CHIPS Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 I will just copy over my response from the other thread. Many guys here believe we should sign a $6 million dman. However I want us to avoid the same mistake that the Flames did last year by taking a huge risk on guys like Bouwmeester. The Flames paid big bucks, $6.7 million, for this guy hoping that he will score for them. Instead Bouwmeester didn't help offense much. And because they wasted so much money on him they cannot sign more dangerous forward to help their offense. They have a very hard time winning because they can't score. Instead we should sign solid and fast skating defensive dmen that doesn't have much offensive abilities. These guys should come at a much cheaper price tag than these offensive dmen and it fulfills our needs much better. I made a poll recently and most people agree that our problem is with our defensive skills, not offensive skills. A lot of people seems to think grabbing a $6 million dman doesn't hurt the team. Actually I believe it hurts the team A LOT. In the cap era when we overpaid players we are weakening the team. Take the Flames for example. Their offense suffered indirectly because of signing Bouwmeester instead of dangerous forwards. What we should do is grab those fast skating dmen with good +/- but not much points. These guys will boost our defensive abilities and come at a cheaper price ($2 to $3 million instead of $6 million). The salary cap that we saved can then be used to acquire dangerous forwards. For example guys we should trade for or sign as FA should be like Mark Fistric. http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8471241 +27 in 67 games, but only scored 10 points in the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Defence was the MAIN reason we lost in the 2nd round again. I say sign hamhuis / re-sign Mitchell (hopefully he gets better) / and put bieksa and edler in the weight room all Fu**ing summer. Hamhuis Ehroff Mitchell Edler Bieksa Salo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 I should have clarified that I don't see a UFA defenseman that could be considered elite that the Canucks even have a remote chance at getting. Is that better? I would take Lidstrom ahead of almost anyone, but there is really no point even putting his name into the mix. He will go to Detroit or he will retire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 To me, the most likely guy with definitive #1 ability/potential that could conceivably be available would be Eric Johnson. The Blues haven't been able to get a deal done with him, which is strange, considering a guy like that you usually try to lock up as a cornerstone. I suggested it in another thread, but Mason Raymond and Corey Schneider may land him. Gives St. Louis the proven top-6 guy and goaltender they covet. But even if it took an additional pick (3rd round or later) on our side, I'd still do it. If that doesn't happen, we might have to go for a D prospect, and hope he pans out. Nashville has a ton of them, and need scoring badly. Raymond for Franson or Blum should be doable. It's a gamble for sure - if the guy we get busts, we'll be regretting it. But something has to be done. As far as I see it, this #1 D is the biggest hole on our roster, and we don't have a prospect with even a long shot at it. I have high hopes for Connaughton and Sauve, but at best, they'll make up a solid second pairing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 While not a Norris candidate, Ohlund was our defensive leader and a total beast. Letting him go was a HUGE mistake. I said so at the time and it proved to be true. If we do go after Hamhuis I hope he's as good as he's been made out to be. I haven't seen him enough to know. I would be all for trading something/someone to get one of the top D in the league. It is an area we need to address for sure. If we could move Bieksa in that trade it would be good for us. He's just not good enough when it really matters. He's far too inconsistent. Plus he's our hightest paid D-man and completely unworthy of his salary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suolucidir Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 That is actually a pretty good suggestion. We could also work Bieksa into the deal and get one of their forward prospects as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjc Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 In my personal view the main reason we lost the Chicago series is because our defense not stacking up to Chicagos(OBVS, right?). This got me thinking. Have the Canucks ever had a real elite defenseman? The last few years it seemed as though we had a pretty strong defensive core. Especially this year. I really thought we were very strong at D, but after watching the Hawks and the Kings in the playoffs this year its been abundantly clear that we are completely out-classed when it comes to this position. Every one of the teams that are left have at least 1, of what I consider to be, elite defenseman. Chicago - Keith, Seabrook, Campbell San Jose - Boyle, Blake Philly - Pronger, Timonen Boston - Chara Montreal - Markov(til he went down), Subban(arguable for sure) And now the past few cup winners Pittsburgh - Gonchar Detroit - Lidstrom, Rafalski Anaheim - Neidermayer, Pronger Carolina - (Didn't have one) Tampa Bay - Boyle New Jersey - Neidermayer, Stevens Detroit - Lidstrom, Chelios Colorado - Bourque, Blake New Jersey - Niedermayer, Stevens Dallas - Zubov The list goes on. Rangers had Leetch and Zubov in 94. Pittsburgh had Coffey. Edmonton Had Coffey. Calgary had Mackinnis. In fact the only team that has won it without one of these "elite" defenseman since Vancouver joined the league was Carolina in 06. I started wondering. Have we ever had an elite defenseman? Heres our statistical leaders in that position: Doug Lidster - 86/87, 63 points, -35 Dennis Kearns - 76/77, 60 points, -25 Rick Lanz - 83/84, 57 points, -3 Paul Reinhart - 89/90, 57 points, +2 Paul Reinhart - 88/89, 57 points, -4 Those guys were pretty good. Unfortunately I never got to see them play(born in 86). Out of the 4 of them I only really new of Lidster(who was also on the 94 Rangers BTW). The point I'm trying to make is that Vancouver has never really had one of those "elite" defenseman. One of those guys that puts up the points and still has a good +/-. The last time we had a guy who put up more than 50 points was Lumme in 96. The last guy to get close to 50 was Jovo in 03 with 46. I think it would be in this teams best interest to invest in an elite defenseman this off-season. To me its the last piece of the puzzle. We have elite scoring as well as scoring depth. We have decent goaltending. Our bottom 6 is above average. All we're missing is that one guy to shore up the defense. Whether through trade or FA signing this needs to be Gillis' number 1 priority this off-season. Personally I'd love to have Scott Niedermayer, but it'd be pretty hard to pry him away from Anaheim. What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupinski Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 To get an elite d-man is not easy, unless there are contract issues, and even then, there usually has to be some animosity between the parties for a player to switch teams or else some difference of opinion on the way a team plays, ice time, etc. (Heatly, e.g.). Of course, no team has any delusions about a player's abilities, so we can pretty much rule out getting high calibre for a batch of players wallowing in mediocrity and potential. One solution is the draft, which is very long term unless a future superstar on D is available (none this year). We can also look at young players we think have a strong upside in the KHL, AHL, ECHL, that is, those who are drafted and have yet to make the jump. Other than that, we may have to put our eggs into having a competent D core and simply wait for a draft opportunity to work out a trade for. In the meantime, let's get some size, some more shutdown guys with heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 I will just copy over my response from the other thread. /topic/275902-general-suggestion-solid-defensive-dmen-instead-of-offensive-dmen/">http://forum.canucks...offensive-dmen/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 I'm a lot older than you and saw many Canuck teams play, right back to the days when people hated Doug Halward. Paul Reinhart was a superb defenseman but he came to us in the latter part of his career. His best years were with Calgary. Still, he was exceptional. Perhaps of more importance than one defenseman is strength through the team and through the defence which, in hindsight, we didn't have this year. I was a season ticket holder in 94 and was thinking about that team in comparison to this year's. I know the game has changed somewhat but here's what that team had: Trevor Linden - all heart and grit, true leader Pavel Bure - one of the league's most explosive goal scorers Sergio Momesso - very mean and nasty Gino Odjick - no one messed with him Tim Hunter - tough veteran with Stanley Cup experience Jyrki Lumme - skilled defenseman Jeff Brown - power play defenseman with incredible shot from the point Dave Babych - tough, solid defenseman Cliff Ronning, Greg Adams, Geoff Courtnall - lots of scoring depth Martin Gelinas - gritty third liner When I look through all of this the one thing that stands out as missing from our current team is the meanness and toughness. Even the finesse players in 94 were scrappy. That's why Don Cherry called Pavel Bure a weasel. They didn't have a great regular season but what would you rather have, a Northwest Divison banner or a Stanley Cup banner? We need weasels.....and wolverines with an occasional grizzly. Anything that bites first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 This board is obsessed with getting Weber out of NAS. Give it up, it's never going to happen. We would have a much better shot at getting Suter instead as NAS might decide to retain Hamhuis and deal Suter for scoring depth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comfortably_Numb Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 I will just copy over my response from the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahf149 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Are you really comparing Hamhuis to the people the OP listed ? Hamhuis is a good D man but he's not an elite D man. Weber and Suter have made him look better than he is in Nashville. He's just being over hyped in this market because he's a B.C. boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 Bouwmeester, your only bad example. Also, elite doesn't mean offensive. Teams left and their elite defenseman: San Jose - Boyle Chicago - Keith/Seabrook Boston - Chara Philadelphia - Pronger Montreal - Markov (Gill is playing like Stevens right now though) I posted a similar topic at the beginning of the year, people are finally starting to realize that the most important position in hockey is defense. A great defenseman neutralized all star scorers and can help score goals. What can an elite forward do? Usually they are one dimensional and can be completely shut down (Crosby, Ovechkin). Goalies rely more on their defense than many people think, take Montreal's amazing structure and defense away from Halak and he wouldn't be doing as amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahf149 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Scott Niedermayer is the only guy I'd like to get out of free agency. If we can't get him then we need to make a trade. I think we need to actively pursue Nieds the way we pursued Sundin. Offer him a one year deal at 7.5 million and if he takes it then we'll have to shed some salary(preferably in the form of Bieksa). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 Hamhuis is better than you think. Like I said hes overshadowed by Weber. Thats because Weber is THAT good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooremooremoore Posted May 14, 2010 Author Share Posted May 14, 2010 Why? Yeah hes great, but he is getting up there in age. Hes slowing down. If you want a Elite defensmen you want to be able to have him around for a long time and why would we spend 7.5 million dollars on one player when we only have 11 million in cap space. This team doesnt need just ONE player to complete its pieces. They are a couple of pieces away from a championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Sedins 1 cup Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 To me, the most likely guy with definitive #1 ability/potential that could conceivably be available would be *Erik Johnson*. The Blues haven't been able to get a deal done with him, which is strange, considering a guy like that you usually try to lock up as a cornerstone. I suggested it in another thread, but Mason Raymond and Corey Schneider may land him. Gives St. Louis the proven top-6 guy and goaltender they covet. But even if it took an additional pick (3rd round or later) on our side, I'd still do it. If that doesn't happen, we might have to go for a D prospect, and hope he pans out. Nashville has a ton of them, and need scoring badly. Raymond for Franson or Blum should be doable. It's a gamble for sure - if the guy we get busts, we'll be regretting it. But something has to be done. As far as I see it, this #1 D is the biggest hole on our roster, and we don't have a prospect with even a long shot at it. I have high hopes for Connaughton and Sauve, but at best, they'll make up a solid second pairing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeria Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Weber ain't going anywhere don't get your hopes up. If he ever does get traded 28 teams would be interested and it would take way more than the names you put out there. They wanted Hodgson for Hamhuis at the deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Durden Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Hamhuis size is a deterent for me.. He's Bieksa's size, and not as scrappy.. We need D the size of OB.. More big body physical players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.