Not off the Bieksa Bandwagon Yet

 Blog  Add comments
Jul 032010
 

A lot of people have joined the anti-Bieksa bandwagon and it’s something I just haven’t been able to wrap my head around. At times it honestly seems like people want to get rid of Bieksa more than Andrew Alberts, but it seems unfounded to me. There’s a few things that Bieksa brings to the table that I really think the Canucks benefit from and with the additions of Hamhuis and Ballard, Bieksa’s role is going to not only change but be defined with new specifics.

On a blue line that sees a lot of defensive prowess, none of the Canucks defenceman can be classified as offensive defenseman. Edler, Ehrhoff, Salo, Hamhuis, Ballard, Rome, O’Brien and Alberts make for a full defense core, but Bieksa’s offensive mindedness and tendencies are in my mind the perfect complement to the defensive talent that the Canucks carry on the back end. He’s been unfortunate with not one but two tendon lacerations, but there’s no doubt that his drive and commitment to this team is amongst the best in the locker room.

Aside from the offensive element he brings to the blue line, his compete level is something that the Canucks really benefit from. He’s an aggressive blue liner, something that stands out amongst the more passive nature of players like Salo, Ehrhoff and Edler to name a few.

With the addition of Hamhuis and Ballard though, Bieksa’s role becomes a lot more specific to the team. He needs to embrace the gritty side of his game. There’s nothing better than a fired up Bieksa. Bieksa needs to be the physical force we’ve seen him to be in the past and bring his physical presence and element to the Canucks’ game.

I’ve not sold Bieksa out yet. In my books he’s got two strikes. While he can defensively worrying sometimes, there’s a reason we have Luongo and our blue line is amongst the best blue lines in the league. Bieksa’s is not expendable yet. The Canucks don’t have needs that are so pressing that his value needs to be capitalized on and his role is one that in my mind complements the host of blue liners the Canucks currently have.
 

  • Pingback: Hockey as of July 3, 2010 « Sports-Post.Com

  • Davidchong

    Bieksa certainly still has his plus side, the problem is his salary which could be better used at the other end of the is.

  • Davidchong

    err…other end of the ice even.

  • Canucksfan

    Ehrhoff is not defensive-minded, he's probably the best playmaking defenseman the Canucks have and is capable of rushing the puck up the ice. As for Bieksa, you are making an argument to keep him now can you also tell us how to resign Mason Raymond while keeping Bieksa and staying under the salary cap?

  • UTM

    I couldn't agree more! Think back to how Bieksa was playing before he got injured. At that time there were rumours that he was being considered for the Olympic team, and those rumors were not undeserved.
    The biggest problem with Canucks' fans is that they are sheep. They hear a rumour, or watch a news story and believe everything being fed to them. It was the same thing at the last Olympics when Kessler said he hated (playing against) the Canadians. One idiot “journalist” chose to omit a few words and it became “Kessler hates Canadians”. Canucks lemmings jumped all over that and demanded Kessler be traded. It's the same thing here. A few reporters have suggested that the player most likely to be moved (due to salary cap issues) is Bieksa, and it gets turned into a “Trade Bieksa” movement.
    When healthy and confident, and a little bit pissed, Bieksa is a monster. Few players get louder cheers than an angry Bieksa. Yet these same people who cheered him heard he may be traded, and he's suddenly the most hated guy on the roster.
    Think for yourselves people. It's fine to hope he's traded for salary cap reasons, but to hate on him because some reporter said he should go is ludicrous!

  • Iansarahfitz

    Not hard actually. Right now the Nucks have 2.4 available. Bury Alberts in the minors and now its 3.4. Sign Raymond for 2 and bring up Hodgson and Schroeder for 0.975 (Bonuses not due till next year). 4th Line made up of $500k guys and you got a roster with Raymond and Bieksa

  • http://twitter.com/kmeghji kmeghji

    The canucks have a couple of big immediate problems, and a few ones looming at the end of the season.

    Now:
    8 defencemen on 1 way NHL deals
    No cap space (Raymond's deal, and filling out the 3rd/4th lines)
    Top 5 D earning between $4.5m and $3m

    End of the season:
    Ehrhoff, Bieksa and Salo are all UFAs.

    Gillis has to plan in order to have the best chance to win in the short and long term.

    If he can resign Ehrhoff to an extension, then you have a solid 4man D-core of Ballard, Hamhuis, Edler, Ehrhoff which is young, and talented.

    If not, then you make a pitch to Bieksa to extend. In either case, Bieksa is a top 4 D on any team in the NHL who should get a good return, doesn't have a no trade, and isn't vital to the team's short term success.

    All things considered, I'd rather have Ehrhoff than Bieksa, but if you get something in return for him (a decent pick or prospect) then the Canucks win in the long term.

  • skeeter_dan

    Ehrhoff is the precise definition of an offensive defenceman. Look up Offensive Defenceman in the dictionary and you will find a picture of Christian Ehrhoff. I found it incredibly difficult to read this post after such an unfounded claim, but I struggled through.

    The reason Bieksa's expendable is because of his contract. At the moment, Bieksa is the fifth defenceman on the depth chart: he's getting paid far, far too much for that role. In addition, he doesn't have a NMC like Salo and has significant value on the trade market.

    I like Bieksa a lot, but with the acquisition of Ballard and Hamhuis, the Canucks don't need him anymore. With his value, it would be better to trade him and clear up the cap space. Alberts is a serviceable seventh defenceman, behind SOB and Rome on the depth charts, so it's not like people are saying that they'd prefer Alberts to Bieksa. Alberts is getting paid a heck of a lot less than Bieksa, so it's not an equitable comparison.

  • Jhiebert

    Agreed! I'm a big Bieksa fan and I suspect he'll have a great rebound season (hopefully here). No idea why fans automatically assume that Ballard and Hamhuis are so much better than Bieksa. He's had two freak injuries that have limited his effectiveness, but I think he has as much chance of earning his contract this year as the new guys. He's not old and has shown good skills at both ends of the ice.

    Everyone seems to forget the trouble the team ran into this year with injuries on the blueline — it was so painful seeing Alberts/Rome/Baumgartner/SOB getting thrown in there in key situations, getting lots of ice time (and getting injured themselves in the playoffs). As we all know, Salo will be out for at least half the season with multiple issues, and that likely won't be the full extent of the injury trouble for the D-men.

    Obviously it will take some fancy juggling (and perhaps a long-term injury early in the season) to make the cap situation work with both Bieksa and Raymond in the lineup, but not impossible.

  • CanucksFan

    Actually that's not only hard its next to impossible. Raymopnd is not going to sign for 2 million, if he was he'd probably be locked up before July 1. Canucks are not going to go with 7 defensemen which you suggest by sending Alberts down. Schroeder and Hodgson are not going to be handed 3rd line minutes, its extremely doubtful that both make the roster. 4th line players that can actually contribute usually cost more than 500K, even Hordichuk makes more than that. Oh and that's not to mention Shane O'Brien whom I'm guessing you are going to send down to the minors or trade for a draft pick.

  • 11

    And just how are they going to send SOB down to the minors hmm? The second he goes on waivers he will be getting picked up and it'll be OUR loss and we won't be compensated for it.

  • Sam

    Are you kidding? Ehroff is much more of an offensive defenseman that Bieksa. Edler and Salo would also help fill that role.

    In terms of toughness, I agree. Bieksa can bring that element to the game. But, when was the last time he played aggressive between the whistles?
    He is too passive with the puck and tends to run around in his defensive zone coverage.

    You must be watching games from 2007.

  • Jonavision

    Agree that Bieksa is valuable. I think your idea that Canucks fans are anti-Bieksa are unfounded. Sure there are the fans who will complain but they complain about everyone. Ballard and Hamhuis can move the puck and create the rush which our top two lines will thrive on. Edler and Salo have great shots. Bieksa can move up on the rush and pinch but is not a puck moving defensman. There is a style change here and Bieksa doesn't fit now. We want Bieksa traded because he has high value on a packed defensive core. Trading Bieksa makes room for Raymond to stay and gives cap flexibility and might land us some picks or prospects.

  • Mtrowbri

    If you can't wrap your head around why Bieksa is not wanted in Vancouver, then you either just haven't been watching, or you have no idea what a defenseman's priorities are. It is unacceptable to give away the puck in your own zone once in a game, let alone every shift. You people see the stats but not the games.

  • Jonavision

    Agree that Bieksa is valuable. I think your idea that Canucks fans are anti-Bieksa are unfounded. Sure there are the fans who will complain but they complain about everyone. Ballard and Hamhuis can move the puck and create the rush which our top two lines will thrive on. Edler and Salo have great shots. Bieksa can move up on the rush and pinch but is not a puck moving defensman. There is a style change here and Bieksa doesn't fit now. We want Bieksa traded because he has high value on a packed defensive core. Trading Bieksa makes room for Raymond to stay and gives cap flexibility and might land us some picks or prospects.

  • Mtrowbri

    If you can't wrap your head around why Bieksa is not wanted in Vancouver, then you either just haven't been watching, or you have no idea what a defenseman's priorities are. It is unacceptable to give away the puck in your own zone once in a game, let alone every shift. You people see the stats but not the games.