Archived

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

DownUndaCanuck

New Defensive Pairings Needed!

49 posts in this topic

For once I agree with you DownUnda.

Ballard has been great (IMO our best) as has Tanev.

Didn't mind Hamhuis - Edler infact I think that just shows (along with how great the Tanev/Ballard pair has been) that Bieksa isn't quite as valuable as we thought.

I do like that idea.

Hamhuis - Edler

Ballard - Garrison

Tanev - Bieksa

Only thing is I am not sure it lines up well (3rd pair especially) with the handedness, although I am scared to play Bieksa with anyone besides Tanev and Hamhuis

Maybe:

Hamhuis - Edler

Ballard - Tanev

Garrison - Bieksa

It is risky having those 2 together, but I am confident Garrison's style is sturdy and responsible enough to be able to help absorb & anchor Bieksa's terrible plays.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. Switch 'em up. Specifically, the Edler-Garrison pairing. Just plain awful. Both players are redundant to each other (if Garrison is even all he's cracked up to be).

Edler and Garrison are both shoot-first D-men. Why are they playing together?

However, at the same time, who do you split up? Hamhuis - Bieksa is solid, and Ballard - Tanev has been playing good hockey to start the season.

Edler - Garrison pairing really needs to pull its socks up. They are playing some god-awful hockey right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's been 5 games into the season and just about all of our defencemen are struggling. I would give them another few weeks of playing together but we really don't have that sort of luxury in a shortened season, so why not try a few new defensive pairings?

Edler - Hamhuis

Hamhuis is still playing good defence, Edler and Garrison both are not. Edler needs a safety net behind him in case he's caught out of position (which is often) and Hamhuis is far better at that than Garrison. Plus, Edler is far more physical and able to look after himself and Hamhuis - he doesn't need Garrison to watch his back. This way we also have 1 designated shooter as opposed to having Edler and Garrison fighting over a shot and both getting caught out of position when up the ice.

Garrison - Ballard

Ballard has played well so far and deserves better quality ice time. He and Garrison have had proven chemistry together in Florida already and their games complement each other PERFECTLY. Garrison is a big, physical guy who sits back whereas Ballard is a smaller, free-wheeling, great-skating defenceman.

Bieksa - Tanev

Bieksa has been brutal for us lately defensively, so hopefully our best defenceman in Tanev (yes that's right) can have a bit of a calming influence on him, similar to the way Salo did on Edler. Bieksa will be the designated offensive defenceman here, Tanev the guy who sits back to cover him, but ideally Bieksa will make less mistakes when paired with Tanev.

Thoughts? You could swap Tanev and Hamhuis for the same effect.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid I have gone further in another thread and now think KB3 should be traded if we can find a big stay at home ball crusher. He just appears to be too small to give the protection needed to our goalie. Lu lived with it but I suspect Cory will find it too difficult. So it's Bieksa or just as sadly Ballard for someone BIG.

MG missed his chance when Salo left as Garrison was too similar to what we have.

PS and putting Edler up there is not going to solve the problem.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's been 5 games into the season and just about all of our defencemen are struggling. I would give them another few weeks of playing together but we really don't have that sort of luxury in a shortened season, so why not try a few new defensive pairings?

Edler - Hamhuis

Hamhuis is still playing good defence, Edler and Garrison both are not. Edler needs a safety net behind him in case he's caught out of position (which is often) and Hamhuis is far better at that than Garrison. Plus, Edler is far more physical and able to look after himself and Hamhuis - he doesn't need Garrison to watch his back. This way we also have 1 designated shooter as opposed to having Edler and Garrison fighting over a shot and both getting caught out of position when up the ice.

Garrison - Ballard

Ballard has played well so far and deserves better quality ice time. He and Garrison have had proven chemistry together in Florida already and their games complement each other PERFECTLY. Garrison is a big, physical guy who sits back whereas Ballard is a smaller, free-wheeling, great-skating defenceman.

Bieksa - Tanev

Bieksa has been brutal for us lately defensively, so hopefully our best defenceman in Tanev (yes that's right) can have a bit of a calming influence on him, similar to the way Salo did on Edler. Bieksa will be the designated offensive defenceman here, Tanev the guy who sits back to cover him, but ideally Bieksa will make less mistakes when paired with Tanev.

Thoughts? You could swap Tanev and Hamhuis for the same effect.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were shaking things up a bit last night as I recall?...had Bieksa with Garrison and Edler with Hamhuis. I'm sure they did.

I don't agree about Bieksa but have been down this path before (where everyone was screaming to trade him). I saw him doing some good work in front of the net and also think he's back to having an edge, which is how he should play.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These line pairings are awful and will never happen. LL-LL-RR. Enough said

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we already have Edler playing on his off side this year (something he hasn't done very well in the past), so you want to keep him on his off side, but with Hamhuis, and then move Ballard to his off side as well (another guy who did quite poorly at that) to play with Garrison? And then have our only two right handed shots on the same pairing together? No thanks.

If - and I mean if - forced to change up the D, I'd consider this:

Garrison Bieksa

Hamhuis Tanev

Ballard Edler

I'd utilize Ballard and Edler in prime situations and be careful with them otherwise (unless they are having an 'on' game). Hamhuis and Tanev get more defensive minutes but are used in all situations, and Garrison and Bieksa play both ends of the ice as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we get down on the D, we need to understand that the whole team is struggling defensivly. If the defense is supposed to be engaged in the rush and the offense, then there needs to be a teamwide consciouseness as to defensive responsibilities but this has been lacking on many shifts. As it stands, the backcheck has been terrible so this is a much bigger problem than just the defensive pairings.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to see Tanev-Ballard on PP instead of Bieksa-Hamhuis

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think we should bring in barker or vandermeer as a 3rd pairing d-man, sit tanev for a game, we need a big physical d-man against the kings tonight

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think we should bring in barker or vandermeer as a 3rd pairing d-man, sit tanev for a game, we need a big physical d-man against the kings tonight

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard and Tanav are the best pairing right now - leave them alone.

Hamhuis is a tad rusty and Bieksa into his usual slow start - give them time.

Garrison and Edler -Edler on the right side is awful -switch them around.

Just say no to Vandermeer and Barker.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this not what AV is doing. Mix & match when the game is won or lost to see which pairs work better together. A couple more game should give him enough information to have settled pairs. The usual problem though, too many "D" men taking penalties mixing un the "D" on the PK.

Go Canucks Go

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, because Tanev's the problem right? He's been great thus far, and he's not getting scratched anytime soon.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't get with Garrison-Edler is Edler on the right side. Garrison played the right side in Florida where he started putting up more offence. Edler is notoriously bad in all ways on the right side. It just seems non-sensical to do that.

I don't eat Ballard-Tanev split up, and have full confidence Hamhuis-Bieksa will go back to their usual great level; they're vets.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard and Garrison never or barely played with each other in Florida.

Garrison was with Weaver and someone else while Ballard played with McCabe and Boynton.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ballard and Tanav are the best pairing right now - leave them alone.

Hamhuis is a tad rusty and Bieksa into his usual slow start - give them time.

Garrison and Edler -Edler on the right side is awful -switch them around.

Just say no to Vandermeer and Barker.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.