wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Well first off this arguement goes both ways. Secondly it's not a conclusion it's an opinion and some peoples opinions are different. It's like when we get the: A-Bieksa is sucks and all goals are his fault nothing good happens when he's on the ice. B-Oh well his +/- is 0 so that doesn't make sense. A-Oh um err uhhhh well ummmm OMG HEZ GONNA GET TRADED AND SO THAT MEANS HE SUCKS CONVERSATION OVAR. I dont think there is anyone (even you or other Bieksa supporters) who can honestly say he is better than average defensively, at best. I would say even that is pretty generous. 5 on 5 he is brutal and a major liability. The stats certainly bear that point out. Since this team relies on solid 5 on 5 play to gain an advantage, his presence does hurt at times. The stats (as miller was trying to point out) certainly support the theory that if something holds true for his entire career, season by season, injured or not, then it is a pretty high likelihood that it is a viable conclusion and not just a statistical anomaly. That was my point. People are arguing that the fact he has been the worst dman on the team defensively even during his high point seasons is irrelevant. Either he adds value by putting up more points than he costs the team, or he is a liability. I think everyone knows where his play right now puts him. 9 games is 11% of the season, it is not too early to start worrying about his lack of point production. Consistent point production is his only tangible value to the team right now. His physical game is inconsistent and his defensive game is suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I don't remember asking for any stats. Who did? I think the reality is that people shove some stats in front of us and say "Seez, I told uz guyz, he's teh suck!" Not that this is a personal attack against you... And people on the other side point to his +/- (a far inferior stat to CORSI) to suggest he is great defensively this season. Some Bieksa supporters argue that people saying he is suspect defensively are just stating a hater opinion with nothing to back that up. One guy did try to provide some stats to actually back up his claim only to be told that stats are not the end all and be all (they arent of course, but in his context they were used in support of his argument and were effective and fairly applied to what he was saying). I think most people know who the ardent Bieksa haters and supporters are on here. They are the ones who can never see that the other side might have a valid argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I dont think there is anyone (even you or other Bieksa supporters) who can honestly say he is better than average defensively, at best. I would say even that is pretty generous. 5 on 5 he is brutal and a major liability. The stats certainly bear that point out. Since this team relies on solid 5 on 5 play to gain an advantage, his presence does hurt at times. The stats (as miller was trying to point out) certainly support the theory that if something holds true for his entire career, season by season, injured or not, then it is a pretty high likelihood that it is a viable conclusion and not just a statistical anomaly. That was my point. People are arguing that the fact he has been the worst dman on the team defensively even during his high point seasons is irrelevant. Either he adds value by putting up more points than he costs the team, or he is a liability. I think everyone knows where his play right now puts him. 9 games is 11% of the season, it is not too early to start worrying about his lack of point production. Consistent point production is his only tangible value to the team right now. His physical game is inconsistent and his defensive game is suspect. You were right up until that part bolded. That part is the sensational over-reactions that I'm talking about. Never said he was great I just said he's good overall. Idiotic arguements like Oberg over Bieksa are just dumb. As well you are smart enough to know there's more than just putting up points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 AV seems to agree on Bieksa's weakness, his defensive play: Something lost in translation, or beat writer hack job? Probably writer with an agenda but still, coach says his defensive game needs work but Bieksa says he's playing pretty good shutdown hockey... and I absolutely agree and I absolutely haven't changed my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 And people on the other side point to his +/- (a far inferior stat to CORSI) to suggest he is great defensively this season­. Some Bieksa supporters argue that people saying he is suspect defensively are just stating a hater opinion with nothing to back that up. One guy did try to provide some stats to actually back up his claim only to be told that stats are not the end all and be all (they arent of course, but in his context they were used in support of his argument and were effective and fairly applied to what he was saying). I think most people know who the ardent Bieksa haters and supporters are on here. They are the ones who can never see that the other side might have a valid argument. I disagree. I think you're generalising again. I don't think that most Bieksa supporters never see your side of the argument nor Bieksa's shortcomings. Again, a hyperbolic generalisation, from a so called moderate. Again, this is an observation of your point and post and in no way meant to be a personal attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I disagree. I think you're generalising again. I don't think that most Bieksa supporters never see your side of the argument nor Bieksa's shortcomings. Again, a hyperbolic generalisation, from a so called moderate. Again, this is an observation of your point and post and in no way meant to be a personal attack. I get the point about your personal attack. Even if it was, I wouldnt realy give a crap anyway, so there is no need to waste your time typing it at the end of every post you addresss to me. If I feel you are attacking me rather than my arguments, I will let you know.... And just for the record, being facetious really doesnt help you seem more amenable to opposing viewpoints. People on both sides (including you) continually make excuses as to why the other side is wrong or why their opinion has no merit. I stand corrected: Maybe they see the argument on the other side, but they can rarely admit that it might have merit without an excuse or a feeble rationalization as to why it doesnt. Both sides are right about certain things and wrong about others. I guess it somehow offends you that I see myself as outside the full out hater group, but my posts disagree with your so called opinion on whether or not I am a moderate regarding Bieksa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 You were right up until that part bolded. That part is the sensational over-reactions that I'm talking about. Never said he was great I just said he's good overall. Idiotic arguements like Oberg over Bieksa are just dumb. As well you are smart enough to know there's more than just putting up points. He is close to the worst dman in the league 5 on 5, and has been so for his entire career. To say he is a major liability is only an overstatement if we are comparing him to AHL or beer league guys. He has, as statistically proven, been one of the worst dmen in the league at 5 on 5 play. How is that good or even average? Talk about a sensational overreaction. I never said Oberg was better than Bieksa or anything else like that so I think youo have me confused with someone else. Yes, there is a lot more to hockey than putting up points. Like solid defensive positioning and awareness. Physical play. Sticking up for teammates by scrapping once in awhile. Practicing good decision making. Working to improve your weaknesses. Yep, there are a lot of other areas. It is just that Bieksa does not really excel at any of them. The only thing he has over guys like Alberts, Rome, Parent, etc. is his offensive production. Without that, whats left. All those guys are better defensively and more physically punishing. They are all a lot cheaper cap-wise too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I get the point about your personal attack. Even if it was, I wouldnt realy give a crap anyway, so there is no need to waste your time typing it at the end of every post you addresss to me. If I feel you are attacking me rather than my arguments, I will let you know.... And just for the record, being facetious really doesnt help you seem more amenable to opposing viewpoints. People on both sides (including you) continually make excuses as to why the other side is wrong or why their opinion has no merit. I stand corrected: Maybe they see the argument on the other side, but they can rarely admit that it might have merit without an excuse or a feeble rationalization as to why it doesnt. Both sides are right about certain things and wrong about others. I guess it somehow offends you that I see myself as outside the full out hater group, but my posts disagree with your so called opinion on whether or not I am a moderate regarding Bieksa. Whoah, whoah, WHOAH! I'll have you know.....it was not a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Whoah, whoah, WHOAH! I'll have you know.....it was not a waste of time. Okay, fair enough. You can choose to spend your own time however you wish. I will just know not to waste my time reading the last sentence of your posts directed at me, as they will include nothing about Bieksa or the discussion at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 He is close to the worst dman in the league 5 on 5, and has been so for his entire career. To say he is a major liability is only an overstatement if we are comparing him to AHL or beer league guys. He has, as statistically proven, been one of the worst dmen in the league at 5 on 5 play. How is that good or even average? Talk about a sensational overreaction. Yup....moderate eh? I never said Oberg was better than Bieksa or anything else like that so I think youo have me confused with someone else. I never said you did. Yes, there is a lot more to hockey than putting up points. Like solid defensive positioning and awareness. Physical play. Sticking up for teammates by scrapping once in awhile. Practicing good decision making. Working to improve your weaknesses. Yep, there are a lot of other areas. It is just that Bieksa does not really excel at any of them. and I'm saying he's not as bad as you are making him out to be. Not nearly as bad as the less thought driven posters around here. The thing is that I'm not saying he's exceling at anything and yet you're quick to point out that he doesn't. He doesn't have to excel at anything to mean that the negative sensational "assessment" is wrong. The only thing he has over guys like Alberts, Rome, Parent, etc. is his offensive production. Without that, whats left. All those guys are better defensively and more physically punishing. They are all a lot cheaper cap-wise too. All those guys are more consistent...well actually one of those guys but whatever, with their defensive play and physical punishing. All of those guys have however had moments games so far in this short season that have been questionable. I'm going to run with your implication about offensive production and just say his has been fine so far this season; he just doesn't have any points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darcy Rota Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I would like to see Kevin Bieksa wear the C for the Canucks. Juice is the true leader on our team. Juice has the respect of management/coaches and his teamates. Go JUICE Go... Put the C on Juice. He is the true leader on our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Al Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha aha lollololo ha ha ha ha... frack off really? ha ha ha ha ha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darcy Rota Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha aha lollololo ha ha ha ha... frack off really? ha ha ha ha ha. Why is this so hard to believe ? Juice already has the A so that would put him next in line. How do you not rate him C material when he is already got the A stitched on his jersey. Is this your first year following hockey ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANUCKLELION Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 AV seems to agree on Bieksa's weakness, his defensive play: Something lost in translation, or beat writer hack job? Probably writer with an agenda but still, coach says his defensive game needs work but Bieksa says he's playing pretty good shutdown hockey... Another great post by Millerdraft. +1 I laughed out loud when I read the below portion of the quote. Bieska thinks it will just take a big game or two to turn things around. Man, that Bieksa is egotistical, us fans have been waiting at least two or three years for him to turn it around. Nope, IMO @29, KB has peaked and won't be turning anything around. I mean the guy even fracks up in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANUCKLELION Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Why is this so hard to believe ? Juice already has the A so that would put him next in line. How do you not rate him C material when he is already got the A stitched on his jersey. Is this your first year following hockey ? I don't think BXa has enough ability or leadership to captain the moose let alone the Nucks. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darcy Rota Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I don't think BXa has enough ability or leadership to captain the moose let alone the Nucks. lol Good thing you don't coach the Canucks as they clearly see him as potential Captain material thus the A stitched on his jersey. Juice would be a great Captain on our team. He is a true leader and an inspiration to him teamates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Yup....moderate eh? I never said you did. and I'm saying he's not as bad as you are making him out to be. Not nearly as bad as the less thought driven posters around here. The thing is that I'm not saying he's exceling at anything and yet you're quick to point out that he doesn't. He doesn't have to excel at anything to mean that the negative sensational "assessment" is wrong. All those guys are more consistent...well actually one of those guys but whatever, with their defensive play and physical punishing. All of those guys have however had moments games so far in this short season that have been questionable. I'm going to run with your implication about offensive production and just say his has been fine so far this season; he just doesn't have any points. Being a moderate has nothing to do with taking a middle of the road approach to each individual aspect of a players game. It has to do with being able to fairly assess his overall game without being predisposed either way. To me, the negatives outweigh the positives with Bieksa. If you see that as being one extreme or the other, so be it. The stats clearly show that 5 on 5 is an area where he is terrible. Is he overall a terrible player? No. But 5 on 5 he is consistently terrible. Just because that does not agree with your take on him doesnt make it wrong or an extreme argument. Let me rephrase for you then. He is below average defensively overall. He is average physically (only because he is far less consistent with it and therefore worse than he used to be). He is high risk offensively and when he actually puts up points, it helps the team at least somewhat. When he doesnt put up points, it magnifies all the other things he is not good at that much more. If 0 points is fine offensive production in your mind then there is probably no point in discussing it with you (production means actually generating some points in this context after all). He is still playing a high risk offensive minded game, and it isnt helping the team on the scoresheet. If the value of an offensive dman is not actually offense, then what is it? He is still making some good pinches, but his shots have not been very good, he has been a lot slower in making decisions even offensively, and his passing has not been very good so far this season. IMO of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Why is this so hard to believe ? Juice already has the A so that would put him next in line. How do you not rate him C material when he is already got the A stitched on his jersey. Is this your first year following hockey ? Was Luongo an A before he got the C? Oh, there goes the theory about the A meaning you are next in line for the C. It doesnt always work that way and Bieksa will not likely be a Canuck after this season, so there is not much chance he will ever be captain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darcy Rota Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Was Luongo an A before he got the C? Oh, there goes the theory about the A meaning you are next in line for the C. It doesnt always work that way and Bieksa will not likely be a Canuck after this season, so there is not much chance he will ever be captain. Not many goalies get to wear the C. It was as desperate move . I would think that most Captains actually do wear the A first. Juice is not going anywhere. Management loves what he bring to our team both on and off the ice. Juice is a leader on our team and it is pretty sad the CDC posters need to pick a player to pile on to. Now that Bernier is gone i guess CDC pathetic posters gotta pick a player. Fans that know hockey can see the intangibles that Juice brings to our team. EG LOYALTY and being a good teamate. Juice is clearly respected by the coaching staff and his fellow players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Not many goalies get to wear the C. It was as desperate move . I would think that most Captains actually do wear the A first. Juice is not going anywhere. Management loves what he bring to our team both on and off the ice. Juice is a leader on our team and it is pretty sad the CDC posters need to pick a player to pile on to. Now that Bernier is gone i guess CDC pathetic posters gotta pick a player. Fans that know hockey can see the intangibles that Juice brings to our team. EG LOYALTY and being a good teamate. Juice is clearly respected by the coaching staff and his fellow players. If the Canucks were so desperate to find a captain when they named Luongo,....why didnt they just name Bieksa then if he was the best choice, as you suggest? The answer? Because he was not and is not the best choice. He will not be back next season, and money will be the number one reason. MG will not likely carry 5 dmen at 3+ million next year when there are more reliable and cheaper defensive options already available and his offensive production has been replaced by Ehrhoff and Edler. The only possibilities that Bieksa is back are if MG cannot sign Ehrhoff to an extension or if Hamhuis or Ballard are long term injured. Even then, Gillis might just go another direction anyway. If he re-signs Bieksa, he takes ownership of one of the ill-advised contract mistakes that ultimately led to Nonis being shown the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.