PONCHE Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 As they've been playing i'd rank them like so: 1.Ballard T2.Hamhuis T2.Tanev 4. Bieksa 5. Edler 6. Garrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Erhoff was a perfect fit with our style of team. PP is not the same without him. Erhoff got his shot through on target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananas Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Pretty safe to say that puck rushing d-men are more rare than the stay at home D. A pinching defensive player is nothing without a stay at home partner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 IMO bieksa only had two noticeably bad plays: A bad pinch A bad cross ice pass coming back into our zone. He's by far our most physical dman consistently for what that's worth Last night he was our only physical dman...I notice it more now when he is paired with JaGarr who for s big guy seems weak and unphysical...I don't think he protects the puck well, hasn't added hitting to his game, and loses battles to smaller guys. Still waiting for the type of playoff dman this team needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch16 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 You people all realize that we just won 6 games in a row prior to this loss, right? You also realize that we allowed a combined 6 goals in those 6 games, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanIsleNuckFan Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Wah! Ehrhoff was weak. Garrison looks good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballisticsports. Posted February 16, 2013 Author Share Posted February 16, 2013 Our D-guys have made some pretty comical blunders. It almost seems that everyone takes a turn bumbling around. Im suspecting Eddy, Garrison, and Juice are playing injured. But really the vets have to tighten up and be so cute with the puck all the time. Tanev and Bally have been good because their game is simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 With a one and a half months to go before playoffs, these guys need to focus on adjusting and improving their play. Replacing them with lesser players will stop this process. Edler should be playing on the left side. I don't see that Bieksa is playing that bad -people seem to focus only on his risky plays. Garrison will be an important factor in the playoffs. He's the only guy that can clear the net. He's only layed 13 games on a new team in a new conferance. If these guys are 'playing injured,' the Nucks are screwed already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Untill he gets chicken winged by Marchand and goes back to the bench and pouts or stands there like a plug watching Daniel get speedbagged by said Marchand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyzer Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Disagree, this year and in the past he has shown he has it. He did even at times in the prior few years. ¸Just look at tonight, he made a great play to setup the JS chance that injured Lehtonen, and stepped up on another chance and rung it off the crossbar. He totally has the ability to be a puck mover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossram Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 I'd be hesitant to put Garrison on the right-side. I've been noticing he had below-average puck handling on his forehand. I wouldn't want to force him to use his backhand. He has a tendency to just chop at the puck; he's not very smooth. That being said, I would like to reunite the Hamhuis-Bieksa pairing. The real problem here is we need another right-handed defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 good thing you will never be the coach. that is horrible, Barker over Bieksa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Yea, we've seen lots of Bieksa without those two players(Mitchell and Hamhuis). Nothing to write home about. You're right, he's a secondary player. So wait... what's with the paycheque? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disisdayear Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Ballard definitely deserves a shot at a bigger role. So does Tanev, honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I'm always wondering, if Tanev is a great passer and position ally sound, why the Canucks don't play him with Edler for all the primary offensive shifts? One player in our FOUR top four capable left side guys always has to play their off side.Edler and Ballard have both shown their actually pretty awkward at it. Hamhuis is so valuable where he is. Old News rang up some stats pre-season suggesting Garrison, who got great grades defensively started the majority of his shifts on the right side which is also his off side. Garrison should be the guy who moves over. And we have two line options IMO Edler Garrison or Edler Tanev Hamhuis Bieksa Hamhuis Bieksa Ballard Tanev Ballard Garrison IMO I want to see how playing with a stud defensive guy would also free up Ballard? Tanev is one thing, Garrison makes the pairing 220 and 212 lbs including Ballards dynamic speed and a massive big shot bringing up the rear. It would be our most physically gifted tandem. I think that would allow us to see the true Ballard. Disagree, this year and in the past he has shown he has it. He did even at times in the prior few years. ¸Just look at tonight, he made a great play to setup the JS chance that injured Lehtonen, and stepped up on another chance and rung it off the crossbar. He totally has the ability to be a puck mover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 He is also the consumate team player that would fall on his own sword rather than blame others, even a coaching staff who by anyone's account really have not given him any opportunity to show what he can do offensively here. With all due respect, he wants to play. What is he going to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Gillis ,in his infinite wisdom,decided that Bieksa was more valuable to the team than Ehrhoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Concerning our Dmen lately I am thinking Garrison and Bieska should be eased in with less important minutes t the moment, if not only for them to get some confidence,or whatever it is they are lacking I think Ballard and Tanev deserve the extra minutes Edler has not been himself for sometime now I just think, that having quality defencemen, You should reward the defence who Are playing well, and take the pressure off the ones who are not in order for them to find their game Without having any stud defencemen, where everyone is above average, I dont believe You should name them 1st 2nd and 3 rd lines and stick with them regardless When a forward is struggling or not performing, AV would say, we go with the players that give us the best chance to win Now that the Canucks win streak is over. I would like to see some off our other Dmen move in to some games,depending if the prediction for that game may require talent or muscle,speed etc and insert the Appropriate Dman for the job. I see it as keeping the guys hungry and focused too and Our D sharp, if injuries should occur Am I alone on my thoughts with this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananas Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 This I agree with. Based on the way they are playing, Ballard and Tanev should have their icetime from 17mins/16mins respectively bumped up to 18-19 minutes each. Edler continues to have inconsistency issues with his defensive zone coverage, and with Bieksa...well, you know what you're getting with him (high risk/high reward). Hamhuis has been his usual steady, quiet self, and Garrison is starting show that he can be relied on defensively (and he's been hung out to dry by Bieksa on more than a few occasion). I think Edler and Bieksa's icetime needs to be pared back with this time given to Ballard and Tanev. For the past few seasons, the Canucks have been playing a five man attack game in the offensive zone with the d-men doing a lot of pinching. Obviously, this is high risk and high reward (which suits Bieksa's mindset). The Canucks of 2012-2013 so far has been playing a much more patient/conservative/defensive game which I believe explains partly as to the renaissance of Luongo. With Kesler coming back and some recent success the team has enjoyed offensively, I believe the Canucks are trying to transition back to their attack first mentality, which didn't serve them well last night (especially the bad pinches by Bieksa and Edler). I'll be interested to see if the Canucks go back to a more defensive mindset against the Blues, or try to move their game to a more offensive style, with the defence being very involved in the offensive zone. The season is still young...we've got the luxury of an unexpected very good start, and we've got teams in the NW division that seemed to have digressed and do not appear to be threats to our reign as NW division champs. So personally, I think we have the opportunity to work out a lot of the kinks right now (i.e., giving Edler time to adjust to the right side; distributing ice time more evenly, allowing Garrison the time to work into the system, etc., giving Tanev and Ballard more responsibility, etc.) without fear of being seeded anywhere less than third in the Western Conference. The problems that we have on our back end are, as problems go, are good ones to have. We have 3/4 quarters of the shortened season to work these things out. On paper, our top 6 D are as good as any in the NHL...I'm certain they will gel over the next month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I'm always wondering, if Tanev is a great passer and position ally sound, why the Canucks don't play him with Edler for all the primary offensive shifts? One player in our FOUR top four capable left side guys always has to play their off side.Edler and Ballard have both shown their actually pretty awkward at it. Hamhuis is so valuable where he is. Old News rang up some stats pre-season suggesting Garrison, who got great grades defensively started the majority of his shifts on the right side which is also his off side. Garrison should be the guy who moves over. And we have two line options IMO Edler Garrison or Edler Tanev Hamhuis Bieksa Hamhuis Bieksa Ballard Tanev Ballard Garrison IMO I want to see how playing with a stud defensive guy would also free up Ballard? Tanev is one thing, Garrison makes the pairing 220 and 212 lbs including Ballards dynamic speed and a massive big shot bringing up the rear. It would be our most physically gifted tandem. I think that would allow us to see the true Ballard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.