Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Does Bieksa Belong On First D-Pairing?

Discussion

  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 mrsasaki

mrsasaki

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,757 posts
  • Joined: 19-May 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 02:47 PM

We've all seen Bieksa try to pull an Alex Edler, and, miserably fail. Hamhuis almost always makes the smart play, minus the last 5 seconds of the Canucks season. What if AV put Tanev with Hamhuis to make a very smart shutdown d-pair, and Bieksa with Edler to make more of an offensive pair?
  • 3
CDC Sim Connected: Nashville GM
LOB (PS3): Boston GM

#2 Patrick Jane

Patrick Jane

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 771 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 02:52 PM

Edler and Tanev will make a pretty good line
  • 1
Posted Image
Drouin#27 Halifax Mooseheads Star

Credit to Canucks Top Scorer

#3 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 02:53 PM

No.

He's #3/4. Hamhuis is a legit #2 or 1 on many teams
  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#4 bobopan

bobopan

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,442 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 05

Posted 21 May 2012 - 02:55 PM

Bieksa- Edler would make a terrible pairing in fact didn't we see that several times this season and it was a complete disaster...?

Is Bieksa a top pairing d-man... im not so sure about that. I think he's be much better off on a 2nd pairing but on this team with whom we have i guess he is.

Im a firm believer in pairing an offensive type guy with a stay at home player to cover his ass. The problem with this team too many times is guys trying to do more than their capable of doing (Bieksa may be one of the biggest culprates) and part of that is the coaching philosophy imo.
  • 0

#5 Wheels22

Wheels22

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 03:07 PM

Hamhuis made Bieksa 4.75 mill for 5 years

EDIT : I suppose Bieksa did play well the entire 2010-11 season and playoffs. But still, last season he showed he isn't as dependable as he should be while on that 1st pairing....

Edited by Wheels22, 21 May 2012 - 03:13 PM.

  • 2

#6 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 64,784 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 21 May 2012 - 03:12 PM

I like Hamhuis-Bieksa as the 2nd pairing. We just need to find Edler a partner.

Edler - ______
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Salo

IMO, sign Garrison & Allen and trade Ballard for picks/prospects.

Edler - Garrison
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Allen - Salo
Extras: Tanev
  • 2
Posted Image

#7 tjkaemingh

tjkaemingh

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 730 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 03

Posted 21 May 2012 - 03:19 PM

No. Too many brain farts.
  • 3

#8 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,677 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 21 May 2012 - 03:30 PM

no
  • 0

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#9 ButterBean

ButterBean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 09

Posted 21 May 2012 - 04:10 PM

We should keep him with Hamhuis because that's when he's the most effective. Then we find Edler a reliable top 4 partner and we should hopefully be set. I hope AV decides to bring down Bieksa's ice-time this year. 20 minutes a night should be good and not much more.
  • 1

#10 Durl Dixsun

Durl Dixsun

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,243 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 10

Posted 21 May 2012 - 04:15 PM

Yes he is.

Maybe a bit over paid. I would settle for 3.75-4 for him, not 4.6
we need to trade Ballard and free up 4.2 for a right handed, right side d-man to play with Edler

and maybe sign Garrison to 2.75 mil and play him on the 3rd paring

Hamhuis/Bieksa
Edler/______
Garrison/______

Edited by Badassian9, 21 May 2012 - 04:15 PM.

  • 1

Posted Image


#11 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 21 May 2012 - 04:22 PM

I like Hamhuis-Bieksa as the 2nd pairing. We just need to find Edler a partner.

Edler - ______
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Salo

IMO, sign Garrison & Allen and trade Ballard for picks/prospects.

Edler - Garrison
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Allen - Salo
Extras: Tanev


Yes, 100% agree with this. In a perfect world (Pipe dream for now):

Edler-Weber
Hamhuis-Bieksa
Ballard-Tanev
  • 0
Posted Image

#12 billabong

billabong

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,949 posts
  • Joined: 20-June 09

Posted 21 May 2012 - 04:47 PM

in a perfect world he would be a 2nd pairing d-man but when he is paired with such a steady d-man in hamhuis in makes life easier for bieksa so he can be put up against the other teams top players
  • 1
Posted Image

#13 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,482 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 21 May 2012 - 04:52 PM

No. We should trade him and Burrows for Hedman.

Is this 2009?


TOML
  • 1
Posted Image

#14 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,391 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 21 May 2012 - 05:13 PM

No

and he shouldn't be paid more than Hamhuis

he got you that contract !@#$%
  • 0

#15 micgao

micgao

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,595 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 09

Posted 21 May 2012 - 05:17 PM

No. Too many brain farts.


Which is why he should play with Hamhuis, which is why he belongs on the 1st pairing.
  • 0
Posted Image

#16 samurai

samurai

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 06

Posted 21 May 2012 - 06:23 PM

Kevin is a legit top 4 - so it doesn't matter if it is first pairing or second. When he is on his game he is very very good.
  • 3

#17 Rypien37

Rypien37

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,282 posts
  • Joined: 26-March 07

Posted 21 May 2012 - 06:36 PM

Is that even a question? On a contender a #4 AT BEST.
  • 1
Posted Image

R.I.P. Your heart and fearlessness will be remembered


#18 G-52

G-52

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 694 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 06:38 PM

bieksa should be #3 dman imo, hamhuis is a #2, we still need a #1 imo.

I wish edler and hamhuis played different sides, that would be a good pair.

Edited by clidefrog, 21 May 2012 - 06:38 PM.

  • 1

Posted Image


#19 Newsflash

Newsflash

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,169 posts
  • Joined: 30-December 08

Posted 21 May 2012 - 06:39 PM

Whoa whoa whoa. What's with all the negativity? This isn't 2006. His contract is not that bad. The cap has gone up by A LOT, and do not expect him to be the highest paid D-man on the team when Edler has to re-sign his contract. His contract won't even be close.

He doesn't dive, he fights, and maybe he isn't super reliable defensively but he is one of our proven playoff performers despite being shat on constantly by this city. Him and Hamhuis form a much better pairing then any two defenseman we have can muster. It doesn't matter how good you think he is, he's a top pairing d-man for that reason.
  • 2

Buddy I called this EXACT situtation on here two years ago and was flamed, so I guess I have a bit of hockey knowledge, not to mention the 4 years I played in the OHL idiot.


The conspiracy theories that used to be against Lateralus:
Puberty, life, movie theaters, movie theaters that frown upon you pulling it out, movie theaters that frown upon you pulling it out during a children's movie, Toy Story 3, Pixar, who ever decided to make Woody so damn attractive, a job, his mothers basement, being 40, being 40 five years ago, dogs who can out run him, all dogs, the Olympic committee, Truth, Fact, Honesty, Logic, Newsflash, a father figure who was there to see him learn to ride his first bike, bikes,

#20 Newsflash

Newsflash

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,169 posts
  • Joined: 30-December 08

Posted 21 May 2012 - 06:41 PM

bieksa should be #3 dman imo, hamhuis is a #2, we still need a #1 imo.

I wish edler and hamhuis played different sides, that would be a good pair.


Edler-Weber?

:bigblush:
  • 1

Buddy I called this EXACT situtation on here two years ago and was flamed, so I guess I have a bit of hockey knowledge, not to mention the 4 years I played in the OHL idiot.


The conspiracy theories that used to be against Lateralus:
Puberty, life, movie theaters, movie theaters that frown upon you pulling it out, movie theaters that frown upon you pulling it out during a children's movie, Toy Story 3, Pixar, who ever decided to make Woody so damn attractive, a job, his mothers basement, being 40, being 40 five years ago, dogs who can out run him, all dogs, the Olympic committee, Truth, Fact, Honesty, Logic, Newsflash, a father figure who was there to see him learn to ride his first bike, bikes,

#21 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,027 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:23 PM

Edler-Bieksa

LOL
  • 1

2qn360i.jpg

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#22 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,166 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:37 PM

Personally I would rank last season's top 4 this way, with Salo potentially even #2...
1 Hamhius
2 Edler
3 Salo
4 Bieksa

but your pairings don't have to depend on who your best two are...

I love Bieksa, but he certainly isn't the most consistent guy on our blueline.

Edited by oldnews, 21 May 2012 - 07:39 PM.

  • 0

#23 The Brahma Bull

The Brahma Bull

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,224 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 08

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:46 PM

Not even close. Ballard was much better than him during the playoffs. I don't care if Bieksa was injured. If that is the case, AV should have switched up the pairings. AV is an idiot.
  • 2


#24 surtur

surtur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-March 10

Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:04 PM

only on contract years......
  • 0
Release The KraKassian
Posted Image

#25 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,160 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:32 PM

Not even close. Ballard was much better than him during the playoffs. I don't care if Bieksa was injured. If that is the case, AV should have switched up the pairings. AV is an idiot.


+1
  • 0

#26 MoneypuckOverlord

MoneypuckOverlord

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,927 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 09

Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:43 PM

Not sure why the hate for him, he was solid last year, was pretty good this year, playing those minutes, I have no problem with him in our top 2. We won the Presidents trophy twice, on top of a 7 game stanley cup final in the past 2 seasons with him geting the 3rd most minutes as a defencemen, I have no issues with him. Canucks fans will always find something to bitch about.
  • 0
November 20th 2013, Canucks just lost their 5th straight game. Last time this happened the Canucks, they missed the playoffs.

#27 Ray_Cathode

Ray_Cathode

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,793 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 07

Posted 21 May 2012 - 09:31 PM

We've all seen Bieksa try to pull an Alex Edler, and, miserably fail. Hamhuis almost always makes the smart play, minus the last 5 seconds of the Canucks season. What if AV put Tanev with Hamhuis to make a very smart shutdown d-pair, and Bieksa with Edler to make more of an offensive pair?


Considering how high risk Edler is, it would not be a good pairing. Can we clone a mirror image Hamhuis - one that shoots right? Tanev is not it. He is alright as a sixth D, but not much more - at least not yet - maybe in another year. We'll have to see how our prospects have progressed, but if HF is right, we don't have much in the pipe, contrary to the propoganda issuing from the Canucks head office and their fans - rated 29th for player scouting/development and they deserve every last bit of that awful rating. Of course, trading away your first round picks for dreck doesn't help, nor does trading two fourths+ for Pahlsson.
  • 0

#28 Christophe

Christophe

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 908 posts
  • Joined: 26-December 10

Posted 21 May 2012 - 09:42 PM

He's a 2nd pairing D-man, that's for sure.

Hamhuis is a solid #2 on any team. Number 1 on teams without that big star D.

Still need a stud D-man IMO to go with Bieksa/Hamhuis/Edler in the top 4.
  • 0

#29 thad

thad

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:04 PM

IMO hamhuis is a #2 top pairing guy and Bieksa is the leader of a second pairing if I were to build a perfect team..

That being said they do well with each other and if u can't have a weber/pronger like stud leading the charge, then they make about as good shutdown pair you can ask for.
  • 1

#30 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,943 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 10

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:42 PM

We've all seen Bieksa try to pull an Alex Edler, and, miserably fail. Hamhuis almost always makes the smart play, minus the last 5 seconds of the Canucks season. What if AV put Tanev with Hamhuis to make a very smart shutdown d-pair, and Bieksa with Edler to make more of an offensive pair?


Tanev is still far from ready to handle top-pair minutes against the NHL's best forwards. AV tried the Edler-Bieksa pair already and it failed. Hamhuis-Tanev also wasn't too successful against LA.

The bottom line is, regardless of whether Bieksa is capable of being a top-pair player or just in the top-four, he and Hamhuis play their best together. The Hamhuis-Bieksa tandem is the best pair we have. They can play a shutdown game or more of a two-way game, which is what I think they really do.

Now the goal is to get Edler a solid defensive partner. Either find a good player to fit with Edler, or trade him.

If we signed Garrison - which is definitely in the realm of possibility - and re-signed Salo, we would have a defense core of:

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Salo

Solid 1 through 6. I would ditch Alberts and re-sign Rome and Gragnani to be the extras. Tanev could go back to the AHL to get more all-around experience and hopefully become a true top-four player.
  • 0
What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...





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.