Everyone ignoring the part that is true. The Canucks defense can be very very bad at times. Good two-way players, but I'd rather have a defenseman who can handle his own end first. Edler and Bieksa... nightmare. Garrison good, but lacks consistency. Tanev has been great. Hamhuis has trailed off a bit defensively, but he's been good. Ballard doesn't play and Barker/Alberts can easily get exposed.
Keith - Norris winner, can play in his own end.
Seabrook - Defense first, but can chip in points
Hjalmarsson - Mobile, shut-down defenseman
Oduya - Mobile, shut-down defenseman
Leddy - Offensive defenseman
Rozsival - Veteran two-way defender (Salo-esque)
Beauchemin - Shutdown defenseman with big shot.
Souray - Offensive defenseman with big shot.
Fowler - Offensive defenseman
Sbisa - Shut-down defenseman who can chip in points.
Allen - Shutdown defenseman
Lydman - Mobile shutdown defenseman
I agree about Seabs and Keith; however, Hjalmarsson isn't that great, Rozsival is nowhere near Salo-esq, and Oduya isn't all that great either.
As for Canucks, the only reason Hamhuis is playing poorly this season is because he's spending too much effort chipping in offensively, as the team struggles to find scoring. If it wasn't:
Hamhuis- Shutdown D
Bieksa- Shutdown D with offensive capabilities
Garrison- Shutdown D with offensive capabilities
Edler- Offensive D
Tanev- Shutdown D
Ballard- I don't know what he is, frankly.
Edit: error on Rozsival; better defensively, lightyears away offensively.
Edit #2- Hamhuis also has amazing offensive capabilities, though it comes at a cost of him committing to more errors in his own zone.
To say that the Canucks has a bad D corp is stupid; it is better to say that they are playing severely under expectation and sync, and not to its fullest potential.
Edited by Pyrene, 07 April 2013 - 11:13 PM.