[Report] Kevin Bieksa wants to stay in Vancouver

[The-Impersonator]

Tony Gallagher. Goes up to Hamhuis and Bieksa and asks them if they'd waive their NTCs if asked. What a flipping scumbag. Not just old and senile, but a scumbag. Somebody egg his car when he drives into his office.

Tony G is one of the very few if not the only decent sports reporter in Vancouver. The guy actually tells it like it is amd has legit sources.

[ey40]

Tony Gallagher. Goes up to Hamhuis and Bieksa and asks them if they'd waive their NTCs if asked. What a flipping scumbag. Not just old and senile, but a scumbag. Somebody egg his car when he drives into his office.

Can't stand this guy and don't know why someone would ask him to do a Canucks pre-game show. He sounds like a whiny old man from East Van who can always find something to complaint about.

[riffraff]

You missed the point, and must have missed the series as well because there certainly were no instances of Bieksa avoiding Ferland - after Ferland's initial attempt to fight Dorsett, Ferland pretty much avoided anything after the whistles. The idea that Ferland had Bieksa "peeing his pants" is an ignorant comment - defend that if you want. but there's no need to hang any hat on any single thing Bieksa did - he's never been the turtling type.

Right. I missed the series.

I never supported the peeing the pants statement. Pretty clear in my post.

My point was that bieksa jumping ferland was a reactionary play because ferland had successfully got into bieksa and the canucks head. There is no denying that based on the play of the defenders especially. Ferlund did not need to add to after the whistles. His success was complete in consecutive short shifts.

Bieksa or dorsett could have or should have sorted him out right away - proactive as opposed to reactive.

Fist period of ducks flames Nate Thompson reverse hits ferlund and that was all she wrote. It comes down to the fact that we don't have a player to match or respond to a ferlund. Some would say Kassian. But I doubt WD supports that type of play from Kassian as we've seen. And Kassian in the box while supposedly playing on the top line or wherever in the top nine does the team no good.

I've always been a bieksa fan....my post history going back to the erhoff debates support that. I've called him out for not ensuring that lain didn't have to fight that no name from Calgary and in this instance here. That's it.

Even above I've said I'm on the fence on what to do with bieksa. He is no deterrent now and his play has dropped. It's a tough situation involving a character player.

[oldnews]

Right. I missed the series.

I never supported the peeing the pants statement. Pretty clear in my post.

My point was that bieksa jumping ferland was a reactionary play because ferland had successfully got into bieksa and the canucks head. There is no denying that based on the play of the defenders especially. Ferlund did not need to add to after the whistles. His success was complete in consecutive short shifts.

Bieksa or dorsett could have or should have sorted him out right away - proactive as opposed to reactive.

Fist period of ducks flames Nate Thompson reverse hits ferlund and that was all she wrote. It comes down to the fact that we don't have a player to match or respond to a ferlund. Some would say Kassian. But I doubt WD supports that type of play from Kassian as we've seen. And Kassian in the box while supposedly playing on the top line or wherever in the top nine does the team no good.

I've always been a bieksa fan....my post history going back to the erhoff debates support that. I've called him out for not ensuring that lain didn't have to fight that no name from Calgary and in this instance here. That's it.

Even above I've said I'm on the fence on what to do with bieksa. He is no deterrent now and his play has dropped. It's a tough situation involving a character player.

Ok, you're not in agreement that Bieksa was peeing his pants, which was what the post you responded to was taking issue with - and I'm not attempting to hang a hat on going after Ferland whether he was consenting or not, but simply making the point that Bieksa was certainly not wetting his pants at the sight of him.

Whether Ferland was effective, and in his kitchen is another matter - it's pretty clear how effective Ferland was.

I do think Kassian will be able to play that role (and does) of providing deterrence as well as a skill role, taking his share of shifts with the Sedins - particularly when they have Burrows, Vrbata or even Hansen who can step up if Kassian winds up in the box on occassion. My opinion is that Kassian could have made a significant difference in that series (as could Giordano) - guys like Ferland tend to tread differently when Kassian is around. Maroon is a good example - who will probably cause more problems for Calgary without Ferland.

I thought it was actually a Vatanen elbow that concussed Ferland in the first place - I think the reverse hit came after that and made it clear to him that his bell had been rung and that he'd have to cease the kind of play that made him effective - and that he probably needed the quiet room. Really, anyone can deliver a hit like the one that injured Ferland (Vatanen may be one of the smaller guys in the NHL, but an elbow from any NHLer can injure anyone in the league). It's not a matter of the Canucks having anyone capable of injuring Ferland imo, it's more a matter of simple luck and timing.

I'm not under the impression that Bieksa was particularly good in that series - I think he clearly struggled and had a number of difficulties, and one of them was certainly the heat Ferland applied - but what I found annoying was the suggestion that Bieksa is was a feline - that's just ignorant and misrepresents the guy.

I'm of two minds where his comments about Ferland are concerned. I respect the game that guys like Ferland play - they put it on their sleeve and sacrifice. But I also sympathize with what Bieksa was getting at. He had good reason imo. Ferland was running around, crossing the line on lots of occassions, from legit hits into late hits and obvious charges - and was entirely permitted to. Hartley's tactics were also essentially rewarded (a fine means nothing) by the subsequent crackdown that cost Vancouver more than it did Calgary.

Bieksa's anger probably had as much to do with hating Hartley as it did Harltey's soldiers.

The game Ferland plays however ends in the kind of thing that happened in game 1 in Anaheim. It's a matter of time - it just happens that he was lucky enough to escape the Vancouver series (if in fact he was healthy heading into Anaheim).

[riffraff]

Ok, you're not in agreement that he was peeing his pants, and I'm not attempting to hang a hat on going after Ferland whether he was consenting or not, simply making the point that Bieksa was certainly not wetting his pants at the sight of him.

Whether Ferland was effective, and in his kitchen is another matter - and it's pretty clear how effective Ferland was.

I do think Kassian will be able to play that role and take his share of shifts with the Sedins - particularly when they have Burrows, Vrbata or even Hansen who can step up if Kassian winds up in the box on occassion. My opinion is that Kassian could have made a world of difference in that series - guys like Ferland tend to tread differently when he's around. Maroon is a good example - who will probably cause more problems for Calgary without Ferland.

I thought it was actually a Vatanen elbow that concussed Ferland in the first place - I think the reverse hit came after that and made it clear to him that his bell was already rung and he probably needs the quiet room. Really, anyone can deliver a hit like the one that injured Ferland - it's not a matter of the Canucks having no one imo, it's more a matter of simple luck and timing.

I'm not under the impression that Bieksa was particularly good in that series - I think he clearly struggled and had a number of difficulties, and one of them was certainly the heat Ferland applied - but what I found annoying is the suggestion that he was peeing his pants - that's just ignorant and misrepresents the guy.

Agreed on last sentence 100%

And to "Kassian tangent" for a moment, I hope that once his consistency is in place that he is afforded the opportunity to be the player he is; meaning dealing with the oppositions "agitators" when required even if the result is the odd message sending penalty.

[RUPERTKBD]

CDC: Where Kesler's a "traitor" for wanting to leave a sinking ship and Bieksa is "selfish" for wanting to stay...

[MoneypuckOverlord]

CDC: Where Kesler's a "traitor" for wanting to leave a sinking ship and Bieksa is "selfish" for wanting to stay...

Canucks fans for ya.

[RUPERTKBD]

Bieska may want to stay in vancouver but if canucks don't plan on resigning him he doesn't really have a choice. If canucks let him know that they wont be resigning him, other than being stubborn, why would he not waive him NTC, especially if the canucks are willing to work with him on the team they deal with. Remember what Benning said last year. He's not afraid to ask players to waiver their NTC. Garrison a BC boy got dealt.

For anyone that thinks Bieska is going to take a 2 million dollar discount just to resign in vancouver after his contract is up... Zero chance that happens. On the open market there are still teams that will be willing to sign him 4 million plus I just hope that team isn't vancouver.

Why in the world would anyone sign him to that kind of money if he's as bad as everyone around here says he is? Do you all think you know more than actual NHL GMs?

Reactionary play on ferland by bieksa. I doubt you ever see bieksa square off with ferland. Maybe a few years ago. I wasn't impressed with that when it went down and I'm still not. Don't see how a fan can hang their hat on that instance as a form of toughness or leadership. He jumped ferland and was lucky he wasn't assessed an instigating penalty.

What about last season, when Juice stepped in to take the opening faceoff, after Hartley sent the goon squad out to start the game?

Bieksa may want Vancouver, but Vancouver doesn't want Bieksa.

Speak for yourself.

The Canucks have one of the softest defense corps in the league and people around here want to replace Bieksa with Corrado?

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Why in the world would anyone sign him to that kind of money if he's as bad as everyone around here says he is? Do you all think you know more than actual NHL GMs?

What about last season, when Juice stepped in to take the opening faceoff, after Hartley sent the goon squad out to start the game?

Speak for yourself.

The Canucks have one of the softest defense corps in the league and people around here want to replace Bieksa with Corrado?

A - Because to a team that needs his type of play, a gritty vetran that's how much he's going to get, especially on the UFA market. You can see from past off season teams like to over pay for players they feel is need to there team, even at an older age

Willie Mitchell 36 still got 4.25 on as a UFA.

Robidas at 36 got 3 million on the open market

Gonchar got 3.7

Streit got 5.2

visnovsky 4.75

Oilers gave ference 3.25 and nikitin 4.5

England got 3 from the flames.

Souray got 3.7

I can see a numerous number of teams with lots of cap look at a player like Kevin throw stupid money at him. It happens every year.Canes, Toronto, Oilers, Buffalo, Montreal, Stars, Blues (if they let Jackman walk) Sharks, and most likely, I think the wings.

B- Bieska sure did take the face off. But who'd did juice end up fighting, Oh wait, Lain ended up fighting against (westgarth) the guy who Kevin the protector was supposed to save the day against. And Bieska, he weaselled his way over to the smallest guy (Smid) on the ice.

C- Bieska is our grit on our back end, for that your right, But sadly that's really not saying much. He got pushed around and not off his game buy a 22 year old that has less than 50 NHL games experience. We need to get bigger than Bieska size on the point. We need to be a much tougher team to play against, especially in our own end. By the end of next season there is a very good chance that both Hammer and Juice are gone as UFA's Trade one this summer, and use the cap to sign a UFA, there are more D available this summer than there are next year. Then hope by next summer we have someone in our own system (one of the russians) ready to step up and take over

[JeremyCuddles]

CDC: Where Kesler's a "traitor" for wanting to leave a sinking ship and Bieksa is "selfish" for wanting to stay...

Kesler is a douche for HOW HE LEFT. Why do people still not get this? If you want out that's fine. But if you handcuff the team to 1 or 2 destinations kind of a d*** move. As much as I want Bieksa out, I won't be disappointed if he stays. 1 year left (I think) could be resigned for cheap. At this point he is hurting this team with his play though.

[JiffyPB]

Kesler is a douche for HOW HE LEFT. Why do people still not get this? If you want out that's fine. But if you handcuff the team to 1 or 2 destinations kind of a d*** move. As much as I want Bieksa out, I won't be disappointed if he stays. 1 year left (I think) could be resigned for cheap. At this point he is hurting this team with his play though.

Like how Luongo handcuffed us for 2 friggen years because we didn't trade him to Florida and then we had to dump him for a 3rd liner walking into FA and a washed up goalie prospect? This team not only endured embarrassment because he couldn't outplay his backup but also has to PAY this guy to play against us for the rest of his career AND are still on the hook for cap recapture when he retires. All this continued even AFTER trading his competition because the meanie angry coach didn't start him for a "special" game.

But yeah, Kesler is the villain.

[soshified]

Like how Luongo handcuffed us for 2 friggen years because we didn't trade him to Florida and then we had to dump him for a 3rd liner walking into FA and a washed up goalie prospect? This team not only endured embarrassment because he couldn't outplay his backup but also has to PAY this guy to play against us for the rest of his career AND are still on the hook for cap recapture when he retires. All this continued even AFTER trading his competition because the meanie angry coach didn't start him for a "special" game.

But yeah, Kesler is the villain.

In his defense, the Canucks organization were more to blame with all that "goalie controversary"

[Bobby_Lu1ngo]

We will hold on to him until the deadline. We will be siting outside of the playoff picture at the deadline this year in all likelyhood based on teams around us bouncing back like LA and SJ and CGY and EDM improving. It will be a much needes rough year.

Benning is more excited for next years draft. You will probably see guys like higgins, bieksa, vrbata, miller at this years deadline for picks and prospects if we are in bottom 10 at that point which ia quite realistic.

We have the potential to load up for a good draft year if we are not in the running. Next summer could be a very important year for the movement between this core to our next crop. If we do move those guys we could shorten the period to contention again especially with maybe a top 5 pick if we make thise deadline moves.

[jovocop55]

Bieksa may want Vancouver, but Vancouver doesn't want Bieksa.

im ok paying him 1-1.5 per for 2 yrs.. and play him as a 5-6 dmen..

[canuck73_3]

A - Because to a team that needs his type of play, a gritty vetran that's how much he's going to get, especially on the UFA market. You can see from past off season teams like to over pay for players they feel is need to there team, even at an older age

Willie Mitchell 36 still got 4.25 on as a UFA.

Robidas at 36 got 3 million on the open market

Gonchar got 3.7

Streit got 5.2

visnovsky 4.75

Oilers gave ference 3.25 and nikitin 4.5

England got 3 from the flames.

Souray got 3.7

I can see a numerous number of teams with lots of cap look at a player like Kevin throw stupid money at him. It happens every year.Canes, Toronto, Oilers, Buffalo, Montreal, Stars, Blues (if they let Jackman walk) Sharks, and most likely, I think the wings.

B- Bieska sure did take the face off. But who'd did juice end up fighting, Oh wait, Lain ended up fighting against (westgarth) the guy who Kevin the protector was supposed to save the day against. And Bieska, he weaselled his way over to the smallest guy (Smid) on the ice.

C- Bieska is our grit on our back end, for that your right, But sadly that's really not saying much. He got pushed around and not off his game buy a 22 year old that has less than 50 NHL games experience. We need to get bigger than Bieska size on the point. We need to be a much tougher team to play against, especially in our own end. By the end of next season there is a very good chance that both Hammer and Juice are gone as UFA's Trade one this summer, and use the cap to sign a UFA, there are more D available this summer than there are next year. Then hope by next summer we have someone in our own system (one of the russians) ready to step up and take over

Bieksa didn't "weasel" out of Westgarth 2 officials stepped in and Westgarth moved on to Lain, nice revisionist history there...

[RUPERTKBD]

He usually has his best season during contract years. Maybe if we are out or on the bubble, he will waive to go to a contender at the trade deadline.

People keep saying that, but it isn't really backed up by the facts.

Bieksa has signed two contracts since he started as a rookie with the Canucks. The first was in June of 2007 and came after what most would call his "breakout season.

People are quick to point at the 2008 season as a poor one and use it to back up the "contract year" theory, but it ignores the fact that Bieksa suffered a severe calf laceration and missed half of the season.

The following season, Bieksa played 72 games and put up 43 points. Not a contract year.

In '09-10, Juice suffered a second skate laceration and played only 55 games. Still, he managed a respectable 22 points....

[DownUndaCanuck]

I'd happily keep him on and re-sign him to a 2 year deal at around 1M per year, playing as our 6th or 7th defenceman. As long as he's not in our top-4 making mistakes, and on the PK or PP.

At the end of next season we'll have some real decisions to make. Here's our defence assuming we make no additions:

Edler - Tanev

Hamhuis - Clendening

Sbisa - Corrado

Bieksa

And here's our defence at the end of next season assuming we sign Franson cheap and draft Kylington.

Edler - Tanev

Hamhuis - Franson

Sbisa - Clendening

Corrado

Bieksa

Kylington

[Boudrias]

DownUndaCanuck;

I like the size that a Franson would bring. I expect a major deal to shore up the d-core. I highly doubt Bieksa would settle for a low depth role. I still do not see a true #1 in your proposed d-core roster. It might be a good enough transition group however.

Any rumour of a Franson interest in Vancouver?

[aGENT]

I'd happily keep him on and re-sign him to a 2 year deal at around 1M per year, playing as our 6th or 7th defenceman. As long as he's not in our top-4 making mistakes, and on the PK or PP.

At the end of next season we'll have some real decisions to make. Here's our defence assuming we make no additions:

Edler - Tanev

Hamhuis - Clendening

Sbisa - Corrado

Bieksa

And here's our defence at the end of next season assuming we sign Franson cheap and draft Kylington.

Edler - Tanev

Hamhuis - Franson

Sbisa - Clendening

Corrado

Bieksa

Kylington

DownUndaCanuck;

I like the size that a Franson would bring. I expect a major deal to shore up the d-core. I highly doubt Bieksa would settle for a low depth role. I still do not see a true #1 in your proposed d-core roster. It might be a good enough transition group however.

Any rumour of a Franson interest in Vancouver?

If we're spending north of $5m on a d-man, I highly doubt it will be Franson. He has a largely redundant skill set to Edler and Benning went out of his way to cap dump an equally similar, redundant Garrison, with an NTC, just last summer. I just don't see it happening.

We either break the bank and get a fast skating, offensive D with size who can move the puck (Green) or we largely roll with what we have. Maybe we make some depth changes like picking up McQuaid.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

We either break the bank and get a fast skating, offensive D with size who can move the puck (Green) or we largely roll with what we have. Maybe we make some depth changes like picking up McQuaid.

That's so funny. I was just messing around with the roster for 2015-16 and those (Green and McQuaid) are the two FA acquisitions I added to the D. Also traded for Wiercioch (nice article on him here for those unfamiliar: http://www.tsn.ca/patrick-wiercioch-analytics-vs-eyeball-test-1.223118).

Was basically looking at what we could add to the D if we removed Bieksa, Hamhuis, and Weber (roughly $10 million together). Figured that the salaries basically balanced out if we swap those players, leaving us with:

Wiercioch-Green

Edler-Tanev

Sbisa-McQuaid

I would add in RFAs Clendenning and Corrado. While both are RH shots, they are also both capable of playing either side (and have done so with success in the past at various levels). Not sure how much they stand to earn on their respective extensions?

Obviously, the weakness of this new D would mostly be in the meat'n'potatoes category. However, given the way Hamhuis and Bieksa have been going is recent years, in terms of declining physical play, I don't think we'd lose as much "grit" as it might seem. Adding McQuaid (in place of Weber) might even make that D a little more imposing than what we had before.

And we do already have some absolute behemoths (Pedan, Tryamkin, et cetera) coming in the D pipeline.

The main payoff would clearly be on offense (especially in terms of puckmoving and the power play). And the new guys (at 24, 28, and 29) are also a total of 10 years younger than the outgoing players (at 26, 32, and 33).

Unfortunately, as much as I'd love to see local kid Wiercioch brought in, the article I linked at the top is pretty good at explaining why it won't happen. Bryan Murray, while aware of Wiercioch's strong underlyings, still seems to be a guy who "eyeballs" players more than using numbers (which, coupled with how Ottawa's coaching staff has used--and not used--this player, is why I believe that a smart GM could acquire Wiercioch at good value). Unfortunately, my fear is that when it comes to analytics, even a relatively old school guy like Murray ends up looking like Kyle Dubas in comparison to "meat'n'potatoes" Jim.

(<----sorry--old joke but it's been a while and I couldn't resist)

And given that Wiercioch is pretty much the anti-Sbisa, I don't think he's going to be one of the guys circled on Benning's office wall as a potential target.

Green and McQuaid, however, might be options for JB, if he can make moves needed to acquire the necessary cap space.

And please don't take this as a serious proposal (in case my tone wasn't clear enough). Was just messing around with the roster and then came here and found it funny that the very first post I opened (J.R.'s) mentioned the two players I'd just been toying with adding via free agency.