Kevin Bieksa you are really...

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

It would be a huge mistake to keep BXa after the trade deadline, unless the team had more injury problems, ie. one of the other top 6 were LTIR injured. Unlike Bieksa, MG isn't prone to brainfarts or costly mistakes, so I can't see him keeping the sad sack Bxa in a Nuck uniform.

I'll take your bet, with the only rider being, if none of the 5 Dmen ahead of him on the teams depth chart are injured. I'll even move the timeline up to whenever Salo returns.

What would I like to wager? How about a 100 word apology for being either a Bieksa lover or hater? I'm open to suggestion.

How about a sig bet instead. Quite frankly when I win I have no need for a 100 word half ass back handed apology from you that ends in "lol" and starts with "stupid".

AS well the bet was simply laid out and it stays that way or no deal. Don't start adding in all these sissy little stipulations. You claim bieksa is so terrible well then how about man up and put your money where your mouth is. He's here or he's not after the deadline. Simple as that.

[CANUCKLELION]

How about a sig bet instead. Quite frankly when I win I have no need for a 100 word half ass back handed apology from you that ends in "lol" and starts with "stupid".

AS well the bet was simply laid out and it stays that way or no deal. Don't start adding in all these sissy little stipulations. You claim bieksa is so terrible well then how about man up and put your money where your mouth is. He's here or he's not after the deadline. Simple as that.

If at the trade deadline, if either Edler, Ehrhoff, Hamhuis or Ballard were on LTIR even I would want to keep bieksa around. But non the less I'll take the bet because I'm confident the only way BXa will still be a NUck after Feb. 28, will be if he is the one on LTIR.

I need you to expand on what a sig bet is. Cheers

[CANUCKLELION]

Please understand, for the second time, that as a fascinating gadabout man with varying important, entertaining, and frivolous things to do, participating ad nauseum on a Bieksa thread is far down my list of daily priorities. The posts here are occasionally hilarious (when the anti-Bieksonians are in top form), but often strangely fawning, silly, and ganging-up in a juvenile way, especially when the groupies join hands like a shiny-cheeked church choir.

My opinion hasn't changed since page 1: Bieksa is overrated by many, his cap hit is atrocious, his UFA status (and the fact that there's been no indication Gillis/Gilman have even hinted they're talking extension) and our need to be cap compliant soon, all coincide and point to Bieksa's backside being shown the final exit sign before the trade deadline.

As long as the rest of our D hold together till the end of January, I expect the Bieksa rumours to heat up, and hopefully a desperate bubble team offers the impressively patient Gillis a prospect package that makes sense for us.

Further for the Bieksa-hopefuls: again, Bieksa has value around the league. How much is hard to figure out. But at least one team, probably more, will be willing to cough up $4 million plus for him in a longish-term deal. There's no way Gillis does that, and there's no way Bieksa turns that down since it's his chance at his biggest payday ever. Even the Bieksa lovers speculate on a 2.75 million per year deal. That's fantasy.

+1, spoken like a true Canuck fan.

[CANUCKLELION]

The title of this thread now should be:

Canucklelion you are reallly ......

asinine.

Delusional

probably a hockey god, in the least a true master of time space and dimension

[Sharpshooter]

probably a hockey god, in the least a true master of time space and dimension

Delusional it is then.

[CANUCKLELION]

Delusional it is then.

Nope, just not a BXa apologist. lol

[Sharpshooter]

ATTENTION Hockey Fans! Today ONLY visit www.Surrey.com to purchase hockey tickets for only $5.

ATTENTION Mandi S! Selling or soliciting crap is not appreciated here.......so piss off!

[Hugemanskost]

The title of this thread now should be:

Canucklelion you are reallly ......

DRuNk...

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Well, as far as potential goes, I seriously doubt if either Salo or Bxa are included in the teams plans beyond this season, so potential is irrelevent. Also as I've stated numerous times, the team will be better off keeping the bigger, defensively smarter, smoother skating, better shooting Salo over BXa this season. There actually is a recent poll in one of the Salo/Bxa topics in that 75% of the cdc responders choose Salo over BXa. That said I believe the BXa detractors are the silent majority vs you 6 Bieksa apologists.

Really?

They weren't such a silent majority at the start of the season. In fact I would say they were a vocal minority. Throughout the season though it's a lot tougher to make a good argument against him (look at you for example...not a single good argument this thread. ) and most have slipped away only to make an occasional silly comment.

Silent majority? I think not, just silenced idiocy.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

If at the trade deadline, if either Edler, Ehrhoff, Hamhuis or Ballard were on LTIR even I would want to keep bieksa around. But non the less I'll take the bet because I'm confident the only way BXa will still be a NUck after Feb. 28, will be if he is the one on LTIR.

I need you to expand on what a sig bet is. Cheers

No you wouldn't. Bieksa is too small and is constantly making mistakes and costing the Canucks games. I mean you'd rather have Alberts than Bieksa.

If Bieksa is LTIR and can't be traded then for sure we negate the bet out of fairness but even if another D man is injured by your own statements about Bieksa you'd rather see him traded because he's garbage right? It's just now they could trade him and get someone in return.

A sig bet means I make a sig for you if you lose and you make one for me if I lose. You can make the terms as far as how long we have to keep it on.

I'm already thinking of a new york firefighter calender style sig for you with the caption "is that another picture of Canuckelion sucking"

[CANUCKLELION]

No you wouldn't. Bieksa is too small and is constantly making mistakes and costing the Canucks games. I mean you'd rather have Alberts than Bieksa.

If Bieksa is LTIR and can't be traded then for sure we negate the bet out of fairness but even if another D man is injured by your own statements about Bieksa you'd rather see him traded because he's garbage right? It's just now they could trade him and get someone in return.

A sig bet means I make a sig for you if you lose and you make one for me if I lose. You can make the terms as far as how long we have to keep it on.

I'm already thinking of a new york firefighter calender style sig for you with the caption "is that another picture of Canuckelion sucking"

Sounds like we have a bet, say keep the sig for a month.

I'm neither very creative or talented at making sigs, but I'm sure I could figure something out. Meanwhile, on with the thread...

How bad is Bxa gonna be tonight, minus 2, 0 or will he have another once in a blue moon +3 night? any predictions?

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Sounds like we have a bet, say keep the sig for a month.

I'm neither very creative or talented at making sigs, but I'm sure I could figure something out. Meanwhile, on with the thread...

How bad is Bxa gonna be tonight, minus 2, 0 or will he have another once in a blue moon +3 night? any predictions?

Neither am I which is why I'm trying to figure out how to do fireman abs in microsoft paint.

Not gonna lie they may end up just being cookie monters with a fire hose.

[Millerdraft]

Jesus Christ Canucklelion, can't you recognize that Bieksa is playing better defensively than he's ever played?!

Give the guy some frickin' credit for listening to the coaches because it's working. He's not nearly a quarter of the defensive liability he's been the past three years. Having said that, I wouldn't risk re-signing a guy who has a sudden uptick in performance in a contract year.

[CANUCKLELION]

Neither am I which is why I'm trying to figure out how to do fireman abs in microsoft paint.

Not gonna lie they may end up just being cookie monters with a fire hose.

Sounds creative to me, great even.

Why not just finish up your idea and change the name, depending on who wins the bet?

There's probably 6 to 8 weeks before bieksa gets the boot. Maybe less if were lucky.lol

[Sacrilage]

Really?

They weren't such a silent majority at the start of the season. In fact I would say they were a vocal minority. Throughout the season though it's a lot tougher to make a good argument against him (look at you for example...not a single good argument this thread. ) and most have slipped away only to make an occasional silly comment.

Silent majority? I think not, just silenced idiocy.

Its so hard to put a reasonable argument against a player on CDC, because there are soooo many one post wonders, who come in, make a stupid comment, and bugger off , clogging up the forum and stopping people form having a good discussion about a player like Bieksa.

I never liked him. Well, after his first breakout season. He was bad before both of those injures, and people used those as excuses for his poor play after he returned from them.

However, he has played well this year. If he says with the team, I actually wouldnt mind. However, I think it is in the best interest of the Canucks to move him.

Here are my reasons. Unless you think he is an integral part, that can not be replaced in the cup run that we hope to have this year, he is unlikely to be back in a Canucks Uni after this season. Because he has a 3.75 mil contract. How often do players, in their prime, go down in pay as a FA? He isnt worth the 3.75 currently, so If he gets an extention to that, he isnt worth it to us, and he is likely going to sign elsewhere anyway. So why not get something in return while we can? I dont believe he is sooo important to this team, that we can risk losing an asset (yes he is a tradable asset) for nothing.

Also, he is inconsistent. With the trade roumours, and the fact he thought he was going to be moved, is he playing better because of it? And because of a contract year? I dont know. But i just dont trust him to be consistent.

Is he playing well right now? Yes. And I really dont have a bad thing to say about his current play. However, I still believe he is worth more to us as a tradable asset, than a few more playoff games, and then gone in the off season. We need to get something in return for him. He can not be another teams Tambellini.

[CANUCKLELION]

Jesus Christ Canucklelion, can't you recognize that Bieksa is playing better defensively than he's ever played?!

Give the guy some frickin' credit for listening to the coaches because it's working. He's not nearly a quarter of the defensive liability he's been the past three years. Having said that, I wouldn't risk re-signing a guy who has a sudden uptick in performance in a contract year.

Yes Bieksa has been better than expected defensively, his trade value is probably as high as it has ever been, he's an F/a at the end of the season , the trade deadline is approaching fast and the team needs to clear cap space to accommodate a lower priced player who will be an upgrade in the role Bieksa currently fills.

I'm still not sure BXa would re sign unless the Nuck's were overpaying. He's still not worth his cap hit, MG can do better, I seriously doubt he is part of the Nuck's plan moving forward.

[AbbyNucksFan]

if keeping Bieksa means we have a better chance at winning the Cup, I dont care if he leaves for nothing after this season. After 40 years of nothing, I'd gladly take nothing for Bieksa if it meant winning.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Its so hard to put a reasonable argumenbt against a player on CDC, because there are soooo many one post wonders, who come in, make a stupid comment, and bugger off , clogging up the forum and stopping people form having a good discussion about a player like Bieksa.

It's really not that hard especially if you understand that the one post wonders aren't the ones you're presenting the argument to.

I never liked him. Well, after his first breakout season. He was bad before both of those injures, and people used those as excuses for his poor play after he returned from them.

After his breakout season as you call it and prior to his first leg laceration he wasn't looking as good as he did before. However that may also have something to do with the abdominal injury he was playing through. Funny most other players seem to get a pass for injuries...when it happens for Bieksa they are just excuses.

However, he has played well this year. If he says with the team, I actually wouldnt mind. However, I think it is in the best interest of the Canucks to move him.

I think it's in the best interest of the canucks to keep him. Gillis it would seem agrees with me.

Here are my reasons. Unless you think he is an integral part, that can not be replaced in the cup run that we hope to have this year, he is unlikely to be back in a Canucks Uni after this season. Because he has a 3.75 mil contract. How often do players, in their prime, go down in pay as a FA? He isnt worth the 3.75 currently, so If he gets an extention to that, he isnt worth it to us, and he is likely going to sign elsewhere anyway. So why not get something in return while we can? I dont believe he is sooo important to this team, that we can risk losing an asses (yes he is a tradable asset) for nothing.

There is not a single player on this team that can't be replaced; save maybe the sedins and a kesler. As far as his likelyhood to come back after this season well I guess I wonder if maybe you were also one of the people who said he wasn't likely to be back this season after aquiring Ballard and Hamhuis. He may be back he may not. It's likely that we can all talk out of our asses about it until we're blue in the cheeks. If they have to trade him there will be very little return.

Also, he is inconsistent. With the trade roumours, and the fact he thought he was goign to be moved, is he playing better because of it? And because of a contract year? I dont know. But i just dont trust him to be consistent.

You said it before, he's injury free now. Contract year or not there's only so much he's going to get out of MG. His consistency issues however seem to line right up with his injuries. If you think he's a prick who's only going to play well in a contract year well that's fine to have that opinion.

Is he playing well right now? Yes. And I really dont have a bad thing to say about his current play. However, I still believe he is worth more to us as a tradable asset, than a few more playoff games, and then gone in the off season. We need to get something in return for him. He can not be another teams Tambellini.

If he is traded it's for one reason and one reason only; cap space. That means there can be virtually no return for him. In all likelyhood this team is a cup contender and will be at the deadline as well. Contenders don't drop assets so they can get "some" return for them they make their team the best it can be. Trading Bieksa for someone who isn't NHL ready or who is a lesser player does the opposite. If this is the year then this is the year, and hopefully the team acts like it. You want 10 more years of division champ banners or a stanley cup banner?

[sampy]

If Salo returns, and a big IF, what are the chances he will return to form. Salo us turning 37 this year and is constantly injured, it wouldn't be very smart to move a quality dman for Salo unless we getting something good in return. How many playoffs are the Canucks going to go through with a decimated dcorp before they learn.

My prediction is Gillis and Gilman find a way to keep all our top dmen.

[Sacrilage]

It's really not that hard especially if you understand that the one post wonders aren't the ones you're presenting the argument to.

After his breakout season as you call it and prior to his first leg laceration he wasn't looking as good as he did before. However that may also have something to do with the abdominal injury he was playing through. Funny most other players seem to get a pass for injuries...when it happens for Bieksa they are just excuses.

I think it's in the best interest of the canucks to keep him. Gillis it would seem agrees with me.

There is not a single player on this team that can't be replaced; save maybe the sedins and a kesler. As far as his likelyhood to come back after this season well I guess I wonder if maybe you were also one of the people who said he wasn't likely to be back this season after aquiring Ballard and Hamhuis. He may be back he may not. It's likely that we can all talk out of our asses about it until we're blue in the cheeks. If they have to trade him there will be very little return.

You said it before, he's injury free now. Contract year or not there's only so much he's going to get out of MG. His consistency issues however seem to line right up with his injuries. If you think he's a prick who's only going to play well in a contract year well that's fine to have that opinion.

If he is traded it's for one reason and one reason only; cap space. That means there can be virtually no return for him. In all likelyhood this team is a cup contender and will be at the deadline as well. Contenders don't drop assets so they can get "some" return for them they make their team the best it can be. Trading Bieksa for someone who isn't NHL ready or who is a lesser player does the opposite. If this is the year then this is the year, and hopefully the team acts like it. You want 10 more years of division champ banners or a stanley cup banner?

1st, I was referring to your comment about the minority of posters against Bieksa being Idiots. You point them out, and I was merely stating that when someone tried to make a reasonable post against a player, they are lumped in with all the idiots. You seemed to do that in your last post by generalising bieksa "haters" all into one.

2nd, Prior to his fist skate cut, he was healthy, and was Benched by AV in the game prior to the Nashville game I think it was. Also I think it was the only time in his career here AV called out Bieksa.

You state that it seems Gillis agrees with you. Its hard for him not to at this point isnt it? Salo is Injured, and Bieksa is better than the alternatives. So stating that MG agrees with you seems a bit pompus, when in reality, wether MG wants to trade KB or not (I dont know, you may be right) Mg really doesnt have a choice at this point.

Further to that point

"It's likely that we can all talk out of our asses about it until we're blue in the cheeks. If they have to trade him there will be very little return."

Thats exactly what your doing when your stating MG seems to agree with you. It is all just speculation.

"If you think he's a prick who's only going to play well in a contract year well that's fine to have that opinion."

Where did I call him a prick? Thats getting personal, and putting words in my mouth, making out as if im some guy who just hates Bieksa for hating him. Lots of players play better in contract years. Its human nature. Being a prick has nothing to do with it.

Finally, whats with the hostile tone to your post? Have you been arguing with too many people to just simply reply to someone without having seething undertones to them?