HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The All Purpose Canucks Defense Thread I

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-25-2012, 01:25 AM
  #101
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
What was the complaint tonight? Other then a couple cases of bad communication, I thought they looked really good.
It be wrong to not look great against a banged up Oilers team that scored 9 goals in 8 games and played back to back. Yet we our D just gave them 2 goals.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2012, 04:57 AM
  #102
David71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,295
vCash: 500
with salo back, he stablizes everything. makes the safe plays. played like 22mins tonight. his read along the boards where the puck is, before the opposition even gets there is really good.

David71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2012, 03:53 PM
  #103
Agent007
Registered User
 
Agent007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
Calling a 9-1 blowout next week game Vs Chicago. Defense gets exposed bad.
Sounds good. Gonna hold you to that call

Agent007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2012, 03:59 PM
  #104
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
The problem with defense is the bad performance of Ballard. Look at this.. for what we pay Ballard he should be able to be a Top 4 when Salo is injured:

http://www.canada.com/sports/Sami+Sa...908/story.html

For the first time, the Canucks clearly miss departed free agent Christian Ehrhoff, who gave Vancouver five defenceman who could play 20-25 minutes.

That enabled the Canucks to sustain one key injury without losing anything from the blueline's top four. Salo missed the entire first half of last season and top defenceman Alex Edler most of the second, yet Vancouver still amassed 117 points and won the Presidents' Trophy.

But with Ehrhoff in Buffalo and Salo out, Canuck coach Alain Vigneault has been unable to plug the hole in his top four, which is why minor-league call-up Chris Tanev gets the chance to play there this afternoon.

rban* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2012, 04:07 PM
  #105
rban*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,894
vCash: 500
BTW all of Edler Bieksa et al will have occasional breakdowns, even Hamhuis.

Why? Well, they are not the best elite Dmen in the league, they are all above average but not necessarily great.

They all get paid 4 to 4.5 mil a year .. whereas the best Dmen in the NHL get 6 to 8 mil/yr. Their pay structure shows where they rank.

ONLY way to fix that problem is to get rid of Ballard and Salo and use their combined 6 million plus capspace to land a truly elite Dman. But you cant do that cuz Salo's cap after his retirement will cover Edler's raise. SO we're stuck.

Ideally, you'd want Elder, Bieksa Hamhuis PLUS an elite 7 mil dollar Dman, preferably less than 30 yrs old, locked up for at least 4-5 yrs. Two possibilities in Nashville.

rban* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2012, 05:14 PM
  #106
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rban View Post
ONLY way to fix that problem is to get rid of Ballard and Salo and use their combined 6 million plus capspace to land a truly elite Dman. But you cant do that cuz Salo's cap after his retirement will cover Edler's raise. SO we're stuck.

Ideally, you'd want Elder, Bieksa Hamhuis PLUS an elite 7 mil dollar Dman, preferably less than 30 yrs old, locked up for at least 4-5 yrs. Two possibilities in Nashville.
You can't look at just the defense when considering salary cap.

For next year, the only significant forward we have to worry about is Mason Raymond, who is likely due a raise, but because of his injuries and streaky production, it won't be a huge raise. However the following year Hodgson is an RFA and at the rate he is progressing, we have to allocate at least $3M to him. Burrows and Higgins are also due substantial raise for the 2013 season.

On the defense, Salo's contract expires this season and Edler's the following season. Everyone is assuming Salo will retire, but this is not set in stone. If he re-signed for another 1 year, $2M contract is would still be an incredible value. Edler is probably going to get more than $5M.

Cory Schneider will be traded rather than re-signed, but any reliable backup is going to cost around $1M (maybe slightly more).

The wild card in the whole thing is the CBA. The NHL is certainly going to push to lower the every increasing cap because the floor is hurting the lower revenue teams. We can't count on an increasing cap to allow us to re-sign Edler, Hodgson, Burrows, Raymond and Higgins. Without knowing what the next CBA is going to look like, is it really wise to take on a $7M defenseman?

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-25-2012, 07:01 PM
  #107
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,733
vCash: 500
What I don't get is why the coaches continually refuse to play Ballard with Edler. Everyone just assumes it would be an automatic disaster. AV has said that he's tried it before... for 1 game.

Basically you aren't putting him in a position to succeed and use his strengths for the benefit of this team. Sure offensively you want more out of him but his skating and puck-moving ability is there. Don't people find it strange that after a year and a half after we traded for him, we still don't fully know what we have in Ballard?

He was also playing well on the right side before but now they've gone and moved him back to the left... with Rome on the right.

I say give him a run of 10-15 games with Edler to see if he can be the Top 4 replacement we've all been looking for... and then all the speculation and hand-wringing will be over for good. Makes no sense not to fully explore your assets before going out and acquiring another Top 4 D-man.

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 01:00 AM
  #108
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
What I don't get is why the coaches continually refuse to play Ballard with Edler. Everyone just assumes it would be an automatic disaster. AV has said that he's tried it before... for 1 game.

Basically you aren't putting him in a position to succeed and use his strengths for the benefit of this team. Sure offensively you want more out of him but his skating and puck-moving ability is there. Don't people find it strange that after a year and a half after we traded for him, we still don't fully know what we have in Ballard?

He was also playing well on the right side before but now they've gone and moved him back to the left... with Rome on the right.

I say give him a run of 10-15 games with Edler to see if he can be the Top 4 replacement we've all been looking for... and then all the speculation and hand-wringing will be over for good. Makes no sense not to fully explore your assets before going out and acquiring another Top 4 D-man.
It's not going to happen. There are all sorts of reasons why it SHOULD happen. But it isn't. Let's face it, right now AV won't play ANYBODY his third pairing more than 15 minutes - even when Rome averaged 17 last year. Expecting him to about-face and play him 23 minutes with Edler is a little much.

I am steeling myself for another couple months of 'Ballard should be traded for a bag of pucks' because I still think Ballard's inevitable trade needs to bring back significant assets.

Despite what people on here think, I don't think MG will view offloading Ballard as 'addition by subtraction'.

So I'm expecting that he's going to be around for the playoffs again (which he should be, considering our current depth even with Tanev) and he will be underutilized, again.

mossey3535 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 01:12 AM
  #109
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
It's not going to happen. There are all sorts of reasons why it SHOULD happen. But it isn't. Let's face it, right now AV won't play ANYBODY his third pairing more than 15 minutes - even when Rome averaged 17 last year. Expecting him to about-face and play him 23 minutes with Edler is a little much.

I am steeling myself for another couple months of 'Ballard should be traded for a bag of pucks' because I still think Ballard's inevitable trade needs to bring back significant assets.

Despite what people on here think, I don't think MG will view offloading Ballard as 'addition by subtraction'.

So I'm expecting that he's going to be around for the playoffs again (which he should be, considering our current depth even with Tanev) and he will be underutilized, again.

Quote:
“Keith is probably playing his best hockey since he’s been with us,” Vigneault said of Ballard’s seven points and a plus-2 rating in 15:35 of average ice time in 42 of the team’s 48 games. “He’s very competitive in one-on-one situations and with the grit he needs to play with. He’s playing with good control with and without the puck and his gaps are good. We like his game.” AV
Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Scra...#ixzz1kXeYsRQE

I think he would get the ice time on the left side now but he isn't good on the right side. I think he played OK with Edler for a game but Edler really struggled.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 01:15 AM
  #110
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
It be wrong to not look great against a banged up Oilers team that scored 9 goals in 8 games and played back to back. Yet we our D just gave them 2 goals.
Lapierre lost his man chasing the puck out to the blue line on the first goal and Hall tipped a pass on the PP for the second. I guess you could blame Hamhuis for taking a penalty but I thought Jones flopped.

How were those goals our D's fault?

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 09:52 PM
  #111
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent007 View Post
Sounds good. Gonna hold you to that call
Yea I am too. Really hope I get burned. I want as much as any guy for this team to win. But I look at how we played the last few games defensively and lose my confidence.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 10:00 PM
  #112
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Lapierre lost his man chasing the puck out to the blue line on the first goal and Hall tipped a pass on the PP for the second. I guess you could blame Hamhuis for taking a penalty but I thought Jones flopped.

How were those goals our D's fault?
True, you can sort of fault Lappiere on that, but what was Ballard doing in front of the net. He just froze... like Luongo. Looked like he was confused. And this is not the first or second or the third time hes been like that.

The 2nd goal is a direct result of taking a dumbass penalty. We take stupid penalties and it costs us a goal, been happening a too many times the last few games. I don't mind if it was an unavoidable penalty but the penalties really is just very BAD and it is happening somewhat often the last few games and mostly from defensemen, there is no excuse.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2012, 11:56 PM
  #113
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
True, you can sort of fault Lappiere on that, but what was Ballard doing in front of the net. He just froze... like Luongo. Looked like he was confused. And this is not the first or second or the third time hes been like that.

The 2nd goal is a direct result of taking a dumbass penalty. We take stupid penalties and it costs us a goal, been happening a too many times the last few games. I don't mind if it was an unavoidable penalty but the penalties really is just very BAD and it is happening somewhat often the last few games and mostly from defensemen, there is no excuse.
Hamhuis was just running interference on Jones. Virtually all NHL D-men do that nowadays or their partners get pasted into the boards. Jones went down pretty easily too.

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 12:38 AM
  #114
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Defense gave up 11 Breakaways this game and we won. Bieksa and the rest are going to think they played well.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:34 PM
  #115
Agent007
Registered User
 
Agent007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
Calling a 9-1 blowout next week game Vs Chicago. Defense gets exposed bad.


Great call



Typical

Agent007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:54 PM
  #116
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent007 View Post


Great call



Typical
yea and did you think it was impossible for that to happen given the amount of turnovers, odd man rushes they had? I love it when some fans think Canucks are better when clearly it was the goalie who stole game.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:56 PM
  #117
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
yea and did you think it was impossible for that to happen given the amount of turnovers, odd man rushes they had? I love it when some fans think Canucks are better when clearly it was the goalie who stole game.
You said it would happen...it didn't. You lose

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:58 PM
  #118
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
You said it would happen...it didn't. You lose
is that all? Ok I lose happy?

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 03:07 PM
  #119
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
yea and did you think it was impossible for that to happen given the amount of turnovers, odd man rushes they had? I love it when some fans think Canucks are better when clearly it was the goalie who stole game.
the goalie is part of the defense and team

kanuck87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 04:13 PM
  #120
rye&ginger
Registered User
 
rye&ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanuck87 View Post
the goalie is part of the defense and team
Get outta here with your rational thought. The Canucks Tea Party movement has trouble with it.

rye&ginger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 01:27 AM
  #121
Lonny Bohonos
Kassian = P.A.G.A.N
 
Lonny Bohonos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United Nations
Posts: 8,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
Defense gave up 11 Breakaways this game and we won. Bieksa and the rest are going to think they played well.
Forwards had no role in these?

Lonny Bohonos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 04:25 AM
  #122
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,733
vCash: 500
Something tells me he has yet to see that article on PITB about the whole 'short shift' thing.

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:06 PM
  #123
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,159
vCash: 500
1st period tonight was another poor performance for Hamhuis. Anyone notice how mistake prone he has been over the last month or so?

Don't get me wrong, he is a solid player. I think his play as of late is partly a reflection of him having to play too many minutes over a busy schedule. In reality he is a solid #2 or #3 guy (as he was in Nashville), but he and Bieksa are being forced to play too many minutes against tough matchups. This is mostly a result of our lack of depth - the 3rd pairing can't handle significant duties at the moment and this is putting too much of a workload on the top 4.

This is absolutely a recipe for disaster - one injury and this defence corps suddenly looks very underwhelming. Gillis really needs to add a solid defenceman or two by the deadline or we have very little chance of going all the way this year. Longer term he needs to work some magic and get a stud to pair with Edler and create a true top pairing.


Last edited by Chubros: 02-03-2012 at 02:19 AM.
Chubros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2012, 02:16 AM
  #124
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,733
vCash: 500
^ Agreed that Hamhuis wasn't quite himself tonight. Right after we tied it up after (I think) the 3rd goal he took a gamble in the neutral zone leaving that 2-on-1 with Bieksa defending against Datsyuk and Zetterberg.

I'm not sure if it's fatigue from playing too much as it's just after the All Star Break, but maybe he's just being asked to do a lot more offensively this year and taking risks like that is part of it?

I'd still rather he and Juice just focused on defence and good 2-way play, instead of seemingly forcing things at times and getting caught, and trying too hard to replace the 50 points the freaking media kept on reminding them that the Canucks lost from Ehrhoff.

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2012, 09:32 AM
  #125
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,239
vCash: 500
Ballie has been better this season but it's still a fire-drill whenever he and Rome are on the ice. Well, not every shift but at any moment either of them can blow up and cost the team (see tonight).

MG has to fix this and I think he realizes it. Especially with the certain impending injury to any of he top 4, we're straight up ****ed in that case.

monster_bertuzzi 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 06:11 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.