Edler or Tanev

[Odjick_fan]

I think Edler just needs some good old motivational speeches before games jus like Ramses lol

 

 

[Fakename70]

1 minute ago, J.R. said:

Edler and Subban would have made a pretty killer 1st pair but I'm largely glad we didn't make that move as I'd prefer we focus more on the future than the present.

You don't think that pairing would've solidified the D not only for the present, but the future as well? 

[5Fivehole0]

11 hours ago, Odjick_fan said:

This joke flew under too many radars

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Fakename70 said:

You don't think that pairing would've solidified the D not only for the present, but the future as well? 

Immediate, sure. Long term, no. 

 

Would have cost us to many futures. 

[kloubek]

Tanev is the better player.   He plays his role to a tee,  and it is role players which make differences in games. 

 

Edler is better than we tend to give him credit for.  He can score and he can hit.   (Though we haven't exactly seen a lot of either like we used to).   But at the end of the day, he doesnt excel at anything.  Tanev does. 

 

Now with more role players on our team,  Edler is also the more expendable of the two.   (With that said,  I'd like to ensure Hutton continues his development, and to see if anyone else on our blueline can contribute.   As it stands,  I'm not sure we have another defenseman who can score,  and last season was woeful in that regard).

[alfstonker]

3 hours ago, kloubek said:

Tanev is the better player.   He plays his role to a tee,  and it is role players which make differences in games. 

 

Edler is better than we tend to give him credit for.  He can score and he can hit.   (Though we haven't exactly seen a lot of either like we used to).   But at the end of the day, he doesnt excel at anything.  Tanev does. 

 

Now with more role players on our team,  Edler is also the more expendable of the two.   (With that said,  I'd like to ensure Hutton continues his development, and to see if anyone else on our blueline can contribute.   As it stands,  I'm not sure we have another defenseman who can score,  and last season was woeful in that regard).

Tanev has not and would imo not be able to carry the D like Edler has done, for years.

 

That is the true comparison right there. The fact is Tanev is not physical enough or has enough offense to have carried the D that Edler has had to carry and that can't be denied.

 

Add to that the suspicion that Edler still carries the remnants of a long standing back injury and how he eats minutes without complaint and I can't see why we are having this discussion.

 

Imo I also fail to see how you can say Edler is the more expendable. If that had truly been the case we would not have crashed so spectacularly when Edler was lost to injury.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

13 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

1, 3, 5 D are the more balanced member of the pair and have a certain amount of offensive ability.  2, 4, 6 play a more supporting role and are usually the stay at home member of the pair.  It has nothing to do with which side they play.  This concept was related by Ray Ferraro and is how people in the league rank defensemen according to him.

 

Based on history then, which is reliable evidence, Tanev or Gudbranson would never be cast as a #1 or #3.  I'd love to see Gudbranson develop the offensive promise he had as a junior but to date he has not lived up to his high draft selection.

Guddy's never really had a high offensive promise,  the year he got drafted he had 2 goals and 23 point in 41 games,  He was never expected to be an offensive guy and it really had nothing to do with his high draft selection.  I'm with you that I don't think Guddy is a #1 guy but could be a really strong #2 guy, scott stevens type #2 from 1995 on, a 20 point player that is strong defensively and can make opposing players keep their heads up.  

 

Quote

Edler played 52 games last year because he had a broken leg.  And it is no coincidence that the Canucks began their slide the night that Edler was injured (and Sutter broke his jaw).

Our slide after edler going down was more of a testiment to our poor D depth more than it was on how good edler is.  Sbisa also went out against the jets after he was the only phyiscal presence we had that game. Depth was the biggest reason.  We had Beiga playing top 4 along with a first year pro.  Then all we had as back up was Bart and Weber.  This year if edler went down, we'd probably be able to manage our ice time fairly well.  We'd still hurt but not near as bad as last year.

 

Quote

Edler plays on the PP for a reason.  Because he has offensive ability and at 6, he was tied for the most goals by a Canuck defenseman (tied with Matt Bartkowski of all people) and 2nd in points.  I'm not sure who else you would start on the PP.  Gudbranson has 11 goals in 5 seasons.

I wouldn't call Edler a PP specialist, he averages 4 PP goals a year over the last 3 seasons.  Our powerplay has been in the decline and he is one of the main reasons for that.  He's not the trigger man, he's a passenger.  Personally I would rather have Hutton carrying the puck into the zone than edlers drop pass.  

 

Quote

#1 D men who play 27-28 minutes are rare.  In fact, last season there were only 3:  Karlson 28:58, Suter 28:35, and Doughty 28:01.  We all know that there are about 10 true #1 stud defensemen in the league.  This is a figure that Jim Benning has stated recently.  So most teams don't have a stud #1.  Nobody has called Edler a true #1 stud but he does play in the 1-hole which makes him a #1 D.  He was 18th in the league in terms of ice time last season which puts him in the middle of the pack in a metric that reflects the coaches opinion.  I'm not sure why you think that Edler should have played more if you think he isn't the Canucks best D.

The only reason we put Edler in that situations is because we didn’t really have any options and he had shown promise in the past.  But we can clearly see he’s not a driver of the PP unit and plays better when there is another player anchoring that back end,  Ehrhoff, Salo, Vbrata.  So again the only reason we’ve had him on the PP is because of teams lack offensive depth and Edler’s past.

 

Ben Hutton has shown that he has offensive awareness and puck moving skills.  I would say he’d almost be a better fit on that #1 unit, but if Hutton steps up and QB’s the #1 PP, where does Edler fit?   He’s never been a big producer on 5 on 5 points, in fact Tanev has out produced Edler on 5on5 points for the last 3 years.  So if Edler isn’t getting the #1 PP ice time, would he even considered a top pairing D? I’d argue that he’d be a strong #3.

 

2014 - 30 D got more EV points than edler got total points.

2015 -  Edler wasn’t even in the top 50 for even strength points

2016 – A first year pro, Hutton almost doubled (1.7x) Edler’s EV points  

[Fakename70]

9 hours ago, J.R. said:

Immediate, sure. Long term, no. 

 

Would have cost us to many futures. 

Depends on your definition of "long term", I guess. I wouldn't have given up any more futures than this year's. A top 5 pick plus Tanev and "something else" (a forward, most likely) should've been enough to suffice. 

Although Juolevi, according to the U.S. broadcast on draft day, was dubbed the best overall defenceman, truth is we have no idea how he'll turn out in the NHL. Particularly, if he's rushed rather than developed once he arrives from the minors. But, we've already seen what Tanev and Subban are capable of every year. If given a choice, I'll take Subban.  

 

Regardless, it's moot now. 

[Kokanee king]

21 hours ago, 5Fivehole0 said:

You would make a good politician then, you just dance around every counterpoint and bring up irrelevant things like Edler Sbisa or Tanev Sbisa. You say that Gudbranson is playing better hockey than Edler and how Edler should be playing, or how Edler played 5 years ago. I proved that Edler 5 years ago was WAY better than Gudbranson has ever been, so now that's a moot point. 

If you played hockey ever, you would know that defense is more about just clearing the net and hitting guys (which Tanev does neither). Defense is about getting the puck back, possessing the puck, making good break out passes, getting the puck OUT OF YOUR ZONE and driving the offense from the blue line. All of these things Edler excels at, his corsi and fenwick proves it. When Edler is on the ice, the Canucks possess the puck more than when Tanev is on the ice without Edler as proven by Edler and Tanevs individual corsi numbers. 

You have yet to show any facts other than "What's better Hutton Edler or Tanev Hutton" 

I'm 28 and have played hockey my entire life, and still do. I may not be the greatest player by any means (best goalie in my tier 3 years straight #bragging) but I understand the game, which it does not seem like you do. 

As a goalie, I want a guy who can get the puck and get it into the other teams zone. If you're blocking shots, that means you aren't possessing the puck. Tanev takes away passing lanes and blocks shots, as does Gudbranson, but they have to do that because they don't have the puck. 
 

im dancing around, Wow, clueless 

 

Your the one that say Edler is better than Tanev and that edler is better than Gudb yet the only facts you put forward is that Edler has scored a whopping 7.2 goal per year of his 10 year career. 

 

you're the one that compared gudb stats to edler stats even though they were not on the same team or play the same style. The canucks have been a high scoring team for edler entire career except the last 2 or so and gudb has been on the Panthers, enough said. 

 

 

The thread is Edler and Tanev who is better at that is simple just answer the question below and stop avoiding it. 

 

Edler Sbisa or Tanev Sbisa 

 

Answer my question is you are so smart and such an expert.

 

Everyone know the best d-man or the #1 d-man on the team will always match up better with the worst d-man on the team and that is common sense. 

 

edler excells at getting the puck back, possessing the puck, making good break out passes, getting the puck OUT OF YOUR ZONE and driving the offense from the blue line. WOW, PLEASE WATCH THE GAMES. absolutely clueless statement!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

 

Corsi is BS and how the &^@# would a defencive D-man ever get a good Corsi #. again clueless.

 

your a goalie that explains all i need to know. Please stop living in the past!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Maybe you should be out playing Pokemon 

[alfstonker]

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Guddy's never really had a high offensive promise,  the year he got drafted he had 2 goals and 23 point in 41 games,  He was never expected to be an offensive guy and it really had nothing to do with his high draft selection.  I'm with you that I don't think Guddy is a #1 guy but could be a really strong #2 guy, scott stevens type #2 from 1995 on, a 20 point player that is strong defensively and can make opposing players keep their heads up.  

 

Our slide after edler going down was more of a testiment to our poor D depth more than it was on how good edler is.  Sbisa also went out against the jets after he was the only phyiscal presence we had that game. Depth was the biggest reason.  We had Beiga playing top 4 along with a first year pro.  Then all we had as back up was Bart and Weber.  This year if edler went down, we'd probably be able to manage our ice time fairly well.  We'd still hurt but not near as bad as last year.

 

I wouldn't call Edler a PP specialist, he averages 4 PP goals a year over the last 3 seasons.  Our powerplay has been in the decline and he is one of the main reasons for that.  He's not the trigger man, he's a passenger.  Personally I would rather have Hutton carrying the puck into the zone than edlers drop pass.  

 

The only reason we put Edler in that situations is because we didn’t really have any options and he had shown promise in the past.  But we can clearly see he’s not a driver of the PP unit and plays better when there is another player anchoring that back end,  Ehrhoff, Salo, Vbrata.  So again the only reason we’ve had him on the PP is because of teams lack offensive depth and Edler’s past.

 

Ben Hutton has shown that he has offensive awareness and puck moving skills.  I would say he’d almost be a better fit on that #1 unit, but if Hutton steps up and QB’s the #1 PP, where does Edler fit?   He’s never been a big producer on 5 on 5 points, in fact Tanev has out produced Edler on 5on5 points for the last 3 years.  So if Edler isn’t getting the #1 PP ice time, would he even considered a top pairing D? I’d argue that he’d be a strong #3.

 

2014 - 30 D got more EV points than edler got total points.

2015 -  Edler wasn’t even in the top 50 for even strength points

2016 – A first year pro, Hutton almost doubled (1.7x) Edler’s EV points  

Not really. Our depth was better last year with more capable players than the previous 2 years. To deny that Edler, in his ability to eat up minutes, supply most of the constant physical presence and lead by example is to ignore the facts imo.

 

Do you really think that to state that "the only reason we put Edler in that situation is because etc" is any kind of argument against how important Edler is for this team? You could say that about any player.

 

Hutton is not yet able to supplant Edler in any area of the game. That is not to say he won't some day be as good as Edler but that remains to be seen.

You and people who share your opinion would be better concentrating on what Edler brings to the D when fully fit than what he doesn't. Edler has scored at almost .5 over his illustrious career (Tanev at .2) - not bad for someone who is "not a big producer 5 on 5 or other, because they all count and as the Canucks have always been a PP team his role is important.

 

You also seem to ignore that Edler has suffered (until JB arrived) from lack of real physical help. In fact you could argue his 5 on 5 would be better if he wasn't knocking his pan in supplying virtually all the physical presence, racking up huge minutes, trying to keep the team in the game.

 

Even our lightweight forwards have never added much physicality to our defense and you could argue players like Tanev only add to the physical toll on Edler. That thankfully is all about to change.

 

"2014 - 30 D got more EV points than edler got total points.

2015 -  Edler wasn’t even in the top 50 for even strength points

2016 – A first year pro, Hutton almost doubled (1.7x) Edler’s EV points "

 

As you know comparing outside of the team is spurious as is comparing Hutton's first season where they are not even playing the same minutes or competing against the same players in the opposition.

[Kokanee king]

14 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

1, 3, 5 D are the more balanced member of the pair and have a certain amount of offensive ability.  2, 4, 6 play a more supporting role and are usually the stay at home member of the pair.  It has nothing to do with which side they play.  This concept was related by Ray Ferraro and is how people in the league rank defensemen according to him.

 

Based on history then, which is reliable evidence, Tanev or Gudbranson would never be cast as a #1 or #3.  I'd love to see Gudbranson develop the offensive promise he had as a junior but to date he has not lived up to his high draft selection.

 

Edler played 52 games last year because he had a broken leg.  And it is no coincidence that the Canucks began their slide the night that Edler was injured (and Sutter broke his jaw).

 

Edler plays on the PP for a reason.  Because he has offensive ability and at 6, he was tied for the most goals by a Canuck defenseman (tied with Matt Bartkowski of all people) and 2nd in points.  I'm not sure who else you would start on the PP.  Gudbranson has 11 goals in 5 seasons.

 

#1 D men who play 27-28 minutes are rare.  In fact, last season there were only 3:  Karlson 28:58, Suter 28:35, and Doughty 28:01.  We all know that there are about 10 true #1 stud defensemen in the league.  This is a figure that Jim Benning has stated recently.  So most teams don't have a stud #1.  Nobody has called Edler a true #1 stud but he does play in the 1-hole which makes him a #1 D.  He was 18th in the league in terms of ice time last season which puts him in the middle of the pack in a metric that reflects the coaches opinion.  I'm not sure why you think that Edler should have played more if you think he isn't the Canucks best D.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr Crabcakes 

 \

The subject you quoted was about my 5th back and forth between another guy. A guy that Stated Edler is a #1 D and i believe Tanev and Gudb will be better this year. this year not last and not 5 years ago. i believe Edler is the only D on the team that is on the decline. he clearly is since 2011

 

i dont think edler should play more i think he should play less or better yet just trade him. i was just telling the other guy that the true number 1 dman in the league play 3-5 minute more than Edler. 

 

i beleive the best dman on the team can be paired with any other D an the team regarless of what side they play on. i think the Edler Sbsia or Tanev Sbisa potential pairing says it all because no one would pick Sbisa Edler. 

 

Edler has been our #1 and its time to pass the torch to someone more qualified and someone that is on the upswing of his career not the downswing. Hopefully Van-city doesn't became a Swedish retirement home. 

[RWMc1]

6 minutes ago, Kokanee king said:

Mr Crabcakes 

 \

The subject you quoted was about my 5th back and forth between another guy. A guy that Stated Edler is a #1 D and i believe Tanev and Gudb will be better this year. this year not last and not 5 years ago. i believe Edler is the only D on the team that is on the decline. he clearly is since 2011

 

i dont think edler should play more i think he should play less or better yet just trade him. i was just telling the other guy that the true number 1 dman in the league play 3-5 minute more than Edler. 

 

i beleive the best dman on the team can be paired with any other D an the team regarless of what side they play on. i think the Edler Sbsia or Tanev Sbisa potential pairing says it all because no one would pick Sbisa Edler. 

 

Edler has been our #1 and its time to pass the torch to someone more qualified and someone that is on the upswing of his career not the downswing. Hopefully Van-city doesn't became a Swedish retirement home. 

There should be at least 30 true #1s that play more minutes than Edler.  And if that is the case, how many d-men played more minutes than Tanev?

After Edler went down last year, we had the option of Sbisa Tanev but we still plummeted out of the Playoff picture right after losing Edler. Make any excuse you want! Facts are facts.

[aGENT]

36 minutes ago, Kokanee king said:

Edler Sbisa or Tanev Sbisa 

 

Answer my question is you are so smart and such an expert.

 

22 hours ago, J.R. said:

They fill similar roles. Edler at a far higher level than Sbisa. 

 

They'd never be a pairing as they don't remotely compliment each other. They also (largely) play the same side. 

 

You're showing a very elementary knowledge of the position and pairing dynamic. 

 

[elvis15]

15 minutes ago, Kokanee king said:

...

Edler Sbisa or Tanev Sbisa 

 

Answer my question is you are so smart and such an expert.

 

Everyone know the best d-man or the #1 d-man on the team will always match up better with the worst d-man on the team and that is common sense. 

...

That is faulty logic. How about if your best player is someone like Karlsson and your worst is our recently departed Yannick Weber? Clearly they'd leave a pretty big defensive gap, where someone like Tanev would help either player more.

 

You think Edler/Sbisa and Tanev/Sbisa is a cut and dry choice. It's not, and you're skewing the choice as well by forcing a player to their off side (likely Sbisa) in the Edler/Sbisa pairing. Also, if you pair Tanev and Sbisa together they likely become a second pairing, but if you put Edler and Sbisa together Edler would still put the pairing into the realm of a 1st pairing (based on usage and assuming there aren't different pairings in special teams situations).

 

I'd likely pick Edler/Sbisa unless it was a completely defensive usage, then I would pick Tanev/Sbisa. Don't go walking around so high on your horse and telling people they should go play video games when your posts aren't as definitive as you think they are.

 

 

Here's my take even though this thread has gone on far too long, and I'll start by talking about the #1D/#1 on a given team ranking systems. If I call someone a #1 with no other clarification, I think he's a #1 anywhere. If I say someone is a #1 on a given team, he's playing in that role.

 

Going by that, Edler is a very good 2-way defenceman who's a #2 (maybe even a #2b) playing the #1 role on our team. Tanev is a top shutdown defenceman who's also likely a #2 if not a #3 playing the #2 role on our team. They each have their strengths: Edler's is that he does a bit of everything pretty well and can add offence where Tanev is strong defensively and very poised. Hutton is finally a player who can take a lot of load off of Edler offensively for us but he'll have to be brought along slowly. We haven't had really that player that can shoulder the load apart from Edler for a few years, where we have had someone like Hamhuis who can help Tanev a lot in his role (and now we have Gudbranson and to a point Tryamkin) more defensively so Tanev hasn't had to be the only guy.

 

Right now, they're about even with each having their pros and cons, and factoring in the contract/age/etc. type of factors tend to push the meter to Tanev's side for our future. But again, they aren't the same type of defenceman and you can't just say, "Edler, Tanev. Pick one now or we shoot this puppy!" and expect an easy answer.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

12 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Not really. Our depth was better last year with more capable players than the previous 2 years. To deny that Edler, in his ability to eat up minutes, supply most of the constant physical presence and lead by example is to ignore the facts imo.

Edler is not a physical presence.  He hasn't been for quite some time.  Sbisa has been a far greater physical presence over the last two years.

 

12 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Do you really think that to state that "the only reason we put Edler in that situation is because etc" is any kind of argument against how important Edler is for this team? You could say that about any player.

We have been a bottom team for 2 of the last 3 years. It's not saying a lot when your team is loosing.  Our D is finally starting to get some depth and players better suited for those roles, where does that leave edler?. 

 

12 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Hutton is not yet able to supplant Edler in any area of the game. That is not to say he won't some day be as good as Edler but that remains to be seen.

You and people who share your opinion would be better concentrating on what Edler brings to the D when fully fit than what he doesn't. Edler has scored at almost .5 over his illustrious career (Tanev at .2) - not bad for someone who is "not a big producer 5 on 5 or other, because they all count and as the Canucks have always been a PP team his role is important.

 

Why use Edlers entire career.  At one point Burrows was a 60 point player, Edler is far from being that offensive player anymore.  You're ignoring that Edler for the last 3 years has not been providing offense, he doesn't drive offensive he's a passenger of the twins the PP.  If he was a driver of offensive Chris Tanev wouldn't have higher 5on5 points over the last 3 years. 

 

What does Edler bring to the top paring? Really ask your self that.  He doesn't hit anymore, Tanev is better defensively and he actually produces higher ppg at even strength, so what is it that edler brings?  Eats minutes?  Gudbranson can do that too.

 

12 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

You also seem to ignore that Edler has suffered (until JB arrived) from lack of real physical help. In fact you could argue his 5 on 5 would be better if he wasn't knocking his pan in supplying virtually all the physical presence, racking up huge minutes, trying to keep the team in the game.

 

If Edler was asked to be our physical presence the last few years he's completely failed.  He's been soft as butter the last few years. Where is the edler that laid out Kane and Doughty.  That guy is long gone, be it his back or just the fact that he's more financially secure, he's no longer a physical presence.   It's not like this team hasn't had Bieksa, Kassian, Torres and Sbisa as a physical presence.  This whole asking edler to be the physical presence is the reason he's sucked the last few years is a new excuse i've yet to hear.  

 

12 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Even our lightweight forwards have never added much physicality to our defense and you could argue players like Tanev only add to the physical toll on Edler. That thankfully is all about to change.

 

"2014 - 30 D got more EV points than edler got total points.

2015 -  Edler wasn’t even in the top 50 for even strength points

2016 – A first year pro, Hutton almost doubled (1.7x) Edler’s EV points "

 

As you know comparing outside of the team is spurious as is comparing Hutton's first season where they are not even playing the same minutes or competing against the same players in the opposition.

Edler is quickly becoming expendable.  He hasn't been able to meet the expectation people once believed he would reach.  In fact he's regressed in his play.  We've brought in players who can play big minutes,  we've brought in physical players, we've brought in strong defensive players.

 

That means Edlers role needs to be offense.  Something he hasn't provided in 3 years, something we are currently developing in our system with Hutton and Juolevi.  And once they replace Edlers offensive output (which could be as early as this year), Edler is gone, hopefully while he has some value. 

[kloubek]

8 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Tanev has not and would imo not be able to carry the D like Edler has done, for years.

 

That is the true comparison right there. The fact is Tanev is not physical enough or has enough offense to have carried the D that Edler has had to carry and that can't be denied.

 

Add to that the suspicion that Edler still carries the remnants of a long standing back injury and how he eats minutes without complaint and I can't see why we are having this discussion.

 

Imo I also fail to see how you can say Edler is the more expendable. If that had truly been the case we would not have crashed so spectacularly when Edler was lost to injury.

I think you missed my point entirely.

If I could have a defense full of Edlers or a defense full of Tanevs, I'd have a defense full of Edlers.  Why?  Because the scoring has to come from somewhere, as does the physicality.  But that doesn't mean that as an individual, I feel Edler is the better player for us; only the more "rounded" player.  He can play in all situations, but doesn't excel at any of them. 

A good defense (or forwards, for that matter) is a sum of all the players; role players.  Some guys are good at hitting, some guys are good at clearing the net, some are good at scoring.  If you are lucky, you might have one or two players who can do two or three of these things.  But for a team like ours which is not teeming with ridiculous talent, I believe the key is to ensure you have role players who play at a high level based on how they are being utilized by the coach.  This means that the hitters hit like a freight train.  It means that the scorers score at a high pace.  It means the defensive defensemen reduce opportunities for the opposing team with aplomb.  So if you have a scorer who isn't the best at defense or at hitting, that's ok... you just need to compliment him with other players in your lineup who DO bring those qualities. 

So let's look at our defensemen who have a role:

 

Hutton - Puck moving.  Still learning, but might become exceptional in this role.

Tryamkin - Hitting.  Does it as good or better as anyone in the league.

Larsen - Puck moving.  (If he works out as hoped.  Remains to be seen)

Gudbranson - Hitting.  Not as good as Tryamkin in that role, but perhaps better in other areas?

Tanev - Defensive defenseman.  One of the best in the league.

 

...and let's look at our two defensemen who don't have a role:

 

Sbisa - Little of this, little of that, but does nothing particularly well.

Edler - Some of this, some of that, but does nothing exceptionally well.

So it's not that I believe Tanev is truly the better *all-around player*, but that I believe he plays his role far better than Edler does.  I think strong role players are more desirable than all-around "OK" players - particularly on a team like ours, since nobody else on the team can play that defensive role to nearly the same degree.  (Some might argue Gudbranson can, but the stats suggest otherwise.)  This is also why I view Edler as more expendable.  Depending on what happens with Larsen, if we can replace the scoring then Edler really doesn't bring anything to the table we don't already have.  If we lose Tanev, we lose a ton of defensive ability on the back end, which would in turn reduce our scoring, as our defensemen would be afraid to pinch as much and the forwards would always worry about getting back to take their man, and therefore wouldn't play as deep.  So for what Tanev lacks in scoring, he makes up for in enhancing team scoring in general, imo, and that makes him further valuable to us.

 

Edit: And yes, of course, besides his worth to our team directly, someone a post or two after mine pointed out that he is younger, cheaper, and not yet hit with reoccurring injury.  All excellent points, and more reasons to consider Tanev the better player for us.

[Canucklehead73]

Edler has a bigger skillset than Tanev. Hard to argue who is better when one player is multi faceted and one is not. Wheels fell off when Edler got injured last year... He does a lot for the team eating a lot of minutes playing good hockey.

 

Tanev plays a simple game, a quick skater but one dimensional defense only type who has not developed any offense.

 

Even Hamhuis could generate more offense than Tanev....

 

Edler, for all his "perceived" flaws in these forums, can play a defensive role, skate, hit (less since back injury), shoot and pass the puck in the offensive zone and generate points and as I said, eats a lot of minutes for a team that had little depth last year. We improved our depth, Edler might be even better with managed minutes...

 

Not really slagging Tanev by any means, but the comparison is flawed imho... I think most people are voting "valuable" not better.

[VIC_CITY]

8 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Tanev has not and would imo not be able to carry the D like Edler has done, for years.

What Edler has done 'for years' (last 4 years) is averaged 58.5 games played and 23.75 points. He is also declining, so unless you're talking about the season he had 5 years ago, I fail to see how this supports your argument of Edler currently being the better player.

 

That is the true comparison right there. The fact is Tanev is not physical enough or has enough offense to have carried the D that Edler has had to carry and that can't be denied.

 

Of the last 4 years, Edler has led our defense in scoring once and has led our defense in hitting ZERO times. I agree that he is more physical and offensive than Tanev, but the leader of your defensive corps should be one of the best in the league at something...Edler is not even close.

 

Add to that the suspicion that Edler still carries the remnants of a long standing back injury and how he eats minutes without complaint and I can't see why we are having this discussion.

 

Back or not, he's missed about 30% of the games over the last 4 years. He can't lead our defense or contribute at all for that matter when he isn't in the lineup.

 

Imo I also fail to see how you can say Edler is the more expendable. If that had truly been the case we would not have crashed so spectacularly when Edler was lost to injury.

 

I fail to see how a player past his prime, with a significant injury history, who also makes more money, is not more expendable than a comparable player who is entering his prime, does not have an injury history and is locked up long term to less money.

Also, just because Edler was injured when we were playing our worst hockey doesn't mean he is the sole reason. We had several other injuries as well. We also had a young line up with players that weren't used to the grind of an NHL season. We also had horrible depth on D with players like Weber and Bartkowski playing significant roles in Edler's absence. So I agree that losing Edler hurts, but there were other contributing factors to our poor performance.

 

[alfstonker]

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Edler is not a physical presence.  He hasn't been for quite some time.  Sbisa has been a far greater physical presence over the last two years.

With respect you do not seem to understand the difference between physical presence and perhaps "hits" Edler has 20lbs of muscle over Sbisa, plays the opposition's top line and plays way more minutes at that intensity.

Quote

 

We have been a bottom team for 2 of the last 3 years. It's not saying a lot when your team is loosing.  Our D is finally starting to get some depth and players better suited for those roles, where does that leave edler?. 

It leaves him to at last get some physical help to spread the load, cut his minutes and to stop basing how well the team plays on his displays alone which is something people like you seem to ignore.

Quote

 

 

Why use Edlers entire career.  At one point Burrows was a 60 point player, Edler is far from being that offensive player anymore.  You're ignoring that Edler for the last 3 years has not been providing offense, he doesn't drive offensive he's a passenger of the twins the PP.  If he was a driver of offensive Chris Tanev wouldn't have higher 5on5 points over the last 3 years. 

Unlike Burr who has had the same help and opportunities he has always had Edler has had to carry the defense. I'm not prepared to count the last 2 years where Edler was injured, the team was injured and (in the last year) the team was carrying so many rookies. If that doesn't seem fair to you then you haven't any perspective on how and what affects a player's performance.

Quote

 

What does Edler bring to the top paring? Really ask your self that.  He doesn't hit anymore, Tanev is better defensively and he actually produces higher ppg at even strength, so what is it that edler brings?  Eats minutes?  Gudbranson can do that too.

I have already answered that it seems to me. It would be more relevant to ask what has the team done to help Edler up until this season.

Quote

 

 

If Edler was asked to be our physical presence the last few years he's completely failed.  He's been soft as butter the last few years. Where is the edler that laid out Kane and Doughty.  That guy is long gone, be it his back or just the fact that he's more financially secure, he's no longer a physical presence.   It's not like this team hasn't had Bieksa, Kassian, Torres and Sbisa as a physical presence.  This whole asking edler to be the physical presence is the reason he's sucked the last few years is a new excuse i've yet to hear.  

Total biased rubbish and not worthy of a rebuttal. You are talking about 3 seasons which have for different reasons been clusters--ks to say the least, yet in 2014-15 Edler despite leading an injured D still managed a +13. The fact is while Bieksa, and Hamhuis, were sadly playing like shadows of themselves nearly all the weight was being taken by Edler.

Quote

 

Edler is quickly becoming expendable.  He hasn't been able to meet the expectation people once believed he would reach.  In fact he's regressed in his play.  We've brought in players who can play big minutes,  we've brought in physical players, we've brought in strong defensive players.

And not one of them has been tested like Edler. So let's wait and see how they shape up. I hope they do shape up as you think because that will be the best thing that could happen for Edler - getting some help at last.

Quote

 

That means Edlers role needs to be offense.  Something he hasn't provided in 3 years, something we are currently developing in our system with Hutton and Juolevi.  And once they replace Edlers offensive output (which could be as early as this year), Edler is gone, hopefully while he has some value. 

There you go again - I honestly thought you were a bit smarter - blaming Edler for lack of offense when the whole team over the last 3 seasons has lacked it and more to the point they lacked defense which is why Edler was too overworked keeping the puck out of the net to go sallying up the other end to score.

I hope you are right and some of these new guys are able to help him. He is far to valuable to be allowed to rot away - similarly to what we have done to the Sedins. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

With respect you do not seem to understand the difference between physical presence and perhaps "hits" Edler has 20lbs of muscle over Sbisa, plays the opposition's top line and plays way more minutes at that intensity.

 

Size and weight don't mean much on physical presence when the player doesn't use them.  Taylor Pyatt. Edler does not play with any sort of intensity.

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

It leaves him to at last get some physical help to spread the load, cut his minutes and to stop basing how well the team plays on his displays alone which is something people like you seem to ignore.

So say our new depth takes some responsibility of Elder.  What are you expecting to come out of that?  What kind of player our you thinking edler becomes? A 50 point player again? A #1 defenseman?  good luck with that.

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Unlike Burr who has had the same help and opportunities he has always had Edler has had to carry the defense. I'm not prepared to count the last 2 years where Edler was injured, the team was injured and (in the last year) the team was carrying so many rookies. If that doesn't seem fair to you then you haven't any perspective on how and what affects a player's performance.

Edler hasn't been the same since Ehrhoff left, and furthermore since Salo left. It was our mistake thinking Edler was the driver of the play and could be expected to continue to drive the play.  But he can't, If you haven't noticed his drop in play and you might want to take another look at the player your watching.

 

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

I have already answered that it seems to me. It would be more relevant to ask what has the team done to help Edler up until this season.

Actually you didn't.  Does he bring shut down defense? Does he bring Offense? does he bring a intimidation? Does he bring a physical presence, and no standing there looking big doesn't count.

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Total biased rubbish and not worthy of a rebuttal. You are talking about 3 seasons which have for different reasons been clusters--ks to say the least, yet in 2014-15 Edler despite leading an injured D still managed a +13. The fact is while Bieksa, and Hamhuis, were sadly playing like shadows of themselves nearly all the weight was being taken by Edler.

 

Speaking of playing like a shadow of his former self, you got Edler, but for some reason the excused are only excepted for Edler. Good for Edler being a +13, he sure lead by example in 2013-14 only separated tanev from a -51 spread. 

 

Funny you pick that season.  In the last 4 years Tanev is a +26.  Mean while no one on our current roster has a worse (+/-) than Edler with his -39.  What a leader.  He's really shown that he can handle those hard minutes.

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

And not one of them has been tested like Edler. So let's wait and see how they shape up. I hope they do shape up as you think because that will be the best thing that could happen for Edler - getting some help at last.

 

When they do step up, it means it's the end of Edler in a canucks uniform. 

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

There you go again - I honestly thought you were a bit smarter - blaming Edler for lack of offense when the whole team over the last 3 seasons has lacked it and more to the point they lacked defense which is why Edler was too overworked keeping the puck out of the net to go sallying up the other end to score.

 

If you want to a be a top 2 D in the NHL you have to fill a role.  You have to be elite in some area of the game, or at least above average..  What area is Edler above average.  just because he was our #1 D, doesn't mean that's how the league views him.

 

9 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

I hope you are right and some of these new guys are able to help him. He is far to valuable to be allowed to rot away - similarly to what we have done to the Sedins.