2012 UFAs

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Potatoe1 » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:08 am

Strangelove wrote:
SKYO wrote:Edler realistically is an awesome #2 dman and plays much better as such, so hopefully we can acquire a right side dman who can log big minutes so they can form a deadly combo for next season.


That would be great Skyo, but I think it's more realistic we trade Edler+ for that RS beast.

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Beast


Who is on the first unit power play?
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Waffle » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:13 am

Hey Fred, that is a good question, and goes to what you and everyone else means by a "#1" defenceman.

Some people would say its your best defenceman overall on the ice, others would say its the defenceman with the best offensive numbers, others would say its your best shut down guy, and still others would say its your overall best D-man in terms of an average of offensive/defensive play, plus leadership (like fighting to protect your team and off ice activities with the press and in the community).

I think of Bieska as their #1 defenceman, although he is not the best defenceman on the ice.
Waffle
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:38 am

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Groovypippin » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:28 am

dbr wrote:
Strangelove wrote:If Gillis can scoop up a great offensive defender like Justin Schultz then you can probably deal Edler, or if he's getting you Shea Weber in return then you can probably deal him. Otherwise..


I don't mean to be overly provocative, but it amazes me that smart hockey people on this site think that signing someone out of a US College = replacing Alex Edler or any other NHL caliber defenceman. The chances of that panning out next year are lotto 6/49-like.

I'd be delighted if we sign Justin Schultz, but not even in my wildest fantasies to I see him as an immediate top-four.
Groovypippin
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Jovocop » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:30 am

Waffle wrote:Hey Fred, that is a good question, and goes to what you and everyone else means by a "#1" defenceman.

Some people would say its your best defenceman overall on the ice, others would say its the defenceman with the best offensive numbers, others would say its your best shut down guy, and still others would say its your overall best D-man in terms of an average of offensive/defensive play, plus leadership (like fighting to protect your team and off ice activities with the press and in the community).

I think of Bieska as their #1 defenceman, although he is not the best defenceman on the ice.


If Bieksa is the #1 dman, the Canucks really have a huge problem. It was between Edler and Hamhuis. The fact is that both Hamhuis and Edler were not ready to take all the responsibilities. If there was a defined role for them, they both could excel but that was not the case last season. Both Edler and Hamhuis were good when their main focus was defense. However, the added responsibilities (offense) affect their overall game. At this stage, Edler is not ready to be the true #1 defenseman.
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1688
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby herb » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:39 am

Vancouver doesn't have what I would consider a "#1 defenceman".

What we have are three guys who are pretty comparable in terms of their value to the team. Edler, Bieksa and Hamhuis are all good two way players, who put up strong offensive numbers. Hamhuis is better defensively than Edler, Edler is better offensively than Hamhuis and Bieksa is somewhere in between these two players. Overall they are pretty equal in their value to the team.

I am happy, and I think GMMG is happy, moving forward with these three players. I think it is very unlikely that we will land a true #1 guy via free agency or trade, as these are simply too few and far between. The best option going forward is probably to continue to develop Edler, and roll with a balanced top 4. If we could land another young guy with tons of upside like Luke Schenn, then even better.

This off season the main issue (other than Luongo) is finding a guy to play with Edler. This player is not Keith Ballard. Salo cannot be that player next year either. As others have observed, his play declined throughout the season. I love Sami Salo and think he has made a wonderful contribution to the organization, but we can't go into next season with him penciled into the top 4. He needs to be a 6/7 guy (i.e. replace Rome or Alberts in their role to the team).
Last edited by herb on Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
herb
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2001
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Mars

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby dbr » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:40 am

Groovypippin wrote:
dbr wrote:
Strangelove wrote:If Gillis can scoop up a great offensive defender like Justin Schultz then you can probably deal Edler, or if he's getting you Shea Weber in return then you can probably deal him. Otherwise..


I don't mean to be overly provocative, but it amazes me that smart hockey people on this site think that signing someone out of a US College = replacing Alex Edler or any other NHL caliber defenceman. The chances of that panning out next year are lotto 6/49-like.

I'd be delighted if we sign Justin Schultz, but not even in my wildest fantasies to I see him as an immediate top-four.


Well, I'd go ahead and be provoked :) but you are basically supporting my original point.

I think if you can get a Justin Schultz (or dealing a goaltender gets us an.. I don't know.. John Moore type player) then you can go ahead and hope they add enough offensive ability to take some of the sting out of losing Edler. No way do they replace all of his offense but at least there's reason to believe they can pick up some of the slack right away and eventually, most of it.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby dbr » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:43 am

herb wrote:This off season the main issue is finding a guy to play with Edler. This player is not Keith Ballard. Salo cannot be that player next year. As others have observed, his play declined throughout the season. I love Sami Salo and think he has made a wonderful contribution to the organization, but we can't go into next season with him penciled into the top 4. He needs to be a 6/7 guy (i.e. replace Rome or Alberts in their role to the team).


Totally agree.

Unless we're prying Shea Weber out of Nashville I think we're more likely to have success adding a defenseman who can play with Edler than anything - or alternatively, adding a defenseman who can play in the top four when needed and try to let Edler and Tanev (nice as they are) build some chemistry together.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Orcasfan » Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:47 am

I realize that we are all suffering from post-playoff depression still, but to have people seriously suggest that we trade Edler is just mind-boggling! :shock: He just turned 26, he scored 49 points...in his "off" year. He plays in all situations; he is a key on the PP, and someone wants him gone. Unbelievable! Yes, he has his deficiencies - who doesn't (even St Weber!). Like most of the team, his play deteriorated in the 2nd half of the season, and culminated in a difficult playoff series. But, in the guy's defense, he played with an assortment of D partners, none of whom really jelled. One problem was that the so-called shut-down pair of Hamhuis and Bieksa was much less effective this year. So, AV was forced to mix and match to try and create a new shut-down pair. Didn't really happen. :(

Given the prices out there for quality D men, Alex Edler is a bargain. I believe that he will put the last few months behind him and have a real career year next season (his contract year). No way will he get traded!

I think the real challenge for the organization is what to do about Bieksa and Hamhuis as a pair. Will they slip back into their "groove" next year, or not? If not (again), then who becomes the shut-downers? :hmmm:
User avatar
Orcasfan
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:28 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Fred » Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:37 am

Jovocop wrote:
Fred wrote:Here's a question regarding the'Nucks defense...who is their number one guy ? if the answer is not clear i think we have a problem. Second question after henrik who is the next play maker on the team ?


Having a #1 dman would not solve all the problems, the chemistry is just not there.

Daniel is the next play maker on the team. Seriously, some teams do not even have a playmaker to begin with let alone having two.


A number one defensman is the guy when he steps on the ice there's a collective release of breath from the bench. A take charge, Lidstrom, Weber, Seabrooke type...every one relaxes and resets their own space. Edler who I like a lot, took a step back this season. Personally i started to post to that effect mid season. His personality just doesn't seem conducive to taking a commanding role. A quality #2. Ohlund was maybe the guy that came closest in recent times.

Play makers. Some teams do not have a play maker...the Leafs spring to mind :D But if you only have one you basically become a one line team and with the failure of kesler this season that's what Vcr became a one line team. Easy for any opposing coach to match. If we want success next season we need another play maker does MG gamble that will be a refreshed Kesler or a Schroeder ( big gamble ) or does he try and bring in a ready made guy through a trade.

Should be an interesting summer. There are few UFAs coming up in 2012 maybe we should be looking at the 2013 ie players that have to be signed next season. Jordon Stall for example ....how long will he be willing to play behind Malkin and Crosby ? or how about Travis Zajac if NJ would want to sign Luongo as a replacement for Brodeur ??

Just a side note every one notice the teams left in the Cup are all boring defense first teams, we should get a refund from our tickets next season if this is the route that the league is going to follow


Just seen this at Canucks Army

There is no shortage of relevant Canucks topics to discuss right now. Planning for the summer and beyond seems a tad premature, as does writing a eulogy for Roberto Luongo as a Canuck. Will Mason Raymond be back? Much to the chagrin of many, I’ll say yes. What happens to Keith Ballard? Do the Canucks address the lack of a playmaker on the second line? Who do they build the third line around? The answers to these questions will come in due time.

&

Did Gillis not think the club was ready this season? He did bring in Sammy Pahlsson to “replace” Hodgson. However, he didn’t break the bank acquiring a top four defenseman, which was and is the most pressing need for the team. Gillis saw what we are starting to see now – the Canucks will be able to field a contender for the next three or four years, at least. He also saw a team that wasn't necessarily worth going all in on. Depending on how the rest of the summer plays out, this season could be a case of the team taking "one step back, and two steps forward."

cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Strangelove » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:18 pm

tantalum wrote:
Strangelove wrote:That would be great Skyo, but I think it's more realistic we trade Edler+ for that RS beast.

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Beast



Seeing a lot of trading Edler but why not Bieksa? I realize Edler has more value of course, but while Edler had a rough series he stepped up in his previous playoffs. I like Bieksa and he's a great team guy, but it still concerns me that you still can't play him with other partners but Willie MItchell and Dan Hamhuis. Just a thought. I'm really not adverse to trading any member of the team.


Well personally I like Bieksa a lot.

Also he's a valuable team leader imo.

Also he plays the right side.

Would I trade him if I had to in order to land a true BEAST?

Indubitably.
____
"I like to think that this team can get its mojo back" - Ryan Miller
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7028
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Strangelove » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:25 pm

dbr wrote:
Strangelove wrote:Edler's main problem is that he's too damned nice. We need a major asshole in the top 4 and Edler would probably need to be the dee going the other way in part of a package for said beast.


Yeah agreed on Edler and the need for a big time asshole who can play tough minutes - I thought that was Kevin Bieksa but he seems to fall apart when he's out there trying to initiate.

Anyway if we're not dealing Edler for the RS beast then I'm not sure trading him away doesn't take the Canucks too far off from the offensive team Mike Gillis claims he is building.. that Hamhuis/Bieksa/Ballard/Beast top four.. if you're talking about Luke Schenn then that's two players who can contribute to the attack (but can't be expected to make something out of nothing).

If Gillis can scoop up a great offensive defender like Justin Schultz then you can probably deal Edler, or if he's getting you Shea Weber in return then you can probably deal him. Otherwise..


And wot if a Lou + Edler deal would bring back Hedman??

After you finished eating your hat, would you be a happy camper? :D

Yes I hope they sign Schultz, but I highly doubt he replaces Edler's offense.

You are one of the few Canuck fans who agrees with me about Schenn.

Schenn + Edler would make a nice 2nd pairing.

Schenn's value is prolly as low as it will ever be.

Lou + 1st for Schenn + 5th overall?? 8-)
____
"I like to think that this team can get its mojo back" - Ryan Miller
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7028
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Strangelove » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:27 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
Strangelove wrote:
SKYO wrote:Edler realistically is an awesome #2 dman and plays much better as such, so hopefully we can acquire a right side dman who can log big minutes so they can form a deadly combo for next season.


That would be great Skyo, but I think it's more realistic we trade Edler+ for that RS beast.

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Ballard - Beast


Who is on the first unit power play?


Someone + BEAST (#1 dee).

Prolly Grags, but we'd hafta experiment....
____
"I like to think that this team can get its mojo back" - Ryan Miller
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7028
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Jovocop » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:28 pm

Strangelove wrote:
dbr wrote:
Strangelove wrote:Edler's main problem is that he's too damned nice. We need a major asshole in the top 4 and Edler would probably need to be the dee going the other way in part of a package for said beast.


Yeah agreed on Edler and the need for a big time asshole who can play tough minutes - I thought that was Kevin Bieksa but he seems to fall apart when he's out there trying to initiate.

Anyway if we're not dealing Edler for the RS beast then I'm not sure trading him away doesn't take the Canucks too far off from the offensive team Mike Gillis claims he is building.. that Hamhuis/Bieksa/Ballard/Beast top four.. if you're talking about Luke Schenn then that's two players who can contribute to the attack (but can't be expected to make something out of nothing).

If Gillis can scoop up a great offensive defender like Justin Schultz then you can probably deal Edler, or if he's getting you Shea Weber in return then you can probably deal him. Otherwise..


And wot if a Lou + Edler deal would bring back Hedman??

After you finished eating your hat, would you be a happy camper? :D

Yes I hope they sign Schultz, but I highly doubt he replaces Edler's offense.

You are one of the few Canuck fans who agrees with me about Schenn.

Schenn + Edler would make a nice 2nd pairing.

Schenn's value is prolly as low as it will ever be.

Lou + 1st for Schenn + 5th overall?? 8-)


Lou + Raymond for Schenn + 2 1st rounder. :lol:
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1688
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby tantalum » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:30 pm

Strangelove wrote:Well personally I like Bieksa a lot.

Also he's a valuable team leader imo.

Also he plays the right side.

Would I trade him if I had to in order to land a true BEAST?

Indubitably.


I like him as well despite my criticism of some of his tendencies and he is a great team guy.

Personally I don't like to move either Edler or Bieksa and they wouldn't have to from a cap position if Ballard, Raymond and Luongo are gone. The question really is do they have the assets without one of those guys to get that Beast? Likely not though the goaltender return may change things...
User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: 2012 UFAs

Postby Strangelove » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:31 pm

Jovocop wrote:Lou + Poo for Schenn + 2 1st rounder. :lol:


:shock:
____
"I like to think that this team can get its mojo back" - Ryan Miller
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7028
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron