Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Wanted: One big bad defenceman


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
135 replies to this topic

#61 vwnuck

vwnuck

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,071 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 09

Posted 30 October 2011 - 04:40 PM

It's an attitude thing, too. O'Brien had an attitude problem, but another example would be Matthew Schneider - He didn't have a team-first attitude, so he didn't stick. I wonder if that may have been (or is a continuing) issue with Ballard. I also raised the question of his work ethic, which of course got me labeled as a hater, but to me there is likely a logical reason for his icetime, and "AV has a chubby for Rome" isn't exactly a logical reason.

All I'm saying is, there are a lot of defensemen making what Ballard makes that I'd MUCH rather have on the Canucks. But while he's here, I hope he'll pick up his play.


no i totaly agree with you... just saying have loves rome and hates ballard are not logical reason for there ice time...and i have to admit i felt more confident with rome than ballard last year and look forward to rome coming back.. having said that, it could be an attitude problem, it has been well documented that ballard has had shouting matches with other head coaches.. it was done played but still it happened and was talked about in the press.. whether that has been the case in vancouver who is to say.. the canucks are pretty tight lipped when it comes to those matters, which i like..no dirty laundry type of deal..

but i find that ALOT of guys on cdc have blinders on, and get a little hot for a new player..aka booth the new flavour of the month, they were already giving the line a nick name before they had even played a game together...how long is it going to take for the mob to turn on him if he doesn't produce....

and like wise ballard was the new savor of this team, and granted he came off injury but he didn't play very well. but people didn't care about that they still had there blinders on...

Posted Image


Posted Image


#62 vwnuck

vwnuck

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,071 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 09

Posted 30 October 2011 - 04:48 PM

Bieksa is mean but seems to take himself out the play to make that mean hit.

He is playing with our most reliable defenceman in Hamhuis and is still -8.

The problem we face is that our D-men our all very similar.

Yes, a big, mean defenceman who can pass is on our list.


he has only played 3 of the 10 games with hamhuis. where have you been there were split up and bieksa and ballard played against top lines... and are now back together... and he is -7 but really - 7 on a team that has been shut out 3 times already this year and could not score..and had a goalie that couldn't stop a Sherman tank.... not really a fare assessment of anyone's play

Posted Image


Posted Image


#63 austy

austy

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 08

Posted 30 October 2011 - 07:18 PM

Adam McQuaid? He has bigger arms than Chara, it may take a lot, and he might not want to come but he is big.

Pretty much any D-man from Colorado is huge.

Brayden Coburn from Philly, 6'5 220 lbs and can skate very well



yeah mcquaid is tough.

please be gentle with my posts...I am Australian, hockey isnt my first language.

#64 hudson bay rules

hudson bay rules

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts
  • Joined: 03-November 10

Posted 30 October 2011 - 07:35 PM

Let me do the math. With one quarter of the season left at trade deadline you pay one quarter of his salary what's one quarter of his salary math wizard,


Since the salary cap is actually calculated daily you still need full room for any contract and not just 1/4 of it like your example.
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.

#65 Bure1994Mclean

Bure1994Mclean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,777 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 30 October 2011 - 09:27 PM

A young Pronger we can use. Who's out there?

Sean Pronger
OMG SUNDIN.

The word fear is not in our dictionary, it is in the eyes of the enemy.

The objective of war is not to die for your country, it is to make the enemy die for theirs.

One generation plants the trees, the other gets the shade.

#66 Ohnoeszz

Ohnoeszz

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 10

Posted 30 October 2011 - 10:34 PM

It's an attitude thing, too. O'Brien had an attitude problem, but another example would be Matthew Schneider - He didn't have a team-first attitude, so he didn't stick. I wonder if that may have been (or is a continuing) issue with Ballard. I also raised the question of his work ethic, which of course got me labeled as a hater, but to me there is likely a logical reason for his icetime, and "AV has a chubby for Rome" isn't exactly a logical reason.

All I'm saying is, there are a lot of defensemen making what Ballard makes that I'd MUCH rather have on the Canucks. But while he's here, I hope he'll pick up his play.


Ballard hasn't been able to adjust to the system offensively. He doesn't understand how to move the puck within the team concept. He tends to hold the puck longer throwing his teammates out of rhythm with the play. Been plain as day since last season but I chalked it up to being traded to a new team. To me it looks like his conditioning is better so his defensive play has been more active and better overall. His hip may have been bothering him last season too. Offensively though, he seems like the defenseman version of Lappierre. Very north south and not much passing.

#67 Otherside

Otherside

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 272 posts
  • Joined: 18-October 11

Posted 30 October 2011 - 11:00 PM

we should trade one eyes with philly. then we'd have exactly what we need.

#68 PredsFanFromLa

PredsFanFromLa

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 848 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 11

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:16 AM

Good post, we lack toughness we will get Webber come deadline

yes,the canucks will get webber come deadline,but they won't be getting shea weber come the trade deadline

#69 PredsFanFromLa

PredsFanFromLa

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 848 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 11

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:17 AM

Good post, we lack toughness we will get Webber come deadline

yes,the canucks will get webber come deadline,but they won't be getting shea weber come the trade deadline

#70 Baercheese

Baercheese

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,734 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 10

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:18 AM

I don't see why we would want Yannik Webber. I am more interested in Shea Weber.

It's still Yannick WEBER

:bigblush:

3499h5x.jpg
Johnny Gaudreau>any Casucks

Edler, Markstrom, Hansen, 2nd round pick 2014 to Islanders for Ryan Strome, 5th overall pick 2014

This is fairly even as well.

 


#71 PredsFanFromLa

PredsFanFromLa

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 848 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 11

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:34 AM

Shea Weber is leaving Nashville, he's done there just look at his play right now. He seems dissinterested expecially in the game against the Canucks were he cost his team a few goals.

the way shea weber is playing right now,does not mean that he is leaving nashville.

nobody here really knows that shea weber wants out of nashville,people need to stop acting they know.

#72 PredsFanFromLa

PredsFanFromLa

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 848 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 11

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:34 AM

[quote name='JamesTW' timestamp='1320011579' post='10120537']<br />Shea Weber is leaving Nashville, he's done there just look at his play right now. He seems dissinterested expecially in the game against the Canucks were he cost his team a few goals.



the way shea weber is playing right now,does not mean that he is leaving nashville.



nobody here really knows that shea weber wants out of nashville,people need to stop acting like they know.

Edited by PredsFanFromLa, 31 October 2011 - 11:56 AM.


#73 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:41 AM

Ballard hasn't been able to adjust to the system offensively. He doesn't understand how to move the puck within the team concept. He tends to hold the puck longer throwing his teammates out of rhythm with the play. Been plain as day since last season but I chalked it up to being traded to a new team. To me it looks like his conditioning is better so his defensive play has been more active and better overall. His hip may have been bothering him last season too. Offensively though, he seems like the defenseman version of Lappierre. Very north south and not much passing.


Ballard is not the problem. The team needs a physical guy to compliment Edler, Hamhuis, Ballard and Salo, our faux tough Dman, Bxa doesn't intimidate anyone.
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#74 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,731 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:44 AM

That is true we could use a physical guy. But if Alberts can pick up his game we will be ok for now.
Posted Image


#75 aqua59

aqua59

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,833 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 08

Posted 31 October 2011 - 11:49 AM

We are so close! And yes, I am a Canuck fan! Since the WHL days!, Which is longer than some of you are old! Anyways! It seems the peices are here, except someone who will make the opposing forwards think twice about running around near the net. Our mean guys aren't big enough and big guys are mean enough! If KB was 15 lbs heavier, or Edler had some good old Canadian toughness the problem would be solved, but we don't. And it shows.I can remember through the years many of the Stanley Cup Championships, that the champs had really one offensive Defenseman, then just some big old boys to clear the net. Even once in a while they would even come down and stand up for a smallish forward. This is one of the reasons today they don't allow the D to come into the offesive zone on a scrum.....cause they caused so much crap. I think Rome is as close as we have. And that is why AV loves him, secretly AV loved his hit on Horton, and if we would have had a couple more like him to stand up to the big old bad Bruins, we would have been lifting the Cup instead.,( Please note that the only real reason Boston won was because we were too injured) But we might not have been if the Bruin D would have thought that our D could have done the same to their smaller forwards, aka Seguin etc. They might not even had played Raymond the same way, but again once Rome was gone, they were all freebees.......and if you don't believe, just watch how the oppoition responds when Rome is out there, again that is why AV like him.Not dity, just tough! If we could get one more like him, who could start in our top 4...we would not be stopped.

FOOT NOTE: Can you imagine the crap our forwards will be able to cause if Raymond comes back healthy!


I think the only point that can be argued here is that Edler isn't tough. You might want to say he's not mean enough but he's tough as nails. He steam rolled players in both the Chicago and Nashville series last year. I believe he'll get there too, Edler's development isn't done

#76 janisahockeynut

janisahockeynut

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 595 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 11

Posted 31 October 2011 - 01:32 PM

Don't get me wrong, I like our D-men. Jury is still out on Ballard for what he gets paid, but all in all, a solid group. When I look at Edler, I see a player who is bordering, but not there yet. He is big, and hits like a mule ( when he does) And his shot is major league. I think the thing that he lacks is the knowledge that he is that good and can do it when ever he pleases ( within reason). I am reminded of a little gem he showed a few games ago, when he basically went end to end. Very pretty! But Edler will never be known as the mean stay away from d-man. ( unless you're trying to block his shot, cause you will want to stay away from that!) No, what I am looking for is a big guy, at least 225, that can play regular minutes without hurting us. Someone that if you cut through the middle of the deap slot, when Lui is collecting a rebound, and you look like you might make a play on Lui, will come across and knock you out of your skates. I really don't see that on the Canucks. KB just isn't big enough for that, and sort of reminds me of a mean dog that isn't quite big enough to be a big dog......but don't put your hand in to pet him...cause he still has a nasty bite. All the rest of the regular D-men remind me that they are a little the same kind of offensive, none agressive type..until you get down to Rome, Sultzer? and Alberts, who have limitaions, and are not top 4 type players. But don't get me wrong, I don't want to blow up the D=men core, just tweet it a little..

I think the only point that can be argued here is that Edler isn't tough. You might want to say he's not mean enough but he's tough as nails. He steam rolled players in both the Chicago and Nashville series last year. I believe he'll get there too, Edler's development isn't done



#77 georgeparrosesmustache

georgeparrosesmustache

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,802 posts
  • Joined: 23-December 08

Posted 31 October 2011 - 02:01 PM

"...secretly AV loved his hit on Horton..."

You know this because?


I publicly loved the hit on Horton

Posted Image

Pleasejustwin.


#78 riske1

riske1

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 293 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 05

Posted 31 October 2011 - 06:59 PM

Could you be any more ignorant and racist?

???? ping pong? You mentioned he might be posting from Korea, and then mention ping pong? The country you're thinking of might be China.


And somehow you assume only Canadian players are tough and mean?

You must be one of those morons who thinks that only teams with Canadian captains win the Stanley cup, or that all Europeans are ballerinas, and that visors are for pussies.



While I agree it would be great to have a hard-hitting right=handed defenceman who inspires fear into the oppositions's forwards, I personally don't give a crap where he's from as long as he plays with heart and steps up in the playoffs.


Who the hell are you to call anyone a racist? The knob I was responded to was bashing the OP for trying to articulate his position. There seems to be a lot of New Canadians on this site that seem to think that us old guys know nothing about the great Canadian game and show a lack of respect for the history and traditions for the game. I dont give a crap if you call me a racist, you mean nothing to me.

Liberal Fool.



I started out with nothing and I still have most of it left.

#79 nuck luck

nuck luck

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 497 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 11

Posted 01 November 2011 - 03:12 AM

Are you posting from Korea? Obviously you are out of touch with what this team needs. The OP has been watching this team and has been a fan of the great Canadian game longer than you have been alive. He sure as hell does not have to answer to a smart ass Johnny come lately like you.

Stick to your ping pong and soccer.


You are just an embarrassment. Do yourself a favor and keep your mouth shut, thoughts to yourself and only use your hands for pocket pool or exploring your own cavities. If your gonna come out with a dumb comment and a racial slur, at least you can get your facts straight! Ping pong is a chinese sport...nothing to do with Korea.

Nothing against the OP, but from what you're saying, we should all bow down and adhere to anything a member writes on here if he is older? Does his age eliminate all other's thoughts? I don't disagree with everything the OP wrote, yet I don't disagree with the person you were referring to... I don't give extra credit to someone's opinion due to their AGE, I can listen, analyze and THINK for myself. You obviously can't? That's fine. But, most people on this site have the capability to think for themselves and not just follow another's word as fact, based on their age.

How old are you? You seem to have the same mentality as my nephew and he's 10 (he listens to everything I say because I'm older), but he can't type, so you're obviously a little more talented... just a little. Or are you one of those angry old bastards that went through a $hitty life and decided to blame it on every person with color? either way... you still need to grow up. Go back to Edmonton or Calgary...

#80 FeStealth

FeStealth

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,386 posts
  • Joined: 10-March 04

Posted 01 November 2011 - 05:06 AM

If only we can get Ohlund as one of our bottom pairing guys. He's big, he hits and he's defensively reliable.

Not as fleet of foot anymore (how he was like a pylon during the first Chicago series), but for a tight-checking, gooning it up type of series (like Boston and Nashville), he first right in. Unfortunately, his contract is long and he's still being paid a lot in actual dollars.

Who knows... maybe someday he'll return to the Vancouver, help win the cup and then retire as a Canuck :towel:


The next I wouldn't mind back on the Canucks would be Bryan Allen. He's big and he has a mean-streak. He's in the final year of his contract and has a cap hit of almost 3million. Might not be a bad fit with someone like Ballard. Have Ballard skating with the puck, etc.... and then have Allen as the stay at home guy. Plus, didn't they play together for a bit back in Florida?
<img src="http://i548.photobuc...kills22_b2.jpg" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
RIP Luc Bourdon
----

Thats the way it is now. IF you're rich you go to the game. If you are middle class you watch in hd, if you are lower class you watch in sd. If you are broke azz you listen to the radio.

Samuelsson to AV: He can go **** himself!


#81 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,187 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 01 November 2011 - 07:14 AM

We have all the pieces we need in our defence right now. It all depends on how they perform. When they're playing physical our D is arguably the best in the league. When they're scrambling out of position they're easily the worst (we've seen their bad side these last few games).

Bieksa - a nightmare in front of the net for forwards when he's on his game.
Hamhuis - great defensive positioning and hard hip checks along with the best board play in the league.
Edler - consistently delivers painful huge hits.
Ballard - hip checking expert
Rome - has delivered the occasional giant hit
Alberts - absolutely crushes players, but rarely and often caught out of position.


The only defenceman out of our bunch who can't throw a hit consistently is Salo, but he easily makes up for it. The only problem is, we more consistency of hits out of guys like Hamhuis, Ballard and Bieksa. The occasional hip-check is great for the fans, but doesn't wear down opposing teams forwards quite like the consistent punishment Weber and Chara deliver (eg. in front of the net, crunching forwards along the boards every single play etc.)

Edler throws big hits, yes, but Alberts is the only guy on this team who really crunches guys into the boards every time they go behind our net, which is what we need from guys like Bieksa, Hamhuis and Ballard. Sure they're trying to be sound positionally and not get caught out, but they have to adjust and one of them has to go in for the hit, because over time in a 7-game series this wears down forwards. Its the only reason our forwards couldn't score in the SCF and theirs could. We were punished - they were not.
Posted Image

#82 Yeria

Yeria

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,400 posts
  • Joined: 05-December 06

Posted 01 November 2011 - 07:20 AM

I thought Chara put that "good Canadian toughness" garbage to rest. You sure sound old.

Rome is not the answer to our physical problems. I don't think you made your point clear as to WHY he is the answer. He is not big, he does not have much of a mean streak (maybe as mean as Ballard), and his raw ability isn't that great. Work ethic and injuries gave him a chance to be a regular here, but he is really NOT the answer.


Two words: Reading Comprehension
Posted Image
Thanks to Hockey_Crazy for the sig!

#83 janisahockeynut

janisahockeynut

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 595 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 11

Posted 01 November 2011 - 09:55 AM

Here ia my thoughts on your defencemen strengths: my opinions only


Bieksa- mean average size D-man ( -7) average top2/3 d-man, any team would take him, but he is not a #1
Hamhuis-good positional D-man, average top 2/3 d-man, any team would take him, not a #1. I havn't seen any hip checks this year
Edler-full of potential, needs to believe, could be a #1 d-man in the league, if he took the next step, not sure he is a #1 d-man yet???close
Ballard- high risk,inconsistant, great hip checks, has to convince the NHL that they are legal, cause they are not sure ( I love them!) , not a #4
Salo- old #1 or #2 ( like me), not suppose to put himself in position to be hit, smart, positional, sure hope he stays healthy, great shot ( Hope Edler watches him)
Rome-journeyman d-man, hits well, a little slow, is where he is because that is what he is. I love his team first attitude.
Alberts-love his try, don't why he is not better, probably bad decisions, he's got the rest to be a # 5
Sultzer -too early, gotta trust AV on this one, doesn't look to be a #4 or better
Tanev - Derserves to be on the team, but he is down in the AHL to play, I think he is perfect for the new NHL, probably #5 or #6 right now.


Now collectively, they are pretty strong group, but they didn't replace Erhoff. This is where that big strong mean d-man could come in handy, has to be a true top 4, but you are all right, what would be the cost? And how would it affect the cap! But if I could trade Ballard, I would, but his contract gets in the way, maybe his rep, also So, if you do, you are going to add a draft pick or another player to the trade


quotname='DownUndaCanuck' timestamp='1320156858' post='10124121']
We have all the pieces we need in our defence right now. It all depends on how they perform. When they're playing physical our D is arguably the best in the league. When they're scrambling out of position they're easily the worst (we've seen their bad side these last few games).

Bieksa - a nightmare in front of the net for forwards when he's on his game.
Hamhuis - great defensive positioning and hard hip checks along with the best board play in the league.
Edler - consistently delivers painful huge hits.
Ballard - hip checking expert
Rome - has delivered the occasional giant hit
Alberts - absolutely crushes players, but rarely and often caught out of position.


The only defenceman out of our bunch who can't throw a hit consistently is Salo, but he easily makes up for it. The only problem is, we more consistency of hits out of guys like Hamhuis, Ballard and Bieksa. The occasional hip-check is great for the fans, but doesn't wear down opposing teams forwards quite like the consistent punishment Weber and Chara deliver (eg. in front of the net, crunching forwards along the boards every single play etc.)

Edler throws big hits, yes, but Alberts is the only guy on this team who really crunches guys into the boards every time they go behind our net, which is what we need from guys like Bieksa, Hamhuis and Ballard. Sure they're trying to be sound positionally and not get caught out, but they have to adjust and one of them has to go in for the hit, because over time in a 7-game series this wears down forwards. Its the only reason our forwards couldn't score in the SCF and theirs could. We were punished - they were not.
[/quote]

#84 CHIPS

CHIPS

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,787 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 07

Posted 01 November 2011 - 10:57 AM

Boris Valabik on waiver today. He is freaking huge, big and bad, and has some unrealized potential. Worth a pick up perhaps?

Edited by CHIPS, 01 November 2011 - 11:01 AM.

CanucksvsBruinsPollsmall-1.jpgRogerNeilsonSmall.jpgSig too big. 


#85 CANUCKLELION

CANUCKLELION

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:29 PM

Boris Valabik on waiver today. He is freaking huge, big and bad, and has some unrealized potential. Worth a pick up perhaps?


At 6'7", 245 lbs, Boris is interesting, he has good AHL stats, but is not even a top 4 guy in the AHL so it would be a stretch to expect him to crack the Nuck's lineup. However he is a huge, intimidating, presence on the blueline. here is a scouting report on him, pasted below.

Mobility is listed as a weakness, it seems that is one thing MG looks for in a Dman, he seems to prefer mobility over size, with the acquisitions of the smooth skaters, Ballard and Hammer. That and he passed on the monster who could play, Myers, in the draft.

Boris Valabik, Slovak,

Birthdate:

1986-02-14
Don't let the birthday fool you, this guy is anything but a sweetheart. In fact, he might be the meanest European defenseman to ever come over to the OHL. He uses his body well and is a fearsome fighter. He can make a good first pass and has decent shot selection. Has a good slapshot, but rarely uses it.


Weaknesses include mobility, puckhandling, and discipline.
R.I.P, Rick Rypien Posted ImagePosted Image

#86 malHOEtra

malHOEtra

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,565 posts
  • Joined: 21-August 06

Posted 01 November 2011 - 03:33 PM

Milan Jurcina. Plays for Isles, 1.8 mil cap 1 year left. 6'4 250 lbs. Hits plenty.

Essentially a better bigger Andrew Alberts. Slow, hits lots, low end offense.

Could be a top 4 guy in the event of injuries.
Only losers quote themselves in their sig

View PostmalHOEtra, on 22 February 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

I think Columbus would move him for significantly less than Raymond.

I think you could get him for a B-Level prospect (Yann Sauve) or maybe NYI 4th + Vancouver 4th.

Pahlson was actually Malhotras replacement in Columbus (you could even argue Pahlson > Malhotra).

#87 Hugh Chardon

Hugh Chardon

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • Joined: 21-December 09

Posted 03 November 2011 - 01:27 AM

Wanted: one big bad defenceman for raunchy but safe man on man action. Discretion is a must.....ooops, wrong board.

#88 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,779 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 03 November 2011 - 07:55 AM

Screw big and bad. I want Weber!!!!!!!

In Gillis we trust!
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#89 janisahockeynut

janisahockeynut

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 595 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 11

Posted 07 December 2011 - 12:24 AM

We are so close! And yes, I am a Canuck fan! Since the WHL days!, Which is longer than some of you are old! Anyways! It seems the peices are here, except someone who will make the opposing forwards think twice about running around near the net. Our mean guys aren't big enough and big guys are mean enough! If KB was 15 lbs heavier, or Edler had some good old Canadian toughness the problem would be solved, but we don't. And it shows.I can remember through the years many of the Stanley Cup Championships, that the champs had really one offensive Defenseman, then just some big old boys to clear the net. Even once in a while they would even come down and stand up for a smallish forward. This is one of the reasons today they don't allow the D to come into the offesive zone on a scrum.....cause they caused so much crap. I think Rome is as close as we have. And that is why AV loves him, secretly AV loved his hit on Horton, and if we would have had a couple more like him to stand up to the big old bad Bruins, we would have been lifting the Cup instead.,( Please note that the only real reason Boston won was because we were too injured) But we might not have been if the Bruin D would have thought that our D could have done the same to their smaller forwards, aka Seguin etc. They might not even had played Raymond the same way, but again once Rome was gone, they were all freebees.......and if you don't believe, just watch how the oppoition responds when Rome is out there, again that is why AV like him.Not dity, just tough! If we could get one more like him, who could start in our top 4...we would not be stopped.

FOOT NOTE: Can you imagine the crap our forwards will be able to cause if Raymond comes back healthy!



Canucks won 6-0 vs Colorado tonight...........noticed MG could add a BIG BAD FORWARD TOO! 3 or 4 liner. Doesn't need to fight alot, just win big when he does! I guess Boston won't give up Thorton.......maybe if Eagers was smarter! Hmmmmm this is not so easy! But seriously we need a big dman and a big forward,,,don't see them yet and the injuries didn't help!

#90 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,187 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 07 December 2011 - 01:14 AM

I have a feeling our current defencemen will play a lot meaner and a lot more physical in the playoffs.

We've seen Edler can really dish out big hits in the playoffs so he's not a concern. He and his partner are fine.
Hamhuis doesn't often hit consistently in the playoffs because he's busy being sound positionally.
Bieksa can really thrive in the intensity of the playoffs so that pairing is fine.
For the 3rd pairing, Ballard doesn't hit much but Rome and Alberts are both big hitters so we're fine.

As for crease-clearing, Hamhuis-Bieksa are our best defencemen at that. Ballard is alright but Rome and Alberts have a tough time, often screening our goalie so our 3rd pairing needs help clearing the crease effectively. As for Edler and Salo, they aren't very physical infront of the net, especially Salo who is often jostled out of position which costed us many goals against Boston. Ehrhoff was especially terrible in this department.

As for board play, Salo and Hamhuis are two of the best in the league IMO, they make clever small passes to aleviate pressure really well. Bieksa and Edler have shown they really crumble under pressure and a strong forecheck, but with their good partners they shouldn't be an issue. Then there's Ballard, who is a smooth skater but can fall under pressure as well as Rome. He did, however, work really well with Tanev to get the puck out of the zone, but Ballard-Rome/Alberts are overall terrible in moving the puck up the ice against a forecheck.

Our defence isn't far from perfect, I feel that we have all the pieces though. Alberts is our big, physical #6 man so we need him in the lineup instead of Rome during the playoffs. Injuries are sure to occur, we should plan for at least 2 so another bottom-4 defenceman would be perfect.

That being said, if we really want we should find a defenceman who's not necessarily a big hitter, but someone who is great along the boards and great at clearing the crease (ie. another Hamhuis) to play alongside Edler. This would let us drop Salo down to the 3rd pairing, where he would play really well with Alberts (a physical presence). Note: Ballard misses out, so maybe he would be packaged in a trade. We can't have Salo-Ballard as our bottom pairing unless Ballard is willing to play physically and hit every single shift.
Posted Image




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.