Kevin Bieksa you are really...

[Geoff Courtnall]

Honestly how long can you talk about bieksa?

Some of you are really obsessed

[CANUCKLELION]

Bieksa's fight card

http://www.hockeyfig...om/players/1562

Man you must have great emotional toughness because you keep making a fool of yourself and keep coming back for more you are like the Dana Murzyn of the Bieksa haters.

If Bxa is such a winning fighter, how come his latest hi- lites on the sie in your link are from 2006?

Truth is, BXa isn't half the player or fighter Bxa lovers think he is and he is a non factor when intimidation is a factor in a game. He is a lightweight.

[RUPERTKBD]

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.

Bb posted those stats as a direct response to yet another idiotic post by HankandDan. It served the purpose of completely busting the point H&D was pulling out of his rear end.

For the most part, the stats in this thread have been posted by your fellow haters. Perhaps you should quote one of those +/- posts and tell them what a joke you think they are.

As you said yourself: You can't have it both ways.

1. He doesnt fight anymore. And it is more than just this season. There were plenty of opportunities when the team was self-destructing in the playoffs he could have given our team a real boost when they needed it). Instead, he did nothing.

2. He doesnt engage with the other team after the whistle at all (which, by default, shows an emotional investment in the game). Instead, he just stands there or skates away, even when a guy bumps Luongo or roughs up another guy. No emotion. back in the day, he would have been the first in to at least facewash a guy.

I could go into all kinds of examples about his lazy plays defensively and his lack of keeping his mind in the game at critical points (both which show a lack of emotional involvement in the game to a certain degree), but the above, as it relates to Bieksa, really should be enough.

The OLD Bieksa played with emotion. The new one does not.

Case closed.

Closed? Why? Because you said so?

Is this the same Wallstreeet who claimed in this thread that he's "defended" Bieksa?

Now you're slagging him for not fighting enough? Should he go looking for fights? What about those "boneheaded penalty" complaints that you're so fond of?

Do you really believe that KB would turn down an invitation to dance from someone in (or close to) his own weight class? If so, I'd bet you the mortgage that you're wrong.

Please stop claiming to be a "moderate". You're the same as Canuckelion and Barry Wilkins as far as I'm concerned.

[bbllpp]

<br />The province says Ham and Rome, all other pairings the same. Alberts has been the only partner BXa has had when BXa has a plus, +/- game. Why would AV change it?<br />

There you go again sounding the fool. Bieksa 2 plus games 1 minus game and 2 even games playing with Hamhuis. How do expect people to listen to you when you can never get your facts straight.

[CANUCKLELION]

He usually fights to stick up for himself or to send a message to the other team that their roughing up our players, will not go unanswered, when he's on the ice. But again, he wasn't on the ice when Ballard got hit. He can't do it alone out there. That Rypien's and Desbiens's job and responsinsibility....not Bieksa's. When and if Bieksa fights, that'll be his decision. So stop getting your panties in a knot over your 'concern' and "i'm just saying" perception of his fighting or lack of fighting.

Seriously....next you'll be putting lol after everything a la Canucklelion. Is this what it's come to for you, to go after Bieksa...some amatuerish points about not fighting in the last 13 games?

Seriously, you can do better....at least I thought so. Very....meh, on your part.

I can't wait for you to get back in your usual normal form. We'll chalk it up to a tweak or an upper body(way upper) injury and give you a maintenance day....hopefully, you'll get back soon, and we won't have to list you as day-to-day.

Get better brother.

BXa sends a message? I guess he hopes the other teams can lip read eh? The only message he sends is a lame ass sneer.

oh I almost forgot, lol.

[RUPERTKBD]

There you go again sounding the fool. Bieksa 2 plus games 1 minus game and 2 even games playing with Hamhuis. How do expect people to listen to you when you can never get your facts straight.

Don't worry bb. No-one is really listening to him.

[bbllpp]

<br />If Bxa is such a winning fighter, how come his latest hi- lites on the sie in your link are from 2006?<br /><br />Truth is, BXa isn't half the player or fighter Bxa lovers think he is and he is a non factor when intimidation is a factor in a game. He is a lightweight.<br />

So I take it you didn't bother looking?

[Barry_Wilkins]

When has a coach ever told a scorer to not shoot so much?

When has a coach ever told a supposedly tough player to turn the other cheek if he or a teammate gets unfairly crunched?

[Standing_Tall#37]

I guess that's why Bieksa hasn't won one for at least a year eh? lol

Yup, and it's the same reason why you haven't won one in your life, Darren.

[Barry_Wilkins]

No, it's a lazy and stupid analogy. The Sedin's practice their shooting in order to perfect it and accomplish as many of them as they can, at the urging and expectations to shoot as much as possible, in most every situation while on the ice. The coaching staff would be pissed if they stopped shooting for 13 games.

Conversely, Bieksa, doesn't practice fighting. It isn't an essential trait for him to help the team win games, like the Sedins' shots and shooting %. Bieksa isn't urged by the coaching staff to fight or fight more. If anything they have tried to get him to fight less, with dmen injured and his responsibility being more towards eating up minutes, than served up knuckle sandwiches with a side of punch. The coaching staff would be quite pissed, of he took himself out of the play for 5 or possibly 10 and a game because without thinking and instigated a fight. That's dumb and detrimental to the team.

To say the he was "never" an intimidating physical presence throws any credibility of your hypothesis right out the window. You don't have a leg to stand on after that asinine comment. Nothing, including the truth could be further than that. He consciously goes out, even acording to him in his interviews that are scattered over the last few pages, and looks to hit guys to set the tone and to give them pause for later in the game while rushing into the zone again. That's physical presences, that's intimidation, and that a concerted effort on his part to do both.

Apple.

Oranges.

"He looks to hit guys to set the tone".

So what? He's ineffective at it. I could lace up the skates on the Sedin line and "look to shoot and score" with them, but it wouldn't matter because I'd have zero results. Hyperbolic in this case? Yes, but sometimes hyperbole points out what previous common sense has failed to deliver in a debate: Bieksa isn't intimidating anyone with his "physical presence". He's small, and if he's not playing with an edge, as is the case over the majority of the past year, he's not making up for it with some bogus reputation among opponents of "I'd better not go into the corner with that guy"

I never said he should go out instigating fights. Quit putting words in my mouth. I said he has consistently failed to stick up for teammates who've been rocked on his very own shifts, but even more troublesome, he doesn't even get upset when an opponnent staples HIM to the glass or catches him looking the other way or pushes him out of the way like one would do to a pesky kid in front of the net. He doesn't RESPOND to instigation. Some people here, including yourself, are so dewy-eyed over your Bieksa love that you even spin this into a positive: "oh, he's just being smart and not putting the team down a man" or "oh, he's too valuable too fight, he gets 20 minutes a game" or "oh, he's not a goon, his reputation is enough to make opponents quake in their skates". All horsebleep, all pathetic shiftiness. Well, which is it? Is he a tough player, or a tough mirage?

[Barry_Wilkins]

Seriously....next you'll be putting lol after everything a la Canucklelion. Is this what it's come to for you, to go after Bieksa...some amatuerish points about not fighting in the last 13 games?

Seriously, you can do better....at least I thought so. Very....meh, on your part.

I can't wait for you to get back in your usual normal form. We'll chalk it up to a tweak or an upper body(way upper) injury and give you a maintenance day....hopefully, you'll get back soon, and we won't have to list you as day-to-day.

Get better brother.

Yes, no amateurish response here. A much loftier passive-aggressive self-righteousnessness, though. I'd rather have someone make fun of me than to go the "tsk tsk" route. That kind of snippiness belongs in a British freshman college class.

Stick to the argument and can the self-congratulatory smirks. They don't help your cause.

[Standing_Tall#37]

When has a coach ever told a supposedly tough player to turn the other cheek if he or a teammate gets unfairly crunched?

All the time since the instigator rule was introduced... even in juniors its that way and its as frustraiting as hell...

[Barry_Wilkins]

Bb posted those stats as a direct response to yet another idiotic post by HankandDan. It served the purpose of completely busting the point H&D was pulling out of his rear end.

For the most part, the stats in this thread have been posted by your fellow haters. Perhaps you should quote one of those +/- posts and tell them what a joke you think they are.

As you said yourself: You can't have it both ways.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the most part, the stats in this thread have been posted by BOTH sides equally. I don't support these stats as an argument pro OR con Bieksa.

But I noticed how you deflected the thrust of my response by not dealing with what I said regarding the ridiculousness of how these stats are compiled, and how so many important areas of the game are NOT covered by stats. Interesting, but not a surprising ploy.

[hank&dan]

"He looks to hit guys to set the tone".

So what? He's ineffective at it. I could lace up the skates on the Sedin line and "look to shoot and score" with them, but it wouldn't matter because I'd have zero results. Hyperbolic in this case? Yes, but sometimes hyperbole points out what previous common sense has failed to deliver in a debate: Bieksa isn't intimidating anyone with his "physical presence". He's small, and if he's not playing with an edge, as is the case over the majority of the past year, he's not making up for it with some bogus reputation among opponents of "I'd better not go into the corner with that guy"

I never said he should go out instigating fights. Quit putting words in my mouth. I said he has consistently failed to stick up for teammates who've been rocked on his very own shifts, but even more troublesome, he doesn't even get upset when an opponnent staples HIM to the glass or catches him looking the other way or pushes him out of the way like one would do to a pesky kid in front of the net. He doesn't RESPOND to instigation. Some people here, including yourself, are so dewy-eyed over your Bieksa love that you even spin this into a positive: "oh, he's just being smart and not putting the team down a man" or "oh, he's too valuable too fight, he gets 20 minutes a game" or "oh, he's not a goon, his reputation is enough to make opponents quake in their skates". All horsebleep, all pathetic shiftiness. Well, which is it? Is he a tough player, or a tough mirage?

I wish this fit in my sig

[Kes101]

Scrap what i said there....

Bieksa sucks.

'Nough said.

[Barry_Wilkins]

All the time since the instigator rule was introduced... even in juniors its that way and its as frustraiting as hell...

There are lots of ways to get back at an opponent. Many fights happen because one guy challenges, and the other accepts. There are no instigator penalties in most NHL fights.

Another way is to punish the perpetrator with legal hits. To make a point of finishing hits with vigour and emotion. As already mentioned, this is impossible for Bieksa because of his stature.

Another way is to say "the heck with it", take the instigator penalty, and start the fight (which, again, isn't really instigating, that was done by the guy who first picked on your own teammate). Lots of games, including Canucks games this year, one team is up by few goals in the third period. A 2 minute minor in those cases is a relatively minor trade-off to make in order to send a message to the other team.

[hank&dan]

Bieksas lack of fighting might also be due to the fact that he never throws a big/hard enough hit to merit any retaliation.

[Sharpshooter]

The province says Ham and Rome, all other pairings the same. Alberts has been the only partner BXa has had when BXa has a plus, +/- game. Why would AV change it?

Pfft...The Province.

[Sharpshooter]

If Bxa is such a winning fighter, how come his latest hi- lites on the sie in your link are from 2006?

Truth is, BXa isn't half the player or fighter Bxa lovers think he is and he is a non factor when intimidation is a factor in a game. He is a lightweight.

More of a middle weight, I'd say.

[Sharpshooter]

"He looks to hit guys to set the tone".

So what? He's ineffective at it. I could lace up the skates on the Sedin line and "look to shoot and score" with them, but it wouldn't matter because I'd have zero results. Hyperbolic in this case? Yes, but sometimes hyperbole points out what previous common sense has failed to deliver in a debate: Bieksa isn't intimidating anyone with his "physical presence". He's small, and if he's not playing with an edge, as is the case over the majority of the past year, he's not making up for it with some bogus reputation among opponents of "I'd better not go into the corner with that guy"

I never said he should go out instigating fights. Quit putting words in my mouth. I said he has consistently failed to stick up for teammates who've been rocked on his very own shifts, but even more troublesome, he doesn't even get upset when an opponnent staples HIM to the glass or catches him looking the other way or pushes him out of the way like one would do to a pesky kid in front of the net. He doesn't RESPOND to instigation. Some people here, including yourself, are so dewy-eyed over your Bieksa love that you even spin this into a positive: "oh, he's just being smart and not putting the team down a man" or "oh, he's too valuable too fight, he gets 20 minutes a game" or "oh, he's not a goon, his reputation is enough to make opponents quake in their skates". All horsebleep, all pathetic shiftiness. Well, which is it? Is he a tough player, or a tough mirage?

Teamates? Who? When? Show me...otherwise it's just another brown rabbit out of your dirty crapcatcher...and i'm not sure which end on you that would describe most adequately.