HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Number 1 defense-man needed

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2012, 08:39 PM
  #101
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whale View Post
It won't take long before Edler starts getting the respect he deserves. People used to say that he wasn't a #1 because he wasn't physical enough, now he crushes and everyone says its consistency. Consistency comes with age, Pronger, Niedermayer and Lidstrom were not consistent at his age, and Doughty and Karlsson are hardly consistent or defensively reliable at this point in their careers, and neither are Boyle or Greene.

The quality of a teams defense corps is directly related to a teams special teams ratings, we have consistently been at or near the top of the league for a long time in both PK and PP. I am not worried.

What would be nice would be a right handed offensive dman to play beside Edler, but he does not have to be a true #1.
Agree with everything here.

14s incisor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 08:42 PM
  #102
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Wow, having a really good team wins you the Cup? Thanks, coach.

Seriously though, one thing that is common in winning the Cup is good depth at center, 1 dynamic defenseman and at the very least a goalie that can make a timely stop (if not lots).

LA - (Kopitar, Richards, Stoll, Doughty, Quick)
Boston - (Bergeron, Krejci, Kelly, Campbell, Chara, Thomas)
Chicago - (Toews, Sharp, Bolland, Madden, Keith, Niemi)
Pittsburgh - (Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Letang, Fleury)
Detroit - (Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Filppula, Lidstrom, Osgood)
Anaheim - (Getzlaf, McDonald, Pahlsson, Niedermayer, Pronger, Giguere)
Carolina - (Staal, Weight, Brind Amour, Kaberle, Ward)

I mean it's a fairly common theme.
Only if we could get past the Kings... we'd be like the 2006 Hurricanes

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 09:02 PM
  #103
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,289
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyC View Post
Only if we could get past the Kings... we'd be like the 2006 Hurricanes
Need more defense! Can't score so maybe we can win games 1-0? Or 0-0 and hope the NHL flips a coin and we win a coin toss.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 01:12 AM
  #104
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,942
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Frantisek Kaberle a dynamic #1 defenceman? Roflmao.
Well, not exactly they were definitely an exception to the rule but Kaberle played some really good hockey in those playoffs.

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 08:36 PM
  #105
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
Letang was 5th on the Penguins blueline in ice time in those playoffs.

Sergei Gonchar led that team in ice time and I wouldn't say he is the mythical, bona fide #1 guy people are looking for.

....................

Look at the Flyers, they went all in to get Pronger and now that his career is all but over they are completely screwed along the blueline. They got bent over acquiring a solid young defender and have a couple of other solid young guys (Franson and Meszaros) and then a collection of journeymen filling out the ranks. (I'm not counting Timonen as he's said he may retire).
Both the Flyers current defense and the Pens defense that yr they won Cup remind me of the current Nucks defense.

Defense by committee, four or five good Dmen (possibly number two's) but no clear number 1.

Flyers: an old slower Timonen, Meszaros, Coburn, Schenn, Grossman....

Can anyone say those are 'bad Dmen'? Nope.

Can anyone call them superstars? Timo may have been , but not anymore.

Very similar to Vancouver.

rban* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 09:14 PM
  #106
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,719
vCash: 500
Personally, I think we have a greater need for secondary scoring. In the last 2 playoffs series it has been a lack offense that has killed us - mostly due to injuries. When you lose a player the calibre of Daniel Sedin or Ryan Kesler there aren't a lot of players who can replace them, but your team can't be so dependent upon a few guys that you become a 1 line team with 1 or 2 injuries.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 09:38 PM
  #107
PG Canuck
Moderator
 
PG Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Prince George, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,502
vCash: 1512
Don't need a clear cu number one defensemen when you have a deep defense like ours where everyone can handle big minutes. Need some scoring far before we need a number one defensemen.

PG Canuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 10:24 PM
  #108
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeslerKrony View Post
Wasn't Edler ranked in the top 25 of defenseman in an HF Poll? That's a #1 Dman. He's still improving too.
No that list only lists those active defensemen considered the most skilled and trained but not their actual skill set and potential.

A true #1 defenseman does not even need to be the teams best, most skilled defenseman. A true #1 defenseman may be a poored player at defense than other defensemen on the team, but a #1 defenseman has a special knack in that he can often influence the outcome of the game by his play (e.g. Jovanovski, Weber, Chara, Suter). Often those players are also considered franchaise players because the GM will build his team around those special players.

If you are indicating that those 25 players are all #1 defensemen because each team has a #1 defenseman, that would be wrong. Each team has a roster space for a #1 defenseman, but that does not mean the team's player has the skill to be a true #1 defenseman, only that the team uses him to fill the teams roster spot for the #1 defenseman.

Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 10:27 PM
  #109
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Total luxury that shouldn't be a priority at all, IMO.

You have a great defensive core and great goaltending, with huge holes on your second and third lines, and you're asking for a #1 defenseman?! what the *******.

Hamhuis is way better than anyone we can conceivably get anyways.

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 10:28 PM
  #110
Yammer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Republic of East Van
Posts: 2,244
vCash: 500
I don't think we need a number one.

I think we need a pushrusher though. Someone who has the hands and feet to bring the puck with speed, creating his own breakout and instantly overloading on that side.

Bieksa can do it sometimes, Edler can do it sometimes. Ehrhoff did it a lot, but he is gone. Hedican could have done it but didn't have the instinct; Jovo was maybe the last of those rushing d.

My guess is that Ballard was supposed to be that guy, and I think he still could be, but for whatever reason he doesn't get the minutes or the pp time

Yammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 10:38 PM
  #111
serge2k
Registered User
 
serge2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taelin View Post
Then how do you propose we find one? Tank for a year?
Trade Kesler and Edler for the mythical saviour that is a number one dman.

Then when we don't win the cup people will instead whine about a big number 1 center.

serge2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 10:47 PM
  #112
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yammer View Post
I don't think we need a number one.

I think we need a pushrusher though. Someone who has the hands and feet to bring the puck with speed, creating his own breakout and instantly overloading on that side.

Bieksa can do it sometimes, Edler can do it sometimes. Ehrhoff did it a lot, but he is gone. Hedican could have done it but didn't have the instinct; Jovo was maybe the last of those rushing d.

My guess is that Ballard was supposed to be that guy, and I think he still could be, but for whatever reason he doesn't get the minutes or the pp time
I think the problem is that the type of puck rusher we need has to be able to pass the puck and play off our other players-- Ballard does not seem to be able to do anything other than do a one-man-end-to-ender and occassional make the backdoor play. He's nothing like Ehrhoff or Jovo in that sense.

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2013, 10:47 PM
  #113
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by serge2k View Post
Trade Kesler and Edler for the mythical saviour that is a number one dman.

Then when we don't win the cup people will instead whine about a big number 1 center.
QFT

Moral of the story is that people will find any reason to b**** and complain when things don't go right.

kanuck87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 02:57 AM
  #114
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,725
vCash: 50
List 30 defenders better then Edler and Hamhuis. Good luck, 15-20 of them will be very debatable. I think the sentiment is we need a Weber, Chara, Pronger, Doughty style number one, and sorry boys and girls, that simply won't happen if we don't destroy our team or draft and develop one ourselves.

We have two guys that I think on most teams are a number 1, and then 2 guys that are more complementary but could still be top pairing guys, Bieksa and Garrison, and even Ballard, for the amount of crap he gets, is top four on most teams. Tanev isn't top 4 yet, but he's getting there. If anything, we need some depth, as Joslin and Alberts aren't going to cut it for full time duty if we suffer injuries.

I think our biggest need is a second line center that can move down when Kesler gets back, or a third line center that is comfortable playing in the top six until Kesler is back.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:01 AM
  #115
Bougieman
Registered User
 
Bougieman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,777
vCash: 500
Our defense is FINE. Especially if Ballard steps up the way I'm expecting him to now that he's injury free and more settled in. He couldn't drop any further down the ladder at this point, anyway. It's all up from here.

Edler is coming along perfectly, and I'm excited to see what kind of player Garrison is.

What we REALLY need is secondary scoring. Players that step up when the chips are down. It was a serious issue in the last two playoff rounds we played -- both of which we lost, in case anyone has forgotten. Scoring goals, not defence, was the major issue for this team in both series. Raymond is not cutting the mustard, for one, and he's not the only one that seems to fade away when the going gets rough.

Bougieman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 04:31 AM
  #116
LiveeviL
No unique points
 
LiveeviL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Jämtland, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,370
vCash: 50
Send a message via ICQ to LiveeviL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bougieman View Post
Our defense is FINE. Especially if Ballard steps up the way I'm expecting him to now that he's injury free and more settled in. He couldn't drop any further down the ladder at this point, anyway. It's all up from here.

Edler is coming along perfectly, and I'm excited to see what kind of player Garrison is.

What we REALLY need is secondary scoring. Players that step up when the chips are down. It was a serious issue in the last two playoff rounds we played -- both of which we lost, in case anyone has forgotten. Scoring goals, not defence, was the major issue for this team in both series. Raymond is not cutting the mustard, for one, and he's not the only one that seems to fade away when the going gets rough.
Yes, in the choice between an even better D-man and a more solid 2nd line I know what I want.

But, we haven't seen yet what the second line will look like. With Kesler out some more time (which is bad of course) I am still expecting something new, creative and unexpectedly good coming out of it.

LiveeviL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2013, 11:17 AM
  #117
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
No that list only lists those active defensemen considered the most skilled and trained but not their actual skill set and potential.

A true #1 defenseman does not even need to be the teams best, most skilled defenseman. A true #1 defenseman may be a poored player at defense than other defensemen on the team, but a #1 defenseman has a special knack in that he can often influence the outcome of the game by his play (e.g. Jovanovski, Weber, Chara, Suter). Often those players are also considered franchaise players because the GM will build his team around those special players.
What?

We've gone from people mis-using the term "#1 defenseman" to making up new poorly defined terms like "true #1 defenseman"? This is silly.

Proto is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2013, 06:51 PM
  #118
rebel diamond
Registered User
 
rebel diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Trinidad and Tobago
Posts: 5,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
We have two guys that I think on most teams are a number 1, and then 2 guys that are more complementary but could still be top pairing guys, Bieksa and Garrison
That about sums it up. I mean, everyone would love to have a Weber or a Lidstrom on their team, but realistically if you have 4 guys that can at least reasonably be considered as top pairing then you're doing ok. There are bigger issues to worry about than trying to bump Hamhuis off the #1 pairing.

rebel diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2013, 06:59 PM
  #119
BrockH
HFBoards Sponsor
 
BrockH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rban View Post
Both the Flyers current defense and the Pens defense that yr they won Cup remind me of the current Nucks defense.

Defense by committee, four or five good Dmen (possibly number two's) but no clear number 1.

Flyers: an old slower Timonen, Meszaros, Coburn, Schenn, Grossman....

Can anyone say those are 'bad Dmen'? Nope.

Can anyone call them superstars? Timo may have been , but not anymore.

Very similar to Vancouver.
Dude, don't you know, this thread is supposed to be necro'd once a month. You were 7 days early.

Seriously though...so sick of this stupid argument. I have no idea why you felt the need to respond to and quote a post that was over 2 months old.

BrockH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2013, 01:51 PM
  #120
Lemurion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 145
vCash: 250
The D problem is simple: Either someone plays out of position, or either Garrison or Edler is a third pairing defenceman and Chris Tanev is top-4.

Lemurion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2013, 07:55 PM
  #121
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
List 30 defenders better then Edler and Hamhuis. Good luck, 15-20 of them will be very debatable. I think the sentiment is we need a Weber, Chara, Pronger, Doughty style number one, and sorry boys and girls, that simply won't happen if we don't destroy our team or draft and develop one ourselves.

We have two guys that I think on most teams are a number 1, and then 2 guys that are more complementary but could still be top pairing guys, Bieksa and Garrison, and even Ballard, for the amount of crap he gets, is top four on most teams. Tanev isn't top 4 yet, but he's getting there. If anything, we need some depth, as Joslin and Alberts aren't going to cut it for full time duty if we suffer injuries.

I think our biggest need is a second line center that can move down when Kesler gets back, or a third line center that is comfortable playing in the top six until Kesler is back.
Agree with everything you say. Secondary scoring IS more important for this team.

By way of explanation though, I can TRY to explain why people still think Nucks have to have ... a 'true number 1'.

A one word answer: HISTORY.

When folks look at recent Cup winners, they usually see lineups with one of these beasts: either a Doughty or a Chara.

So they think it is impossible to win a Cup without having one of those things.

There are cases like Pens and Hurricanes where they win without one, but they see those as exceptions to the rule.

But it is a bit of a false dichotomy. There are other reasons why this team didnt get a Cup. But people sometimes focus or obsess on one factor.

BUT I agree with you. When the Sedin line is checked or ground into submission no secondary scoring is good enough to step up. That's the main problem as I see it.

rban* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2013, 08:21 PM
  #122
AmazingNuck
Registered User
 
AmazingNuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,130
vCash: 500
The Canucks don't need a #1 defenseman. The Canucks simply needed a fourth defenseman to round out the top 4. Ehrhoff-Edler-Bieksa-Hamhuis was an elite top 4. They pretty much carried us through the playoffs (along with Luongo) when the offense was sputtering.

Last year, we had Edler-Bieksa-Hamhuis-Salo. While Salo was good, he slowed down and was nowhere near as effective as Ehrhoff, and couldn't take any pressure off of Edler. This year, we have Garrison to replace Salo. As long as he can take some defensive pressure off of Edler and allow Edler to shine, the Canucks' top 4 will be the critical portion of the Canucks' roster.

The only thing the Canucks really lack on the back-end is mobility.

AmazingNuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2013, 08:27 PM
  #123
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Need more defense! Can't score so maybe we can win games 1-0? Or 0-0 and hope the NHL flips a coin and we win a coin toss.
You need good to great defensemen to score in this league. Defensemen also have a big affect on possession and shot differential, which lead to more goals. Our scoring droughts have typically come when our defence has been playing poorly or is injured.

I'm indifferent to the "#1" debate but I would like to see as much talent, especially offensively, on our blue-line as possible.


Last edited by Scurr: 01-10-2013 at 08:36 PM.
Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2013, 08:42 PM
  #124
timw33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemurion View Post
The D problem is simple: Either someone plays out of position, or either Garrison or Edler is a third pairing defenceman and Chris Tanev is top-4.
Or roll three pairings pretty equally.

timw33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-10-2013, 10:55 PM
  #125
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmazingNuck View Post
The Canucks don't need a #1 defenseman. The Canucks simply needed a fourth defenseman to round out the top 4. Ehrhoff-Edler-Bieksa-Hamhuis was an elite top 4. They pretty much carried us through the playoffs (along with Luongo) when the offense was sputtering.

Last year, we had Edler-Bieksa-Hamhuis-Salo. While Salo was good, he slowed down and was nowhere near as effective as Ehrhoff, and couldn't take any pressure off of Edler. This year, we have Garrison to replace Salo. As long as he can take some defensive pressure off of Edler and allow Edler to shine, the Canucks' top 4 will be the critical portion of the Canucks' roster.

The only thing the Canucks really lack on the back-end is mobility.
True that. What could have really super charged the defense corps (and might still do so) is if Ballard starts playing as well as I believe he can.

That would REALLY relieve the pressure on Edler.

rban* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:59 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.