Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Kevin Bieksa you are really...


Zigmund.Palffy

Recommended Posts

Kevin Bieksa you are really an important piece of this team. If you are traded the Canucks will get a much better player or draft pick back then most people think.

If you stay with this team, you will be a large part of its success.

The threads that people make on CDC to bash you, can be made for any player if that player is under the microscope as much as you are of negativity.

Keep playing your game, but i got 1 peice of advice to you: Keep it Simple

You contributions to the Canucks defensively and offensively will be recognized in a positive manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I got from the last few pages... Bieksa needs a babysitter to look decent most nights (yes occasionally he can do one on his own).

Wasn't Ballard cKB'ing Kovy? I couldn't watch the game just heard radio. Shot blocking maybe 4 shots of his but credited with one?

English please.

And if that's what you got from the last few pages then you should watch more games, or at least watch them later, before posting.

Or not....you could keep commenting without watching, that's fun too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even strength icetime?

2008/2009 70gp multiplied by 15mins equals 1050mins of EV icetime.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/app?service=page&page=playerstats&fetchKey=20092ALLDADAll&viewName=timeOnIce&sort=evenStrengthTimeOnIce&pg=4

Upon a quick glance #117, Carlo Colaiacovo, had 1050mins of EV TOI but he played 73 games and therefore only managed to average 14:23 EV TOI which was below the cutoff. There are fourteen defencemen on that list that didn't make the 70gp minimum and 10 more that played more than 70gp but didn't average 15mins of EV TOI, which means there was 93 NHL defencemen who averaged over 15mins of EV TOI and a minimum 70gp.

There are 84 names on this list:

http://behindthenet.ca/2008/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=70&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D

So you appear to be correct that there is a discrepancy, which is a big problem but 9 omitted is still not close to the 60+ you suggested were omitted.

Just out of curiosity here...if the requirement is 15 minutes of even strength ice time and a minimum of 70 games played how is Bieksa is being credited as being in the bottom 5 for 4 years running when he only played 70+ games 2 of the past 4 seasons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity here...if the requirement is 15 minutes of even strength ice time and a minimum of 70 games played how is Bieksa is being credited as being in the bottom 5 for 4 years running when he only played 70+ games 2 of the past 4 seasons?

Because it fits the narrative better. Duh! :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity here...if the requirement is 15 minutes of even strength ice time and a minimum of 70 games played how is Bieksa is being credited as being in the bottom 5 for 4 years running when he only played 70+ games 2 of the past 4 seasons?

Did they mention as well that everytime Beiksa plays 70+ games he gets at least 40 points per year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

English please.

And if that's what you got from the last few pages then you should watch more games, or at least watch them later, before posting.

Or not....you could keep commenting without watching, that's fun too.

There was my laugh of the day. Thanks, I needed that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin Bieksa you are really an important piece of this team. If you are traded the Canucks will get a much better player or draft pick back then most people think.

If you stay with this team, you will be a large part of its success.

The threads that people make on CDC to bash you, can be made for any player if that player is under the microscope as much as you are of negativity.

Keep playing your game, but i got 1 peice of advice to you: Keep it Simple

You contributions to the Canucks defensively and offensively will be recognized in a positive manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity here...if the requirement is 15 minutes of even strength ice time and a minimum of 70 games played how is Bieksa is being credited as being in the bottom 5 for 4 years running when he only played 70+ games 2 of the past 4 seasons?

Seriously Baggins, you're smart enough to figure it out but just in case you've overlooked it, I'll requote the original post:

It's cut to show a minimum of 5 games played & a minimum average of 15mins per game in the games played in order to weed out irrelevant data.

Here's the past four years with a minimum of 15mins/game icetime and the relevant games played (Bieksa is bottom 5 every year except this one which he's bottom 15):

2007 (30gp min): http://behindthenet.ca/2007/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=30&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D

2008 (70gp min): http://behindthenet.ca/2008/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=70&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D

2009 (50gp min): http://behindthenet.ca/2009/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=50&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D

2010 (5gp min): http://behindthenet.ca/2010/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=1&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D

Bieksa is the only name that is bottom 15 in all four seasons.

People can say I purposely cut it to frame him poorly all they want, but even if you cut 2008/2009 by a 60gp 10mins/game guideline Bieksa is still 3rd worst with only Cam Barker & Brendan Witt below KB.

http://behindthenet.ca/2008/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=60&mintoi=10&team=&pos=D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize now that no one wants to admit that he's pretty much established a trend and will thus be avoiding Bieksa threads like the plague.

There's a few good pro-Bieksa posters, Baggins, EOTM, BedBeats, etc, posting meaningful positive posts, a couple pro-Bieksa posters ignoring any and all negative stats outright, Sharpshooter, LonnyBohonos, etc, (yet they have vaild counter arguments) and refuse any negative critique. The rest are complete caricatures.

As for the anti-Bieksa posters, wallstreetamigo aside, let's just say they're not helping the discussion and 95% are complete trolls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

psssst here's a secret: it won't happen unless you can objectively define the quality of plays. In hockey that's going to be next to impossible due to the nature of the game.

So we should just abolish any attempts at getting there, amirite?

OOPs. I'm not supposed to be allowing myself in threads like these anymore. Cheerio!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize now that no one wants to admit that he's pretty much established a trend and will thus be avoiding Bieksa threads like the plague.

There's a few good pro-Bieksa posters, Baggins, EOTM, BedBeats, etc, posting meaningful positive posts, a couple pro-Bieksa posters ignoring any and all negative stats outright, Sharpshooter, LonnyBohonos, etc, (yet they have vaild counter arguments) and refuse any negative critique. The rest are complete caricatures.

As for the anti-Bieksa posters, wallstreetamigo aside, let's just say they're not helping the discussion and 95% are complete trolls.

It took you 139 pages to figure that out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took you 139 pages to figure that out?

Thankfully I wasn't there for 80% of it and I forgot to add your name as one who can admit player strengths and weaknesses and debate the net gain thereof but let me go! :D

Here's hopin' Bieksa can play light years over his head so we can raise the Cup. :towel:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<br />Seriously Baggins, you're smart enough to figure it out but just in case you've overlooked it, I'll requote the original post:<br /><br /><br /><br />People can say I purposely cut it to frame him poorly all they want, but even if you cut 2008/2009 by a 60gp 10mins/game guideline Bieksa is still 3rd worst with only Cam Barker & Brendan Witt below KB.<br /><br /><a href='http://behindthenet.ca/2008/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7&section=goals&mingp=60&mintoi=10&team=&pos=D' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://behindthenet....=10&team=&pos=D</a><br />

Just looked at the link for 2010-2011 and I can tell you the data for Bieksa is wrong.

They have Bieksa on the ice for 4, 5 on 5 goals for and 7, 5 on 5 goals against

Bieksa has been on the ice for 8 ESG 1 of them 4 on 4 in OT, the 7, 5 on 5 goals against is correct

Not say the stats in the other links are wrong but this is clearly wrong

Edit:

Just looked again and saw that the Canuck stats are for only 7 gp

after 7 games Bieksa was on for 6 GF and 6 GA when on the ice 5 on 5. Again the wrong data

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize now that no one wants to admit that he's pretty much established a trend and will thus be avoiding Bieksa threads like the plague.

There's a few good pro-Bieksa posters, Baggins, EOTM, BedBeats, etc, posting meaningful positive posts, a couple pro-Bieksa posters ignoring any and all negative stats outright, Sharpshooter, LonnyBohonos, etc, (yet they have vaild counter arguments) and refuse any negative critique. The rest are complete caricatures.

As for the anti-Bieksa posters, wallstreetamigo aside, let's just say they're not helping the discussion and 95% are complete trolls.

Honestly, I understand the key crticisms as i've said many times before...again, I don't ignore your stats, i ignore the context of your stats because they are narrative supporting for the most part. The narrative is that Bieksa sucks....not saying that you've asserted that...correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's the narrative trying to be written by the anti-Bieksa crowd.

As I've said numerous times before, stats are not the be all and end all of arguing pro or con. They are a slice of the truth. I fully except Bieksa's downsides as much as I appreciate his upsides...if that makes me ignorant, so be it. My argument has always been, that he isn't as bad as he's made out to be...whether by non-contextual statistical arguments or skewed subjective and biased post game arguments. When it comes to Juice, I take the good with the bad, except, I choose to recognise the bad and celebrate the good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...