Is This The Best Defence Ever? In Depth?

[IBatch]

25 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

2011 was far ahead of our current defense. We didn't have a #1 like Hughes, but we had five #2 defensemen and Keith Ballard, who was probably a 4/5 as our #6.

2/3 yes.   And Ballard was a solid top four when we acquired him.   

 

Far ahead.   That said we can't romanticize that team too much either.  Salo was often injured, which made things tough.   And of the guys who were on that team, not sure who'd I take before Ohlund.   And that was an era I wasn't very fond of.    Mitchell would have been a much better keep them trading for Ballard.   At least he went on to raise the cup.   And was winning Pratt awards over most of the guys on that 2011 team in his 30's.   For sure a lot more than points when it comes to defending. 

 

Edit:  Also will say, the more quality you get together, the better everyone looks.   Erhoff fell off a cliff once he left.   Edler never became who we thought he'd become either.    Not that we haven't had a lot of that in our history either.     

Edited December 4, 2023 by IBatch

[Jess]

4 minutes ago, IBatch said:

2/3 yes.   And Ballard was a solid top four when we acquired him.   

 

Far ahead.   That said we can't romanticize that team too much either.  Salo was often injured, which made things tough.   And of the guys who were on that team, not sure who'd I take before Ohlund.   And that was an era I wasn't very fond of.    Mitchell would have been a much better keep them trading for Ballard.   At least he went on to raise the cup.   And was winning Pratt awards over most of the guys on that 2011 team in his 30's.   For sure a lot more than points when it comes to defending. 

 

Edit:  Also will say, the more quality you get together, the better everyone looks.   Erhoff fell off a cliff once he left.   Edler never became who we thought he'd become either.  

 

Yeah, it's probably not that all of them were #2s. I think there's a strong case for Hamhus, Edler, and Ehrhoff all being #2s, but Salo and Bieksa were maybe more of #3 guys. Ballard was expected to be better than he was--I think he regressed a little in Vancouver, but it was okay since our depth was nuts. Mitchell would've been better for sure. He was basically an old-school version of Chris Tanev.

[IBatch]

15 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

 

Yeah, it's probably not that all of them were #2s. I think there's a strong case for Hamhus, Edler, and Ehrhoff all being #2s, but Salo and Bieksa were maybe more of #3 guys. Ballard was expected to be better than he was--I think he regressed a little in Vancouver, but it was okay since our depth was nuts. Mitchell would've been better for sure. He was basically an old-school version of Chris Tanev.

 

Mitchell was a very good player.    A lot grittier then tanev and a lot harder to play against.   Tanev's fearlessness infront of pucks is his super power, and that didn't really kick in until Torts decided everyone was going to do that (Tanev himself, just said that last week, when he took a puck to the jaw ouch!).    Mitchell doesn't feel old school to me, so that makes me feel older lol.    Both great Canucks though.   Would love if we can sign him in the off season. 

 

Im from an era, that Craig Ludwig would shove boards into his socks and block shots that way.   Willie Mitchell felt like a "throwback" when we got him. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by IBatch

[IBatch]

22 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

 

Yeah, it's probably not that all of them were #2s. I think there's a strong case for Hamhus, Edler, and Ehrhoff all being #2s, but Salo and Bieksa were maybe more of #3 guys. Ballard was expected to be better than he was--I think he regressed a little in Vancouver, but it was okay since our depth was nuts. Mitchell would've been better for sure. He was basically an old-school version of Chris Tanev.

Very strong case AJ.   Also Salo would have been a solid #2 if he could play most of a season.    Our winning percentage went up, when he was in the lineup.   A very good hockey player. 

 

As for Bieksa, probably my favourite player on that team.   But will admit he was prone to gaffes.   So was Edler.   Hamhuis was probably our best D back then.  Which says a lot.  Salo was a very good D too.  

Edited December 4, 2023 by IBatch

[PeteyBOI]

1 hour ago, canucks curse said:

agree

 

we had:

edler-Bieksa

Erhoff - Salo

Hamhuis - Tanev

all of those guys are top 3 d men.

 

Ballard was the 7th D and he came from FLA where he was their no.3/4

Edler and erhoff were our top pair if i recall salo was often injured and tanev came in as our 8th defenceman. Keith ballard Aaron rome and Andrew alberts were all higher up the depth chart in 2010/2011 than tanev even in the playoffs...

 

Both Edler and erhoff played both  PP and PK Erhoff... PP1 and PK2 and Edler PK1 and PP2

Edited December 4, 2023 by Dankmemes187

[DrJockitch]

We have the best top pairing in Canuck's history.

Feels like the rest of the D are all historically good bottom pairing guys being asked to play up somewhat.

Cole, Zad, Soucy have never really been thought of as more than bottom pairing guys though Cole has consistently played higher than that.

Myers has been but oof he has been awful whenever asked to play more than third pairing minutes.

So no, don't think is the best depth we have had.

I think it can work though.  The first pair is exceptional and should be able to cobble together good minutes with the monsters below the Hrughes pairing.

[PeteyBOI]

10 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Very strong case AJ.   Also Salo would have been a solid #2 if he could play most of a season.    Our winning percentage went up, when he was in the lineup.   A very good hockey player. 

 

As for Bieksa, probably my favourite player on that team.   But will admit he was prone to gaffes.   So was Edler.   Hamhuis was probably our best D back then.  Which says a lot.  Salo was a very good D too.  

i agree salo was often our best defenceman healthy... they all played about the same 5vs5 what stood them apart was edlers skill on the PK and, Erhoffs skill on the PP and both salo and Hamhuis being rock solid steady 5vs5... But bieksa wasnt too far away, he brought that grit along with rome. Alberts was a beast but just didnt use his size as well as rome or Bieksa... ballard he was exciting i guess likely our number 6 in terms of skill, but just often was out of position and was not the player we were hoping he was hyped up to be.

[PeteyBOI]

5 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

We have the best top pairing in Canuck's history.

Feels like the rest of the D are all historically good bottom pairing guys being asked to play up somewhat.

Cole, Zad, Soucy have never really been thought of as more than bottom pairing guys though Cole has consistently played higher than that.

Myers has been but oof he has been awful whenever asked to play more than third pairing minutes.

So no, don't think is the best depth we have had.

I think it can work though.  The first pair is exceptional and should be able to cobble together good minutes with the monsters below the Hrughes pairing.

Zads can play top 4 in a pinch and has many skills... he's i think just slightly lower hockey iq than a true top 4 dman, often making mistakes like Myers... i thinks its harder when your bigger, one mistake and the smaller forwards use their agility and tighter edges to make you look bad, especially 5v5... id still rather have 2 giant monsters making 3M with slight below IQ, than a top 4 dman like pesce making 6 million..(aka next year) who is less tough

[KoreanHockeyFan]

If Willander lives up to expectations in the next 2-3 years, the defence would look a lot more balanced:

 

Hughes Hronek

Zadorov WIllander

Soucy Myers?

[DrJockitch]

2 minutes ago, Dankmemes187 said:

Zads can play top 4 in a pinch and has many skills... he's i think just slightly lower hockey iq than a true top 4 dman, often making mistakes like Myers... i thinks its harder when your bigger, one mistake and the smaller forwards use their agility and tighter edges to make you look bad, especially 5v5... id still rather have 2 giant monsters making 3M with slight below IQ, than a top 4 dman like pesce making 6 million..(aka next year) who is less tough

Zads can play top 4 in a pinch.

Cole can play top 4 in a pinch.

Soucy can play top 4 in a pinch.

Myers shouldn’t play top 4 in a pinch. 
 

Kind of what I was saying. Though still a lot better than what we had last year. 
 

I think it is true that Myers gets a bad rap though he also has earned it. Juulsen is making more mistakes/minute and they are just as egregious but he is being payed league minimum. 

[PeteyBOI]

Just now, DrJockitch said:

Zads can play top 4 in a pinch.

Cole can play top 4 in a pinch.

Soucy can play top 4 in a pinch.

Myers shouldn’t play top 4 in a pinch. 
 

Kind of what I was saying. Though still a lot better than what we had last year. 
 

I think it is true that Myers gets a bad rap though he also has earned it. Juulsen is making more mistakes/minute and they are just as egregious but he is being payed league minimum. 

myers is better than all of them... I think your wrong. my guess is by ends year Myers plays more minutes per game than cole by the end of the year... if you look at the trends this is likely true...

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

31 minutes ago, KoreanHockeyFan said:

If Willander lives up to expectations in the next 2-3 years, the defence would look a lot more balanced:

 

Hughes Hronek

Zadorov WIllander

Soucy Myers?

 

And maybe with luck, EP(D) replaces one of the bottom two? 

[IBatch]

49 minutes ago, Dankmemes187 said:

i agree salo was often our best defenceman healthy... they all played about the same 5vs5 what stood them apart was edlers skill on the PK and, Erhoffs skill on the PP and both salo and Hamhuis being rock solid steady 5vs5... But bieksa wasnt too far away, he brought that grit along with rome. Alberts was a beast but just didnt use his size as well as rome or Bieksa... ballard he was exciting i guess likely our number 6 in terms of skill, but just often was out of position and was not the player we were hoping he was hyped up to be.

Bieksa led the league one year in EV points.   Never got a chance on the first PP unit and limited second unit time.  Not sure why really, he also could put up points.   To me Erhoff is << then Jeff Brown.   Just at the right place at the right time.   A 30 point player otherwise and it showed once he left the team.    Never bought into his hype.    Bieksa didn't have size really.   I'm not even sure he's 6 feet tall.   After seeing him up close. 

[PeteyBOI]

40 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Bieksa led the league one year in EV points.   Never got a chance on the first PP unit and limited second unit time.  Not sure why really, he also could put up points.   To me Erhoff is << then Jeff Brown.   Just at the right place at the right time.   A 30 point player otherwise and it showed once he left the team.    Never bought into his hype.    Bieksa didn't have size really.   I'm not even sure he's 6 feet tall.   After seeing him up close. 

ii agree with erhoff likey the worst of the top 4 in terms of 5v5 play.. he kinda reminds me of that old colarado defenceman all offense no defense that retired a couple years ago... john michael Lyles? but he was good because of his deployment all OZ starts and TOP PP1 play... Brown had a better shot for sure even Salo and Edler did. but erhoff was a great playmaker and a above average stickhandler... he was great passing the puck around and pinching because he was fast and was a main reason our PP was so good. when erhoff was Out it was not the same, Salo mostly replaced him but that was often lead to alot of slapshots from the point, instead of puck movement down low to the twins

 

Bieksa was likely just a little too less skilled, shot wasnt the hardest, he wasnt the biggest, he wasnt the fastest, he was just solid but got burned from time to time... bieksa ne

[EB43]

Myers out, Pesce in this offseason, then we can discuss.

[Tocchet.A.Hockey.God]

5 hours ago, Integra250 said:

Maybe not the best but this defense core helped solidify a  #1 Offense, PP, and PK...

 

Hamhuis

Ehrhoff

Edler

Salo

Bieksa

Tanev

Ballard

Alberts

Rome

 

 

I would Take Hughes over both Ehroff and Edler. 

 

We have no one like Hamhuis

 

Hronak >>>>>> Salo

 

Cole better defensively than Bieksa. Physically even 

 

We have no one like Tanev

 

Myers better than any off Ballard, Rome, and Alberts by a mile

 

Saucy he is a top four but not a Hamhuis or a Tanev type (defensive Defenseman)

 

Zadorov I'm on the fence with this guy hitting is good but it is not Defense. I want to see if he can move traffic from the net 

 

IMO, Hughes and Hronek make this the most offensive defense we have ever had.

 

Hamhuis and Tanev make that group the best defensive group we have ever had. Add Edler as part of that defensiveness as well

[RawkDrummer]

Allvin and Rutherford identify useful players and go after them, no screwing around.

[TheGuardian]

7 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

Wilander and Brzustewicz are not close to being NHL players yet.

As emergency depth maybe. They could even get some ice time at the end of the season.

6 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

Hughes, Hronek, Soucy, Cole, Zadorov and Myers for now are a formidable six Dmen when they are all healthy and in the lineup, I would argue Bear for 7th improves us vs Juulsen, Brisebois, Poolman, Irwin, McWard, Hirose, Wolanin, Johansson and Woo (not in any particular order for those AHL kind of guys). I think we don't need Bear but I would like Bear, I guess that is for me the distinction, more than the other AHL guys. Shrug. Happy with what Management has done to reinvent our D rather fast. Bear would be the icing in the middle of the two layered cake though. 

 

I am still hopeful to see Myers gone sooner than later, but worst case scenario, his 6m is on the books till summer. 

It may not be Myers but Benning's contract. 

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Bieksa led the league one year in EV points.   Never got a chance on the first PP unit and limited second unit time.  Not sure why really, he also could put up points.   To me Erhoff is << then Jeff Brown.   Just at the right place at the right time.   A 30 point player otherwise and it showed once he left the team.    Never bought into his hype.    Bieksa didn't have size really.   I'm not even sure he's 6 feet tall.   After seeing him up close. 

Most NHL players are shorter than what is advertised. Anything over an inch is taken to the next inch. I saw that when they hugged Demko, he is supposed to be 6'4" but looked shorter than Joshua. And when the IOC listed Quinn Hughes height at 5'9 3/8", now he is 5'10" not that it matter for his offence.

1 hour ago, EB43 said:

Myers out, Pesce in this offseason, then we can discuss.

The cap will still rule unless they mange to trade Boeser and Garland.

 

I have to apologize to many old time posters It has been quite awhile since this team had 4 decent defencemen.

 

Zadorov and Myers will not suddenly change the entire landscape but Zad will help players play bigger. Myers next contract, if with the Canucks, will be much smaller but the cap is going up so a little larger than it really is. In 3 years the cap may go up by 15 million making 3 or 4 mil not that much.

 

Bear keeps coming up, but can he dance? Is he a target? Will he be the same as last year? Will his shoulder hold up, they sometimes don't? If signing him doesn't drain the cap space he could be useful as a depth guy in the easy season but any money given him long term is taking precious money away from Hronek.

 

I am pretty sure Myers 6 mil cap hit and Zadorov's 3.75 can be split between the two with some left over. There may even be enough for Pesce or another 6 million dollar dman if Cole's 3 is used on defence. Say Hanifin? Or Tanev and ? in the off season. Brisebois should get more ice time, Wilander and Brz will take some time 2/3 years, just when OEL's buyout hits over 4 million a year for three years.

 

What does a 3/4 dman look like in this watered down league now? Now there is usually the top two and the next four all pretty similar with maybe one a little ahead. The regular/easy season see's quite a few midgets succeed but disappear in the real season. Larger dmen are becoming much more agile because they are now trained differently than 20 years or more ago. Some coaches just still hang onto, "big equals mean and nasty only". Ya, here it comes, when Tryamkin first was with the Canucks one of the highlights was "he skates like he is 6' tall instead of 6'8". Myers is a pretty damn good skater too. But it is hard to get out from under the "lunk head" role once there. Dance a few times and it is expected more and if not dancing then not playing good or be big and not dancing then not very good.

 

This current group, so far, is the best in 8/9 years, how is that?

 

AND looking around the league certainly in the upper quarter now in depth and playoff possibilities success.

 

Looks like Cole gets another year of playoffs.

Edited December 5, 2023 by TheGuardian

[PuckYa]

9 hours ago, IBatch said:

 Bieksa didn't have size really.   I'm not even sure he's 6 feet tall.   After seeing him up close. 

Bieska could handle his own with the toughest guys out there. Yes not a true heavy weight but one of the tougher light heavy weights. Always kept himself in top shape. Tough, tenacious, smart as he could fill many roles with some underrated hands.    

 

 

 

 

[Kevin Biestra]

13 hours ago, IBatch said:

Bieksa led the league one year in EV points.   Never got a chance on the first PP unit and limited second unit time.  Not sure why really, he also could put up points.   To me Erhoff is << then Jeff Brown.   Just at the right place at the right time.   A 30 point player otherwise and it showed once he left the team.    Never bought into his hype.    Bieksa didn't have size really.   I'm not even sure he's 6 feet tall.   After seeing him up close. 

 

Jeff Brown was probably a tier above Ehrhoff.  Ehrhoff was good for sure but Brown was just a shade below Kevin Hatcher / James Patrick / Steve Duchesne territory, just without the career longevity.  78 points in 71 games one year...the list of defensemen in NHL history who have achieved 80 even once is actually pretty short.

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by Kevin Biestra

[IBatch]

5 hours ago, PuckYa said:

Bieska could handle his own with the toughest guys out there. Yes not a true heavy weight but one of the tougher light heavy weights. Always kept himself in top shape. Tough, tenacious, smart as he could fill many roles with some underrated hands.    

 

 

 

 

Again he was probably my favourite Canuck during that era.    One fight he had early in his career, the "Tale of the Tape" listed him 6'4 228 or something, fighting another guy about the same size...hilarious because of the colour commenting too (US feed), pumped him up like he was our goon.  Which of course he never was.    Didn't lose many, kept mostly in his lane too (wasn't fighting the McGratton, Parros, Laraques etc).   Drove Eager mad, won the series for us (and SJ was just getting better and better in that series, we lose Game 5, who knows).  I'm well aware of his exploits, including his bar fight with 6'4" 230lb Federov, which got him signed in the first place.    One tough hombre.   Wouldn't have any issues if he was up in the ROH with Burrows. 

Edited December 5, 2023 by IBatch

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Jeff Brown was probably a tier above Ehrhoff.  Ehrhoff was good for sure but Brown was just a shade below Kevin Hatcher / James Patrick / Steve Duchesne territory, just without the career longevity.  78 points in 71 games one year...the list of defensemen in NHL history who have achieved 80 even once is actually pretty short.

 

Brown and  Reinhart, were the closest things we'd had to a true number one D in that era.    Brown was an offensive tier above Lumme, who was also pretty close.   Jovo of course was a number one D later.   Only guy in club history, that was a regular Norris vote candidate, think back to back 6th...Always wondered if our fate would have been different in 2006 if he wasn't injured (Olympics).   2002 made the play for Sakics GWG, and played admirably.    For me anyways, should have captained that team as well.   Also blew we didn't re-sign him (or at least trade him).   ARI sure loved having him too.    Scored a lot of goals for his era.  

 

Jeff Brown did his part for us in 1994.   It's too bad that things didn't work out.     Of course that group of D's was also better than the one we have today. 

 

A legit #1 or at least 1b in Brown, a number 2 in Lumme, arguably Babych too, they faced the other teams best, and in the playoffs his previous scoring touch came out more (amped things up, usually it goes the other way),  Murzyn back then a number 3 (it's too bad he was injured...), Hedican went on and became a legit 2/3 and was for sure a 3 or four back then.   Diduck maybe a 4/5 but he made it work, (and one tough customer).   We had a very solid D core, and it was big.   If Diduck and Brown are your smallest defenseman...I don't think the 2011 team would have faired well against the 1994 team in a 7 game series.   We'd of made Boston (2011), look small and skilled.    Sandlak was gone, but Antoski would have made mincemeat of any of their guys, and was used mostly over Gino because of his speed.   Hunter would have handled Scott Thornton just fine,  Antoski would have knocked him out of the series's.   Our forwards were also much bigger, and there with Ronning.    94 Rangers and CAL team, likely would have done the same. 

 

Agree with your previous 1982 post as well.   A lot of weapons.   And probably deeper than any team we've ever had (d-core).    

 

As for Quin Hughes.   Growing up in the 80's, and falling in love with the sport.. well there was a certain envy of why we couldn't have a Paul Coffey,  Ray Borque,  Phil Housley, Chris Chelios,  Larry Robinson, Potvin, AL Mac, Leetch..well it was part of why I liked Babych so much.    At least he was close at one point, to these type of guys, plus he was stronger then most guys, at a time when hockey was a lot rougher and in the 90's, much bigger too.   

 

Fast forward 30 years later and we finally have that.    It's awesome.   Don't mind the OP.   We've got the chance, because of QHs, to actually create the best D we've ever had.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by IBatch