Defense

[Alflives*]

If you are expecting true, franchise level players, then you gotta pay 8 mill +, most high tier second line players and average first liners get 6 mill each. For 5 mill, I really like a player like Derek Roy. Only way to have really cheap players is to draft them.

Considering your evaluation of top players' salaries, what does that say about the Canuck's current Defense? Do they really have any D-men who are top pairing guys. Sure these guys can play the role of a 1/2 pair, but not consistently. When they try to play those minutes over a series of games, they break-down - either physically, or mentally, or both. They are better suited in the roles below:

Edler: 3/4
Bieksa: 3/4
Hamhuis: 3/4
Garrison: 3/4
Tanev: 5/6
Ballard: 5/6
Barker: Plug
Alberts: Plug

Click to read more...

 

[Pip]

Considering your evaluation of top players' salaries, what does that say about the Canuck's current Defense? Do they really have any D-men who are top pairing guys. Sure these guys can play the role of a 1/2 pair, but not consistently. When they try to play those minutes over a series of games, they break-down - either physically, or mentally, or both. They are better suited in the roles below:

Edler: 3/4
Bieksa: 3/4
Hamhuis: 3/4
Garrison: 3/4
Tanev: 5/6
Ballard: 5/6
Barker: Plug
Alberts: Plug

I think you are underrating our defense here, there is no way guys like Edler, Hamhuis, and Garrison are 3/4 in my opinion. I would put them in the #2 catagory.

What I was attempting to lay out was market price for certain level of players. I am under the belief that players like Garrison, Hamhuis and Edler took a bit of a discount here and could of got much more from other teams. If you look at the #1s league-wide you will find that most of them make 6 mill+ and franchise level guys make 7 mill ie Weber, Chara, Suter ect

 

[polarbearcub]

Considering your evaluation of top players' salaries, what does that say about the Canuck's current Defense? Do they really have any D-men who are top pairing guys. Sure these guys can play the role of a 1/2 pair, but not consistently. When they try to play those minutes over a series of games, they break-down - either physically, or mentally, or both. They are better suited in the roles below:

Edler: 3/4
Bieksa: 3/4
Hamhuis: 3/4
Garrison: 3/4
Tanev: 5/6
Ballard: 5/6
Barker: Plug
Alberts: Plug

Dissagree.

Edler, Bieksa, hamhuis are all number 2`s. Garrison is 3.

 

[Alflives*]

I think you are underrating our defense here, there is no way guys like Edler, Hamhuis, and Garrison are 3/4 in my opinion. I would put them in the #2 catagory.

What I was attempting to lay out was market price for certain level of players. I am under the belief that players like Garrison, Hamhuis and Edler took a bit of a discount here and could of got much more from other teams. If you look at the #1s league-wide you will find that most of them make 6 mill+ and franchise level guys make 7 mill ie Weber, Chara, Suter ect

Oh, my mistake. I see what you mean now. The Canucks lack a #1 D-man. However, I question whether any of their D are able to play top pairing minutes without breaking down. I don't think that is underrating them; it's more a function of what they have shown their abilities to be.

Let's look at them:

Edler: up his minutes and he breaks down mentally = 3/4
Bieksa: up his minutes and he breaks down physically = 3/4
Hamhuis: It's hard to up his minutes due to his not being a PP guy = 3/4
Garrison: He may be a 2/3. The jury is still out on him. Maybe a 2?

 

[kmad]

Considering your evaluation of top players' salaries, what does that say about the Canuck's current Defense? Do they really have any D-men who are top pairing guys. Sure these guys can play the role of a 1/2 pair, but not consistently. When they try to play those minutes over a series of games, they break-down - either physically, or mentally, or both. They are better suited in the roles below:

Edler: 3/4
Bieksa: 3/4
Hamhuis: 3/4
Garrison: 3/4
Tanev: 5/6
Ballard: 5/6
Barker: Plug
Alberts: Plug

What you're saying here is that, AT BEST, Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis and Garrison are OUTSIDE of the top 60 defensemen in the NHL, and Tanev is outside of the top 120. Does that sound reasonable?

 

[polarbearcub]

What you're saying here is that, AT BEST, Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis and Garrison are OUTSIDE of the top 60 defensemen in the NHL, and Tanev is outside of the top 120. Does that sound reasonable?

No it doesn`t. Even just saying Hamhuis is 3 or 4 is ridiculous. I would love to make a poll on the main boards about saying some of these canuck d are 4`s

 

[Canucks LB]

Considering your evaluation of top players' salaries, what does that say about the Canuck's current Defense? Do they really have any D-men who are top pairing guys. Sure these guys can play the role of a 1/2 pair, but not consistently. When they try to play those minutes over a series of games, they break-down - either physically, or mentally, or both. They are better suited in the roles below:

Edler: 1/2
Bieksa: 2/3
Hamhuis: 2
Garrison: 2/3
Tanev: 4/5
Ballard: 6
Barker: Plug
Alberts: 7

Fixed it for you man.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Dissagree.

Edler, Bieksa, hamhuis are all number 2`s. Garrison is 3.

Garrison is a #1 dman in terms of even strength play and killing penalties. His work on the PP is good enough to be on a top unit, as long as there is someone to get him the puck. Garrison is a #1 defenseman IMO. Has been for the last 2 seasons.

Hamhuis is another guy that could easily be classified as a #1.

I would put Edler and Bieksa as 3/4 guys just for the fact they often struggle with top pairing, shutdown minutes. Too erratic to count on, game in, game out.

 

[CherryToke]

I bet it will have zero factor. Roy seems exactly like the type of guy that will just go wherever the most money lies. Gillis never ends up getting those kinds of guys. Gillis counts on hometown discounts.

what makes you think that? I've heard him say multiple times that winning the cup is his main goal at this stage in his career.

so maybe winning the cup this year would be a bad thing

 

[Angry Little Elf]

Garrison is a #1 dman in terms of even strength play and killing penalties. His work on the PP is good enough to be on a top unit, as long as there is someone to get him the puck. Garrison is a #1 defenseman IMO. Has been for the last 2 seasons.

Hamhuis is another guy that could easily be classified as a #1.

I would put Edler and Bieksa as 3/4 guys just for the fact they often struggle with top pairing, shutdown minutes. Too erratic to count on, game in, game out.

If Garrison had better skating, he'd be a #1.

 

[Angry Little Elf]

The Derek Roy thread kind of got off on a tangent. Continue any discussion about the D, here.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

If Garrison had better skating, he'd be a #1.

His skating isn't an issue because he never gets beat wide or to loose pucks. I don't think I've seen anyone walk around him in the last 25 games.

Shea Weber isn't much quicker...

 

[luongo321]

What has been up with Edler this season? Is his back still giving him problems? Does he have confidence problems? Does he not care? Is the coaching staff not providing him with the best advice? Something is up.

 

[Alflives*]

[/B]

Fixed it for you man.

Come on? We can disagree on the placement of the top guys, but Alberts has to be considered a plug too.

 

[Alflives*]

What has been up with Edler this season? Is his back still giving him problems? Does he have confidence problems? Does he not care? Is the coaching staff not providing him with the best advice? Something is up.

What's up is he's a 3/4 being asked to play 1/2 minutes?

 

[Pip]

Come on? We can disagree on the placement of the top guys, but Alberts has to be considered a plug too.

he's a pretty average #7 imo

 

[Angry Little Elf]

What's up is he's a 3/4 being asked to play 1/2 minutes?

Not true, Edler is a #1. if he learns consistency

 

[Scurr]

What has been up with Edler this season? Is his back still giving him problems? Does he have confidence problems? Does he not care? Is the coaching staff not providing him with the best advice? Something is up.

He was never as good as people thought he was. Now that he's signed the big contract and is having to take on tougher minutes, his warts are showing more. Some of the money Gillis gave him was for potential, he has a ton of it, we need to hope he keeps getting better.

 

[Scurr]

Not true, Edler is a #1. if he learns consistency

He plays like a 3/4 far more often than he plays like a #1.

 

[tantalum]

I continue to get the sense that people believe a #1 D-man means annual Norris contender.

That's a franchise D-man. A franchise D-man is of course a #1 but a #1 need not be a franchise guy.

Last year:

Edler was 10th in ES points
Edler was 7th in PP points
heck he was 20th in SH points (only 1...D-men don't get a lot of SH points).
Edler was 24th in time/game
He wasn't top 30 in PK time but he did get about the same amount as Suter and Weber.

There really isn't much of a stat that doesn't say Edler is a #1 or as close as you can get without being one.

Now I'm sure we'll get the advanced stats etc to show that he had easier competition than Hamhuis, but hey that's to be expected. However, if Edler was several other team he'd immediately be their best D-man.


And I just chose Edler as a quick comparison. i think you'll find similar things for Hamhuis and perhaps even Bieksa. You'll likely find it this year with Garrison (provided they got 82 games so that his 15 game familiarization didn't so obviously bias the stats). These guys are #2s or better.

The problem boils down to what I said....people expect a franchise D-man rather than a #1 D-man. The latter costs about $5 mil a year and the former much more than that.

 

[luongo321]

What's up is he's a 3/4 being asked to play 1/2 minutes?

I'm not arguing about where he is on the depth chart. He's just sooo bad this season. I'm not talking about playing amazing, I just mean having the fundamentals down. Painful to watch.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

His skating isn't an issue because he never gets beat wide or to loose pucks. I don't think I've seen anyone walk around him in the last 25 games.

Shea Weber isn't much quicker...

I agreed it seems when people talk about defenseman's skating they think about forward skating. Garrison seems to be an elite backwards skater. When players do the chip and chase he just continues skating backwards then pivots and moves the puck. So he does not get beaten even on the chip and chases so he must be a very good backwards skater which is why he is not often beaten one on one same with Tanev. Edler seems poor at backwards skating. Bieksa is average backwards, very fast forwards.

 

[Proto]

Not true, Edler is a #1. if he learns consistency

I don't know. Short of the Canucks finding a Hamhuis/Garrison that plays on the right side, Edler is just not a guy that can anchor a defensive pairing. I think what we've seen the last two years is that Ehrhoff's quickness/awareness really complemented Edler, even if Ehrhoff was only a decent positional defender who lacked physicality. Bieksa isn't easy to play with, but Edler is a trainwreck with him half the time.

I really like Edler, but moving forward I'm starting to think he should be on a 3rd pairing at ES so his minutes can be used more effectively.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Edler is someone I would consider moving if we can get an impact player (forward or RHD) in return.

 

[Royal Canuck]

Edler is meant to be the #1, skill wise.

Has to find his consistency though.