Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Reunite Ham and Juice thread.


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1 Gustavo Fring

Gustavo Fring

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,523 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 11

Posted 15 April 2013 - 09:53 PM

*
POPULAR

Posted Image

+

Posted Image



Anyone miss this D pairing?

The time is now to reunite them, Garrisons been a beast defensively lately just check his +/-
He could cover Edler's mistake and hes used to playing on the right side now...

Soo I think the best shutdown line from 10/11 should reunite, especially come playoff time.
  • 8
Posted Image

#2 canucks#01fan

canucks#01fan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,975 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 06

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:01 PM

Ham and juice walk into a bar and the bartender says "sorry we dont serve food here"


  • 4
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for avatar

#3 Pablo

Pablo

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 966 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 09

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:01 PM

Tanev-Edler
Hamhius-Bieksa
Ballard-Garrison
  • 0

#4 CanucksSayEh

CanucksSayEh

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,419 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 12

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:02 PM

I too would like to see Eddie and Garrison back together. Edlers slowly pulling his head out from his backside, and Garrison has his flow goin good these days.

Edited by CanucksSayEh, 15 April 2013 - 10:03 PM.

  • 0

#5 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,716 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:02 PM

Hamhuis and Garrison have been beast together. I wouldn't split those 2 up.
  • 1

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!


CDCFL - Montreal Canadiens GM
CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#6 Alex the Great

Alex the Great

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: 17-April 12

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:02 PM

I want this to happen because honestly, I miss saying "the Hamjuice pairing."
  • 0

105uyog.jpg

 

Thanks to KhalifaWiz for the incredible sig!


#7 Alex the Great

Alex the Great

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: 17-April 12

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:02 PM

I too would like to see Eddie and Garrison back together. Edlers head has crept out form his behind, and Garrison has his flow goin these days.

Lolwut?
  • 0

105uyog.jpg

 

Thanks to KhalifaWiz for the incredible sig!


#8 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:05 PM

I was thinking that too, but Hamhuis and Garrison have been playing well together. The BC pairing :)
  • 0
Posted Image

#9 Rypien37

Rypien37

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,585 posts
  • Joined: 26-March 07

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:08 PM

Bieksa's D partner should be his popcorn in the press box.
  • 2
Posted Image

R.I.P. Your heart and fearlessness will be remembered


#10 crime911

crime911

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 420 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 11

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:11 PM

Hamhuis and Garrison have been beast together. I wouldn't split those 2 up.

yess

Hamhuis-Garrison
Edler-bieksa
tanev-ballard
I really like this D paring what needs to improve is Bieksa's play. lately he has been sloppy in defensive zone.
  • 0
Posted Image

#11 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:14 PM

Hamhuis is probably saying that little prayer of thanks before every game.
  • 1

#12 Jagr68

Jagr68

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 219 posts
  • Joined: 09-March 13

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:14 PM

Tanev-Edler
Hamhius-Bieksa
Ballard-Garrison


Whoah man! If you really think dropping Garrison to the third pair the way he has been playing lately is a good idea...you haven't been watching!

Edler - Garrison
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Tanev
Alberts

Edited by Jagr68, 15 April 2013 - 10:31 PM.

  • 1

#13 Noheart

Noheart

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts
  • Joined: 01-June 12

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:16 PM

Posted Image

Its hammer, not ham
  • 1
Posted Image

BEASTLY!!!

#14 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,536 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:19 PM


The time is now to reunite them, Garrisons been a beast defensively lately just check his +/-
He could cover Edler's mistake and hes used to playing on the right side now...

Soo I think the best shutdown line from 10/11 should reunite, especially come playoff time.



I'm more worried about Bieksa's play than I am Edlers.

But yeah that would be nice.

Edler - Garrison
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Alberts (Tanev when healthy)
  • 0

zackass.png


#15 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,357 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:23 PM

I think it was prudent for AV to put Hamhius and Garrison together. Garrison has had a chance to play with different partner sthis year and will be better prepared in the event of injuries/changes.
Who knows if AV intends to keep Hamhius and Bieksa on different pairings? I think that getting Garrison and Hamhius accustomed to each other was a very good option, particularly if facing a team that is loaded up on their top line - putting those two together in that kind of matchup makes good shutdown sense.
I think Tanev's health may be a big factor in who plays with Edler although it's a bit surprising that in his absence Garrison and Hamhius have remained together.
I'd kinda like to see a KB2 / KB squared pairing and roll the pairings...
Hamhius Garrison
Edler Tanev
Ballard Bieksa

Edited by oldnews, 15 April 2013 - 10:24 PM.

  • 0

#16 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,943 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 10

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:41 PM

I would like to see Hamhuis and Bieksa back together, but Hamhuis + Garrison have been a very effective pairing and extremely solid defensively. Although dropping Garrison back on the right side with Edler would probably have better overall balance, I think we have to leave the Hamhuis - Garrison pair. Even if Edler - Bieksa is a little scary.
  • 0
What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...

#17 Biasbieksa

Biasbieksa

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 538 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 11

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:42 PM

Bieksa/Hamhuis was our best pairing during the 2011 Season and Cup run. Id love for that to happen.
  • 0

#18 Strawberries

Strawberries

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,563 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 09

Posted 15 April 2013 - 10:53 PM

Tanev-Edler
Hamhius-Bieksa
Ballard-Garrison


uhhh no
  • 1
Posted Image

#19 NP-4815162342

NP-4815162342

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 491 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 12

Posted 15 April 2013 - 11:29 PM

The only reason they broke them up is cause they didn't want Edler to ruin garrisons game being the new guy and all
  • 0

#20 Plum

Plum

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,123 posts
  • Joined: 06-April 13

Posted 15 April 2013 - 11:38 PM

Garrison-Hamhuis
Edler-Tanev
Ballard-Bieska

Garrison has played great with hamhuis.
Edler and tanev can be great defensive players at their top.
B-B Bieska has played worse than Edler, so Bieska can get back to old juice.

  • 0

Kevin Fiala will be a star.


#21 Apples

Apples

    Rarity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,664 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 09

Posted 15 April 2013 - 11:41 PM

I just want Tanev back in the lineup when the playoffs starts. He plays great with anyone and makes up for his partner mistakes

Ham Juice
Garrison Edler
Ballard Tanev

Edited by Apples, 15 April 2013 - 11:42 PM.

  • 1

Posted Image

Posted ImagePosted Image

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image


#22 GoaltenderInterference

GoaltenderInterference

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,002 posts
  • Joined: 03-August 07

Posted 15 April 2013 - 11:44 PM

Bieksa needs Hamhuis more than Hamhuis needs Bieksa.
  • 0

Press the Panic Button! Posted Image

Posted Image
Derek Boogaard, Rick Rypien, Wade Belak, Lokomotiv Jaroslavl
Sig by .CM.

#23 Drouin

Drouin

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,081 posts
  • Joined: 25-March 13

Posted 15 April 2013 - 11:49 PM

Garrison-Hamhuis
Edler-Tanev
Ballard-Bieska

Garrison has played great with hamhuis.
Edler and tanev can be great defensive players at their top.
B-B Bieska has played worse than Edler, so Bieska can get back to old juice.

Favourite pairings out of all. Hopefully Juixe steps up.
  • 0

drouin_sig_by_motzaburger-d7ucejm.jpg

Sig by CheddaBurger


#24 needtogetswole

needtogetswole

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 645 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 07

Posted 16 April 2013 - 12:11 AM

why would we try something when nothing is broken at the back?

Edlers finally coming around
Ballard and Tanev been solid

only player I'm worried about right now is Bieksa but you know he'll come around just has had a few bad games...

our team is fine the way it is.

only thing I have a problem with is EBBETT - god damit i hate him.

Edited by debluvscanucks, 16 April 2013 - 06:59 AM.

  • 0

#25 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 16 April 2013 - 12:25 AM

I too would like to see Eddie and Garrison back together. Edlers slowly pulling his head out from his backside, and Garrison has his flow goin good these days.


If Garrison's got his flow goin, wouldn't we want him to get Juice flowin too?

Ham, after all, is very viscous matter.
  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#26 Bananas

Bananas

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 16 April 2013 - 01:02 AM

Ham and juice walk into a bar and the bartender says "sorry we dont serve food here"


That means at LEAST two things! :bigblush:
  • 0
Hey CDC! Remember this!?

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

#27 Everybody Hates Raymond

Everybody Hates Raymond

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,609 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 11

Posted 16 April 2013 - 01:11 AM

Anyone suggesting Garrison gets moved to anywhere but the first pairing is insane. Garrison is our best defenseman. If he keeps improving he could turn into that legitimate number one we've been looking for. God damn beast of a player

He's nearly PPG in the playoffs as well (although one NHL series is an incredibly small sample size, he's not at fault for that)

Edited by Everybody Hates Raymond, 16 April 2013 - 01:17 AM.

  • 0

#28 SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,350 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 08

Posted 16 April 2013 - 01:50 AM

Reunite Ham-Juice for the playoffs? It's an interesting idea and there's certainly some good history there. Recently, I wrote a stats-heavy post discussing the D pairings, most notably the reasons why Edler-Bieksa and Hamhuis-Garrison made sense (and why Hamhuis-Bieksa didn't make sense).

In that case, I mostly considered GF%. GF% is the percentage of total 5v5 goals scored during while a player/pairing/line/team is on the ice that are goals-for (ie: player X is on the ice for 6 goals-for and 4 goals-against, therefore player X has a GF% of 6/(6+4) = 6/10 = 60%).

GF% is great for the regular season because it basically tells you what combinations and pairings put a team in the best position to win games. It's an excellent stat for choosing lineups.

However, we've all seen how the game changes once the playoffs roll around. Great regular season stats don't necessarily translate into great playoff performances. The funny thing is, there actually is a set of regular season stats that translate well as predictors of a team's overall playoff performance. Generally speaking, these are advanced stats differentials that are calculated from a team's numbers at 5v5 in "CLOSE" situations.

What is 5v5 CLOSE? Basically, these are the even strength minutes of games where the score is close. More specifically, the EV (5v5) minutes during the first and second periods when the score is either tied or within one goal and the third period minutes where the score is tied (this is the formula the stats geeks have chosen).

Recently, there have been a few articles that have looked at team 5v5 CLOSE stats and determined that the teams with the best GF% CLOSE and FF% (Fenwick-for percentage) CLOSE are the teams that tend to generally perform better in the playoffs and are almost always the teams that end up winning the Stanley Cup. Here's a very good article (the best one of the recent bunch) on this phenomenon:

http://hockeyanalysi...layoff-success/

Over the past 5 seasons, the teams that have put-up GF% (Close) over 55 and FF% (Close) over 53, during the regular season, have gone on to the greatest success in the playoffs. All five Cup-winners had GF% over 55 during the regular season. 3 of 5 had FF% over 53 (and the other two had FF% between 50 and 53). Only one team with a GF% over 55 (and zero teams with FF% over 53) has missed the playoffs during this period.

These numbers don't lie. If a team puts up excellent GF% and FF% during 5v5 CLOSE in the regular season, that team has a vastly superior chance of doing well in the playoffs (compared to the teams that don't put-up the numbers). Here's some good news: the Canucks are one of the few NHL teams that has excellent GF% and FF% during 5v5 CLOSE (Vancouver is currently #3 overall in GF% at 59.6 and #7 overall in FF% 53.2: http://stats.hockeya...CT&sortdir=DESC).

Given that the standard for team stats is >55 GF% (Close) and >53 FF% (Close), I figured that this would also be a good way to determine the best defensive pairings for the playoffs. Basically, I'm theorizing that the Canucks should choose a defensive lineup that pairs defensemen who put-up the best GF% and FF% when they play together.

WOWYs ("with or without you"--stats for when players play together and apart) from Stats.HockeyAnalysis.com track the GF% numbers for all NHL players but don't tract FF% (WOWY) for individual players. However, they do track CF% (Corsi-for percentage), which should be very close to FF% (please note: Corsi=shots+missed shots+blocked shots; Fenwick=shots+missed shots). With that all said, here's what would seem to be the best choices for defensive pairings, based on statistical evidence from the 2013 regular season (all stats from 5v5 Close situations):

Edler-Garrison (62.5 GF%, 55.2 CF%)
Hamhuis-Tanev (100 GF%, 53.3 CF%)
Alberts-Bieksa (66.7 GF%, 54.0 CF%)

The above players all provide stats (when paired together) that are better than the Cup-winning benchmarks of 55 GF% and 53 CF% (substituted for FF%). Here are the stats for some other possibilities (including some of the "popular" options):

Edler-Bieksa (100 GF%, 53.3 CF%)
Hamhuis-Garrison (50.0 GF%, 55.3 CF%)
Ballard-Tanev (50.0 GF%, 53.8 CF%)

Hamhuis-Bieksa (60.0 GF%, 49.6 CF%)
Edler-Tanev (25.0 GF%, 59.6 CF%)
Ballard-Garrison (33.3 GF%, 64.0 CF%)

A few things worth noting:

The Canucks' current top-four (Edler-Bieksa and Hamhuis-Garrison), while putting up the best 5v5 stats in all situations (total EV TOI), doesn't put-up the best stats during close situations. Edler-Bieksa, to the surprise of many, put-up excellent numbers across the board and in all situations but that pairing forces Garrison into a suboptimal role with Hamhuis, Alberts, or Ballard (in terms of 5v5 Close and its predictive value for playoff performance). That's why Edler-Garrison, for the playoffs, becomes preferable over Edler-Bieksa.

Hamhuis-Garrison has been very strong through the regular season, putting up good overall numbers in all situations but, in terms of 5v5 Close and playoff performance prediction, we see that Hamhuis can get a significant boost from playing alongside Tanev instead of Garrison.

The thread itself was about the Hamhuis-Bieksa (Ham-Juice) pairing and, while that pairing does put-up good GF% (60.0), their CF% (49.6) isn't all that impressive. Better off, again likely to the surprise of many, to pair Alberts-Bieksa (66.7 GF%, 54.0 CF%).

I've ranted significantly in the past about Edler-Tanev as a pairing. They're just terrible together. Their overall stats together are horrendous and there are probably no two other players on the Canucks (who have played significant minutes together) who have a worse effect on each other's performance. GF% tells the story clearest with the pairing putting up a miserable 25.0 (in 5v5 close situtations). Play them away from each other (ie: paired with anyone else) and Edler's GF% (Close) jumps to 60.9 and Tanev's to 64.3. Their CF% (Corsi) might create something of a distraction, in that a 59.6 CF% is quite high. However, this becomes far less significant when you consider that both Edler and Tanev put-up overall CF% numbers (ie: their average with all partners) that are in the mid-to-high 50's. From what we've seen over the 116:30 (and 75:20 in close situations) that these two have played together this season, Edler-Tanev probably shouldn't play alongside each other again until next season's training camp (and maybe not even then) and they certainly shouldn't be considered as a pairing for this postseason.

And finally, a pairing that I've wanted to see tried together during the regular season is Ballard-Bieksa (they have a 100 GF% in their 2013 EV TOI). However, their CF% (Close) is only 40.0 and they have only played a TOI (together) of 14:33 (of 5v5 Close). Alberts and Bieksa have played more than twice the TOI together this season and have excellent stats for both GF% and CF%. Even though I'd like to see KB4-KB3, I have to pick AA-Juice for the final playoff pairing.

For those interested, here are links to the 2013 WOWY stats (GF%, CF%, and much more) for each of the top seven Canucks' defensemen (for 5v5 CLOSE situations & with zone starts adjusted):

Edler: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close
Bieksa: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close
Hamhuis: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close
Garrison: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close
Ballard: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close
Tanev: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close
Alberts: http://stats.hockeya...13&sit=5v5close

For an extra bonus, here are the GF% and CF% stats (from 5v5 close situations) for each of the top seven defensemen, compared for whether they're playing in front of Cory Schneider or Roberto Luongo. I wanted to check this myself, just out of curiosity, so I figured I'd share. I'll put the results in a spoiler, as this post is already quite lengthy:

Spoiler

  • 3

#29 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 12

Posted 16 April 2013 - 04:43 AM

I think KB needs a game off, call it a maintenace day or benching, he has be awful the last few games. If this was Ballard, Ballard would probably have been sent down to Chicago.
  • 0

#30 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,656 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 16 April 2013 - 05:18 AM

Bieksa and Edler together is just asking for trouble, especially in the playoffs when speed will kill both of them. Both get caught flat-footed far too often and both are guilty of turnovers.

Garrison is surprisingly quick on his feet and rarely gives up turnovers.
Hamhuis sits back a fair bit and rarely gets beaten around by speed (as is Tanev).

Makes sense that you pair one of our good D-men with our poor, offensive ones, but right now Garrison and Hamhuis are playing well together. In the playoffs though, I'd like to see this for Game 1:

Edler - Garrison (both can play physically, both bring offence and Garrison can mop up Edler's mistakes)
Bieksa - Hamhuis (as above, but Bieksa is the physical one)
Alberts - Tanev/Barker (need at least one physical beast and Alberts is that).
  • 0
Posted Image




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.