Kevin Bieksa appreciation thread

[Bucky Katt]

Not sure why people around here should have to recant their criticism of Bieksa because of his recent play - if anything his recent play justifies what most of us critics, myself included, have seen for the last few years. He has shown flashes of this but really only played close to this level for a substantial length of time in the 2006-07 season. The fact that he hasn't consistently played this way is frustrating - but let's enjoy that he is producing in all facets of his game (offensive, defense, physical play) and he is living up to what we all saw in him when he first entered the league.

We are all Bieksa.

 

[MightyPirate]

I thought bieksa played maybe his best game in his NHL career last night. Not only hitting, fighting playing gritty, but he was making spectacular defensive plays. He was stripping players of the puck left right and centre then sending great outlet passes.

And he scored a breakaway goal!

 

[Connecticut]

Not sure why people around here should have to recant their criticism of Bieksa because of his recent play - if anything his recent play justifies what most of us critics, myself included, have seen for the last few years. He has shown flashes of this but really only played close to this level for a substantial length of time in the 2006-07 season. The fact that he hasn't consistently played this way is frustrating - but let's enjoy that he is producing in all facets of his game (offensive, defense, physical play) and he is living up to what we all saw in him when he first entered the league.

We are all Bieksa.

I think the point is that if management had the same mentality as most of these posters Kevin Bieksa would not be a Canucks right now. The criticism was also overblown and irrational, even though some significant part of it was deserved, every mistake was magnified and taken out of context by a good handful of posters. Mike Gillis continued to stand by Bieksa -- as did Henrik, assigning him the A -- and have been rewarded by an outstanding season. I think there's plenty of recanting in order.

Having said that, props to those who are recognizing Bieksa's play after being on his back, and even more so to those who kept their criticism within the bounds of reason.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I am shocked by the Bieksa we are seeing in these playoffs. He did have some shaky games vs. Chicago, but on balance, he has been a revelation. I wanted him gone, and if he had repeated what we had seen the last two post-seasons, he'd be running to the airport. Just astounding what we are seeing now. That said, there are still games left to be played...

 

[wholesickcrew]

So why would the nucks keep a 5th D man at 4 + mill?

Depth. Let's not forget so soon how badly our D was hurting in the past two playoffs. Ballard also played well with Tanev, and could help bring him along.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Cannot believe how much better Bieksa has been this season over the last couple.

Night and day.

I gave Bieksa crap last year for playing far under his standards, but he has really got me going the other way. His play quality has exponentially increased this year. He's finally gone back to the guy that we all loved in 2006-07.

Great lockerroom guy, great player. Kevin Bieska.

 

[Bucky Katt]

I think the point is that if management had the same mentality as most of these posters Kevin Bieksa would not be a Canucks right now.

Or perhaps if Salo doesn't get injured he would not be a Canuck right now. We will never know I guess.

The criticism was also overblown and irrational, even though some significant part of it was deserved, every mistake was magnified and taken out of context by a good handful of posters.

Yeah some of it was overblown and irrational - that usually happens when a fanbase feels that a player is underachieving.

Overall, this place is pretty good for debate and discussion and I think we should all be encouraged to call it like we see it but keep an open mind that a player can regress or progress. Every player's game evolves over time so shifting an opinion on a player should be seen as a good thing. Except for Rome, he sucks.

 

[Connecticut]

Or perhaps if Salo doesn't get injured he would not be a Canuck right now. We will never know I guess.



Yeah some of it was overblown and irrational - that usually happens when a fanbase feels that a player is underachieving.

Overall, this place is pretty good for debate and discussion and I think we should all be encouraged to call it like we see it but keep an open mind that a player can regress or progress. Every player's game evolves over time so shifting an opinion on a player should be seen as a good thing. Except for Rome, he sucks.

No, we will never know for sure, but Mike Gillis was asked MANY times about Bieksa's future as a Canucks and he insisted he was staying a Canuck, before and after Salo's mid-summer injury.

As for debate here, I agree that it's a minority of posters that are particularly irrational, but they also seem to be particularly vocal and insistent on their point of view regardless of the evidence. I try to keep them on my ignore list, but sometimes it makes it feel like I'm reading a redacted conversation between people saying obvious things and nobody

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

Or perhaps if Salo doesn't get injured he would not be a Canuck right now. We will never know I guess.



Yeah some of it was overblown and irrational - that usually happens when a fanbase feels that a player is underachieving.

Overall, this place is pretty good for debate and discussion and I think we should all be encouraged to call it like we see it but keep an open mind that a player can regress or progress. Every player's game evolves over time so shifting an opinion on a player should be seen as a good thing. Except for Rome, he sucks.

It's a matter of expectations. The arguments against Bieksa run the whole gamut which tells me that he was the scapegoat. It wasn't like people noticed one part of his game was deficient it was somehow noticed that every part of his game was deficient. Reasons for Bieksa to be run out of town include:

- he's over paid
- he makes bad pinches
- he's too casual
- he has a snarl
- he doesn't fight anymore
- he makes bad break out passes
- he takes bad penalties
- he can't hit the net
- he can't hit
- the teams record when he's in the line up is worse than when he's not
- the team is worse when he's on the ice than when he's not
- we could have scratched bieksa for whoever was next on our depth chart and come out ahead


Those are real no foolin' criticisms of Bieksa. Ones that I have seen and heard. There are more of course.

Does that sound like a guy who should be in the NHL?

Does that sound like a rational fanbase?

What's funny to me is hearing peoples opinion of Jyrrki Lumme. It's seems to me that people really look fondly on his time ad a nuck.

Anyone who was around when he was playing in Van will remember how much flak he would get.

The issue is like Lumme, Bieksa was never as bad as people made him out at the time.

 

[Verviticus]

no... no, you're incorrect, there was a period there where we could have scratched bieksa for whoever was next on our depth chart and come out ahead - arguably if we had done this, we wouldn't have the bieksa we all love today, but he really was That Bad for quite a while.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

no... no, you're incorrect, there was a period there where we could have scratched bieksa for whoever was next on our depth chart and come out ahead - arguably if we had done this, we wouldn't have the bieksa we all love today, but he really was That Bad for quite a while.

Thanks I can add this to my list as well.

 

[alternate]

Good thing Mike Gillis is more patient than myself and the others who wanted Bieksa gone in the offseason. Happily eating crow atm.

don't think so. If Salo didn't get hurt, no way Bieksa would have been kept around. I don't care what Gillis said (what else could he say) we were pretty much exactly Bieksa's contract into LTIR...not exactly a coincidence.

For example the versteeg goal in game 2 last year Bieksa was placed at fault for that. People somehow ignored the fact (youtube it) that 3, actually all 3 canuck forwards were at the canuck goal line. In fact Samuellson was in the net. But yet it was Bieksa fault.

He led the Dmen last year playoffs with 8 points and was a plus 2 and some people poo pooed that by saying he got 2 of those goals in one game. Blah blah blah.

nope. doesn't matter how good Bieksa is playing, it doesn't change that moment. That moment is still probably the dumbest hockey play I've ever witnessed. It still hurts my brain to think about. Hard to believe this year's Bieksa is the same KB that's been around the past couple of years, because that KB made some brain-numbingly stupid decisions. His great play now doesn't change that.

If I had to make a choice between Bieksa and Ehrhoff, I would now choose Bieksa. I never thought I'd say that at the start of the season..

that would be the wrong choice. if you absolutely had to choose only one of them, it has to be Ehrhoff. That's not to take away anything from Bieksa's play this year, but Ehrhoff is way too important to our top-ranked PP.

I went into this past off-season saying Gillis would have failed if the regular season started with Bieksa on the roster. Even after Bieksa's great regular season, I went into the playoffs fearing the worst...when the pressure increased Special K would have a special moment. So far so good...so far.

Now I'm torn. I still don't think the stupid Bieksa has shown in the past has just gone away. And let's be honest, there's been some down moments in these playoffs...like Brian Bickell walking around him TWICE to set up goals. But I'm sure everyone agrees that the good has far outweighed the bad, and to the point where you can take the bad in stride.

As to signing him to a new deal, I just don't know. I do worry that this is contract-year Bieksa that we are seeing. I also think he'll want a longer term deal, and since he's not exactly the most durable guy (yes, there's more than just the "fluke" skate cuts), there's the risk of him breaking down.

but on the other hand, Gillis (or was it AV?) was just saying how defensive pairings age like wine, mentioning Keith-Seabrook and Weber-Suter. So there's a lot of sense keeping the Bieksa-Hamhuis pairing together for a few more years.

How much will he be willing to sign for? He's not going to take less than Ballard money, and that's probably stretching it or coming with a 5+ year deal. The way these play-offs have gone, moving Ballard is obviously on the table. I guess for me, it comes down to term + cap hit...and I think Bieksa will want more of both (and deserves more of both) than I'd probably be willing to give.

in the wings we've got Ballard, Tanev, Sweatt, Alberts (if we re-sign), Parent and maybe Suave all looking for playing time. you can probably have the last four for roughly equivalent of re-signing Bieksa (or keeping Ballard) and we do need to worry about depth. Salo will be gone, unless he's back on a one-year deal worth <$2m.

imo whether to keep Bieksa, and at what cost, is probably the biggest decision Gillis will have to make to date as our GM. imo Ehrhoff is priority one and a no-brainer. But I don't honestly know what I'd do if the decision was mine to make. We'll see I guess.

In the meantime, here's to hoping Bieksa keeps playing the way he's done the majority of this season.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

don't think so. If Salo didn't get hurt, no way Bieksa would have been kept around. I don't care what Gillis said (what else could he say) we were pretty much exactly Bieksa's contract into LTIR...not exactly a coincidence.



nope. doesn't matter how good Bieksa is playing, it doesn't change that moment. That moment is still probably the dumbest hockey play I've ever witnessed. It still hurts my brain to think about. Hard to believe this year's Bieksa is the same KB that's been around the past couple of years, because that KB made some brain-numbingly stupid decisions. His great play now doesn't change that.



that would be the wrong choice. if you absolutely had to choose only one of them, it has to be Ehrhoff. That's not to take away anything from Bieksa's play this year, but Ehrhoff is way too important to our top-ranked PP.

I went into this past off-season saying Gillis would have failed if the regular season started with Bieksa on the roster. Even after Bieksa's great regular season, I went into the playoffs fearing the worst...when the pressure increased Special K would have a special moment. So far so good...so far.

Now I'm torn. I still don't think the stupid Bieksa has shown in the past has just gone away. And let's be honest, there's been some down moments in these playoffs...like Brian Bickell walking around him TWICE to set up goals. But I'm sure everyone agrees that the good has far outweighed the bad, and to the point where you can take the bad in stride.

As to signing him to a new deal, I just don't know. I do worry that this is contract-year Bieksa that we are seeing. I also think he'll want a longer term deal, and since he's not exactly the most durable guy (yes, there's more than just the "fluke" skate cuts), there's the risk of him breaking down.

but on the other hand, Gillis (or was it AV?) was just saying how defensive pairings age like wine, mentioning Keith-Seabrook and Weber-Suter. So there's a lot of sense keeping the Bieksa-Hamhuis pairing together for a few more years.

How much will he be willing to sign for? He's not going to take less than Ballard money, and that's probably stretching it or coming with a 5+ year deal. The way these play-offs have gone, moving Ballard is obviously on the table. I guess for me, it comes down to term + cap hit...and I think Bieksa will want more of both (and deserves more of both) than I'd probably be willing to give.

in the wings we've got Ballard, Tanev, Sweatt, Alberts (if we re-sign), Parent and maybe Suave all looking for playing time. you can probably have the last four for roughly equivalent of re-signing Bieksa (or keeping Ballard) and we do need to worry about depth. Salo will be gone, unless he's back on a one-year deal worth <$2m.

imo whether to keep Bieksa, and at what cost, is probably the biggest decision Gillis will have to make to date as our GM. imo Ehrhoff is priority one and a no-brainer. But I don't honestly know what I'd do if the decision was mine to make. We'll see I guess.

In the meantime, here's to hoping Bieksa keeps playing the way he's done the majority of this season.

Did I say Bieksa didnt make a mistake on that play? Problem is people focus entirely on his mistake on that play a not the other 4 skaters. Why were 3 forwards at the goal line? Including one in the net?

I realize your analysis skills may not be all that strong thats fine, but that goal was a complete team breakdown end of story.

Of course some will argue that all 4 skaters were trying to make up for Bieksa mistake. Which is funny because another ciriticism of Bieksa is that he gets caught out of position trying to make up for other mistakes.

As for the Bickell goal you need to go back and re watch the replay.

Henrik plays absolutely lazy on the forecheck. Hamhuis whos side the puck is on makes a bad force on in the neutral zone. The puck goes bing bang bam in a matter of seconds its up to Bickell who is one the opposite side of the ice to Bieksa.

Bieksa was coming from his side of the ice laterally towards bickell who was skating straight ahead.

Did Bieksa play it well? Not really. But again the terrible play of Henrik and Hamhuis is completely over looked.

Same goes for the Sharp breakaway when Bieksa pinches. When a Dman pinches its the forwards responsibility to cover. Which Lapierre looks like hes doing until he decides to skate across the ice to make a hit on a Hawk and leaves sharp wide open. That was a piss poor and unnecessary decision my Lappy.

As for Ehrhoff great PP skills. I agree hes important for the PP. Not as important as others do but where my opinion differs is the importance of PP vs 5v5.

5v5 is what wins you games. Special teams is important. But 5v5 is more important.

Ehrhoff has been terrible this playoffs on 5v5 hence his demotion to the Rome pairing AKA 3rd paring.

 

[alternate]

Did I say Bieksa didnt make a mistake on that play? Problem is people focus entirely on his mistake on that play a not the other 4 skaters. Why were 3 forwards at the goal line? Including one in the net?

I realize your analysis skills may not be all that strong thats fine, but that goal was a complete team breakdown end of story.

Of course some will argue that all 4 skaters were trying to make up for Bieksa mistake. Which is funny because another ciriticism of Bieksa is that he gets caught out of position trying to make up for other mistakes.

As for the Bickell goal you need to go back and re watch the replay.

Henrik plays absolutely lazy on the forecheck. Hamhuis whos side the puck is on makes a bad force on in the neutral zone. The puck goes bing bang bam in a matter of seconds its up to Bickell who is one the opposite side of the ice to Bieksa.

Bieksa was coming from his side of the ice laterally towards bickell who was skating straight ahead.

Did Bieksa play it well? Not really. But again the terrible play of Henrik and Hamhuis is completely over looked.

Same goes for the Sharp breakaway when Bieksa pinches. When a Dman pinches its the forwards responsibility to cover. Which Lapierre looks like hes doing until he decides to skate across the ice to make a hit on a Hawk and leaves sharp wide open. That was a piss poor and unnecessary decision my Lappy.

As for Ehrhoff great PP skills. I agree hes important for the PP. Not as important as others do but where my opinion differs is the importance of PP vs 5v5.

5v5 is what wins you games. Special teams is important. But 5v5 is more important.

Ehrhoff has been terrible this playoffs on 5v5 hence his demotion to the Rome pairing AKA 3rd paring.

Lol, ok dude. I can't agree with a single thing you've posted here, but I'm happy your favourite player refound his game before you took his poster off his wall.

 

[Canucker]

Lol, ok dude. I can't agree with a single thing you've posted here, but I'm happy your favourite player refound his game before you took his poster off his wall.

I agree with you. Bieksa was terrible and anyone defending his play by trying to throw other players under the bus by saying "well....well...Bieksa wasn't the only one to mess up" is simply grasping. He was awful. He has done a complete 180 and is now playing like our top defenseman. It's been an awesome transformation.

 

[Eddy Punch Clock]

I appreciate Kevin Bieksa.

I also appreciate Salo being injuriy prone and the timing of one particular injury.

 

[ddawg1950]

I appreciate Kevin Bieksa.

I also appreciate Salo being injuriy prone and the timing of one particular injury.

I appreciate Bieksa. He seems to be in his element these days. And I also appreciate Hamhuis, a steadying influence with a panic threshold that seems almost Swedish.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

Lol, ok dude. I can't agree with a single thing you've posted here, but I'm happy your favourite player refound his game before you took his poster off his wall.

Excellent argument.

Considering Kesler would be my "favorite" player your and I don't own any posters your "argument" has no bearing.

If you'd like to come up with some sort of real argument please do.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

I agree with you. Bieksa was terrible and anyone defending his play by trying to throw other players under the bus by saying "well....well...Bieksa wasn't the only one to mess up" is simply grasping. He was awful. He has done a complete 180 and is now playing like our top defenseman. It's been an awesome transformation.

Kinda like luongo is at fault for all goals eh? The defintion of grasping would be laying the blame at one person. Sometimes it's founded often it's not.

No doubt Bieksas upped his game

 

[Canucker]

Kinda like luongo is at fault for all goals eh? The defintion of grasping would be laying the blame at one person. Sometimes it's founded often it's not.

No doubt Bieksas upped his game

No, kinda like Luongo is at fault for goals he's at fault for. Blame can easily be doled out to those who screw up. Most goals have more than a single breakdown and multiple fingers can be pointed, but not all. If Luongo fires a pass onto Joe Thornton's stick who in turn fires it into an empty net...who is at fault? The defenseman for not blocking it? The coach for putting Luongo in net? No, it's Luongo's fault. Same goes for Bieksa and any other player, when they mess up individually, it's on them.

 

[Intangibos]

Excellent argument.

Considering Kesler would be my "favorite" player your and I don't own any posters your "argument" has no bearing.

If you'd like to come up with some sort of real argument please do.

fail

 

[rban*]

Almost everyone who criticized Bieksa in the past and demanded his removal (incl me) have admitted they were wrong. As for apologizing for being wrong? Not sure that is necessary. We are posters on a board and we render opinions based on what we have seen, We are not future-tellers, none of us are named Nostradamus,,,, so how could we know he would turn it around like this?

It is perfectly reasonable for posters on a board to judge a player based on what they have seen to date. ANd based on this, it was perfectly reasonable for people to to have wanted him gone earlier.

 

[rban*]

Oh and my opinion going forward is to do one of two things, either:

1. keep Bieksa and Hoff by dumping Ballard and Salo,

or

2. keep Bieksa and get rid of Hoff ONLY if Weber can be got (also means dumping Ballard and Salo

SO the Top 4 should be either

Bieksa-Hamhuis
Edler-Hoff

OR

Bieksa-Hamhuis
Edler-Weber

Bottom guys can be Rome Alberts

 

[Bleach Clean]

Question: How does calling Bieksa inept, when he was playing without any sense of control for the better part of two season, constitute an irrational opinion of Bieksa? By his play and stats (behindthenet), he seemed to be the weak link on the defense. In fact, weren't there stories of players approaching him about his play?


No, don't let the his current play (which is markedly improved), bring out the revisionist history. He was poor before. He is good now. I've even given him props now for that reason. But I haven't forgotten - Nor should Gillis when handing out a new contract to him. His play should be judged on the balance of his tenure, not the tail-end of it alone.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Henrik suggesting with Coach Vig's and Gillis' blessing that Bieksa should get a A on his sweater should be a reminder that sometimes we really don't have a clue about anything around here.

Question: How does calling Bieksa inept, when he was playing without any sense of control for the better part of two season, constitute an irrational opinion of Bieksa?

Because irrational opinion was more than abundant around here. I saw one person say he'd accept getting AIDS if the Canucks got rid of Bieksa. The smallest of mistakes that anyone could make would turn into a 5 page *****fest if Bieksa was involved. Rational judgement by many people had left the building and headed for Timbuktu.