Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * - 54 votes

Kevin Bieksa you are really...


  • Please log in to reply
10201 replies to this topic

#5161 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,796 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:37 PM

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"?

Last I checked this is the Bieksa thread. This is where people go to point Bieksa's mistakes and good plays. If Bieksa was part of the chain of mistakes that leads to a goal, it will get pointed out here.

Especially when it was Bieksa's mistake that was the biggest and most obvious in this play. You might have a case if Bieksa and Hansen switched places.
Not to mention hating Bieksa is the cool thing to do!

Edited by Duodenum, 13 December 2010 - 08:42 PM.

  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5162 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,335 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:37 PM

:lol:
  • 0

2sa1qgh.jpg

The Canucks Playoff preparation


#5163 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,764 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 08:50 PM

I don't know how anyone in their right mind can suggest that Bieksa wasn't largely responsible for that play turning out as a goal.
  • 0

#5164 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,662 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 09:06 PM

seriously anyone blaming Bieksa for Stamkos's set up goal is ridiculous. IMO Stamkos would have schooled almost any dman in the league on that play with the exception of MAYBE: Doughty, Keith, Boyle

lose the bias.
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#5165 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,774 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 09:08 PM

I don't know how anyone in their right mind can suggest that Bieksa wasn't largely responsible for that play turning out as a goal.

I never said he wasn't; in fact that wasn't the point I was making at all.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5166 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,774 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 09:10 PM

Last I checked this is the Bieksa thread. This is where people go to point Bieksa's mistakes and good plays. If Bieksa was part of the chain of mistakes that leads to a goal, it will get pointed out here.

Especially when it was Bieksa's mistake that was the biggest and most obvious in this play. You might have a case if Bieksa and Hansen switched places.
Not to mention hating Bieksa is the cool thing to do!

It is a Bieksa thread but if the information still isn't correct or there is more to the discussion that also counts.

I know you;re joking with that last part but sadly it's not always a joke.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5167 Duodenum

Duodenum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,796 posts
  • Joined: 29-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 09:18 PM

It is a Bieksa thread but if the information still isn't correct or there is more to the discussion that also counts.

I know you;re joking with that last part but sadly it's not always a joke.

Yea, I understand but I wasn't making any generalized statements, I was just applying it to that specific play.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image

#5168 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

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

Posted 13 December 2010 - 10:41 PM

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.


Barry, if that is the funniest post from an apologist, then as a foaming at the mouth hater, you're a barrel of laughs and have been one from the outset. The laughs you provide on a consistent basis with your inane posts and blind hate are the stuff of slapstick legend.

I wasn't grasping at any straws....as I also thought it was a poor result from a poor decision. But, i didn't respond to Duo, in order to make excuses....but to talk the options he had through to some semblance of a conclusion.

You know hat's really wishy washy and feeble minded? The fact that you are going on about a play two games and three days ago. You haters are hilarious...like a bunch of dogs clamouring over the same small chew toy. If that's the worse thing he's done in a couple of games....then have at it. Keep re-living that mistake...whatever helps you fester your hate. His mistakes are like too much viagra for you guys....like a boner that lasts two days too long.....you really should go consult a doctor.

And to get to your assertion that the onle 'easy' play Bieksa had was to get in front of him....is exactly what he tried to do. He tried to get in front of where he thought Stamkos was going to be and meet him there, with a hit. Well, Stamkos stopped up with his body towards the net, instead of towards the boards, knowing that if he avoided the hit, he'd have a play to make by either going to the front of the net, or perhaps a passing option play. Well, things worked out for him, as his sudden stop, allowed a passin play to come to fruition because NO ONE was checking Purcell. Now does Bieksa earn some criticism for missing the hit? In my mind, yeah. It won't be the first time a dman has missed a hit, and it won't be the last. ALl this panty twisting is kinda ridiculous though....but it seems you guys must "beat" that horse or appendage to death. Well, give'r, if that's what gives you your collective jollies.

The rest of us will just point and laugh, as usual....you know......like the girls do.

And I doubt if Bieksa never made a mistake again (which won't happen) that you'd ever give him any credit, anyways. So you keep stroking that hate and whatever else you can get your tiny hands and mind on.
  • 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


#5169 Tatoes

Tatoes

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,450 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:19 PM

Why are we even arguing about Bieksa still? He flat out sucks. Just like the colour blue is the colour blue, Bieksa will always suck. No matter how blind people want to argue it, Bieksa's sucking is going to be true. Heck, they would probably have a better argument that the colour blue is not blue because colour is just how human beings interpret it, the real world could be black and white. Bieksa being garbage is pretty much a fact and I still haven't heard anything coming close to a remotely decent argument that he doesn't suck from his supporters.
  • 0

#5170 Zach Morris

Zach Morris

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:23 PM

Why are we even arguing about Bieksa still? He flat out sucks. Just like the colour blue is the colour blue, Bieksa will always suck. No matter how blind people want to argue it, Bieksa's sucking is going to be true. Heck, they would probably have a better argument that the colour blue is not blue because colour is just how human beings interpret it, the real world could be black and white. Bieksa being garbage is pretty much a fact and I still haven't heard anything coming close to a remotely decent argument that he doesn't suck from his supporters.



Ummmmm!!!

He makes millions of dollars playing hockey in the NHL??

Is that a sound argument for you??

Edited by Zach Morris, 13 December 2010 - 11:23 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

"Incredulous"

#5171 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,926 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:25 PM

Why are we even arguing about Bieksa still? He flat out sucks. Just like the colour blue is the colour blue, Bieksa will always suck. No matter how blind people want to argue it, Bieksa's sucking is going to be true. Heck, they would probably have a better argument that the colour blue is not blue because colour is just how human beings interpret it, the real world could be black and white. Bieksa being garbage is pretty much a fact and I still haven't heard anything coming close to a remotely decent argument that he doesn't suck from his supporters.


true that, done with this thread

and for those that post in this thread like 10 times a day should find something better to do
  • 0

#5172 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:34 PM

Barry, if that is the funniest post from an apologist, then as a foaming at the mouth hater, you're a barrel of laughs and have been one from the outset. The laughs you provide on a consistent basis with your inane posts and blind hate are the stuff of slapstick legend.

I wasn't grasping at any straws....as I also thought it was a poor result from a poor decision. But, i didn't respond to Duo, in order to make excuses....but to talk the options he had through to some semblance of a conclusion.

You know hat's really wishy washy and feeble minded? The fact that you are going on about a play two games and three days ago. You haters are hilarious...like a bunch of dogs clamouring over the same small chew toy. If that's the worse thing he's done in a couple of games....then have at it. Keep re-living that mistake...whatever helps you fester your hate. His mistakes are like too much viagra for you guys....like a boner that lasts two days too long.....you really should go consult a doctor.

And to get to your assertion that the onle 'easy' play Bieksa had was to get in front of him....is exactly what he tried to do. He tried to get in front of where he thought Stamkos was going to be and meet him there, with a hit. Well, Stamkos stopped up with his body towards the net, instead of towards the boards, knowing that if he avoided the hit, he'd have a play to make by either going to the front of the net, or perhaps a passing option play. Well, things worked out for him, as his sudden stop, allowed a passin play to come to fruition because NO ONE was checking Purcell. Now does Bieksa earn some criticism for missing the hit? In my mind, yeah. It won't be the first time a dman has missed a hit, and it won't be the last. ALl this panty twisting is kinda ridiculous though....but it seems you guys must "beat" that horse or appendage to death. Well, give'r, if that's what gives you your collective jollies.

The rest of us will just point and laugh, as usual....you know......like the girls do.

And I doubt if Bieksa never made a mistake again (which won't happen) that you'd ever give him any credit, anyways. So you keep stroking that hate and whatever else you can get your tiny hands and mind on.


I googled Brain Dead Defense and the article below came up. The goal was Bieksa's fault, period...


In Kevin Bieksa's Defence, Steve Stamkos is Pretty Shifty

By MIKE HALFORD MON, DEC 13 2010


Here is a frame-by-frame rundown of Kevin Bieksa defending Steve Stamkos on Saturday night. Specifically, Bieksa defending Stamkos on the play that led to Teddy Purcell's second-period goal.
Here is a frame-by-frame rundown of Kevin Bieksa defending Steve Stamkos on Saturday night. Specifically,

Bieksa defending Stamkos on the play that led to Teddy Purcell's second-period goal.


SCENE 1: ALL SEEMS WELL

Posted Image

We begin with a relatively non-threatening scenario. Stamkos goes to collect the puck in the corner while Bieksa closes. Stamkos doesn't appear to have any teammates in particularly good shooting areas. And since that's not Dan Ellis in net, scoring from this angle would be extremely difficult.



SCENE 2: INTERESTING...


Posted Image





Bieksa appears to have turned the wrong way. Fortunately, he still holds a key advantage -- his body is between the puckholder and the net. Besides, it's not like he's going to take a dangerous, risky run at one of the league's most dynamic players. I mean, that would be crazy. He'll just contain him instead.




SCENE 3: YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG



Posted Image


This is the beginning of the end. Bieksa has abandoned all defensive positioning to give the Home Hardware sign a snow shower. To be fair, Home Hardware was kind of asking for it with those cutting board scissors commercials.

SCENE 4: WTF

Posted Image

Not only is Bieksa parallel to Stamkos now -- he's also got his back to him. I believe "parallel, back-to-front" is step six of the Electric Slide.

SCENE 5: COME ON, MAN

Posted Image







Bieksa is now stuck to the window like a suction-cup Garfield doll while Stamkos is free to do whatever he pleases, like look for Teddy Purcell.

SCENE 6: DENOUEMENT

Posted Image


Aaaaand...scene.

If you'd like to see the play in real time, here's the video. Fast-forward to the 1:40 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY2W_TxWu78&feature=player_embedded[media][/media]











Edited by CANUCKLELION, 13 December 2010 - 11:46 PM.

  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5173 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,472 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:41 PM

Why are we even arguing about Bieksa still? He flat out sucks. Just like the colour blue is the colour blue, Bieksa will always suck. No matter how blind people want to argue it, Bieksa's sucking is going to be true. Heck, they would probably have a better argument that the colour blue is not blue because colour is just how human beings interpret it, the real world could be black and white. Bieksa being garbage is pretty much a fact and I still haven't heard anything coming close to a remotely decent argument that he doesn't suck from his supporters.

See duodenum? It's morons like this who keep us coming back.
  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#5174 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,774 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:43 PM

Why are we even arguing about Bieksa still? He flat out sucks. Just like the colour blue is the colour blue, Bieksa will always suck. No matter how blind people want to argue it, Bieksa's sucking is going to be true. Heck, they would probably have a better argument that the colour blue is not blue because colour is just how human beings interpret it, the real world could be black and white. Bieksa being garbage is pretty much a fact and I still haven't heard anything coming close to a remotely decent argument that he doesn't suck from his supporters.


Ok so to Hank&dan, Barry, Wallstreet, Canuckelion Duo.

Now you see that any argument you make is trumped by the fact that Tatoes agrees with you.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5175 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,774 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:44 PM

true that, done with this thread

and for those that post in this thread like 10 times a day should find something better to do

I have 20 e bucks that says you come back.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#5176 Zach Morris

Zach Morris

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:45 PM

Canucklelion

Your post defnately sums up the FISH BOWL that these players are subjected too!!

Have you ever played hockey!?

Bieksa looks like he got deeked out - Stamkos faked a pass around the boards, and Bieksa anticipated it. Stamkos is the 2nd leading scorer in the league.

Let us look at all the plays Bieksa played correctly, and all the goals he stopped from happening. Mistakes will happen in Hockey. Teams strategically play to maximize opponents mistakes, and to minimize their own.

This Halford Cat should suck it

Edited by Zach Morris, 13 December 2010 - 11:49 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

"Incredulous"

#5177 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,472 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:47 PM

Canucklelion

Your post defnately sums up the FISH BOWEL that these players are subjected too!!

Have you ever played hockey!!

Bieksa looks like he got deeked out - Stamkos faked a pass around the boards, and Bieks anticipated it. Stamkos is th 2nd leading scorer in the league.

Let us look at all the plays Bieksa played correctly, and all the goals he stopped from happening. Mistakes will happen in Hockey. Teams strategically play to mximize opponents mistakes, and to minimize their own.

This Halford Cat should suck it

Thanks for injecting a bit of objectivity Zach, but the "fish bowel" is definitely going to earn you an "lol" from CANUCKELION..... ;)
  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#5178 Zach Morris

Zach Morris

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:49 PM

Thanks for injecting a bit of objectivity Zach, but the "fish bowel" is definitely going to earn you an "lol" from CANUCKELION..... ;)



hahaha -edited!!!
  • 0
Posted Image

"Incredulous"

#5179 The Big Luongo

The Big Luongo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,474 posts
  • Joined: 04-November 06

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:51 PM

I googled Brain Dead Defense and the article below came up. The goal was Bieksa's fault, period...


In Kevin Bieksa's Defence, Steve Stamkos is Pretty Shifty

By MIKE HALFORD MON, DEC 13 2010


Here is a frame-by-frame rundown of Kevin Bieksa defending Steve Stamkos on Saturday night. Specifically, Bieksa defending Stamkos on the play that led to Teddy Purcell's second-period goal.
Here is a frame-by-frame rundown of Kevin Bieksa defending Steve Stamkos on Saturday night. Specifically,

Bieksa defending Stamkos on the play that led to Teddy Purcell's second-period goal.


SCENE 1: ALL SEEMS WELL

Posted Image

We begin with a relatively non-threatening scenario. Stamkos goes to collect the puck in the corner while Bieksa closes. Stamkos doesn't appear to have any teammates in particularly good shooting areas. And since that's not Dan Ellis in net, scoring from this angle would be extremely difficult.



SCENE 2: INTERESTING...


Posted Image





Bieksa appears to have turned the wrong way. Fortunately, he still holds a key advantage -- his body is between the puckholder and the net. Besides, it's not like he's going to take a dangerous, risky run at one of the league's most dynamic players. I mean, that would be crazy. He'll just contain him instead.




SCENE 3: YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG



Posted Image


This is the beginning of the end. Bieksa has abandoned all defensive positioning to give the Home Hardware sign a snow shower. To be fair, Home Hardware was kind of asking for it with those cutting board scissors commercials.

SCENE 4: WTF

Posted Image

Not only is Bieksa parallel to Stamkos now -- he's also got his back to him. I believe "parallel, back-to-front" is step six of the Electric Slide.

SCENE 5: COME ON, MAN

Posted Image







Bieksa is now stuck to the window like a suction-cup Garfield doll while Stamkos is free to do whatever he pleases, like look for Teddy Purcell.

SCENE 6: DENOUEMENT

Posted Image


Aaaaand...scene.

If you'd like to see the play in real time, here's the video. Fast-forward to the 1:40 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY2W_TxWu78&feature=player_embedded[media][/media]












Your a fool i saw Edler get walked around like a pylon the other night a person could put up video of all of our dmen or goalie looking foolish one time or another.


Pathetic.
  • 0

#5180 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:56 PM

Canucklelion

Your post defnately sums up the FISH BOWL that these players are subjected too!!

Have you ever played hockey!?

Bieksa looks like he got deeked out - Stamkos faked a pass around the boards, and Bieksa anticipated it. Stamkos is the 2nd leading scorer in the league.

Let us look at all the plays Bieksa played correctly, and all the goals he stopped from happening. Mistakes will happen in Hockey. Teams strategically play to maximize opponents mistakes, and to minimize their own.

This Halford Cat should suck it


Yeah Zack, I've played a ton of hockey, Bieksa played that play all wrong, the fact you are defending his lack of fundamental defensive awareness, something Bieksa exhibits consistently, makes me wonder if you have ever played competitive hockey. Bieksa and his rude cap hit have to go.
  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5181 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,472 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 13 December 2010 - 11:59 PM

Your a fool i saw Edler get walked around like a pylon the other night a person could put up video of all of our dmen or goalie looking foolish one time or another.


Pathetic.

The thing is BL, it was a bad read by Bieksa. Most of us supporters have already stated as much.

The problem is, that mistakes like that bring out the clowns who have been laying low for weeks just waiting for a mistake like that so they can post "what a bum!" and "as soon as we trade him, we'll be waaaaaaaaayyyyyyy better!"

The fact is, if not for the unbelievable season of Sidney Crosby, Steven Stamkos would be leading the NHL in scoring. Guys like that are going to make you miss once in a while. But there's no point in bringing that up to the haters. They're so ecstatic that they have something to blame Bieksa for, they're blind to anything else. (Meanwhile Hansen and Schneider get a free pass)

I absolutely guarantee that they were disappointed that it was Ballard missing the block on Eberle's goal rather than Juice.
  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#5182 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:03 AM

The thing is BL, it was a bad read by Bieksa. Most of us supporters have already stated as much.

The problem is, that mistakes like that bring out the clowns who have been laying low for weeks just waiting for a mistake like that so they can post "what a bum!" and "as soon as we trade him, we'll be waaaaaaaaayyyyyyy better!"

The fact is, if not for the unbelievable season of Sidney Crosby, Steven Stamkos would be leading the NHL in scoring. Guys like that are going to make you miss once in a while. But there's no point in bringing that up to the haters. They're so ecstatic that they have something to blame Bieksa for, they're blind to anything else. (Meanwhile Hansen and Schneider get a free pass)

I absolutely guarantee that they were disappointed that it was Ballard missing the block on Eberle's goal rather than Juice.

Or pinning the blame on bieksa even though it was someone else who cocked up a la Hamhuis against St Louis blues.
  • 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.

#5183 Zach Morris

Zach Morris

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:04 AM

Yeah Zack, I've played a ton of hockey, Bieksa played that play all wrong, the fact you are defending his lack of fundamental defensive awareness, something Bieksa exhibits consistently, makes me wonder if you have ever played competitive hockey. Bieksa and his rude cap hit have to go.


Wasn't it the Nucks who offered him that contract?

Why fault him for signing it?

I have never played hockey at that high of level (Junior B is the highest I got too, I also play beer league and industry league, and I play D).

I was not denying that he palyed it wrong I was only pointing out that mistakes are made all the time. If they weren't hockey games would be pretty boring to watch/play??

What do you expect the Nucks to win every game 8-0??

Your expectations of Pro Hockey players are unrealistic.
  • 0
Posted Image

"Incredulous"

#5184 The Big Luongo

The Big Luongo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,474 posts
  • Joined: 04-November 06

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:06 AM

The thing is BL, it was a bad read by Bieksa. Most of us supporters have already stated as much.

The problem is, that mistakes like that bring out the clowns who have been laying low for weeks just waiting for a mistake like that so they can post "what a bum!" and "as soon as we trade him, we'll be waaaaaaaaayyyyyyy better!"

The fact is, if not for the unbelievable season of Sidney Crosby, Steven Stamkos would be leading the NHL in scoring. Guys like that are going to make you miss once in a while. But there's no point in bringing that up to the haters. They're so ecstatic that they have something to blame Bieksa for, they're blind to anything else. (Meanwhile Hansen and Schneider get a free pass)

I absolutely guarantee that they were disappointed that it was Ballard missing the block on Eberle's goal rather than Juice.


Agreed well said!

Bieksa makes a ton of small and big plays that help the team every game and as far as i am concerned thats how a dmens ability to help a team should be judged.

There has been numerous times this season guys like Edler and Erhoff not take their man and get walked around and i don't consider them useless or not keeping a easy puck in on the PP which kills us(Edler).

This is just a case of a few stubborn and bullheaded guys who hate on Bieksa and will fabricate the truth to try to prove their foolish points.

Its pathetic is what it is.

Edited by The Big Luongo, 14 December 2010 - 12:08 AM.

  • 0

#5185 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:12 AM

Yeah Zack, I've played a ton of hockey, Bieksa played that play all wrong, the fact you are defending his lack of fundamental defensive awareness, something Bieksa exhibits consistently, makes me wonder if you have ever played competitive hockey. Bieksa and his rude cap hit have to go.


there is no issue with his rude caphit at the moment. There maybe an issue if and when Salo comes back. Until then irrelevant.
  • 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.

#5186 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:21 AM

Wasn't it the Nucks who offered him that contract?

Why fault him for signing it?

I have never played hockey at that high of level (Junior B is the highest I got too, I also play beer league and industry league, and I play D).

I was not denying that he palyed it wrong I was only pointing out that mistakes are made all the time. If they weren't hockey games would be pretty boring to watch/play??

What do you expect the Nucks to win every game 8-0??

Your expectations of Pro Hockey players are unrealistic.


It is great that you still play hockey but my expectations are that Bieksa play like a guy that is in the last year of a 15 million dollar contract that gets given big minutes on a contending team. I maintain that a) he doesn't deserve nor earn his money and B) he doesn't deserve or his play doesn't warrant the big minutes. BXa's cap space could be spent a lot better, its time for him to go.
  • 0
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#5187 Zach Morris

Zach Morris

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,321 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:28 AM

It is great that you still play hockey but my expectations are that Bieksa play like a guy that is in the last year of a 15 million dollar contract that gets given big minutes on a contending team. I maintain that a) he doesn't deserve nor earn his money and B) he doesn't deserve or his play doesn't warrant the big minutes. BXa's cap space could be spent a lot better, its time for him to go.


Who do you replace him with?

What happens if/when Salo gets hurt again, or doesn't recover?

Do you want to see another playoffs with Rome Alberts Baumgartner (I guess Parent now) again.

No offence to those guys but a line up with bieksa in it looks better than without him?

As for the bold above.

He could be subconsiously making mistakes along the end boards as a result of his twice sliced calf muscles. I don't know, but what I do know is he has not been the same player since. At the time he signed his contract he earned it, but unfortunately in Hockey injuries and dissapointment happen. It is unfair for us to expect him to play without making mistakes, because that is impossible.

Edited by Zach Morris, 14 December 2010 - 12:29 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

"Incredulous"

#5188 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,472 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:35 AM

Who do you replace him with?

What happens if/when Salo gets hurt again, or doesn't recover?

Do you want to see another playoffs with Rome Alberts Baumgartner (I guess Parent now) again.

Even the so-called "moderates" like Wallstreet have opined that the Canucks will get instantly better as soon as Bieksa is gone, without a thought of what that does to the current depth chart. (or as you say, the chances of Salo re-injuring himself)

Apparently, they're serious.
  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#5189 BruinsForCup2011

BruinsForCup2011

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,866 posts
  • Joined: 19-May 10

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:36 AM

Even the so-called "moderates" like Wallstreet have opined that the Canucks will get instantly better as soon as Bieksa is gone, without a thought of what that does to the current depth chart. (or as you say, the chances of Salo re-injuring himself)

Apparently, they're serious.


Who else can we get rid of, that has equal to or greater than Salo's salary, that will not affect the depth chart moreso?

Samuelsson perhaps?? But we might want to hang onto him over Bieksa.. there was a thread about that

I don't see who else on D we could move that would not hurt the "depth" even worse - and we can't keep Salo, Bieksa, AND everyone else.

The depth is going to take a hit somewhere - we knew were virtually over the cap when the season began.

My main concern is that if we keep Bieksa and we have to give him a raise, we might have to permanently have HIM in our top 6 (Even with the cap going up 2m.) instead of Ehrhoff. And I'm sorry, but Ehrhoff > Bieksa.

Edited by RoyalFlush2233, 14 December 2010 - 12:39 AM.

  • 0

Posted Image


#5190 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,472 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:46 AM

Who else can we get rid of, that has equal to or greater than Salo's salary, that will not affect the depth chart moreso?

Who we "get rid of" is beside the point. I am well aware of the Cap situation and who is the logical choice to be moved.

What I was referring to is the assertion by the anti-Bieksa crowd that his departure will automatically make the team "better" defensively.
  • 0
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!




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.