RIPRYP Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Hamhuis is better than Bieksa 8 days a week! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaches Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Part 2: Bieksa-Hamhuis = Edler-Hamhuis = Ballard-Hamhuis = Though they make a good pairing, hammer doesnt need Bieksa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 I think the real question is Hamhuis vs Bieksa vs Edler. Edler is fantastic offensively Hamhuis is fantastic defensively Bieksa is the perfect combination of both, all the while being a tremendous leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raph Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Hamhuis wasn't playing great with Edler last season, which is why AV went with Bieksa + Edler more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Dan Hamhuis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugemanskost Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Who cares who's "better"? This is totally subjective. The important thing is, that together, they are an awesome pair who compliment one another. They are both better when they play together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 What games were you watching? Most AHL pairings were better than what Bieksa-Edler put on the ice. Absolutely zero chemistry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cromeslab Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Definitely Hammers better defenseivly,but I chose Juice because he bring the intangibles that you need to succeed in the playoffs,plus he looks downright evil when pissed off.I also think hammers a little more injury prone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksFanMike Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmotamed Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 I pick Hammer, because we could have kept Ehrhoff is Bieksa was moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Hamhuis no question, Bieksa isn't the same player without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks10271999 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 hamhuis is better overall bieksa is more exciting to watch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Hamhuis can play for weeks without a breakdown or miscalculation that costs the Canucks. Do I need to go on...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I assure you, Hamhuis needs Bieksa just as much to find the level of success that the two find together. Last season was enough proof of that when they played apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Both need to play much better next season. Last year wasn't good enough, especially the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 He also plays a defensive style which doesn't have him jumping up on the rush very often. Part of his job is to stay back when KB goes on the offense. KB wasn't caught very often when we had Erhoff because he played the same safe game that Hamhuis plays. Once Erhoff departed , KB was expected to provide the offense, so sure, he is going to get caught up ice more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Burrows 14 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 its close but i would have to say hamhuis. but i still love bieksa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Why don't you just look at them as a good pairing. Bieksa bailed out Hamhuis just as much as the other way around. Bieska is better offensively, is grittier and a better leader. Hamhuis is a rok defensively and provides outstanding support for Bieksa when he is up on the rush. Both of these guys are better being on the ice together. Hopefully Garrison can provide the same backup support for Edler when he jumps up on the rush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Ohlund.2 Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 For me, Hamhuis, no question. I don't understand why people say that Bieksa is so much better offensively, he is, but not by as big of a margin as people think, IMO. Also, the stat that speaks to me is that Hamhuis was a +26 and Bieksa a +12. I may be slighty biased though . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eh! Team Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Hamhuis. When Bieksa is playing that float around don't pay attention to nothing hockey I wanna through my remote through the wall (TVs to nice) but when he plays like he wants to put his fist through someone's face he's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.