Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Our defense lacking leader


  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#61 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,543 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 29 January 2013 - 04:29 PM

No we clearly do not. This team plays 6 games without Sami Salo and we have one of the worst defences in the league. Sure we don't have one star that carries the defence, but they aren't working well by committee which is the issue - they need a veteran presence desperately because guys like Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler and Garrison are not veterans, they're defencemen in their prime. We need a guy who's played in this league a much longer time, and that was Salo. He'd seen it all. These guys haven't.

As for Ballard yes he's played ok, but he's paired with our best defenceman. You take away Tanev and he becomes our worst in an instance. So yes, Tanev is doing a great job with Ballard. He has turned this pathetic excuse for a defenceman into a decent 3rd pairing guy. You forget how badly he played without Tanev, and how he would be barrated for his poor play. Now Tanev comes along and fixes up his game perfectly.

Basically, we have 4 panicky guys on defence and 2 calm, cool and collected defenceman - Hamhuis and Tanev. We used to have Salo in that mix as well, giving us a set of perfect pairs: Tanev would settle Ballard down, Hamhuis would cover for Bieksa and Salo would help Edler play a more solid game. Now we have a mismatch with Garrison instead of Salo, who is even less experienced than Edler.

Barker and Vandermeer have been in this league a lot longer than some of our guys, I say throw Vandermeer in to see his effect on our other defencemen. This is why I was pushing so hard for Hal Gill or Allen - they would have fit this niche perfectly.


:picard:

Ballard without Tanev >>>>>>>>>> Bieksa without Hamhuis

Ballard struggled for one year, last year he got alot better and from the 2nd half of the season on he has only been consistently solid, and since the playoffs has been our best defensemen, Tanev is great I absolutely agree but if you watched the Chicago wolves games you would know he isn't fool proof, as he struggled early on, basically the same thing Hamhuis is going through right now.

I find it funny that the excuse for Ballard playing well is "that he is playing with Tanev" Yet no one ever acknowledges Bieksa is absolute crap without Hamhuis and even with Hamhuis he manages to play terrible most of the time.

Is some instances I agree, but the way this defense is struggling isn't because Sami left, Bieksa and Edler have always been inconsistent, not sure what is happening with Hammer but my guess is he is regaining form after the lockout, Garrison is adjusting to the new system and aside from some bad turnovers has been alright, Ballard and Tanev have stepped up and become our #1 5 on 5 pair.

It's 6 games in, wait till mid way through the season, this is a veteran group that has grown together and faced adversity, we just need to make a coaching change IMO then we will see this team play the way they can.

Oh and Hamhuis, Ballard and Bieksa are all 30 or older, so I don't know how they aren't veterans: (Hamhuis: 30) (Bieksa, 31) (Ballard 30)

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 29 January 2013 - 04:31 PM.

  • 1

zackass.png


#62 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 04:59 PM

:picard:

Ballard without Tanev >>>>>>>>>> Bieksa without Hamhuis

Ballard struggled for one year, last year he got alot better and from the 2nd half of the season on he has only been consistently solid, and since the playoffs has been our best defensemen, Tanev is great I absolutely agree but if you watched the Chicago wolves games you would know he isn't fool proof, as he struggled early on, basically the same thing Hamhuis is going through right now.

I find it funny that the excuse for Ballard playing well is "that he is playing with Tanev" Yet no one ever acknowledges Bieksa is absolute crap without Hamhuis and even with Hamhuis he manages to play terrible most of the time.

Is some instances I agree, but the way this defense is struggling isn't because Sami left, Bieksa and Edler have always been inconsistent, not sure what is happening with Hammer but my guess is he is regaining form after the lockout, Garrison is adjusting to the new system and aside from some bad turnovers has been alright, Ballard and Tanev have stepped up and become our #1 5 on 5 pair.

It's 6 games in, wait till mid way through the season, this is a veteran group that has grown together and faced adversity, we just need to make a coaching change IMO then we will see this team play the way they can.

Oh and Hamhuis, Ballard and Bieksa are all 30 or older, so I don't know how they aren't veterans: (Hamhuis: 30) (Bieksa, 31) (Ballard 30)


Glad to see someone giving credit where credit is due. As far as I'm concerned Ballard is earning his money, Edler and Bieksa are not. Hopefully they can turn it around and develop some kind of consistency in their game. If they can, the Canucks will have a stronger defense. If not...........

Frankly, Edler has never been a blueliner to build a corps around. He is positionally weak, has little to no ability to clear the crease, and is far too prone to horrible giveaways. I think his numbers give fairweather Canucks fans a false sense of security.

Both Edler and Bieksa are far too inconsistent.
  • 0
Posted Image

#63 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 05:02 PM

This team has never had a legitimate Norris Candidate. Maybe Edler will wake up and realize he "could" be if he wanted to.


Edler will never be a Norris candidate as long as he gives pucks away in front of the net and screens his own goalie.

The Norris usually goes to the defenseman who is a total package. Then again somehow Karlsson won over Weber. So maybe there is hope for defensemen that are weak in their own zone but score goals on a healthy powerplay. Who knew?
  • 0
Posted Image

#64 goal-ghost

goal-ghost

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Joined: 21-December 08

Posted 29 January 2013 - 05:05 PM

Tanev for Tsar!

We will rename Canucks nations Tanevgrad.


he's so good he bridges the revolutionary divide!
  • 0
Posted Image

#65 Maninthebox

Maninthebox

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 09

Posted 29 January 2013 - 06:48 PM

Edler will never be a Norris candidate as long as he gives pucks away in front of the net and screens his own goalie.

The Norris usually goes to the defenseman who is a total package. Then again somehow Karlsson won over Weber. So maybe there is hope for defensemen that are weak in their own zone but score goals on a healthy powerplay. Who knew?


Uh... like, everybody?
  • 0

#66 klosetotheheart

klosetotheheart

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 12

Posted 29 January 2013 - 07:11 PM

We have a very veteran blue line apart from Tanev. They dont lack leadership, they lack form. If this team lacks anything, other then Kesler and Booth, its size/toughness.
  • 0

#67 riske1

riske1

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 300 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 05

Posted 29 January 2013 - 08:57 PM

We have a very veteran blue line apart from Tanev. They dont lack leadership, they lack form. If this team lacks anything, other then Kesler and Booth, its size/toughness.


I agee with you totally. To get out of the west the Canucks will have to get past the Sharks, Ducks, Kings, Blues and Hawks. These teams have just as much skill and speed however they are much bigger and more aggresive.History shows that the Canucks chances are not that good playing against physical teams in a prolonged playoff run.

MG needs to drop a few pieces and live up to his statement about getting younger and bigger.

I sure miss the days when they had an intimidating player to give the skill guys some room.
  • 1
I started out with nothing and I still have most of it left.

#68 LeanBeef

LeanBeef

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:08 PM

:picard:

Ballard without Tanev >>>>>>>>>> Bieksa without Hamhuis

Ballard struggled for one year, last year he got alot better and from the 2nd half of the season on he has only been consistently solid, and since the playoffs has been our best defensemen, Tanev is great I absolutely agree but if you watched the Chicago wolves games you would know he isn't fool proof, as he struggled early on, basically the same thing Hamhuis is going through right now.

I find it funny that the excuse for Ballard playing well is "that he is playing with Tanev" Yet no one ever acknowledges Bieksa is absolute crap without Hamhuis and even with Hamhuis he manages to play terrible most of the time.

Is some instances I agree, but the way this defense is struggling isn't because Sami left, Bieksa and Edler have always been inconsistent, not sure what is happening with Hammer but my guess is he is regaining form after the lockout, Garrison is adjusting to the new system and aside from some bad turnovers has been alright, Ballard and Tanev have stepped up and become our #1 5 on 5 pair.

It's 6 games in, wait till mid way through the season, this is a veteran group that has grown together and faced adversity, we just need to make a coaching change IMO then we will see this team play the way they can.

Oh and Hamhuis, Ballard and Bieksa are all 30 or older, so I don't know how they aren't veterans: (Hamhuis: 30) (Bieksa, 31) (Ballard 30)

Where did OP go? I wanna see him try to justify Ballard's brutal play.
  • 0
Sig too big.
"Being a Canuck fan, maybe sometime down the road be a Vancouver Canuck.... that would conquer all my dreams"
-Milan Lucic

#69 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,543 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:15 PM

Where did OP go? I wanna see him try to justify Ballard's brutal play.


Yeah.. Ballards apparent.. "Brutal play"
  • 0

zackass.png


#70 The Big Luongo

The Big Luongo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,437 posts
  • Joined: 04-November 06

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:43 PM

The defense will pick it up i am not too worried we have all seen these slow starts in the past. I am not liking it but i am not panicking though.

Garrison has been getting better and once the powerplay players get sharper he will get his points.
Hamhuis has been a step behind and has looked very shaky but when he is on which is almost always he is our best all all around.
Bieksa has been medium good and shaky but once Hamhuis gets better i am sure Bieksa will be his usual solid self.
Tanev has been awesome and that time spent on the Wolves has helped his game and clearly the best is yet to come in his very bright future.
Ballard has been solid and looks like his speed and mobility has been helping him a lot while most others have looked much slower then usual.

Edler has looked brutal especially defensively but lots of errors in the offensive zone fighting the puck big time. Edler is on one long bad run of defensive hockey and as far as i have ever noticed will always be his problem and will stop him from ever being a great defensemen. He has been bad all over the ice including not throwing any big hits.

Edler has always worried me the most of all our defensemen and unfortunately he has never done anything to prove me wrong.

Edited by The Big Luongo, 29 January 2013 - 10:45 PM.

  • 0

#71 LeanBeef

LeanBeef

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 11:30 PM

Yeah.. Ballards apparent.. "Brutal play"

I guess he left...
  • 0
Sig too big.
"Being a Canuck fan, maybe sometime down the road be a Vancouver Canuck.... that would conquer all my dreams"
-Milan Lucic

#72 Understand

Understand

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,723 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 07

Posted 29 January 2013 - 11:51 PM

I hope KB3 can transform himself into the Adam Foote type of player.
  • 0

#73 Steve Carell

Steve Carell

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,672 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 06

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:12 AM

Last year Bieksa fought four times in 78 games. He's already fought twice in 6 games. He also leads our D in hits. I'd say he's stepping up. I thought he and Tanev were our best two d-men tonight. Edler is in his 7th pro season, Bieksa in his 8th, and Hamhuis in his 9th. It's not like we're running our D on raw rookies.


Just because you're fighting and hitting doesn't mean you're "stepping up". I mean that's great and all, but you also have to play good defence, and he hasn't been doing that. Mind you, no one really has (except maybe Tanev and Ballard).
  • 1

#74 MrsCanuck

MrsCanuck

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,629 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 09

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:49 AM

Should've kept Salo.
  • 0
Posted Image

#75 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,578 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:04 AM

I agee with you totally. To get out of the west the Canucks will have to get past the Sharks, Ducks, Kings, Blues and Hawks. These teams have just as much skill and speed however they are much bigger and more aggresive...


Hawks are not the bruisers they once were. They are especially small up the middle. The only center they have who cracks 200 lbs is Toews.
  • 0
Posted Image

#76 adniel_g

adniel_g

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:17 AM

Just chillax, the only thing you can comment on this early in a season with injuries etc is the level of effort the guys are putting out. Over and above that critiquing and evaluating players performances is like dissecting a loss...Everything seems to go wrong in a loss, yet the opposite is true in a win. When your offense sucks your defense is also going to be pressured more to score and will be less defensively responsible. Our whole structure is thrown off right now, saying we don't have a defensive leader is ridiculous when its the same crew minus Salo that went to the cup finals, and Salo was not the leader of that group!

Edited by adniel_g, 30 January 2013 - 09:20 AM.

  • 0

#77 adniel_g

adniel_g

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,261 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 07

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:29 AM

I agee with you totally. To get out of the west the Canucks will have to get past the Sharks, Ducks, Kings, Blues and Hawks. These teams have just as much skill and speed however they are much bigger and more aggresive.History shows that the Canucks chances are not that good playing against physical teams in a prolonged playoff run.

MG needs to drop a few pieces and live up to his statement about getting younger and bigger.

I sure miss the days when they had an intimidating player to give the skill guys some room.


Its kinda been that way the last few years now (Sharks, Blues, Ducks, etc having size). If anything we got tougher this season. The only size we can add is in players like Alberts who are fringe players. Zack Kassian/Shea Weber type players who have size and can play at a high level are very rare and expensive.
The only one I can think of that we could have maybe gotten is Big Buff a few years back when he was on the thrashers in a trade and none of you fans wanted to do that at the time considering how horrendous he is defensively.

Edited by adniel_g, 30 January 2013 - 09:30 AM.

  • 0

#78 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,537 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:51 AM

:shock: ....... :sadno:.......... :picard:


The Canucks will never win the Stanley Cup with our present defense. This whole defense by committee idea is ridiculous and doesn't work. The defense has been the issue that killed us in the playoffs both 2011 and last year. People wanted to blame Luongo solely for the losses, but having a lacklustre, and easily overpowered defense is what did it.

Alex Edler will never be the leader that this team needs on the blueline. Yes he can score and hit, but he lacks any kind of grit or leadership. Last night against the Kings he was the reason they tied it up. He couldn't clear the crease (again) and ended up screening Luongo. That is not Norris material now, nor will it ever be. But I am sure a lot of the CDC homers with a crush on Edler will come out defending him as they always have. And these same fools will moan about the forwards lack of scoring or the "questionable" goaltending.

Fact is that both Luongo and Schneider have saved games, Dominated in their positions.

Henrik, Daniel, and Kesler have carried this team on their back.

Has Edler ever saved a game? Has Bieksa ever carried the team? No. Sure Bieksa is a great spokesman and local celebrity, but as a defenseman, his best days are behind him.

The powerplay would be much better if the defense could keep it in the zone, which they usually can't.

If the Canucks ever want another chance at Lord Stanley's cup, they will need a better defense. They will need to trade away some pieces and do what it takes, at whatever the cost to get a true #1. In the process, they should take a long hard look at how Bieksa and Edler fit into this team regardless of their popularity with the fans.


Yet oddly enough going into the finals against the B's three Canucks were being talked about as playoff MVP. Lou, Henrik and Bieksa. Yup, the guy sucks.

I think some of you are still stuck on the Bieksa hate from three, four years ago. Get over it. None of our d-men are elite level so don't expect any of them to play like it. If they were they'd be making in that 8 to 10 million the others are getting. All of our top four are good -dmen who signed for less than they could get elsewhere. Try to find any UFA d-man that puts up 40 or 50 points for the money Bieksa and Edler signed for. Mission Impossible. Even guys like Weber make mistakes. Hell, after 6 games he has ZERO points and is -1. Is he garbage now???
  • 0

MentalMidgetSig.jpg


#79 L'Orange

L'Orange

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,193 posts
  • Joined: 12-November 11

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:15 PM

Yet oddly enough going into the finals against the B's three Canucks were being talked about as playoff MVP. Lou, Henrik and Bieksa. Yup, the guy sucks.

I think some of you are still stuck on the Bieksa hate from three, four years ago. Get over it. None of our d-men are elite level so don't expect any of them to play like it. If they were they'd be making in that 8 to 10 million the others are getting. All of our top four are good -dmen who signed for less than they could get elsewhere. Try to find any UFA d-man that puts up 40 or 50 points for the money Bieksa and Edler signed for. Mission Impossible. Even guys like Weber make mistakes. Hell, after 6 games he has ZERO points and is -1. Is he garbage now???


Thanks for the conjecture. Unless you can provide a quote from a reputable source your statement about Bieksa being considered MVP is laughable, especially considering it would have been Kesler. Unless you didn't see the Nashville series in 2011?

This team needs an elite defender. If you can't see that, I can't help you and your addiction to stats. Bieksa is sloppy. Prove me wrong. And please don't use the San Jose clincher as proof of Bieksa's greatness. That puck basically fell in front of him with no one even knowing where the puck was. He isn't a game changer and never will be. Tanner Glass could have made that shot.

Edited by Canuck-a-nuck, 30 January 2013 - 10:20 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#80 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,537 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 31 January 2013 - 07:26 AM

Thanks for the conjecture. Unless you can provide a quote from a reputable source your statement about Bieksa being considered MVP is laughable, especially considering it would have been Kesler. Unless you didn't see the Nashville series in 2011?

This team needs an elite defender. If you can't see that, I can't help you and your addiction to stats. Bieksa is sloppy. Prove me wrong. And please don't use the San Jose clincher as proof of Bieksa's greatness. That puck basically fell in front of him with no one even knowing where the puck was. He isn't a game changer and never will be. Tanner Glass could have made that shot.


Did you watch the playoffs? Did you listen between periods? Watch Sportsdesk? Kesler was talked about up until the Sharks series. Kesler was injured in the Nashville series and sustained a second injury in the SJ series. He did very little in the western final and was dropped from MVP conversation. I said GOING INTO THE FINALS. The three they were talking about were Henrik, Bieksa and Lou.

I don't think we do need an elite d-man. It's more of a wish than a necessity. I believe we would have beat Boston had it not been for the vast number of key injuries. Even elite d-men get injured. What then? Then of course, how are you going to get this elite d-man? And don't give me the Raymond, Ballard and other spare parts as a viable trade. The truth is most teams that have the elite d-man aren't looking to part with him.

Solid depth is the better option as far as I'm concerned. Which is what we have. One injury can be overcome, but it's tougher if that one injury is the elite guy you spent all your money on.
  • 0

MentalMidgetSig.jpg


#81 Starting Schneids

Starting Schneids

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined: 03-April 10

Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:28 AM

No we clearly do not. This team plays 6 games without Sami Salo and we have one of the worst defences in the league. Sure we don't have one star that carries the defence, but they aren't working well by committee which is the issue - they need a veteran presence desperately because guys like Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler and Garrison are not veterans, they're defencemen in their prime. We need a guy who's played in this league a much longer time, and that was Salo. He'd seen it all. These guys haven't.

As for Ballard yes he's played ok, but he's paired with our best defenceman. You take away Tanev and he becomes our worst in an instance. So yes, Tanev is doing a great job with Ballard. He has turned this pathetic excuse for a defenceman into a decent 3rd pairing guy. You forget how badly he played without Tanev, and how he would be barrated for his poor play. Now Tanev comes along and fixes up his game perfectly.

Basically, we have 4 panicky guys on defence and 2 calm, cool and collected defenceman - Hamhuis and Tanev. We used to have Salo in that mix as well, giving us a set of perfect pairs: Tanev would settle Ballard down, Hamhuis would cover for Bieksa and Salo would help Edler play a more solid game. Now we have a mismatch with Garrison instead of Salo, who is even less experienced than Edler.

Barker and Vandermeer have been in this league a lot longer than some of our guys, I say throw Vandermeer in to see his effect on our other defencemen. This is why I was pushing so hard for Hal Gill or Allen - they would have fit this niche perfectly.



Do you even watch hockey? <_<

Ballard has been great this year- he steadies Tanev completely.
  • 0

Posted Image

The Ratio of Flame Fans compared to Canuck Fans...





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.