Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Garrison and Bieska


  • Please log in to reply
117 replies to this topic

#61 vv2

vv2

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts
  • Joined: 11-November 08

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:18 AM

Yes I did, he made some terrible plays. Like always. There is a reason everyone calls him Casual Kev. He is as streaky as they come.

who the fk calls him Casual Kev?
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#62 Ohnoeszz

Ohnoeszz

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 10

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:20 AM

We have a league leading defense and every one of our top 4 D sucks? It is painful to read here.
  • 1

#63 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,480 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:20 AM

who the fk calls him Casual Kev?


Everyone haha read the GDT`s
  • 0

zackass.png


#64 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,558 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:21 AM

Don't be so hard on Garrison. He just played his first real game as a Canuck. He's been figuring his way out up til now and all of a sudden we switched from a conservative offense to an all-out balls-out game. He wasn't ready for that and it showed. Not the end of the world.
  • 0

#65 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:21 AM

Ballard definitely deserves a shot at a bigger role. So does Tanev, honestly.

I think these guys should be bumped to second pairing.

Then, reunite Hamhuis - Bieksa as the second pairing, and they can play SHUT DOWN defense.

Edler - Garrison can twiddle their thumbs on the third pairing and play forward to their heart's content while 3rd and 4th liners struggle to score on our forwards who consistently out-perform them defensively while they make crappy drop-passes and botched pinches.


I somewhat agree.

Hammer and Juice were a competent duo that were very good in that role.

Every body else's role should be assigned off that pairing.

And i agree that Bally and Tanev should be worked into the PP now. Not only would it be a different look...but using Tanev's RH could be a help.

They have earned a larger role with good play.

It wouldnt suprise me to see them rotated on the PP sooner.
  • 0

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#66 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,887 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:26 AM

You can't base everything on a small sample of a player. Raymond plays 3 good games, and sign him to a 4 million long term contract. It just doesn't make sense to have a bottom pair, making 4 Million.

Ballard has been an offensive defense man throughout his career, but he said, himself, that he was noticing that he was making too many mistakes and need to focus on playing the game the right way. (Sound familiar?)


He is also the consumate team player that would fall on his own sword rather than blame others, even a coaching staff who by anyone's account really have not given him any opportunity to show what he can do offensively here. With all due respect, he wants to play. What is he going to say?
  • 0

#67 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:27 AM

Stay at home defense have become extinct since 2007 since the game has changed to a faster pace. One dimensional defensive minded defense man are hard to find these days. Stop crying about everything, you're acting like a baby. It's just a game. Who cares. "This stupid, that's stupid" please. Give it a rest.

Posted Image
  • 1

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#68 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:32 AM

Don't be so hard on Garrison. He just played his first real game as a Canuck. He's been figuring his way out up til now and all of a sudden we switched from a conservative offense to an all-out balls-out game. He wasn't ready for that and it showed. Not the end of the world.


Indeed. I think he is improving as the games go on. He sometimes appears overwhelmed for his particular skills. He is injured still, IMO.

When he is good and playing simple, he reminds me of Willie Mitchell.
  • 0

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#69 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:41 AM


I've said it all along - Edler was playing great, until the team kind of pushed him to become more offensive and tried to get him to have him replace Ehrhoff in terms of style and wanting him to put up the production. He's not a natural puck mover, none of the Canucks defense are. He hasn't been playing his game for a while now. Still, he's the Canucks most talented defense men.

Team wants to utilize the D and have them be offensive, should have kept Ehrhoff. None of the current Canucks D can skate fast enough to be guys to carry it out. Therefore, they all look stupid defensively.

Don't understand why they continue to do drop passes? because they don't know what else they can do. Ask the natural puck mover..oh wait. We don't have one.



So here we have exhibit "A", where you go on to mention that perhaps it was an error to push Edler into a more offensive role... then carry on to say the team wants the D-core as a whole to offer offensive production, and that they look stupid defensively. So all in all, you come off as saying this with a negative connotations, which would verify the assumption that you disagree with this notion, and perhaps think that there should be more defined roles that suit the players said roles are given to...

The team wants to make everyone two-way defense men so that, they are all capable of putting numbers and defend as well. Just look at how they play. They want them all to contribute and there's pressure to do it. There isn't a stay home D-men on the team but, they'll tighten it up with a quarter of the season left to go. Hopefully...



Here, you continue along this path, and hope that the defense will magically play better D, while playing loose cannon, offensively, without adopting any actual shut-down role.
  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#70 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:41 AM

Stay at home defense have become extinct since 2007 since the game has changed to a faster pace. One dimensional defensive minded defense man are hard to find these days. Stop crying about everything, you're acting like a baby. It's just a game. Who cares. "This stupid, that's stupid" please. Give it a rest.



Then you tell ME to stop crying about the lack of stay-at-home D, even though you kind of just were.

Aside from that one time the Canucks went to the playoffs, Bieksa has never played a shutdown role. I've been bashing him for years now about that.



Why were you bashing Bieksa for years about not playing a shut-down role? I thought you said stop crying... Aren't they a dying breed anyways? I mean, this ain't 2007.

Keith Ballard can skate fast, but we've seen him try throughout the first two years in a Canucks uniform. He's not good at decision making to be a puck mover. It's only when you keep it simple, like the way it is now, that he's reliable and not being a liability defensively.



So Ballard is at his best when he... plays a shutdown role... right? But wait... didn't you say...



  • 1
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#71 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:42 AM

We'll have to agree to disagree. Every time AV has given Ballard the opportunity to play an offensive role, Ballard gets destroyed defensively. Most notably, his first or was it his 2nd year in the playoffs when he got destroyed.

It makes no sense to breakup Ballard and Tanev or move them up.



(you don't even know... also... what opportunity? half a game?)
I can agree with one thing you say: Why break up Ballard - Tanev? After all, they've been playing THE BEST SHUTDOWN HOCKEY THIS TEAM HAS SEEN ALL SEASON.

Lets be honest here, Bieksa has been paired with top shutdown defensive man throughout his career. Mitchell and then Hamhuis. Who honestly, knows what Bieksa can do without them. He's always been a secondary guy, and i expect he will be again. It's something that you just have to live with.



Yea, we've seen lots of Bieksa without those two players. Nothing to write home about. You're right, he's a secondary player. So wait... what's with the paycheque?
  • 1
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#72 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:42 AM

Doesn't make sense for me to continue talking to you until you get cleared up. Your too drunk or stupid to understand anything, just like every time the Canucks lose.



Good stuff :D

You can't base everything on a small sample of a player. Raymond plays 3 good games, and sign him to a 4 million long term contract. It just doesn't make sense to have a bottom pair, making 4 Million.

Ballard has been an offensive defense man throughout his career, but he said, himself, that he was noticing that he was making too many mistakes and need to focus on playing the game the right way. (Sound familiar?)



You mean like the small samples of Ballard's PP opportunities?

If Ballard has been an offensive D-man his whole career, and that is just what we need... then why would we get rid of what we need, change his game, and throw him in the doghouse for his shortcomings?

Maybe because he wants to play the game the "right way", which from what it sounds like, is a shut-down role. Hmm....

I just want to throw this out there, and I'm done with you.

Stay at home defenders are a dying breed, and Bieksa not being a shutdown defender. How is that contradicting? If you aren't drunk then why are you always on these boards acting like a nutjob. No wonder people tell me to ignore you right off the bat. This is what i get for trying.



But you said you bashed Bieksa for not playing shutdown roles? I thought you were in favor of Ballard playing the "right way".
  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#73 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 03:43 AM

Sorry for the multiple posts and small font, but the forum had a hard time handling all your contradictory BS dribble.

Edited by Joe_Shmo, 16 February 2013 - 03:43 AM.

  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#74 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,887 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:00 AM

Posted Image


haha....pwned
  • 0

#75 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:26 AM

lol BedBeats. #winning
  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#76 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:33 AM

Pretty safe to say that puck rushing d-men are more rare than the stay at home D.

A pinching defensive player is nothing without a stay at home partner.
  • 4

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.


#77 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,887 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:38 AM

Pretty safe to say that puck rushing d-men are more rare than the stay at home D.

A pinching defensive player is nothing without a stay at home partner.


QFT
  • 0

#78 Brick Tamland

Brick Tamland

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,134 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:56 AM

Pairings for next game:

Ballard - Tanev
Hamhuis - Edler
Garrison - Barker

Vintage brought up a great point, perhaps we should Scratch Bieksa so give him a wakeup call. His play has been laughable.

At this point I would rate them:

1. Ballard
2. Tanev
3. Hamhuis
4. Edler
5. Garrison
6. Bieksa


good thing you will never be the coach. that is horrible, Barker over Bieksa?
  • 0
I Love Lamp...

#79 Rounoush

Rounoush

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,241 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 10

Posted 16 February 2013 - 06:16 AM

You people all realize that we just won 6 games in a row prior to this loss, right?

You also realize that we allowed a combined 6 goals in those 6 games, right?
  • 0

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


#80 vv2

vv2

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts
  • Joined: 11-November 08

Posted 16 February 2013 - 06:26 AM

good thing you will never be the coach. that is horrible, Barker over Bieksa?

exactly
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#81 PONCHE

PONCHE

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,883 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 08

Posted 16 February 2013 - 07:26 AM

As they've been playing i'd rank them like so:

1.Ballard
T2.Hamhuis
T2.Tanev
4. Bieksa
5. Edler
6. Garrison
  • 0
Posted Image

#82 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,778 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 16 February 2013 - 07:53 AM

Erhoff was a perfect fit with our style of team.  PP is not the same without him.  Erhoff got his shot through on target.

Untill he gets chicken winged by Marchand and goes back to the bench and pouts or stands there like a plug watching Daniel get speedbagged by said Marchand.
  • 0

#83 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,025 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 16 February 2013 - 07:59 AM

Pretty safe to say that puck rushing d-men are more rare than the stay at home D.

A pinching defensive player is nothing without a stay at home partner.


Yea, but stay at home defenders have been a dying breed since 2007 :rolleyes:
  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

http://forum.canucks...in-this-change/

#84 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,590 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 16 February 2013 - 08:16 AM

IMO bieksa only had two noticeably bad plays:

A bad pinch
A bad cross ice pass coming back into our zone.

He's by far our most physical dman consistently for what that's worth

Last night he was our only physical dman...I notice it more now when he is paired with JaGarr who for s big guy seems weak and unphysical...I don't think he protects the puck well, hasn't added hitting to his game, and loses battles to smaller guys.

Still waiting for the type of playoff dman this team needs.
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#85 Clinch16

Clinch16

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 453 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 11

Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:11 AM

You people all realize that we just won 6 games in a row prior to this loss, right?

You also realize that we allowed a combined 6 goals in those 6 games, right?


Ding...Ding!

What a whiny bunch of fans here on the CDC. This thread is just a clone of the 100's that precede it.

Darn, didn't get our 7th straight win. Why is our defense so lousy?
  • 1
Posted Image

#86 VanIsleNuckFan

VanIsleNuckFan

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,639 posts
  • Joined: 31-May 06

Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:27 AM

Wah! Ehrhoff was weak. Garrison looks good!
  • 0

#87 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 239 posts
  • Joined: 29-January 03

Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:10 AM

Our D-guys have made some pretty comical blunders.

It almost seems that everyone takes a turn bumbling around.

Im suspecting Eddy, Garrison, and Juice are playing injured.

But really the vets have to tighten up and be so cute with the puck all the time.

Tanev and Bally have been good because their game is simple.


So, if that was the case of them being injured, wouldn't it be a good time to bring in a Cam Barker, Jim Vandermeer, Kevin Connauton(too bad, he probabily cannot be called up,but I would see it helping like it is with JS now) etc and put either one in a game,where the opponent best dictates using their strengths to be successful?

I would at sometime like to see Ballard get some pp time, he has the speed and talent, maybe being paired with Garrison on the PP, he could help make use of Garrisons shot we have heard of,but not seen much of, and also be quick enough to cover for Garrison if he gets caught. Could be a pair that complements each other on the PP? One who can skate, shoot, pass and one who can shoot
  • 0

#88 higgyfan

higgyfan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,246 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 12

Posted 16 February 2013 - 11:33 AM

With a one and a half months to go before playoffs, these guys need to focus on adjusting and improving their play. Replacing them with lesser players will stop this process. Edler should be playing on the left side. I don't see that Bieksa is playing that bad -people seem to focus only on his risky plays. Garrison will be an important factor in the playoffs. He's the only guy that can clear the net. He's only layed 13 games on a new team in a new conferance.

If these guys are 'playing injured,' the Nucks are screwed already.
  • 0

#89 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,887 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:20 PM

Untill he gets chicken winged by Marchand and goes back to the bench and pouts or stands there like a plug watching Daniel get speedbagged by said Marchand.


Because Ehrhoff was clearly on the team to be an enforcer for the Sedins, right? :rolleyes:

Bieksa and the rest of the supposed "tough guys" on this team folded like a cheap suit against the Bruins. Don't put that on the skill players as it is not their job to stand up for guys.
  • 2

#90 Hyzer

Hyzer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,919 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 12

Posted 16 February 2013 - 02:07 PM

Disagree, this year and in the past he has shown he has it.

He did even at times in the prior few years.

¸Just look at tonight, he made a great play to setup the JS chance that injured Lehtonen, and stepped up on another chance and rung it off the crossbar.

He totally has the ability to be a puck mover.


I think I mentioned this in PGT. Just put Ballard and Tanev on the PP with Kes and the Sedins. Tanev is pretty good at moving the puck and Ballard seems to be good at it as well, plus he seems that he can shoot the puck AND hit the net.
  • 0




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.