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

Kevin Bieksa you are really...


Zigmund.Palffy

Recommended Posts

You could hardly even tell Bieksa missed 15 games tonight. Him and Hammer just fit so well together!

I have a feeling they're going to be huge for us in the playoffs.

Totally agree.....and that's why they will be the #1 pairing in the playoffs irregardless(yeah it's a word mofo's) of Edler coming back....that's right, I said it.

Hamhuis - Bieksa.......#1 pairing of the Canucks in the playoffs. Suck it haters!

EDIT - And wicked sig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make some valid points.....but I think Tanev makes rookie mistakes and can skate his way out of most trouble....Rome is essentially a veteran and makes rookie mistakes, and is flat footed in his own zone.

I think Tanev makes Rookie mistakes but stays reasonably solid unless he really gets caught up.

Rome is a veteran who makes mistakes but is pretty good in his own zone and is overall a solid depth D man who tends to make better decisions than Tanev night in and night out.

Rome > Tanev for now.

If the choice is between the two I would say until Tanev either gets much better and more confident or gains about 30 pounds Rome is the better player to put on the ice.

In any case when either Edler or Alberts comes back Rome is out. There's no AV love fest with him just like there's no hate fest with Ballard. They are simply doing what's best for the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree.....and that's why they will be the #1 pairing in the playoffs irregardless(yeah it's a word mofo's) of Edler coming back....that's right, I said it.

Hamhuis - Bieksa.......#1 pairing of the Canucks in the playoffs. Suck it haters!

EDIT - And wicked sig.

Yeah but so is "bling bling"...

think about it...

think about it...

Now pick up your mind as it has been blown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Tanev makes Rookie mistakes but stays reasonably solid unless he really gets caught up.

Rome is a veteran who makes mistakes but is pretty good in his own zone and is overall a solid depth D man who tends to make better decisions than Tanev night in and night out.

Rome > Tanev for now.

If the choice is between the two I would say until Tanev either gets much better and more confident or gains about 30 pounds Rome is the better player to put on the ice.

In any case when either Edler or Alberts comes back Rome is out. There's no AV love fest with him just like there's no hate fest with Ballard. They are simply doing what's best for the team.

I agree, he's solid depth and has become so, with the extra games he's logged over the season due to injuries. Hw was alright last night as well....no real complaints from me either.

I do think that Tanev will get better....and I kinda see him walking the path that Edler did when he was called up as a filler and showed some promise and ended up sticking with the club. If Tanev can put on a little more weight this offseason and come back with a lttle more refinement in his game, he could be something else next year, and perhaps the first guy we call up, as opposed to the 3rd.

I just sure hope to hell that we re-sign Bieksa though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, he's solid depth and has become so, with the extra games he's logged over the season due to injuries. Hw was alright last night as well....no real complaints from me either.

I do think that Tanev will get better....and I kinda see him walking the path that Edler did when he was called up as a filler and showed some promise and ended up sticking with the club. If Tanev can put on a little more weight this offseason and come back with a lttle more refinement in his game, he could be something else next year, and perhaps the first guy we call up, as opposed to the 3rd.

I just sure hope to hell that we re-sign Bieksa though.

Tanev will probably be 1st on the depth chart. Alberts, Ehrhoff, and Bieksa are all UFA. I'd be surprised if we sign 2 of the 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great to see Bieksa back in tonight. He was the best defender on the ice for either team, IMO. If the "HamJuice" pairing is able to play consistently as they did tonight, the Canucks will have their first ever true "Shutdown" pairing in team history. 23+ minutes and a +1 in his first game back is more than I was expecting. Wait until he's 100%!

towel.gif2e6c8lc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tanev will probably be 1st on the depth chart. Alberts, Ehrhoff, and Bieksa are all UFA. I'd be surprised if we sign 2 of the 3.

In all honesty...I wanted Bieksa traded in the offseason (due to salary cap reasons after Ballard was acquired). But after a stellar year of finally being defensively responsible...I want him back. Hopefully a long term contract 20M/5years (4M cap hit). That would give Canucks a solid shutdown pair for 5 years (Hamhuis and Bieksa contracts would expire at the same time).

I don't think Ehrhoff will stay at a reasonable price (ie. $5M or less). He's shown he can quarterback a PP and will undoubtedly get a lot of suitors willing to pay top dollar (hopefully in the Eastern Conference). Pair up Ehrhoff with a defensive defenceman and you're good to go.

I think Alberts is on his way out due to the emergence of Tanev. Tanev may not be as big and physical as Alberts but he's younger and cheaper.

I think Salo would retire.

Re-sign

Bieksa $4M cap hit for 5 years.

Hamhuis Bieksa

Edler X

Ballard Rome/Tanev

Tanev/Rome X

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all honesty...I wanted Bieksa traded in the offseason (due to salary cap reasons after Ballard was acquired). But after a stellar year of finally being defensively responsible...I want him back. Hopefully a long term contract 20M/5years (4M cap hit). That would give Canucks a solid shutdown pair for 5 years (Hamhuis and Bieksa contracts would expire at the same time).

I agree about keeping Bieksa, and it may take a 4 x 5 deal to keep him - BUT, it would still scare me.

So far in his career, he has only really shown up in a contract year. The injuries were part of it, sure...but I'm not 100% sold that they were ALL of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about keeping Bieksa, and it may take a 4 x 5 deal to keep him - BUT, it would still scare me.

So far in his career, he has only really shown up in a contract year. The injuries were part of it, sure...but I'm not 100% sold that they were ALL of it.

I don't get it. When Bieksa had his 43 point season everyone was saying he wasn't defensively responsible to it doesn't even out. But now, Ehrhoff is doing well offensively, but is a liability in his own zone, and not only is it fine, but he is do for a raise....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it. When Bieksa had his 43 point season everyone was saying he wasn't defensively responsible to it doesn't even out. But now, Ehrhoff is doing well offensively, but is a liability in his own zone, and not only is it fine, but he is do for a raise....

I don't understand how you addressed my point. Bieksa's best years - by FAR - have been his past two contract years. Does that not concern you in the least?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it. When Bieksa had his 43 point season everyone was saying he wasn't defensively responsible to it doesn't even out. But now, Ehrhoff is doing well offensively, but is a liability in his own zone, and not only is it fine, but he is do for a raise....

I think it has to do with Ehrhoff being really effective quarterbacking the PP and Canucks being #1 in PP. Rose-colored glasses and all. Bieksa isn't a puck-moving defenceman. He certainly doesn't have a better shot than Ehrhoff.

That said...I wouldn't be upset at Ehrhoff leaving. I get upset at his defensive lapses like I used to get upset at Bieksa. I think Edler can fill his role on the PP since it seems he's the Canucks future #1 D man.

Canucks can't have so many D men making $4M+. So something's got to give. And like they say...defence wins championships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand how you addressed my point. Bieksa's best years - by FAR - have been his past two contract years. Does that not concern you in the least?

To me...not so much.

Mainly cuz now he has a defined role (shutdown) and is paired with a reliable Dman (Hamhuis) that he's found chemistry with. Going forward...I can see him becoming consistent (ie. 8g 22a 30pts +20) defenceman. He won't be a 40+ Dman anymore. If he tries...I think his old habits will creep up.

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...