ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 I'm a little curious to what everyone else thinks is the Canucks best D when our 2 best are out of the lineup. It's not easy to pick imo, I think it goes to show how weak this D really is when Edler and Tanev are not in the lineup, but even when those 2 are in the lineup the D is still really weak behind them. Imo for this team to be a playoff team or make a push in the playoffs one day, they need more depth on D for that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boeserker Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 Help me https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/201671/quinn-hughes , you're my only hope! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 Easily Hutton. Kid's completely turned his game around. He's involved, plays with urgency and is there for his teammates. Turns out Green saw something in him he may not have seen himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 Hutty has stepped it up for sure, but had to go Stecher on this one, partly because it always seems harder to find right side depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 Stecher the best dman even with those guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slegr Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 Tryamkin. He's got a better +/- for the Canucks this year than Hutton. He does such a good job for the team you hardly notice him out there... that's how a good defenseman is supposed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 I hate to say it but the answer is likely the same as when they are in the lineup...Quinn Hughes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 Gdbranson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 I think Stecher has probably played the best (slightly) but Hutton is the guy who is the best. He has more natural ability than TS and I think his instincts are better. You have to give Green credit for this. A year ago, Hutton looked like he could be a bust, but Travis handled him perfectly. I've always said, one of a coach's main tasks is to figure out how to motivate players. Some need a pat on the back and some need a kick in the pants. Hutton needed a kick and props go to TG for his punting prowess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 The list made me cringe. Tank Insurance Plan policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucks780 Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 I guess someone picked Pouliot as a joke? I have to say Hutton. There's not much panic in his game this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 If Stetcher can improve his shot, I'd put him at #1. For now, it's Hutton for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 From that anemic list of Canucks D, I’d only shudder imagining watching the Canucks play if Guddy wasn’t there. So, for me, it’s Guddy. Not because he’s the best Dman, but because he is irreplaceable and the only thing stoping the Canucks from becoming abuse victims again. I’d have two EG’s before I had two Huttons, Stetchs, Poops, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dombrova22 Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 8 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said: From that anemic list of Canucks D, I’d only shudder imagining watching the Canucks play if Guddy wasn’t there. So, for me, it’s Guddy. Not because he’s the best Dman, but because he is irreplaceable and the only thing stoping the Canucks from becoming abuse victims again. I’d have two EG’s before I had two Huttons, Stetchs, Poops, etc. How high are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Dombrova22 said: How high are you? Never again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dombrova22 Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 1 minute ago, 189lb enforcers? said: Never again. Lmao, you'd like two -27 players on defense. Makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, Dombrova22 said: Lmao, you'd like two -27 players on defense. Makes sense. I’d rather lose the game than the fight, anyway. The Canucks are still crawling out of their image-hole of being the league’s bitch. During a rebuild, you need rugged character guys to at least maintain the sweater’s integrity. If this team lost Hutton for the season, it wouldn’t matter. Same goes for Stetch and Poop. Losing Guddy would hurt the team’s ability to push back against physicality. He provides something that no other Canucks Dman can. I place more value on intimidation and toughness than you do. I’d rather lose well than lose and be beaten up. That’s fine if you don’t see it the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warrchief Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 7 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said: I’d rather lose the game than the fight, anyway. The Canucks are still crawling out of their image-hole of being the league’s bitch. During a rebuild, you need rugged character guys to at least maintain the sweater’s integrity. If this team lost Hutton for the season, it wouldn’t matter. Same goes for Stetch and Poop. Losing Guddy would hurt the team’s ability to push back against physicality. He provides something that no other Canucks Dman can. I place more value on intimidation and toughness than you do. I’d rather lose well than lose and be beaten up. That’s fine if you don’t see it the same way. In the current NHL, I would completely disagree. Guddy has brought no value and rarely reacts or gives energy to the line up (case and point, the two times he failed to react when Pettersson got hurt). If we lost Guddy, I think we would have more wins than losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 42 minutes ago, warrchief said: In the current NHL, I would completely disagree. Guddy has brought no value and rarely reacts or gives energy to the line up (case and point, the two times he failed to react when Pettersson got hurt). If we lost Guddy, I think we would have more wins than losses. I’ve seen enough of Guddy-less Canucks hockey. He’s the only D I’d miss if he was actually gone. Interestingly, you guys want to revert back to what it was before, with Hutton being the rugged presence in front of Marky. Suit yourselves. He might not be the MVP back there, as I said when I first posted, but he is the only resemblance of a backbone, albeit seemingly missing at times. Feel free to choose Stetch or Hutton. I wonder if their trade values are the same as Guddy’s today. Somehow I doubt JB is fielding calls about those two, but wouldn’t be surprised if he is being asked about EG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Industrious1 Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 I think the value of Gudbranson is more what doesn't happen when he is on the ice more than what he actually adds into the play. So for whatever that is worth in today's NHL, that is the value he brings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.