Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Moving on, isn't a number 1 D-man still needed?

Discussion

This topic has been archived.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

Poll: Moving on, isn't a number 1 D-man still needed? (183 member(s) have cast votes)

Who has been our best defensemen in the playoffs for the last 5 years?

  1. Sami Salo (31 votes [16.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.94%

  2. Christian Ehrhoff (11 votes [6.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.01%

  3. Dan Hamhuis (64 votes [34.97%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.97%

  4. Kevin Bieksa (28 votes [15.30%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.30%

  5. Alex Edler (11 votes [6.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.01%

  6. Not one "standout" (38 votes [20.77%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.77%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#31 rawkdrummer

rawkdrummer

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,262 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 30 June 2012 - 02:32 PM

Nashville will be wanting to trade Weber sooner than later as they won't want to lose him for nothing like say "SUTER".
This why I don't think we can take a big contract back in a Luongo trade. We need the cap space for Weber!

#32 Rounoush

Rounoush

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,380 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 02:41 PM

and they lost. and we lost. Doughty, Chara, Keith/Seabrook, Lidstrom, Pronger, Gonchar says hi.


We got within one game with an extremely injured team and without your precious "Norris candidate defenseman." If we would have won, you would all be singing a different tune. Quit thinking that winning the Stanley Cup is that simple and easy.

2dgqi51.jpgfcvifc.jpg
Thanks a bunch to khalifawiz501 and Discord for the signatures.


#33 Jagorim Jarg

Jagorim Jarg

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 12

Posted 30 June 2012 - 02:44 PM

Enterin I am a fan born and live in Vancouver and it's the vast amount of you local brats who ruin everything for hockey fans. This town doesn't deserve a winning team with all the know-it-alls talking smack all day long media or fans.

Edited by Jagorim Jarg, 30 June 2012 - 02:49 PM.


#34 hockeystar

hockeystar

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 147 posts
  • Joined: 09-July 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 02:58 PM

surprise, surprise, the canucks are losers why the hell would he sign with the canucks when the fans treat super stars like crap... and being a hockey fan i would rather play against the canucks then with them its much funner to upset the fans....
Posted Image

#35 Hafizzle

Hafizzle

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,700 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:02 PM

We don't have one standout but people make it sound like that is a bad thing. Having a "Norris candidate defenseman" is overrated and not necessary. Why have 1 standout when you can have many that step up at different times.

Look no further than New Jersey last year not having a Norris defenseman and getting to the Cup Finals.


They made it to the finals but they didn't win the cup.

History proves that teams that win the Cup have a Norris calibre player on their team.

2007: Anaheim - Pronger, Neidermayer
2008: Detroit - Lidstrom, Rafalski
2009: Pittsburgh - Letang
2010: Chicago - Keith
2011: Boston - Chara
2012: LA - Doughty

Notice the trend? That's 6 years in a row. Defence wins championships.

#36 cmpunk

cmpunk

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,051 posts
  • Joined: 12-October 11

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:03 PM

We got within one game with an extremely injured team and without your precious "Norris candidate defenseman." If we would have won, you would all be singing a different tune. Quit thinking that winning the Stanley Cup is that simple and easy.


I agree. And another thing we did not have DAN HAMHUIS! He is our most reliable and overall best defensemen. Hamhuis I think could contend for the Norris this year if he has a good season. Hamhuis is even considered a possibility for team Canada in 2014 because of his reliability.

I think Hamhuis could be our "norris trophy defensemen" and play big minutes.
Posted Image
Credit to Vintage Canuck

#37 S.Mouse!

S.Mouse!

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,426 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 09

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:06 PM

I think the top need is a solid player who compliments Edler well. It doesn't have to be a star, just somebody that can move the puck and be responsible defensively.

That will allow Edler to emerge as the #1 guy we all want to see. He has the tools, but has never really had the right partner to flourish.
Posted Image

#38 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:09 PM

I can't believe a few people voted "not one standout" when a team out there would love to have the defence we have right now. Yeah, we might need a signing this off-season but if you look at the names in our D, other teams would drool to have them all on the same team.

This planet is whacked.

I voted that way. Both Bieksa and Hamhuis have had great series. How do you choose between them. And yes MG does have to sign a right side dman. Not signing Schultz might be a benefit as Van has to address the lack of physicality on this roster or next spring will be no different.

#39 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,112 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:11 PM

We're not getting Schultz, so let's start moving on. Although my pride is hurt, I can see why he would want to sign elsewhere. With Bieksa, Hamhuis, Edler and company he's not coming in as "The Guy". In a place like Edmonton, there is no pressure to win whatsoever. I digress.

That being said, is Garrison therefore really our best option? He played in Florida in a weak division, had a lot of PP time and played alongside Bryan Campbell. Some sources say he will be grabbing upwards of 5 million. Is this really the best option for the Canucks? Having a roster full of number 2,3,4 defense has notched us back to back President's Trophies, but not the illusive Stanley Cup.

In fact, you can go back throughout the entire history of the organization, and we have never had a number 1 defenseman. If the Canuck's all time best defensemen debate is between Mattias Ohlund and Jyrki Lumme, is this not one of the glaring reason's we still do not have a Cup?

Look at the past few Stanley Cup winners... LA, Boston, and Chicago have all had their top defensemen play like top defensemen en route to a Cup win. Who would you say has been our best defensemen over the past 5 playoff runs? (or lack thereof)

OK, I'm cooled off.


Ed Jovanovski says Hi.

He was the complete package on defense, not a stalwart defensively mind you but pretty decent. He was physically imposing (not talking stature, but how he played the game), offensively capable, stuck up for teammates, falcon punched Adam Deadmarsh out of the league, etc.

The fact that you're blaming the lack of having a "number 1 defenceman" as the reason to why we failed to win the cup in '11 and got bounced from the playoffs in the first round this year tells me you're not a very astute fellow.

Would I love to have Weber, Suter etc? Of course, who wouldn't? They aren't needed. What we DO need is legitimate Top 6 help for scoring, further depth on defence and an associate coach who can actually develop a defensive system that maximizes the potential of the defencemen we already have, not one that forces them to play outside of their comfort zone.

Injecting a high priced so called "number one defenceman" into this situation does not work. It's the infantile equivalent of trying to shove the square block into the round hole. I think that Garrison fills out our defence nicely, he adds to the "by committee" offense from defence system we have been working with for some time. The next step is to see if Bowness can develop a system that plays to everyone's strength, rather than pretending he has a learning disability.

#40 BenSurgeon

BenSurgeon

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 244 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:12 PM

The Canucks know they need a genuinine number one defenseman. Not much in UFA, so they will have to do it through a trade but you know they will have to give up something to get something.
Ben Surgeon

#41 mabbott

mabbott

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:14 PM

we just let one walk..................as in Aaron Rome

#42 VanIsleNuckFan

VanIsleNuckFan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,708 posts
  • Joined: 31-May 06

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:21 PM

I can't believe a few people voted "not one standout" when a team out there would love to have the defence we have right now. Yeah, we might need a signing this off-season but if you look at the names in our D, other teams would drool to have them all on the same team.

This planet is whacked.


I totally agree, between all those guys, they are each individually very good. And the core as a unit is unarguably one of the best in the NHL. But........out of those guys, there is no Pronger type defenceman, that's why I voted no standout.

To reiterate, they are all good defenceman but with that in mind, out of those guys there's not one that's head and shoulders over the other in ability, physicality etc, and that's what we need. If we had that, we'd be unstoppable!

#43 six-0h-four-

six-0h-four-

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Joined: 04-June 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:21 PM

surprise, surprise, the canucks are losers why the hell would he sign with the canucks when the fans treat super stars like crap... and being a hockey fan i would rather play against the canucks then with them its much funner to upset the fans....


How much funner would it be? Probably a lot much funner.
Follow me @CurtisEastman on Twitter.

#44 Lidstrom

Lidstrom

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:33 PM

Everybody take a step take a step back,

Garrison doesn't put the canucks over the top. We're not necessarily better on defence with the line-up. We've had the luxury of having quality d-men on our bottom line when were completely healthly.

We have to have a objective view on this. I've seen wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy to many over-paid bust UFA's (see: Bouwmeester, Komisarek, Martin, Michalek, etc.)

I have faith in Gillis and support his moves. He wants to win as bad as we do.
Posted ImagePosted Image

#45 NewSedinTwin

NewSedinTwin

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Joined: 07-February 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:42 PM

I don't want to see Edler, Bieksa or Hamhuis leave. I would like to see us pick up a free agent like Suter or Garrison, if we can't pick up a free agent, then we should look at trading guys like Ballard, Rome, Alberts, and Connauton (I'd like to keep Tanev if possible)
Post 100: Feb.15.10
Post 200: Mar.20.10

#46 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,112 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 03:44 PM

I don't want to see Edler, Bieksa or Hamhuis leave. I would like to see us pick up a free agent like Suter or Garrison, if we can't pick up a free agent, then we should look at trading guys like Ballard, Rome, Alberts, and Connauton (I'd like to keep Tanev if possible)


(Chong) Rome's not here man

#47 Ray Canuck

Ray Canuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 553 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:06 PM

Teams don't trade away #1 or 2 D-men unless those players ask to be traded.
The way the Canucks payroll is structured I can't see a Suter or Weber ever playing here.
I love to see a shutdown D-man come here, one with size to clear the front of the net when needed.
Bryan Allen would be an upgrade over Rome, Matt Carle might be another target, not a shutdown guy but can put up points & better than Schultz in the short term.
We need a 3rd line centre isn't that why we got Phalsson?

For heavens sake no Marco Sturm type signings PLEASE.
Seems Gillis is looking for a diamond in the rough & all he's finding if fools gold.
Think it might be time to be a bit bold, the best before date is approaching we're only a few pieces removed but it is significant.
The Sedins can't carry the load, they need consistent secondary help.
Posted Image
"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Mark Twain

#48 six-0h-four-

six-0h-four-

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Joined: 04-June 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:24 PM

Teams don't trade away #1 or 2 D-men unless those players ask to be traded.
The way the Canucks payroll is structured I can't see a Suter or Weber ever playing here.
I love to see a shutdown D-man come here, one with size to clear the front of the net when needed.
Bryan Allen would be an upgrade over Rome, Matt Carle might be another target, not a shutdown guy but can put up points & better than Schultz in the short term.
We need a 3rd line centre isn't that why we got Phalsson?

For heavens sake no Marco Sturm type signings PLEASE.
Seems Gillis is looking for a diamond in the rough & all he's finding if fools gold.
Think it might be time to be a bit bold, the best before date is approaching we're only a few pieces removed but it is significant.
The Sedins can't carry the load, they need consistent secondary help.


In no way am I saying we will land Weber, but if he really wanted to stay in Nashville, he would be signed already. (and not have signed a 1 year deal last year)
Follow me @CurtisEastman on Twitter.

#49 Red Light Racicot

Red Light Racicot

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,726 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:31 PM

The team still has an Ehrhoff-sized gap to fill on defense

#50 Ray Canuck

Ray Canuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 553 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:34 PM

six-0h-four- True but I'm not sure if guys have places they really want to go, sure a few do but I think for most it's strictly business.
Is Gillis really going to bring in an 8 Mil guy? Same goes for Suter.
Honestly I really thought Schultz was going to come here,being from Kelowna.
So Weber being from Sicamous seems to mean little in the big picture.
Posted Image
"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Mark Twain

#51 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,761 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:42 PM

Until you get the right guy, I believe we would be better to get the BPA moneyball style. Then you have stability to get the guy playing from strength, when he's available!

To me the moneyball signing is Sheldon Souray. He could, with our PP, conceivably score more than Garrison easily, but also add the 238 lb nasty, willing to throw em down, body that we need without breaking the bank. And he would be good enough (see his role in Dallas) that Gillis could perhaps score our guy in a luongo trade without worrying abut fielding a competitive team.

Another under the radar veteran guy who could help us, at the defensive end, is Scott Hannan.

And Carle is more interesting to me than Garrison.

Carle, Garrison and Suter are the only FA's available tomorrow that u would consider an upgrade to our D, and really only Suter is considered a possible #1.



#52 Canucklehead420

Canucklehead420

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 471 posts
  • Joined: 21-January 04

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:42 PM

i think we'll land garrison for Bieksa type money. although a good signing hes not the bonafide norris calibre defenseman we desperately need.

#53 ButterBean

ButterBean

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:46 PM

Sure, historically, cup winners have had a #1 defenseman. But that can be said for almost every other aspect of the game too. Cup winners have had effective 4th lines who hit, forechecked, and were responsible defensively. Same goes for the 3rd line but more offense. Offensive production from the top 2 lines. Hot goaltender. Luck with injuries.

Point is you need to be well rounded everywhere to win a Stanley Cup.

#54 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

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

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:51 PM

Not a big deal. I'm not too upset we missed out on Schultz. I'd rather have some experienced defencemen. Hopefully Gillis can land Garrison for a decent price.

Schultz took the easy way out. Just like how he used a loophole to get what he wants, he's going to Edmonton so the big minutes and opportunities will be handed to him on a silver platter. All these young guys are good, but unless they get some real players to lead them they'll still be stuck at the bottom.

Anyway I hope we can get Garrison. Our defence will look something like this:
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Salo
Alberts/Tanev

I think Salo will be re-signed. I think Salo and Tanev will work out some sort of rotation to keep Salo healthy and fresh.

I'd rather trade Ballard and try to find someone cheaper. I'd like to go after Doug Murray for the bottom pair. I think we need some physicality in our backend and someone who can physically handle big forwards. But if we land Garrison and re-sign Salo we should be good for now.

Edited by bossram, 30 June 2012 - 04:52 PM.

What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...

#55 Ray Canuck

Ray Canuck

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 553 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:52 PM

think we need to draft a Norris type D-man...
unless we can trade for one with Lou I can't see us getting a stud type guy...

Souray.....he might be interesting but a gamble & a bit of a liability
Carle can be much better.... hell he was a +30 something with Pronger at his side
Posted Image
"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Mark Twain

#56 stormchaser

stormchaser

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 08

Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:06 PM

schultz is definitely a huge pu**y anyways.

uses a loophole so he can select what ever team he wants and picks the oilers lol


I'm sure you'd still be saying that if he signed here.

#57 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,138 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:07 PM

Offer sheet Weber... why not.
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#58 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,138 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:14 PM

Teams don't trade away #1 or 2 D-men unless those players ask to be traded.
The way the Canucks payroll is structured I can't see a Suter or Weber ever playing here.
I love to see a shutdown D-man come here, one with size to clear the front of the net when needed.
Bryan Allen would be an upgrade over Rome, Matt Carle might be another target, not a shutdown guy but can put up points & better than Schultz in the short term.
We need a 3rd line centre isn't that why we got Phalsson?

For heavens sake no Marco Sturm type signings PLEASE.
Seems Gillis is looking for a diamond in the rough & all he's finding if fools gold.
Think it might be time to be a bit bold, the best before date is approaching we're only a few pieces removed but it is significant.
The Sedins can't carry the load, they need consistent secondary help.


So don't get a big free agent like Suter and don't try to land a guy like Weber because they are expensive.... but BE BOLD! Great contradicting advice!

I believe the EXACT reverse of your suggestions are the right way to go.

Offer sheet to Weber. then sign a low risk, high reward guy like Huselius who could be had for cheap because of his injuries.

FORWARDS
Daniel Sedin ($6.100m) / Henrik Sedin ($6.100m) / Alexandre Burrows ($2.000m)
David Booth ($4.250m) / Ryan Kesler ($5.000m) / Kristian Huselius ($2.500m)
Chris Higgins ($1.900m) / Manny Malhotra ($2.500m) / Jannik Hansen ($1.350m)
Scottie Upshall ($3.500m) / Maxim Lapierre ($1.000m) / Zack Kassian ($0.870m)
Aaron Volpatti ($0.600m) /

DEFENSEMEN
Shea Weber ($7.500m) / Dan Hamhuis ($4.500m)
Kevin Bieksa ($4.600m) / Alexander Edler ($3.250m)
Sami Salo ($2.000m) / Chris Tanev ($0.900m)
Keaton Ellerby ($0.827m)

GOALTENDERS
Cory Schneider ($4.000m)
Jose Theodore ($1.500m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled without the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $70,200,000; CAP PAYROLL: $66,746,875; BONUSES: $0
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $3,453,125
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#59 B_a_M

B_a_M

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Joined: 10-October 09

Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:00 PM

They made it to the finals but they didn't win the cup.

History proves that teams that win the Cup have a Norris calibre player on their team.

2007: Anaheim - Pronger, Neidermayer
2008: Detroit - Lidstrom, Rafalski
2009: Pittsburgh - Letang
2010: Chicago - Keith
2011: Boston - Chara
2012: LA - Doughty

Notice the trend? That's 6 years in a row. Defence wins championships.


I would put Scrudi up there besides Letang and replace him with Doughty as well. The guy is super under rated but played soo solidly.

Well when it comes down to it, there is no way the Nucks will ge Suter that is a pipe dream. Garrison is doing the samething Hamhuis did when he was FA, and he wants to sign with Vancouver so maybe just maybe he will come with some kind of discount. Other than that I really think a player like Edler needs to push his game he has all the tools to become a top 1,2 dman so hopefully it will happen.

#60 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,071 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:29 PM

All of them have had their bright spots and dark shades over the playoffs lately. The reason we went so far in the playoffs 2 years ago was because different defencemen stood up at different times during the playoffs.

Edler was our best D-man in the 1st round, Hamhuis too.
All of them played well against Nashville, but they didn't have much of a hard task. Ehrhoff in particular was great.
Bieksa and Salo really shined against San Jose, especially Salo.
Then Edler broke his hand and played like crap, Hamhuis was injured, Salo was fatigued and Ehrhoff was banged up against Boston which is why they all stunk.
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.