Ilya Mikheyev Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Hamhuis - Bieksa Edler - Garrison UFA - Tanev Weber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Hamhuis is winning by a landslide. Moving on to "1st pairing right defence"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danthecanucksfan Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Hamhuis-Bieksa Edler-Tanev Garrison-Corrado PP1 Edler-Garrison PP2 Bieksa-Hamhuis PK1 Hamhuis-Bieksa PK2 Garry/Eddie-Tanev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EpicNinja Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I like Hamhuis-Bieksa Edler-Tanev Garrison-Corrado a lot. Keep in mind people that the lines should be changing so that they have even time. I don't think it matters as much on a team with our depth. They should all be averaging somewhere near 20 minutes a game. An alternative lineup I could see would be Hamhuis-Garrison Edler-Tanev Bieksa Corrado Once again, you have each line average fairly close to 20 minutes a game. I like Edler and Garrison on the power play and Tanev and Hamuis on Penalty Kill perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikillchicken Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I honestly can't say for sure. It'll all depend on how guys look once they hit the ice. A few options stand out to me though: Option #1) Stick with Garrison & Hamhuis together. Edler on the second pairing. Pros: Hamhuis and Garrison looked great last season together. Our best two guys by far. Gives us a true top pairing that can be used in any situation. Cons: I really would rather Garrison be on his natural side to maximize his shot effectiveness. You could try Hamhuis on the right but I have no idea if that's even plausible. Also makes a mess of other pairings. Forces us to either pair Edler with Bieksa (disaster) or drop him to the third paring. The latter option is probably preferable. Edler + Tanev is interesting. Hopefully Tanev would bring out the best in him but still tough to know how to deploy them. Tanev looks lost in the offensive zone and Edler in his own zone. Bieksa and Alberts would make a nice 3rd pairing but might be a bit of a waste playing limited minutes. Verdict: Unlikely. Just too many problems with the lower pairings. Option #2) Garrison & Edler together. Hamhuis and Bieksa together. Pros: Gives us two real strong pairing that can both contribute at both ends of the ice. The most likely option to get the best out of Bieksa. Cons: Same problem with Garrison. Want him on his natural side but not sure if Edler is up to playing right. Has the potential to leave us with nothing if both Edler and Bieksa struggle. Verdict: Possible. Especially if Edler figures out the right side. But also the most likely fallback option if we're forced to just bite the bullet and use Garrison on the right. Option #3) Garrison and Bieksa together. Hamhuis and Edler second pairing. Pros: Gives us Garrison on his natural side. Coupled with Bieksa gives us a really versatile and gritty pairing that can play at both ends of the ice. Edler and Hamhuis could be a very solid second pairing. Cons: Contingent on Edler working on the right side which could be a long shot. Also, Hamhuis remains the player I want out there in crunch defensive situations. Yet Edler remains the exact opposite even if Hamhuis settles him down. Hence, makes deployment of Hamhuis tricky. Verdict: Fairly likely if Edler can play right. Fairly unlikely since he probably can't. Option #4) Garrison and Bieksa together. Hamhuis and Tanev second pairing. Edler and Weber or Corrado as third pairing. Pros: Same as above for top pairing but gives us two other good pairings too. Hamhuis pairing used for the bulk of defensive starts to carry the puck out of our own end. Takes advantage of Tanev's poise and great first pass. Edler pairing takes lots of offensive starts and still gets solid ice time. Cons: Puts a lot of pressure on Tanev. May somewhat diminish Edler's ice time. Verdict: My pick at least to start. May have to fall back on something else with an injury or if Tanev struggles in a bigger role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drouin Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Hamhuis, Bieksa Edler, Garrison That'll be our top 4 IMO. if Eddie/Garry are having a better game they'll promoted to "1st pairing". Torts will simply have two pairs to "overplay". (They'll both likely see over 22minutes). Alberts/Tanev will see less time and lesser competition, as it should be. Tanev is not going to displace Garrison (arguably our best d-man by the end of last season) out of the top 4 barring trade/injury. It's simply not happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Voted Hamhuis I personally would like to see it work out where there is a top line of Hamhuis/Bieksa and instead of having a noted second and third line, in essence have two 2nd line pairings (one of Edler/Tanev and one of Garrison/Corrado). Why this works Edler/Tanev: As we all know, Edler is a very good offensive d-man, but does have his defensive lapses in his own zone from time to time. Tanev would provide the calming presence (much like Salo) to allow Edler to play to his strength and be a little more risky. This also helps Tanev because although he has a very strong positional game, at the moment he does not have a very strong offensive game. Being paired with Edler would allow Tanev better establish his offensive game learning from one of the better offensive d-men in the league. Garrison/Corrado: Garrison is a very solid two-way d-man and Corrado is on his way to becoming one. Pairing Corrado with Garrison would provide Corrado with a very good mentor coming into the league and they already get along great, as witnessed on twitter (during the prospect camp they met up for dinner just the two of them). Garrison has proven to be quite a good d-man on his own and I do not think his play would suffer much by mentoring an up and coming kid as opposed to being paired with a more established d-man. Garrison also happens to be a natural left side d-man and although he has transitioned to the right side well, he would most likely be more comfortable of his natural side. Another note is that fans (and I think management) are hoping Corrado turns into a Garrison type player, so why not have him mentored by the type of player you are hoping he will become. So my lines would look like: Hamhuis/Bieksa Edler/Tanev - Garrison/Corrado (think of it as a 2a/2b) This also solved a handedness issue of having people play on their opposite sides (both Tanev and Corrado are righties and both Edler and Garrison are lefties), which doesn't always go so well, and avoids the growing pains of having a third line pairing of two young players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter.S-Kerouac Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 My only argument against Tanev with Edler is...... it means teams will rush Edler hard because he's the only point shot. However at this point I think he's the best option. We will see what Weber brings I hear he was picked up mainly because he can unload in a hurry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian42 Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 I believe, most of the time we should run 3 good pairs Hammer Bieksa Edler Tanev Garrison Corrado Keeping them balanced except when special teams are involved and then boosting the minutes of our strongest guys. PP Edler and Garrison PK hammer Bieksa From Torts history, he overplays one pirs more than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.