Kevin Bieksa you are really...

[wallstreetamigo]

And as always, you always speak with hyperbole. I was not ignoring your point...because you didn't make a point specifically saying that Bieksa was either asked or not asked to earn his playing time this season.

No point about being asked there. In fact you assert that they both are equal to the task of the PK and so there isn't an earning process taking place to decide one over the other.

Ah, see that was your point. Not that Bieksa was never asked to earn his minutes...but that Ballard was getting too many sheltered minutes on the third pairing...and you think that means it's "left over" minutes, as opposed to managed minutes for a player who is coming off hip surgery and then a concussion. AV will start to give Ballard more minutes, once he earns them or if there are other injuries. He is not the better defenceman currently, not because he isn't a good defenceman, but because he hasn't earned his way off of the "managed minutes" third pairing....which has nothing to do with Bieksa or Ballard's worth over or under Bieksa's

Besides...Juice didn't really have to be asked or not asked...the coach saw fit to compliment his game with a pairing with Hamhuis, because Bieksa has already shown to be an offencive minded dman from his historical play under the same coach. AV doesn't need to evaluate what he already knows. There is no point to be made about asking Juice to earn minutes or even handing out minutes...because he was paired with Alberts for his ability to play with anyone, when paired with Alberts and then with Hammer; for his offencive balance to that pairing. Bieksa is versatile, hostile and mobile...and to think otherwise, is ig'nant denial.

And as always....shut up hater.

I have made the point several times in different responses that Bieksa was given his ice time rather than earning it as you suggest. maybe you didnt see those posts, who knows?

Ballard and Bieksa are actually pretty similar dmen. Bieksa has been a bit better offensively and Ballard has been much better defensively and physically over their time in the league.

You are actually admitting my point in your post. That AV made a determination himself to give Bieksa top minutes without making him earn them. Ballard, according to you, now has to do magical things to earn his time. The fact at the end of the day is that other than to you, how can anyone consider that an even and fair environment where everyone is expected to earn their ice time? You are wrong my friend and maybe the reason you dont see it is because the beneficiary of that favoritism is the player you support.

Given the widespread consensus that Ballard was acquired to replace Bieksa because of their similar styles, I have my doubts that AV will risk having Bieksa look even remotely expendable by giving Ballard a true, fair shot to play his game (which has always been big minutes, PP time, and PK time on the top 2 pairings).

The real question is how long will MG let AV make him look like a fool for acquiring Ballard in the first place at such a high price?

[Hugemanskost]

I don't understand how y'all don't tire of this back-and-forthness

We get it. Some of you like Bieksa. Some of you don't. There's really no point reiterating it again and again or resorting to insulting each other.

This^^. There is almost as much whinging and moaning over parts of speech and literary devices and the freaking San Jose Sharks as there is over KB. The Canucks are 8-3-2 and in first place in the NW where they belong. Why can't we agree to disagree about Bieksa instead of flinging poo at each other? Sheesh!

[bbllpp]

<br />Good point.  But, how many giveaways (11) resulted in a goal for the other team VS how many takeaways (9) resulted in a goal for the nucks?<br /><br />I think I could take a pretty good stab at the answer<br />

I think it is better to see it as how many take-aways broke up scoring chances not creating scoring chances.

OK lets have a look

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 1 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 3 giveaways in game 2 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 5 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 6 and was on for a least 1 goal against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 7 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 9 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 give away in game 10 and wasn't on for any goals against

so therefore I would say the most that could've resulted in a goal was 1.

[Clark Kent]

I think it is better to see it as how many take-aways broke up scoring chances not creating scoring chances.

OK lets have a look

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 1 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 3 giveaways in game 2 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 5 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 6 and was on for a least 1 goal against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 7 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 9 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 give away in game 10 and wasn't on for any goals against

so therefore I would say the most that could've resulted in a goal was 1.

Burn much H&D?

[Gnickers87]

...playing much better since you were paired with Alberts.

Who woulda thunk it?

[Sharpshooter]

I have made the point several times in different responses that Bieksa was given his ice time rather than earning it as you suggest. maybe you didnt see those posts, who knows?

Ballard and Bieksa are actually pretty similar dmen. Bieksa has been a bit better offensively and Ballard has been much better defensively and physically over their time in the league.

You are actually admitting my point in your post. That AV made a determination himself to give Bieksa top minutes without making him earn them. Ballard, according to you, now has to do magical things to earn his time. The fact at the end of the day is that other than to you, how can anyone consider that an even and fair environment where everyone is expected to earn their ice time? You are wrong my friend and maybe the reason you dont see it is because the beneficiary of that favoritism is the player you support.

Given the widespread consensus that Ballard was acquired to replace Bieksa because of their similar styles, I have my doubts that AV will risk having Bieksa look even remotely expendable by giving Ballard a true, fair shot to play his game (which has always been big minutes, PP time, and PK time on the top 2 pairings).

The real question is how long will MG let AV make him look like a fool for acquiring Ballard in the first place at such a high price?

Lol...seriously....magical things?? You're awesome. At least you're consistent in your intentional or unintentional hyperbole. You're too much.

No, I wasn't making or admitting your point. I was asserting that Bieksa has already "earned" his spot and playing time on this team over the years here. Just like if Salo was healthy, he wouldn't have to "earn" his spot or playing time. They've already earned it. They are known quantities to AV. They don't need to come into a new team and prove themselves, like say, Ballard and Hamhuis had to.

Hamhuis has proven himself through the preseason and the time played that his truly is all that and a bag of chips. Ballard hasn't....and it's not his fault either. He's coming off surgery, he's had a compounding injury to his recovery and on top of that he's being intentionally managed as a result of those two things. So, his "earning" more minutes isn't over, it's getting started and will continue. He has plenty of time to "earn" more minutes. But, as of right now he hasn't earned them. He may also may be being held back until he's more comfortable with the system or for his recovery needs or for the coaching's staff comfort level, till he gets more oppurtunities to "earn" his minutes.

I don't think it's favortism...if anything AV's job is pn the line too. If AV can't put thogether a far advancing playof team because of things like petty favortism, he'll be let go...especially with the lineup he's been given. You're reading way too much into the conspiracy theories with the doubts about AV's motives, or your suspicions of his motives and thoughts and actions. And MG and AV seem to discuss things amongst each other....i don't think there's am atempt for AV to make MG look foolish, at all. Quite on the contrary...it seems that AV and MG are on the same page for everything i've seen between them since MG got here. MG doesn't coach the player's...and I don't mean to sound patronizing to you by saying that....it's just a cuff upside your head to remind you that these guys are professionals and that are given room to do their jobs and not be micromanaged, by the guy above them, regardless if you're talking about MG or AV...or both.

[Sharpshooter]

This^^. There is almost as much whinging and moaning over parts of speech and literary devices and the freaking San Jose Sharks as there is over KB. The Canucks are 8-3-2 and in first place in the NW where they belong. Why can't we agree to disagree about Bieksa instead of flinging poo at each other? Sheesh!

No ones flinging anything at you and you haven't thrown your hat into the ring much here anyways...so what's the point of whinging about something that you can conciously avoid.

What a weird post. Avoid the thread if it doesn't interest you. Simple.

Sheesh, fricking CDC version of Rodney King over here.

[AbbyNucksFan]

Good point. But, how many giveaways (11) resulted in a goal for the other team VS how many takeaways (9) resulted in a goal for the nucks?

I think I could take a pretty good stab at the answer

I think it is better to see it as how many take-aways broke up scoring chances not creating scoring chances.

OK lets have a look

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 1 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 3 giveaways in game 2 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 5 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 6 and was on for a least 1 goal against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 7 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 9 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 give away in game 10 and wasn't on for any goals against

so therefore I would say the most that could've resulted in a goal was 1.

LOL

[Amish Rake Fighter]

I don't understand how y'all don't tire of this back-and-forthness

We get it. Some of you like Bieksa. Some of you don't. There's really no point reiterating it again and again or resorting to insulting each other.

You wanna talk banging your head against the wall, I've seen the same set of 4 or 5 people on other boards, specifically St. Louis Post Dispatch, that have been literally having the same arguments for almost 8 years now over the role of religion in schools, the 2nd amendment (right to bear arms) and homosexuality. It picks up around election time but it's never stopped and I don't think it ever will.

[Hugemanskost]

No ones flinging anything at you and you haven't thrown your hat into the ring much here anyways...so what's the point of whinging about something that you can conciously avoid.

What a weird post. Avoid the thread if it doesn't interest you. Simple.

Sheesh, fricking CDC version of Rodney King over here.

Touche, Sharpshooter! You rock, man! I truly do enjoy reading this thread. I have been busy at work so, I agree, not much investment in it lately. What I meant was for you guys to stick to the stats and support for your points rather than calling each other names.

I hate to admit it, dude, but the Rodney King reference was right over my head. Explain?

By the way, Bieksa has been an above average defender for the Canucks this year.

Rock on!

[sampy]

I think it is better to see it as how many take-aways broke up scoring chances not creating scoring chances.

OK lets have a look

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 1 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 3 giveaways in game 2 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 5 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 6 and was on for a least 1 goal against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 7 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 9 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 give away in game 10 and wasn't on for any goals against

so therefore I would say the most that could've resulted in a goal was 1.

Thanks for stats bbllpp. It seemed to send the trolls back to their hole for a bit. I am with you on the deeper our depth, the better chance we have come playoff time. Depth is new to this organization and I think some don't realize its importance.

Thank god google images can come up with lame comebacks for you. It's obvious you can't muster up the brain power for your own.

I like the pics. It gives me a better image when reading posts other than the image of a 14year old when I read yours, Barry's and Canucklion's troll posts. In fact, if we got rid all 3 of you, these boards would be a lot better place to be. Imagine everyone cheering for the team as a whole.

[Sharpshooter]

Touche, Sharpshooter! You rock, man! I truly do enjoy reading this thread. I have been busy at work so, I agree, not much investment in it lately. What I meant was for you guys to stick to the stats and support for your points rather than calling each other names.

I hate to admit it, dude, but the Rodney King reference was right over my head. Explain?

By the way, Bieksa has been an above average defender for the Canucks this year.

Rock on!

Lol....no worries....just being my usual sweet self.

Mr. Congeniality as it were.

Stats arguments have their place and have been used, but they're an incomplete source for arguiing for either side. They're fun to support each argument, but they're not the be all and end all. Sometimes a little subjectivity is on order too.

Oh and the Rodney King reference towards you was this :

[Barry_Wilkins]

2 of Ballards 5 ES GA have come from playing against the 4th line

That's a ridiculously small sample size. Try comparing their defensive prowess in their respective careers.

[Hugemanskost]

Lol....no worries....just being my usual sweet self.

Mr. Congeniality as it were.

Stats arguments have their place and have been used, but they're an incomplete source for arguiing for either side. They're fun to support each argument, but they're not the be all and end all. Sometimes a little subjectivity is on order too.

Oh and the Rodney King reference towards you was this :

Bahahahaha! Sha-weeeeeeeet! Ya zinggggggged me goodzzzzzzzzz! Always have enjoyed your humor!

Subjectivity has its place but, as a teacher, I'm not much for it. You get too many responses like, "...Biekszzza sux roxxsszz..." and "... Cody Hodgsonzzzzzz a bust ZZZOMG!" I love it when a stat about Bieksa silences another troll underneath the bridge!

[Standing_Tall#37]

I don't understand how y'all don't tire of this back-and-forthness We get it. Some of you like Bieksa. Some of you don't. There's really no point reiterating it again and again or resorting to insulting each other.

Exactly I just wish the retards would keep it to this site, because they yap about it on all hockey sites... and before other fans were willing to offer high stuff for him, but now they're starting to listen to all the cdc generated stupidity. I like Bieksa, but if he does end up getting traded I hope we get a good return, something to benefit the team. But imho he brings some toughness that no one else on this defense corps brings, so he's more valuable forr that if nothing else.

[wallstreetamigo]

Exactly I just wish the retards would keep it to this site, because they yap about it on all hockey sites... and before other fans were willing to offer high stuff for him, but now they're starting to listen to all the cdc generated stupidity. I like Bieksa, but if he does end up getting traded I hope we get a good return, something to benefit the team. But imho he brings some toughness that no one else on this defense corps brings, so he's more valuable forr that if nothing else.

Ballard and Alberts say hi. At least both of them have actually had a fight this season......to say Bieksa is our only Dman who brings toughness is way too much of a blind Bieksa homer statement.

[Standing_Tall#37]

Ballard and Alberts say hi. At least both of them have actually had a fight this season......to say Bieksa is our only Dman who brings toughness is way too much of a blind Bieksa homer statement.

These videos of all three's fight abilities say HI back!

Reminds you of Gill doesn't it?

OHH no's I hope we get protection from superstars

ok Pansies lets see how its done

[Barry_Wilkins]

I think it is better to see it as how many take-aways broke up scoring chances not creating scoring chances.

OK lets have a look

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 1 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 3 giveaways in game 2 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 5 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 6 and was on for a least 1 goal against

Bieksa had 2 giveaways in game 7 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 giveaway in game 9 and wasn't on for any goals against

Bieksa had 1 give away in game 10 and wasn't on for any goals against

so therefore I would say the most that could've resulted in a goal was 1.

These putative "objective" stats are a total joke, as are the giveaway stats in general. If giveaway stats meant anything, Ballard, for example, would be the worst D man in the league (look at last year's totals).

First, it matters who's compiling the stats. Think there's a uniform procedure for stat takers in each of the thirty rinks? Just as hit totals are completely skewed (some statisticians give out a home "hit" when their man breathes on an opponent; with others, it needs to be a noticeable hit) so too are giveaway totals.

And the nature of "giveaways" are much more ambiguous. I've already detailed many examples, but I'll just condense a few here. Bieksa throws a bad pass into his D partner's skates. That D man coughs up the puck to an opponent immediately pressing him. Guess who gets the minus 1? Bieksa allows a D man to back him up, without pressure, who then makes a dangerous foray into the zone with support. No stats for that. Bieksa loses one of his many many puck battles. Lost possession. No giveaway stats for that either. Bieksa leaves his man to check another. Original check is now free. No stats for that. Bieksa pinches badly creating a two-on-one against. No stats for that. Bieksa makes a poor outlet pass which results in the opponent's possession. Nope, no giveaway there, either. And on and on.

I wish people would quit looking at those facile stats, and instead just make common sense conclusions about what they see on the screen or at the rink. One stat, of course, is important. We all know that defensively, Bieksa is either suspect (his lovers) or atrocious (his haters), but the one simple stat that everyone rightly points to on the offensive side is points. No one gets kudos for "effort" or chances. To be blunt, offense means points. For all of Bieksa's chances up ice, it's resulted in a paltry 3 points this year. And last year's totals were underwhelming, too.

Bieksa's played a few good games in a row. This is what #3's supporters have been reduced to.

[Sharpshooter]

Ballard and Alberts say hi. At least both of them have actually had a fight this season......to say Bieksa is our only Dman who brings toughness is way too much of a blind Bieksa homer statement.

Lol...come on pal.

There's no comparison to Juice by Alberts or Ballard or ANY defenceman on this team, who the man is, when it come to handing out the knuckle sandwiches.

Those other two, yes provide "toughness" as far as physicality...but when it come to the handing out the beats....ain't no one got nothing on Boom Boom Bieksa.

There's no argument here and no equivalency in comparison to him.

/discussion.

[sampy]

Ballard and Alberts say hi. At least both of them have actually had a fight this season......to say Bieksa is our only Dman who brings toughness is way too much of a blind Bieksa homer statement.

Alberts isn't a good fighter and Ballard never fights anybody that can throw em. Bieksa is a very good pound for pound fighter. As far as toughness goes they're not in the same league.

http://www.hockeyfights.com/fights/88442

Kesler says "thanks Juice"