Kevin Bieksa you are really...

[Sharpshooter]

Know your facts

from: http://www.nhl.com/i...ge.htm?id=26336

instigator is 2 min + 5 min + 10 min = 17 min = gone for a period

instigator deemed the aggressor is 2 min + 5 min + 10 min + 10 min (game misconduct) = gone for the game

So tell me, does a coach want a top 4 D-man instigating a fight? Don't think so. Will a top 4 D-man instigate a fight? In the heat of the moment, hell yes.

Should Bieksa have jumped the boards to fight Richardson? Hell no.

Should Bieksa have challanged Richardson later in the game? Sure why not.

Would Richardson accept (4th liner at 5'11" 185lbs and not a fighter)? I doubt it

Should Bieksa then take matters into his own hands and start wailing on the guy? Hell no

If Bieksa does go postal, does Richardson fight back? Doubt it.

Is Bieksa taking a game miss conduct in a payback play when the Canucks are down a D-man a smart play? Hell no.

To quote Baggins "Leave it to the knuckle draggers"

Does Bieksa have a reputation as a fighter? You are crazy to think otherwise.

Are the Heavy weight knuckle draggers intimidated by Bieksa? Doubt it.

Does everybody else think twice about getting Bieksa angry? I would think so (21-3-1 speaks for itself. Go watch all Bieksa's fights on hockeyfights.com if you have doubts).

Would I like to see Bieksa fight more? Hell yes because they sure are entertaining.

Should Bieksa fight more? No it's not his job.

Will Bieksa instigate a fight in the heat of the moment? History shows he will.

Does Bieksa go looking for fights? Not for years

Do opponents come looking to Bieksa for fights? Not many in recent years

Has Bieksa had to fight after hitting the opponent? More often than people realize

Hey, stop hogging all the Bieksa questions and answers. Leave something for us to chew over.

Nice post bbllpp. Good rhetorical questions and it may be a bit presumptuous for me to say 'speaking on behalf of other supporters', so i'll say it for myself, good representative answers also.

[bbllpp]

<br />Hey, stop hogging all the Bieksa questions and answers. Leave something for us to chew over.<br /><br /><img src='http://forum.canucks.com/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br /><br />Nice post bbllpp. Good rhetorical questions and it may be a bit presumptuous for me to say 'speaking on behalf of other supporters', so i'll say it for myself, good representative answers also.<br />

Sorry, I feel shame...

I'll let you guys handle the fall-out

[Sharpshooter]

Sorry, I feel shame...

I'll let you guys handle the fall-out

Oh thanks!

[sQuish]

LOL, this thread is still going?? My goodness...

[Zing!]

It'll probably be a couple more weeks before it surpasses the Burrows thread!

[Sharpshooter]

It'll probably be a couple more weeks before it surpasses the Burrows thread!

A few more weeks after that....The God Thread!!!

Dun Dun Duuuuuun!!

[blitzz66]

This heated Bieksa thread will ultimately start WW3.

That would be a very short war. The Bieksa advocates would be fighting us with make believe weapons, while claiming "intangible" victories to hide their massive losses.

[Sharpshooter]

That would be a very short war. The Bieksa advocates would be fighting us with make believe weapons, while claiming "intangible" victories to hide their massive losses.

And you Bieksa detractors would be lined up in fighting formation like this:

While asserting that your crap don't stink, because you have STATS!!!! Well, you guys should know, you're the ones munching on it daily. Now get back in formation!

[Clark Kent]

That would be a very short war. The Bieksa advocates would be fighting us with make believe weapons, while claiming "intangible" victories to hide their massive losses.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA GOOD ONE!!!! NAWT!

Your joke sucked.

[Mariner]

Sir I run circles around you so this laughable thesaurus filled argument you're trying to make is nothing more than BS to deflect from the usual BS of not being able to admit when you're wrong.

What you are advocating is nothing more that acting like a horses ass because you got can't think of anything else.

As far as my position on number 3 it's well documented in this thread as being much more than the drivel you wrote. Your undecipherable ramblings are nothing more than you trying to defend against a defenseless and unintelligable position.

Put down, or close thesaurus.com and make an argument.

Having said all that. You've made good points up until this little side project. You should go back to that.

Prick much?

[Mariner]

Bieksa is a 5th round pick. I think hes done very well for a 5th rounder . His contract is overpayment but that was Nonis' fault. Not Bieksa's

I keep this in mind when I see him play. I don't know why he gets as much ice time as he does but AV is the coach. We are not.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Prick much?

Absolutely agree.

How many times does a grown adult have to be asked/forced to leave a place before they get the hint and leave? I guess 3 isn't enough.

Good post below however.

[Sharpshooter]

Solid post, actually.

[Hugemanskost]

TRADEZZZZZZZ BEISKAZZZZZZZ! WE NEEDZZZZZZZ A BAG O PUCKZZZZZZZZZ AND STUFF. HE IZZZZZ BAD DEFENCE. BEISKAZZZZZZZ IZZ SUCKZZZZZZZZ1

And now, back to our regularly scheduled program... "Suck or Sign!"... the show all about whether CDCers want to keep KB or flame him and trade him to Espoo!

Looking back at the first goal against the Habs, Bieksa did everything right... forced Plekanec wide, took away the pass and forced a shot from an impossible angle... which Lou blew by allowing a rebound that Alberts wasn't there to clear. He was back after all 3 forwards! Kes did a great job of sliding into the net, though. Lou needs help playing pucks at his feet. He seems to struggle covering up. Bieksa got a -1 for this debacle.

[wallstreetamigo]

TRADEZZZZZZZ BEISKAZZZZZZZ! WE NEEDZZZZZZZ A BAG O PUCKZZZZZZZZZ AND STUFF. HE IZZZZZ BAD DEFENCE. BEISKAZZZZZZZ IZZ SUCKZZZZZZZZ1

And now, back to our regularly scheduled program... "Suck or Sign!"... the show all about whether CDCers want to keep KB or flame him and trade him to Espoo!

Looking back at the first goal against the Habs, Bieksa did everything right... forced Plekanec wide, took away the pass and forced a shot from an impossible angle... which Lou blew by allowing a rebound that Alberts wasn't there to clear. He was back after all 3 forwards! Kes did a great job of sliding into the net, though. Lou needs help playing pucks at his feet. He seems to struggle covering up. Bieksa got a -1 for this debacle.

So, Bieksa got victimized by the inferior play of his teammates on one goal? Aside from the fact that Bieksa did not play it as perfectly as you describe, there is also the fact that:

Isnt that the pot calling the kettle black anyway? He does similar bonehead moves (sometimes multiple times per game) to his teammates.

The Habs could have easily had a couple of other goals on Bieksa mistakes alone (let alone the mistakes of others). The fact that they didnt doesnt make it like he had a perfect game out there. Cmon.

[RUPERTKBD]

So, Bieksa got victimized by the inferior play of his teammates on one goal? Aside from the fact that Bieksa did not play it as perfectly as you describe, there is also the fact that:

Isnt that the pot calling the kettle black anyway? He does similar bonehead moves (sometimes multiple times per game) to his teammates.

The Habs could have easily had a couple of other goals on Bieksa mistakes alone (let alone the mistakes of others). The fact that they didnt doesnt make it like he had a perfect game out there. Cmon.

Meh, you're grasping Wallstreet. The fact is KB was better than Alberts this game. AA was brutally out of position on this goal, and he was in the box for the other one.

It's easy to say "lots of other stuff happened", but it didn't. You certainly wouldn't be buying that argument if Bieksa were in Alberts' place.

[Hugemanskost]

So, Bieksa got victimized by the inferior play of his teammates on one goal? Aside from the fact that Bieksa did not play it as perfectly as you describe, there is also the fact that:

Isnt that the pot calling the kettle black anyway? He does similar bonehead moves (sometimes multiple times per game) to his teammates.

The Habs could have easily had a couple of other goals on Bieksa mistakes alone (let alone the mistakes of others). The fact that they didnt doesnt make it like he had a perfect game out there. Cmon.

I knew I'd get your attention, wallstreet! You're hilarious! We can't let the Bieksa thread die, man! Only 68 games and playoffs to go.

I totally agree with you with you that one goal against played well by KB doesn't make up for other mistakes he has made. Just trying to see if anyone is still paying attention to this thread. I do think KB played well again against the Habs, though.

KB has never, IMO, had a perfect game. He makes mistakes, as do others, which cost goals and chances.

Hockey is a team game and defence is played by 6 players , on most occasions (hopefully), not by 1. KB was the only Canuck, on this goal, who did anything correctly.

It certainly was a bad time for 5 of 6 players to lose their defensive focus. I wish these goals would happen at 5-2 Canucks, more often. It seems our mistakes are always so costly! It should be another close one tonight. Hopefully not another team breakdown that leads to an untimely game-winner this time around.

[wallstreetamigo]

Meh, you're grasping Wallstreet. The fact is KB was better than Alberts this game. AA was brutally out of position on this goal, and he was in the box for the other one.

It's easy to say "lots of other stuff happened", but it didn't. You certainly wouldn't be buying that argument if Bieksa were in Alberts' place.

You certainly do like to read a lot into what I say.

I fully agree that Bieksa was better than Alberts. When exactly did I say otherwise? Having said that, Bieksa was not really all the good just like the rest of our D.

[wallstreetamigo]

I knew I'd get your attention, wallstreet! You're hilarious! We can't let the Bieksa thread die, man! Only 68 games and playoffs to go.

I totally agree with you with you that one goal against played well by KB doesn't make up for other mistakes he has made. Just trying to see if anyone is still paying attention to this thread. I do think KB played well again against the Habs, though.

KB has never, IMO, had a perfect game. He makes mistakes, as do others, which cost goals and chances.

Hockey is a team game and defence is played by 6 players , on most occasions (hopefully), not by 1. KB was the only Canuck, on this goal, who did anything correctly.

It certainly was a bad time for 5 of 6 players to lose their defensive focus. I wish these goals would happen at 5-2 Canucks, more often. It seems our mistakes are always so costly! It should be another close one tonight. Hopefully not another team breakdown that leads to an untimely game-winner this time around.

This thread is starting to bore me actually.

One side will blame Bieksa for everything and the other will suggest he never makes a mistake.

Both will attack anyone who might be able to see both perspectives.

[Hugemanskost]

Meh, you're grasping Wallstreet. The fact is KB was better than Alberts this game. AA was brutally out of position on this goal, and he was in the box for the other one.

It's easy to say "lots of other stuff happened", but it didn't. You certainly wouldn't be buying that argument if Bieksa were in Alberts' place.

Alberts has played well this year, eh RUPERTKBD? Against the Habs, though, he was ASS!

I'm not much of a betting man, but, I think the Hamjuice pairing will stay together and Ballard may slip in to Alberts' place to send a message, no?

There was a thread earlier today saying Ballard would not play again tonight, but, I would rather have a poor Ballard than what we saw from AA agin' the Habs!