pipperoni Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 That's pretty stupid to say you'd take Sbisa and Weber over Bieksa. I honestly wouldn't even take Hamhuis over Bieksa anymore. From what I've seen, probably half the games this year and all of playoffs, Hamhuis is weak in his own end and gets out muscled a lot. As for Sbisa and Weber. Lets be serious. There's a reason why Sbisa is 25 and has been traded twice while racking up a career -31. That +/- is racked up while on playoff teams. There's a reason why Montreal cut Weber (Didn't bother qualifying him). He would be a good 7th D as a fill in guy. He was definitely exposed this playoffs and it was painful to watch. He is not good enough to be a top 4 D. The only way he would have been valuable would have been to severely limit his ice and mostly use him on the PP. That being said, he only had 21 pts, not much of a valuable pp guy either. Gotta agree 110% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realtor Rod Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 The problem with Bieksa is not really with Bieksa. It is mostly his pairing partner. If they ever paired him with a Tanev type dman, he would be fantastic. We just don't have a left shooting Tanev to pair him with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Lord Baltimore Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 I personally would love to see the League get rid of the BS guys in charge and play good hockey (same rules) all the way thru. It's not so much that the rules change (as they don't, really) it's more the players stepping up their game and playing with more intensity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 That's pretty stupid to say you'd take Sbisa and Weber over Bieksa. I honestly wouldn't even take Hamhuis over Bieksa anymore. From what I've seen, probably half the games this year and all of playoffs, Hamhuis is weak in his own end and gets out muscled a lot. As for Sbisa and Weber. Lets be serious. There's a reason why Sbisa is 25 and has been traded twice while racking up a career -31. That +/- is racked up while on playoff teams. There's a reason why Montreal cut Weber (Didn't bother qualifying him). He would be a good 7th D as a fill in guy. He was definitely exposed this playoffs and it was painful to watch. He is not good enough to be a top 4 D. The only way he would have been valuable would have been to severely limit his ice and mostly use him on the PP. That being said, he only had 21 pts, not much of a valuable pp guy either. See here is where dealing in absolutes over simplifies your argument. You are not factoring in several things that have been keys to my stating I would choose those two over Bieksa. Perhaps you are not aware that many of my comments regarding moving Bieksa are with the intention of using that cap to add a top pairing quality offensive dman like Mike Green to the equation, something that I believe is crucial to the success of this team. Now based on that being my goal for moving Bieksa, Sbisa and Weber are a combined cap hit approximately the same as Bieksa going forward. So is what each of them brings equator greater than what Bieksa brings? I would say yes. Weber provides a bottom pairing guy who can help anchor a woeful second pp unit with his shot. He had some success in that area this season once he started being used there. He certainly contributed more than Bieksa (or Hamhuis, Tanev etc) in that spot. As a top 4 dman no I don't want him. But in the context above that is a cost effective boost to our PP. Sbisa, aside from already having been committed to by management, brings a physical element our back end does not have enough of at this point. Some would argue Bieksa provides some of that which is true but again remember the cap hit and the need for improvements at the top of our d. I wouldn't read too much into him being traded twice. The first time he was a highly valued young player traded to acquire a top dman in Chris Pronger and the second time he was part of a very deep d corps and deemed expendable to land a top 6 shutdown center in Kesler. It's not like he was dumped for low picks or garbage players/prospects. As I have alluded to, cap hit is a major factor. Sbisa and Weber plus a guy like Mike Green or even Cody Franson is a net improvement to our d over Bieksa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 The problem with Bieksa is not really with Bieksa. It is mostly his pairing partner. If they ever paired him with a Tanev type dman, he would be fantastic. We just don't have a left shooting Tanev to pair him with. The fact that no one paired with Bieksa seems to work it is interesting to blame all those guys exclusively for that rather than the one common denominator in all those pairings. Bieksa does need a specific type of partner to be effective. But with three good left side dmen under contract that he does not fit with it is easier to move Bieksa and find someone that can bolster our d and fit on one of those pairings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 The fact that no one paired with Bieksa seems to work it is interesting to blame all those guys exclusively for that rather than the one common denominator in all those pairings. Bieksa does need a specific type of partner to be effective. But with three good left side dmen under contract that he does not fit with it is easier to move Bieksa and find someone that can bolster our d and fit on one of those pairings. With that logic, I guess we should move the Sedins. Haven't been able to have a consistent winger with them in like forever - we keep changing who plays with them - guess it's their fault and not the guys that try and make that line after all. Thanks for clearing that up Tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 With that logic, I guess we should move the Sedins. Haven't been able to have a consistent winger with them in like forever - we keep changing who plays with them - guess it's their fault and not the guys that try and make that line after all. Thanks for clearing that up Tips. Lots of fail here. Outside of the obvious that the Sedins have carried several linemates over the years and also had a very good one for a few years in Burrows. The Sedins are the polar opposite of Bieksa. They can play effectively with a wide variety of players of different skill and strengths/weaknesses. Of course it also ignores the fact that the Sedins are still great players who are not declining and who do not need to be carried to be successful. I am not sure you could have come up with a worse parallel to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Hey OP, living in the past doesnt win Cups. Bieksa served us well for many yrs. Now its time to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckofSteel Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 The problem with Bieksa is not really with Bieksa. It is mostly his pairing partner. If they ever paired him with a Tanev type dman, he would be fantastic. We just don't have a left shooting Tanev to pair him with. There's comes a point where you wonder is it only with Bieksa these guys tend to fail. It's not always the other guy, sometimes it is the guy that no one ever questions. What if you take Sbisa off of his pairing with Bieksa and Sbisa plays better? What if Bieksa's play stays the same? Who's fault is it then? Bieksa has had 3 different partners over the past 3-4 seasons in Hamhuis, Edler, and Sbisa. Hamhuis and Edler have both done fine or even better without Bieksa, now let's see how Sbisa plays without Bieksa and if he can excel or if he's just not that good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Lots of fail here. Outside of the obvious that the Sedins have carried several linemates over the years and also had a very good one for a few years in Burrows. The Sedins are the polar opposite of Bieksa. They can play effectively with a wide variety of players of different skill and strengths/weaknesses. Of course it also ignores the fact that the Sedins are still great players who are not declining and who do not need to be carried to be successful. I am not sure you could have come up with a worse parallel to make. How many points do they have in the last 4 playoff series? Less than a ppg. I believe Henrik has 12 points in his last 20 playoff games. They are declining. But way to dodge your own "logic". BTW, are you watching the Ducks game? Bieksa was right - "irrelevant". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 How many points do they have in the last 4 playoff series? Less than a ppg. I believe Henrik has 12 points in his last 20 playoff games. They are declining. But way to dodge your own "logic". BTW, are you watching the Ducks game? Bieksa was right - "irrelevant". How many does Bieksa have? If the Ducks are making Ferland irrelevant (I am not watching) then it only makes Bieksa and our team look even worse. Since they are the ones who made him relevant in the first place. Are you really trying to suggest that Henrik and Daniel have regressed the way Bieksa has? I am sorry but that is pretty dumb. The only players who actually played well were the Sedins and Horvat. Precious Bieksa along with several others played like complete crap. Are we really going to use the Sedins to excuse Bieksa? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Bieksa did his best work paired with the steady Hamhuis. Pairing him with Sbisa is just courting adventure. He has shown that he is no longer a 2nd pairing D-man imo. The arguments go around and around but bottom line, his skills are diminishing. They like his grit and his leadership and the question is whether that is enough to keep him around for another year. If they ask Bieksa to waive, he could either say yes, no or just retire. Is it worth pushing that far? Because I'm pretty sure the answer isn't going to be yes. Waiting for Pedan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3KBieksa Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Why should we put Bieksa or any other player ahead of what is best for the team? The one thing that is obvious is Bieksa is no longer a net positive to this team on the ice. You choose to blame that on Sbisa which is ridiculous. Sbisa is young and has time on his side. Having said that it is not a coincidence that every Dman the past two years who has played with Bieksa has struggled during that time and managed to play well with other partners far more often than not. His denial about the core group getting the job done and his statement that young players are not the answer show just who he is in it for and it isn't the betterment of the team. It is about protecting his job. That much was painfully obvious in his comments. People need to get over 2011. It's beyond embarrassing now. It was a great run despite the team almost choking yet again in the first round vs Chicago. But we lost. And Bieksa was as big a reason for that as every other player on the team. Same as this year. The core group could not get the job done yet again. The fear of change on cdc and within the canucks organization is laughable. Change doesn't automatically mean worse. Hanging on to guys like Bieksa because you might not find someone better is a loser mentality. Winners take calculated risks. They put the team goals above making every player an untouchable even when they are terrible on the ice. Trade him this summer. Go with youth and fresh leadership. If his salary off the books can get us a guy like Green or Franson then waive him if he refuses to be traded. I am sure he will be a good fit in Edmonton or Buffalo. This team needs to look forward not back to 2011. It needs to change with the times. Bieksa is like a VHS tape in a digital world. We all fondly remember when they were a revelation but now they are obsolete. LOL 1. He is not getting traded 2. He is not getting waived However I do agree with that he should be traded... The core needs a change and he should be included. I want Bieksa to keep shining... and Canuck just might not be the team.. But Sbisa still a turnover machine... trading away Bieksa wont change that... I would take Stanton over Sbisa anytime.... Knowing that at least Stanton wont turn over the puck every single damn shift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 How many does Bieksa have? If the Ducks are making Ferland irrelevant (I am not watching) then it only makes Bieksa and our team look even worse. Since they are the ones who made him relevant in the first place. Are you really trying to suggest that Henrik and Daniel have regressed the way Bieksa has? I am sorry but that is pretty dumb. The only players who actually played well were the Sedins and Horvat. Precious Bieksa along with several others played like complete crap. Are we really going to use the Sedins to excuse Bieksa? Lol I'm saying they have declined. They are paid to score goals - Bieksa is paid to defend. Why do you always try to twist what others have said as well as twist what you said yourself? Just admit you were wrong and move on. It's easy - I have been wrong many times and have admitted it - and it feels great afterwards. Edit: what made him relevant were the refs - even Mr. Kerry Fraser said so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Bieksa did his best work paired with the steady Hamhuis. Pairing him with Sbisa is just courting adventure. He has shown that he is no longer a 2nd pairing D-man imo. The arguments go around and around but bottom line, his skills are diminishing. They like his grit and his leadership and the question is whether that is enough to keep him around for another year. If they ask Bieksa to waive, he could either say yes, no or just retire. Is it worth pushing that far? Because I'm pretty sure the answer isn't going to be yes. Waiting for Pedan. I am pretty certain if Benning asks him to waive he will. I mean, his comments suggest he still thinks he is fine so why would he retire and leave millions on the table? He might say no but I would wonder why he would do so just to take on a lesser role? Again his comments suggest he doesn't want to make way for younger players but wants to stay in a key role. If Benning asks they work together and find a place he is willing to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 I'm saying they have declined. They are paid to score goals - Bieksa is paid to defend. Why do you always try to twist what others have said as well as twist what you said yourself? Just admit you were wrong and move on. It's easy - I have been wrong many times and have admitted it - and it feels great afterwards. What am I wrong about? The Sedins carry their line. Even now. Bieksa doesn't work with anyone as a partner. You should admit your comparison is ridiculous. And Bieksa is terrible at defending - you know, what he is paid for - which is kind of my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 What am I wrong about? The Sedins carry their line. Even now. Bieksa doesn't work with anyone as a partner. You should admit your comparison is ridiculous. You are wrong about many things and I don't feel like wasting my time - you are sounding more and more like a troll... "The only players that played well were the Sedins..." wrong. The Sedins are declining "no they are not" wrong. "Bieksa had the most giveaways" wrong etc....etc...etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Wallstreet I admit, it is a pickle. They could keep Bieksa around while he is less than the player he used to be. Or ask him to waive and trade him for very little because everybody knows why he would be on the market. Or they could eat the salary (2.5) and cap hit (4.6) and use him in a utility role as the 7/8 D for the final year of his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 is there anyone that thinks he is worth his cap hit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 You are wrong about many things and I don't feel like wasting my time - you are sounding more and more like a troll... "The only players that played well were the Sedins..." wrong. The Sedins are declining "no they are not" wrong. "Bieksa had the most giveaways" wrong etc....etc...etc... The Sedins are not really declining though, at least to no appreciable degree. They still play pretty much as they always have. And who their winger is doesn't seem to make any difference in that. They adjust very well to whoever they are with. That is why your comparison is not valid. I don't recall saying he had the most giveaways. I would bet he was pretty close though. Not to mention that he was pretty darn ineffective in a lot of other ways offensively and defensively. Based on his comments of how they have been there before etc you would think he would be better. I mean, Sbisa snd Weber weren't there for all those choke jobs so they didn't have the same experience, right? I actually sit and laugh about just how butt hurt you guys get at the slightest criticism of Bieksa. I mean you obviously know there is something to the criticism or it would not bother you the way it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.