Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DownUndaCanuck

Defensive Depth Not Changing

45 posts in this topic

So with Garrison moving into our top-4 with a long contract, our quality defencemen look set for a long time. Edler should sign an extension within the next season because we'll obviously want this guy for a while, which means our top-4 is solidified.

However, our bottom pairing is a bit more flexible and not as sturdy, and we've seen in the past these guys get bullied in the playoffs by the bigger forwards of Boston and Los Angeles, especially Ballard and Tanev.

My question is, who are we going to see on that bottom pairing and how often?

Last season we saw a rotation of Alberts, Ballard, Rome and Tanev each play around 40 games (Tanev only 25), so how will it pan out next season?

Personally I would like to see Ballard play all 82 games, expect around 60-70 with injuries and 17 minutes a game. Then I'd like Tanev to play 40, Joslin to play 20 and Alberts to play 20, but come playoffs I want these pairings and these minutes:

Edler - Garrison (22 minutes each)

Hamhuis - Bieksa (22 minutes each)

Ballard - Alberts (16 minutes each)

Tanev

Joslin

Sure an extra defenceman like Vandemeer, Kubina, Jurcina or Colaicovo would be a huge upgrade at that #6 spot but with 3 million in cap room left I think we're stuck with what we've got on defence.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Tanev & Ballard got bullied any more than our other players in the playoffs, so not sure why you're singling them out...

But yeah I'm sure we'll see Ballard/Tanev/Alberts in the bottom pairing barring injuries. I'd like to see them give Tanev a chance at being a regular, I think he'll be a top 4 D in a couple years and it'd be good to give him the experience to develop further at the NHL level.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Tanev & Ballard got bullied any more than our other players in the playoffs, so not sure why you're singling them out...

But yeah I'm sure we'll see Ballard/Tanev/Alberts in the bottom pairing barring injuries. I'd like to see them give Tanev a chance at being a regular, I think he'll be a top 4 D in a couple years and it'd be good to give him the experience to develop further at the NHL level.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want Tanev to play most of the season. The kid had maybe one or two really bad games last season, and he has a much higher ceiling than Alberts.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course our depth changed. Instead of Salo playing like he can break down at any second, we have an 11yr younger Garrison. Fairly underrated development there. We can actually use Garrison in all scenarios, while Salo came with significant risk. (He wasn't quite the same last season after the Marchand hit.)

Then what of Tanev? If he improves as much as he could, then he's top-4 calibre. AV sure seems impressed with him, so he'll likely get a long look at top-4 potential so we'll have our natural left-side defenders all on the left side.

And what of K-Con? Sauve? A lot of potential there. Joslin is around.

Our depth is fine. I like it better than where it was last season anyway.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather not have Alberts out there all that much. He has some moments here and there, but overall I think he can easily be replaced by the guys waiting for a chance; Tanev, Sauve, Connauton maybe even Joslin, dunno. Ballard needs to give all 110% and the needs to be given the fair minutes and correct role.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith Ballard was the only one that stood up to the crap...

Edit: Nevermind. OP was referring to plays in the corners.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our top 4 D were guilty of some pretty sloppy play and turnovers in this past playoffs. That style of play may need to change.

Tanev, Ballard, and Alberts are fine for the 5,6,7 spots this year so far.

Lets see how the first half of the season goes.

Yes, Joslin, Connauton and Sauve all deserve a 3 game cup of coffee too if need be throughout the year.

By Feb, MG and AV should know better if our top six can handle the playoff grind and intensity. If not, make a trade.

I like certain elements of Ballards and Alberts (physcial) game. I would not hesitate in a heart beat to trade them though to upgrade.

Tanev just needs some time. He is so cool and calm out there.

That is fine for a young #6 guy. You do not want him running around out of position or taking too many offensive gambles....

Depth is okay for now on D. Always look to upgrade though as I am sure MG does.....

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see Joslin playing at all expect as an innury sub, which we will surely need at sometime.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I like where we're sitting. If we would have resigned Salo and Rome we would look exactly the same. I think tanev Sauve and Kcon are ready to challenge for bigger roles and we have the room to let them do so. Sauve and kcon have earned the chance to step in as injury replacements and depth guys and tanev should be given a top 4 chance when one of them gets hurt.

I wouldn't count Joslin out either he was just cut from a team and probably took a serious summer to work his butt off and redefine himself. Getting solid advice from our player development could go a long way. He won't be an impact player but hopefully he can fill in on the bottom pairing responsibly when needed.

We can sign 6 bottom pairing dmen and sit them in the box or put them in Chicago so were going to have to rely on our prospects to be as ready as possible. The last couple years they were too young and that's why we signed so much depth. This year we got a couple guys ready to give it a shot so carrying 2 more dmen isn't necessary

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather not have Alberts out there all that much. He has some moments here and there, but overall I think he can easily be replaced by the guys waiting for a chance; Tanev, Sauve, Connauton maybe even Joslin, dunno. Ballard needs to give all 110% and the needs to be given the fair minutes and correct role.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what exactly is the correct role? Replacing Hamhuis or replacing Edler??? Which of those two are you going to take minutes away from?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooner or later the Canucks are going to have to make room for guys like Sauve and Connaughton.

I would like to see Sauve, Connaughton and Joslin get a 8-10 game stint each and get some experience in the NHL. Assuming that our top 4 are set with Edler/Garrison and Hamhuis/ Bieksa that means that Ballard and/or Tanev are going to have to sit some games to accomplish that.

The prospects are ready to become the defensive depth on this team. If we are not going to play them then we might as well trade them because sooner or later they are going to get frustrated and head for greener pastures.

When Luo is traded, hopefully we will get some NHL calibre scoring help up front and either some prospects or draft picks in the deal. Luo is a top notch goalie and I am dismayed at how little some on CDC are willing to trade him for. The guy should be worth three 1st rounders and a prospect or two 1st rounders and a couple of prospects or a scoring veteran plus a couple of really good prospects and a 2nd or 3rd round pick. You just don't have that much opportunity to aquire a goalie of Luongo's calibre so the asking price is understandably high.

The club will be defined by what the return is for Luongo and may be the start of a reshuffling throughout the lineup. So the defense and the forwards are not set until that trade takes place and I am sure that MG is looking at reshuffling so that he is ready for Burrows and Edler needing new contracts. I can't see how this can be accomodated gracefully without an injection of youth at a lower contract cost.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar Defensive depth to last year = Similar outcome in playoffs. :picard::sadno:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bieksa.. once he gots over 21-22 - here come boneheaded plays.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if Ballard's going to get buried and K-Con or Sauve is ready, then I'd rather move Keith to get more financial flexibility. Of course, if Keith is used properly (maybe QB for 2nd PP) then he would be a luxury but if not then he should be moved and given a Top 4 role elsewhere.

So far I see it as

Hamhuis - Bieksa

Edler - Garrison

*(Ballard) - Tanev

Alberts, Joslin (two big bodies for more physical games)

*could change with Kevin or Yann if they're up to speed and ability with the NHL game, or sign cheaper free agent (though not someone one-dimensional or easily injured please).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did just lose MAG to free agency, so I'm hoping MG can sign a #6 defenceman to fill in for him now. I do like the way our defence is becoming bigger and more of a physical, shutdown type though because that's clearly the way you win in the playoffs nowadays - just look at the successful defences of New York, Boston, LA and NJD. You don't win with small, agile puck movers on the back end because they simply can't handle the physical nature of the playoffs.

That being said, we have now lost Salo, Rome and Gragnani on the blueline, only to be replaced by Garrison and Joslin. 1 more body for depth would be nice (Muller hasn't played an NHL game yet so doesn't count).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith Ballard was the only one that stood up to the crap...

Edit: Nevermind. OP was referring to plays in the corners.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We actually have less depth than last year. Ballard, Tanev and Alberts are the only reliable bottom pair players. After that we have to dip into calling up guys like Joslin, Connauton, Sauve, etc.

I would say our top-four is much stronger with the addition of Garrison. We now have a solid, minute-eating top-four. However I think Gillis really should have just bit the bullet and signed Salo. Him and Ballard would be a great, complementary 3rd pair and give us truly strong blueline 1 through 6.

I don't mind Tanev starting with Ballard,, but in my mind if we want him to evolve into anything more than a bottom-pair player he's going to need to develop more in the minors. I think we should just sign one of the remaining free agent defensemen floating around like Kubina or Rozsival. They're both right-handed, big and physical and would complement Ballard's mobility. They should come a bit cheaper at this point considering no one has signed them yet and we're getting deeper into the offseason.

Hamhuis - Bieksa

Edler - Garrison

Ballard - Kubina/Rozsival

Alberts

Tanev

Tanev is the first call-up and we have a very deep lineup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.