Peaches Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Edler-Bieksa LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brahma Bull Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surtur Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 only on contract years...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Cathode Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 We've all seen Bieksa try to pull an http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVe486gUXqw, 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossram Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 We've all seen Bieksa try to pull an http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVe486gUXqw, 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5minutesinthebox Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Better to have balance on difference lines than overplay strengths on one line while neglecting others. Hammer (D stabilizer, calm presence) - Juice (aggressive, jumps up on the play and pinches, looks for big hits) Edler (aggressive, can make defensive stops but mainly offensive-minded) - Salo/ Tanev (mobile stabilizer, makes safe plays) OP, can you not see how the team would be in trouble if Juice and Eagle (Eddie) were exposed as a pairing without one of the D-oriented guys to clean up after them? (to answer your topic: Bieksa belongs on the first line all right, as long as Hamhuis is there) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 You could argue Bieksa is too good for this team. He's a winner, a fighter, a guy that makes things happen and a player who stands up for his team mates. As for the smart asses who come away with the brain fart cracks, well you tend to make a mistake now and again when you are the only one trying to make things happen. He belongs on the first D because he's a leader who tries to get the job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 <p> 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBCanucks Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Bieksa is hands down our top defenseman behind Hamhuis. Even if we had a guy like Shea Weber on our team to replace Salo after he retires I would still argue Bieksa is the guy that should be paired with Hammer on the 1st defense pairing. Hamhuis-Bieksa Edler-Weber (wishful thinking) Ballard-Tanev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 only on contract years...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samurai Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 the other good thing about Kevin besides his game is he gives good straight interviews. Very honest and with a sense of humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uber_pwnzor Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Yes he is good enough to play on a first pairing. But playing him with Edler just doesn't work, they've tried it, and it didn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Bieksa's Fault Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Does it really matter? The Canucks had four good defencemen last year so that it didn't matter whether it was Edler - Salo followed by Hamhuis - Bieksa or the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 You could argue Bieksa is too good for this team. He's a winner, a fighter, a guy that makes things happen and a player who stands up for his team mates. As for the smart asses who come away with the brain fart cracks, well you tend to make a mistake now and again when you are the only one trying to make things happen. He belongs on the first D because he's a leader who tries to get the job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.