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,868 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 08

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:36 AM

^ The guys been one of our best dmen for the last few weeks. If he continues to play the way he is, we're better off keeping him. Even with his cap hit.
  • 0

#5133 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,078 posts
  • Joined: 22-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:38 AM

Posted Image


Is that Rupert, Sampy + not so Sharpie? The Bieksa love Trolls?
  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5134 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:44 AM

Thhhhhhhhhhhhe wheeels on the bus go round n round...
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#5135 Standing_Tall#37

Standing_Tall#37

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,000 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:47 AM

Reality though dictates that there are people who are more at fault, somtimes it obvious and sometimes you have to look at an entire play to see it.



^ This is why I think Edler is so brutal. I'll admit right now he has offensive upside, But defensively he's a fu(king nightmare. If you watch the whole play he has piss-poor decision makeing and often will put his other d-man out of position. Then Bieksa, Ballard, Erhoff or whomever it may be is forced try to do something desperate. They look totally out of position and you question what they were doing out there, not realizing bobbles put them in that position. I wish more people would look at the whole play before placeing blame. IMO Bieksa is one of the best at creating angles and consistantly makes sure the puck gets out.


I wish Darren(Canucklion) would just learn to get a peice of pu$$ and move out of home so that he didn't have to spend 12 hours a day with his wingman(WSA) bashing Beiksa, its really getting pathetic.
  • 0

#5136 canucksordie

canucksordie

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 10

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:50 AM

I just farted.
  • 0
Breakin' necks and cashin' cheques since 1982

#5137 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,078 posts
  • Joined: 22-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:13 AM

I just farted.


gee, and I thought Bieksa was the stinker.Posted Image
  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5138 themcdeal

themcdeal

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,868 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 08

Posted 13 December 2010 - 01:04 PM

^^^trying way to hard dude
  • 0

#5139 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,552 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 01:39 PM

Well then in this world can't we just say everyone on the ice is responsible. If 10 plays prior player E doesn't pass the puck to player D instead of player C Event A doesn't happen. Everyone on the ice is to blame for this reason and I agree it is a pretty simple concept. That's why saying that if player A gets it right event A doesn't occur is pretty meaningless in this wishy washy equation of "it's not his 100% his fault but he did it."

Reality though dictates that there are people who are more at fault, somtimes it obvious and sometimes you have to look at an entire play to see it.

Jesus, obviously you guys know what I mean by saying that, it's a simple way of showing how someone can be at fault without it being 100 percent his fault. This is just reaching for something to argue against, completely pointless. Every implication does not need to be typed out, I would assume you guys know what somebody did 5 minutes ago doesn't matter.

Edited by Duodenum, 13 December 2010 - 01:46 PM.

  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5140 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,552 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 01:42 PM

So wouldn't the Canuck that coughed up the puck or lost the faceoff be more responsible than Bieksa? Because if that did't happen it never gets to our zone in the first place. So who shoulders the prime responsibility? Should it be whoever gave Tampa puck possession because if that didn't happen then Bieksa never would have tried to hit Stampkos and missed. How far back in the play can we go with stupidity to lay blame? Or does that path just automatically end at Bieksa by default regardless of any other errors.

It pretty much starts with Bieksa and ends with Hansen/Hamhuis because they made the most recent and relevant plays.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5141 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 02:01 PM

Jesus, obviously you guys know what I mean by saying that, it's a simple way of showing how someone can be at fault without it being 100 percent his fault. This is just reaching for something to argue against, completely pointless. Every implication does not need to be typed out, I would assume you guys know what somebody did 5 minutes ago doesn't matter.


I think the problem here is that perhaps your choice of words off the hop weren't better. Perhaps a 'contribitory factor' to the goal would have been better? Saying "fault", especially when you're trying to argue that a particular event led up to a goal, as justification for saying "fault", is careless. And it also invites the responses of pointing out other instances/events that also led up to the goal. (The goaltending, the lazy backcheck, the lost faceoff, the poor coverage, etc) And they didn't happen 5 minutes before the goal, but perhaps less than a minute, beforehand.

Anyways...Bieksa in my mind, played a factor in contributing towards a goal by not connecting with that hit on Stamkos. However I don't believe he had many great options at the time. He could have let Stamkos get the puck and gone to the net, but that would have left the #2 goal scorer all by himself with the puck, feet from our net. He could have tried to play the puck and not the man, which most dmen are taught not to do....but because Stamkos got there before Bieksa, he could have gotten the pass off anyways. Bieksa couldn't have gotten to the puck first, as Stamkos is much faster than Juice.

So all in all, Bieksa may not have been able to make a better play, maybe he could of....whatever. The haters would cry over spilled milk, whatever the play he made, which may have resulted in a a goal as well. Haters gonna hate.....no matter what. At best, they'll shut up....which is all we can hope they do. Bieksa did not have a good night against Tampa....however his play was much better against the Oilers. Still not as good as it can be...but pretty good. 11 shots in 3 periods? I say the d-core had a pretty good night.



  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#5142 Millerdraft

Millerdraft

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,509 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 04

Posted 13 December 2010 - 02:27 PM

I have been looking at these stats from the start of the year. There are 2 games that the data has not been recorded from and this really skews these stats. Nhl.com stats have Edler and Ehrhoff on for 17 ESGA and they were scored against at 4 vs 4 once that I recall. That’s a 33.3% discrepancy in this stat from nhl.com to behindthenet.ca because of 2 games not recorded. Furthermore Bieksa had been on for 21 ESGF from nhl.com one of which was 4 vs 4 that I recall and behindthenet.ca has him on for 18 5vs5 goals for. This is an 11.1% discrepancy of this stat.

Since discussing stats with you when you last came on here with the behindthenet.ca numbers I have been tracking these stats myself. I don’t separate 4vs4 play from 5vs5 and combine ES, SH, and PP numbers to come up with my own +/- stat. First I calculate the players GF and GA stats in terms of minutes played. Then calculate the average ES, PP, and SH time in a 60 minute Canuck game. Using all theses numbers I calculate a +/- stat that incorporates all in game situations for each D-man.

ESGF ESGA PPGF PPGA SHGF SHGA GF GA Rating
Bieksa 2.16 2.26 0.78 0.52 0.09 0 2.93 2.78 0.15
Ehrhoff 2.37 1.75 1.19 0.39 0.13 0.06 3.56 2.14 1.41
Edler 2.24 1.59 0.99 0.67 0.10 0.05 3.23 2.26 0.97
Hamhuis 2.45 2.45 0.46 0.30 0 0 2.91 2.75 0.16
Ballard 2.59 1.95 0.79 0.93 0 0 3.39 2.88 0.51
Alberts 1.50 1.91 0.18 0.53 0.13 0 1.68 2.44 -0.76
Rome 1.37 1.71 0.89 0.80 0 0 2.26 2.51 -0.25
Parent 0.00 2.63 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 2.63 -2.63

Since Alberts has no PP to make an accurate judgement of his effectiveness on the PP his PPGF stat is calculated by using his ESGF/ESTOI information.


Reread what Gabriel DesJardins, "author" of www.behindthenet.ca, himself told me:

As for any discrepancies, here's what Gabriel Desjarden told me:

> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:33 PM, wrote:
>>
>> Hi Gabriel (or whomever it may concern),
>>
>> I really enjoy your statistics and frequently visit your site. However,
>> there seems to be a discrepancy in your stats and it's been that way for
>> awhile. Nhl.com as Bieksa listed as +4 with 22GF (6 of which were on the
>> PP) & 16GA (4 of which were on the PP) when on the ice in 17gp whereas
>> your
>> site has him down for 12GF & 12GA when on the ice in 15gp. He's a -1 in
>> his
>> last two games played and the Canucks only have 1 shorthanded goal for and
>> none against so something is amiss in your numbers...
>>
>>
>> http://www.nhl.com/i...wName=plusMinus
>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gabriel Desjardins"
> <gabriel.desjardins@gmail.com>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Kevin Bieksa's 2010/2011 5on5 GF/GA stats
>
>
> hi
>
> My site lists 5v5 and does not include 4v4, which is usually the
> source of the discrepancy.


On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 9:00 AM, wrote:

> I guess so but that still doesn't add up because the Canucks have only
> scored twice 4on4 so even if he were on the ice for both he'd still be on
> for 13GF (Bieksa was on the ice for Vancouver's only SHG scored) and 12GA at
> 5on5. Maybe the missing GF was scored with Luongo/Schneider out of the net
> for a 6on5?
>
> Nonetheless, thanks for taking the time to reply and thanks for taking the
> effort to compile all these stats. It's a great site!
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gabriel Desjardins"
> <gabriel.desjardins@gmail.com>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2010 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Kevin Bieksa's 2010/2011 5on5 GF/GA stats

>hey,

There are time when the NHL's gamesheets don't match the NHL's master
stats. They're done by two different groups.


Edit: Kudos for compiling your stats bbllpp but you need to account for quality of competition in order for better accuracy. Bieksa & Hamhuis are playing "hard minutes" versus top line players this year. Last year we used Salo & Mitchell in that role.

Edited by Millerdraft, 13 December 2010 - 02:37 PM.

  • 0

Kassian.... Taylor Pyatt 3.0

Lies. He's more of a Steve Bernier. Hopefully his talent level goes up so he can become like a Taylor Pyatt.


#5143 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,552 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 02:34 PM

I think the problem here is that perhaps your choice of words off the hop weren't better. Perhaps a 'contribitory factor' to the goal would have been better? Saying "fault", especially when you're trying to argue that a particular event led up to a goal, as justification for saying "fault", is careless. And it also invites the responses of pointing out other instances/events that also led up to the goal. (The goaltending, the lazy backcheck, the lost faceoff, the poor coverage, etc) And they didn't happen 5 minutes before the goal, but perhaps less than a minute, beforehand.

Anyways...Bieksa in my mind, played a factor in contributing towards a goal by not connecting with that hit on Stamkos. However I don't believe he had many great options at the time. He could have let Stamkos get the puck and gone to the net, but that would have left the #2 goal scorer all by himself with the puck, feet from our net. He could have tried to play the puck and not the man, which most dmen are taught not to do....but because Stamkos got there before Bieksa, he could have gotten the pass off anyways. Bieksa couldn't have gotten to the puck first, as Stamkos is much faster than Juice.

So all in all, Bieksa may not have been able to make a better play, maybe he could of....whatever. The haters would cry over spilled milk, whatever the play he made, which may have resulted in a a goal as well. Haters gonna hate.....no matter what. At best, they'll shut up....which is all we can hope they do. Bieksa did not have a good night against Tampa....however his play was much better against the Oilers. Still not as good as it can be...but pretty good. 11 shots in 3 periods? I say the d-core had a pretty good night.

I have always been quite bad at that thing called "english" :P
That's the way I post though, I'll leave large chunks out because I assume people will understand what I mean regardless. Obviously It's easier to understand your own posts than others.

Edited by Duodenum, 13 December 2010 - 02:37 PM.

  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5144 hank&dan

hank&dan

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,386 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 05:27 PM

Juice is slowly pouring down the depth chart. Down to 4th in nucks D-men in TOI per game. Not long until Ballard over takes him as well. For now, even though the shoe doesn't fit Bieksas still wearin it.


  • 0
Posted Image


But as usual, Bieksa makes the routine defensive play a hair-raising adventure.


#5145 hank&dan

hank&dan

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,386 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 05:49 PM

Some LOLZ My linkhttp://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/kurtenblog/archive/2010/12/13/in-kevin-bieksa-s-defence-steve-stamkos-is-pretty-shifty.aspx
  • 0
Posted Image


But as usual, Bieksa makes the routine defensive play a hair-raising adventure.


#5146 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,634 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 05:52 PM

Jesus, obviously you guys know what I mean by saying that, it's a simple way of showing how someone can be at fault without it being 100 percent his fault. This is just reaching for something to argue against, completely pointless. Every implication does not need to be typed out, I would assume you guys know what somebody did 5 minutes ago doesn't matter.

Jesus, Obviously it's pretty common sense that no single person is responsible for a series of events. This is the problem is that people want to point to one player rather than see the whole picture or the series of events so to speak.

The other problem is using your example as a shield to say "hey guys I'm not saying it's all his fault but his huge mistake cost the canucks a goal."
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5147 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,473 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:03 PM

Some LOLZ My linkhttp://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/kurtenblog/archive/2010/12/13/in-kevin-bieksa-s-defence-steve-stamkos-is-pretty-shifty.aspx


scene 4: WTF

pretty much sums it up
  • 0

#5148 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,078 posts
  • Joined: 22-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:12 PM

Some LOLZ My linkhttp://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/kurtenblog/archive/2010/12/13/in-kevin-bieksa-s-defence-steve-stamkos-is-pretty-shifty.aspx


Here is the link again H + D's link

great post, I'm still chuckling at Bieksa's ineptitude at grasping the concept of defence. lol
  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5149 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:26 PM

Some LOLZ My linkhttp://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/kurtenblog/archive/2010/12/13/in-kevin-bieksa-s-defence-steve-stamkos-is-pretty-shifty.aspx


He missed the hit, it was a split second play...so what? What's Hansen's excuse for tying up his man? He didn't think Purcell would score???
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#5150 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:35 PM

Bieksa, Hamhuis bounce back

By Gordon McIntyre Mon, Dec 13 2010

A lasting image from Saturday night's ovetime loss to Tampa Bay is Kevin Bieksa letting Steven Stamkos get by him, then Bieksa lining up the young Lightning star along the end boards, and finally Bieksa slamming into the glass while an untouched Stamkos slips the puck to the slot for a Teddy Purcell goal.Bieksa also let Stamkos get body position for his first goal, when the puck bounced past Cory Schneider off Stamkos's chest, and the usually reliable Hamhuis was no better.

The duo, supposedly on the ice in shut-down roles, were on for three Tampa goals.

But Alain Vigneault decided to leave them together on Sunday and the two were instrumental in shutting down the Oilers' talented youngsters.

Edited by Sharpshooter, 13 December 2010 - 06:36 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#5151 marinated.pea

marinated.pea

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts
  • Joined: 26-March 08

Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:44 PM

^ HamJuice! :towel:
I find it hilarious that people were complaining that he was being overplayed and the second his minutes go down, it's because "he's played himself out of the spot" :frantic:
  • 0
Posted Image

#5152 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,552 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 07:10 PM

Jesus, Obviously it's pretty common sense that no single person is responsible for a series of events. This is the problem is that people want to point to one player rather than see the whole picture or the series of events so to speak.

The other problem is using your example as a shield to say "hey guys I'm not saying it's all his fault but his huge mistake cost the canucks a goal."

If you want to try to disprove that, go right ahead. Otherwise we're just talking in circles.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5153 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,634 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 07:52 PM

If you want to try to disprove that, go right ahead. Otherwise we're just talking in circles.

Disprove what?

There's nothing to disprove.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5154 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,552 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 07:58 PM

Disprove what?

There's nothing to disprove.

Exactly.
1) Bieksa made a mistake
2) it resulted in a goal
3) other mistakes were also made towards the occurence of the goal (relevant ones)
4) This is what wall said and what I am telling both Rupert and Baggins

Why bring this up in the first place then?

Edited by Duodenum, 13 December 2010 - 08:00 PM.

  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5155 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,494 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:10 PM

Anyways...Bieksa in my mind, played a factor in contributing towards a goal by not connecting with that hit on Stamkos. However I don't believe he had many great options at the time. He could have let Stamkos get the puck and gone to the net, but that would have left the #2 goal scorer all by himself with the puck, feet from our net. He could have tried to play the puck and not the man, which most dmen are taught not to do....but because Stamkos got there before Bieksa, he could have gotten the pass off anyways. Bieksa couldn't have gotten to the puck first, as Stamkos is much faster than Juice.


This is definitely one of the funniest posts yet from a Bieksa apologist.

"Contributing factor".

If Bieksa makes the easy play, there are no other factors that come into play.

Not many "great options at the time".

You're right. There was only one option. The easy one. Which was to simply stay in front of Stamkos so's to prevent a clear path to the net for him or for a pass to a dangerous area. This is something that all Dmen are taught in midget hockey. The "Stamkos is a great player" excuse is nonsense, because in that position it doesn't matter who the opponent is, all the Dman has to do is stay between him and the front of the net, and there is no great option for Stamkos.

But as usual, Bieksa makes the routine defensive play a hair-raising adventure.

I also like the argument that well, Bieksa had a "so-so" game (but so did many other players, too!!), he and Hamhuis played much better in Edmonton. (So did the other players.) This feeble-minded wishy-washy grasping at straws to level the ice is incredible.

Bieksa made a boneheaded play. Again. But the important point is that these boneheaded boo-boos are unforced. There's never a safe moment on the ice when Bieksa's in the vicinity. He'll fall down, unprovoked. He'll deflect the puck at Luongo, unforced, as he did in the Tampa game in the first period. (The similar play by Alberts was actually Torres' fault since he made a rushed bad pass to Alberts.)

He played well in Edmonton. Hooray. Who knows what kind of game we'll get from him against Columbus.
  • 0

#5156 RogersArena

RogersArena

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,529 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 10

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:10 PM

http://communities.c...tty-shifty.aspx

funniest read on Bieksas play on that Stamkos goal
same link person put up there
  • 0

Posted Image


#5157 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,634 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:16 PM

Exactly.
1) Bieksa made a mistake
2) it resulted in a goal
3) other mistakes were also made towards the occurence of the goal (relevant ones)
4) This is what wall said and what I am telling both Rupert and Baggins

Why bring this up in the first place then?

Why bring it up? You are aware this is a discussion board right...for discusion debates and occasionally disagreements. I bring it up because what you said makes it super easy for people to get away with being able to trash a player but hide behind semantics. It's like throwing bull#&%^ while saying have a nice day.

I'm sorry if you don't approve but I honestly don't care. (See what I did there when I told you I was sorry and said I didn't care?)

Anyways I made a point about while your theory is true it's also a mask to hide behind. If so and so makes a mistake and there's a string of mistakes before and after don't you agree it's stupid to single out that player? Even if it's coupled with some sissy statement like "it wasn't just him though"?
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5158 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:25 PM

Lollerz @ 'Bieksa apologists'.

Could be a name of a band.

Anyways...he still isnt as bad as the poo-poo-on-Bieksa-for-flimsy-reasons camp.

It is not like he is Steve McCarthy for crying out loud.
  • 0

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#5159 hockey is nice yes

hockey is nice yes

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 08

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:26 PM

Sexy Bexy YES YES YES!
  • 0

#5160 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:34 PM

Lollerz @ 'Bieksa apologists'.

Could be a name of a band.

Anyways...he still isnt as bad as the poo-poo-on-Bieksa-for-flimsy-reasons camp.

It is not like he is Steve McCarthy for crying out loud.

Buy it's gotta be all one word: Bieksapologistz.

It's like my wife asking my buddy who has a thing for japan if he's a japologist. I said "yeah he likes to make excuses for their behaviour 70 years ago."

Edited by Lonny Bohonos, 13 December 2010 - 09:36 PM.

  • 0
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.


Logic at its finest.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.