RRypien37 Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 2 hours ago, Frazzy Desjardins said: Him and Biega make a solid 3rd pairing..... THIRD pairing Not in my eyes. Biega is a fill in #7 guy the way I see it with Bartowski being the #6 guy. But on this "transition" team this could very well be considered a 3rd pairing I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 20 hours ago, Odd. said: I'm going to come out for the record and say that Bartkowski is our 4th best defenseman. Edler, Tanev, and Hutton come first. IMHO, Hamhuis has trailed down tbh. I really love Bartkowski. Such an agile, mobile defenseman. Yes he might have some down games, but he's been looking really good otherwise. I can't believe people actually hate on him. Bartkowski's game has shown improvement over the past 10 games. Neither he or Hutton are top 4 dmen, yet. Sbisa is better than Bartkowski. Meanwhile back at the ranch, Beiga is quietly nailing down the 6D slot. I suggest that he is outplaying Bartkowski since he came back up. Since Hamhuis will not be back until February at the earliest the lineup likely is; 1st Pairing: Edler - Tanev; 2nd Pairing: Sbisa - Hutton; 3rd Pairing: Bartkowski - Beiga Get a higher FO% and the pressure on the d-core should ease off. Get a slightly more physical game from Edler and the Canucks have a d-core that has some bite. Again last night TB took liberties on Burrows and Markstrom with little push back. Bartkowski should have dropped the guy that pushed Burrows into the boards not given him a love tap on the leg. It might have been a invite but it was to late for that. Drop the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukoncanuck87 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 On December 23, 2015 at 0:11 PM, Boudrias said: Bartkowski's game has shown improvement over the past 10 games. Neither he or Hutton are top 4 dmen, yet. Sbisa is better than Bartkowski. Meanwhile back at the ranch, Beiga is quietly nailing down the 6D slot. I suggest that he is outplaying Bartkowski since he came back up. Since Hamhuis will not be back until February at the earliest the lineup likely is; 1st Pairing: Edler - Tanev; 2nd Pairing: Sbisa - Hutton; 3rd Pairing: Bartkowski - Beiga Get a higher FO% and the pressure on the d-core should ease off. Get a slightly more physical game from Edler and the Canucks have a d-core that has some bite. Again last night TB took liberties on Burrows and Markstrom with little push back. Bartkowski should have dropped the guy that pushed Burrows into the boards not given him a love tap on the leg. It might have been a invite but it was to late for that. Drop the guy. I agree with all you said. But have u noticed Edler hasn't been that physical since his back problem a couple years ago. I don't think he can play that physical game anymore at least not the way he used to a few years ago. Sucks but is what it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logic Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 8 minutes ago, desiboynux4lifee******* said: you were right provost, seems like you watched his games in Boston before hand, good judgement call. Bartkwoski was really bad for us this year. ended the season with 18 points with a -19. Right because Bo-Sang would have done so much better hahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Way to bump this and make me think we re-signed Bartkowski. I was like WTF?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNuCkSLoUiE23 Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 1 hour ago, DeNiro said: Way to bump this and make me think we re-signed Bartkowski. I was like WTF?? I was shaking myself. I just heard a false rumour on Facebook that Benning signed Bartkowski to a Dorsett-like contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.