DL44 267 Report post Posted January 14, 2013 NW Defensive Depth charts... (approximate and not in any order after the top 4 or 5) Vancouver Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Garrison, Ballard, Tanev, Alberts, Barker, Vandermeer, Connauton... Calgary JBo, Wideman, Giordano, Butler, Sarich, Babchuk, Smith, Brodie, Carson, Breen... Edmonton Whitney, Schultz, Schultz, Smid, Sutton, Petry, Fistric, Peckham, Klefbom, Teubert, Potter Colorado EJ, Hejda, Zanon, Wilson, O'Brien, O'Bryne, Hunwick, Barrie, Elliot Minny Suter, Gilbert, Stoner, Scandella, Falk, Prosser, Spurgeon, Brodin, Cuma, Dumba, Kampfer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flyerfan52 1,355 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 & the Canucks have added Vandermeer. He's played for the Flyers, Flames & Oilers. I believe this is his 1st go around in Vancouver. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bronco73 71 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 & the Canucks have added Vandermeer. He's played for the Flyers, Flames & Oilers. I believe this is his 1st go around in Vancouver. he's gonna run out of NW division teams to play for Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carty 7,704 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 & the Canucks have added Vandermeer. He's played for the Flyers, Flames & Oilers. I believe this is his 1st go around in Vancouver. Signing Vanderpylon is a real head scratcher... As far as Barker goes, I would not be surprised that on a one year contract, it is also his last tour with the Canucks... This guy could not even cut it on a defense starved Oilers team, come to think of it, neither could Vandermeer... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Signing Vanderpylon is a real head scratcher... As far as Barker goes, I would not be surprised that on a one year contract, it is also his last tour with the Canucks... This guy could not even cut it on a defense starved Oilers team, come to think of it, neither could Vandermeer... Depth. Quite simple really. NHL capable D on a 2 way.. Good depth move. Barker... As LeBrun put it in terms expectations.... oilers signed him at $2.5 mil to be a top 4... Canucks signed him for $700k to be a 7/8 and challenge for the 6th. Good depth move. D has great veteran support for very cheap. No lose situation which gives em probably one the deepest D's in the league. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carty 7,704 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Sorry DL44, but... D has great veteran support for very cheap. Fixed... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Sorry DL44, but... Fixed... Really? Assuming Tanev and Alberts are 6 & 7... Are there better 7/8/9 options on other teams as NHL capable and experienced? If answer is No, or very few... Then 'great' would be an accurate description of their depth don't ya think? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carty 7,704 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 If answer is No, or very few... Then 'great' would be an accurate description of their depth don't ya think? Actually after watching both of them play quite a bit over the last few years, I think a more accurate description and honest assessment would be a "liability" when on the ice... But perhaps one or both of them might perform better in Vancouver than their track record has indicated with previous teams... It is possible, just not probable... and there is also a reason why they have a history of being allowed to walk without having a contract offer presented... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flyerfan52 1,355 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 he's gonna run out of NW division teams to play for He's amassing a nice jersey collection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flyerfan52 1,355 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Signing Vanderpylon is a real head scratcher... As far as Barker goes, I would not be surprised that on a one year contract, it is also his last tour with the Canucks... This guy could not even cut it on a defense starved Oilers team, come to think of it, neither could Vandermeer... Vandenmeer, Barker & Alberts. All they need now is Randy Jones & the Canucks have a set of 4 pylons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The_Don 100 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Signing Vanderpylon is a real head scratcher... As far as Barker goes, I would not be surprised that on a one year contract, it is also his last tour with the Canucks... This guy could not even cut it on a defense starved Oilers team, come to think of it, neither could Vandermeer... They are #8 and #9 on our depth chart, assuming no prospects step up big in camp. In a condensed season, having defensive depth is that much more important. These guys are marginally better than the guys we have in Chicago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DirtyDeeds 2,608 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 They are #8 and #9 on our depth chart, assuming no prospects step up big in camp. In a condensed season, having defensive depth is that much more important. These guys are marginally better than the guys we have in Chicago. Why are the Canucks stocking up on D when 2/3rds of your 2nd line is going to be on injured list? Isn't Booth out now too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Why are the Canucks stocking up on D when 2/3rds of your 2nd line is going to be on injured list? Isn't Booth out now too? Well.. the D was shored up before the extent of the Booth injury was known... not that it would of mattered. He's only out 4-6 weeks. As of now.. we have an AHL 2nd line with Raymond... 2 of Schroeder/Ebbett/Kassian battling it out. I expect Schroeder to be in the pressbox. So that's the only hole on the team right now... the 2nd line - forwards 4-5-6. Even 4 is ok.. 5-6 forwards will not be NHL standard 5-6's... solid for the AHL tho, heh... Goaltending - solid D - solid Top line - elite forward depth 7 to 13 - solid Basically Canucks will roll with a 1st line, 2 3rds, and a 4th. AV will be able to shuffle and protect the line just fine pairing Bieksa-Hamhuis with them, and spotting their zone starts. I'm not worried considering Booth and Kesler will be back soon enough. Just gotta stay healthy with everyone else now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The_Don 100 Report post Posted January 15, 2013 Why are the Canucks stocking up on D when 2/3rds of your 2nd line is going to be on injured list? Isn't Booth out now too? For one, the Canucks have had a history of defencemen getting injured in bunches over the past few years. Depth D is never filled. There isn't anyone out there they could sign to a 2-way deal that would fill a 2nd line role. That's pretty obvious. We have tons of forwards available depth wise. Sedin Sedin Burrows Kesler Booth Higgins Raymond Kassian Hansen Lapierre Malhotra Weise Ebbett Schroeder Volpatti Gordon Desbiens All guys with NHL experience with the exception of JS. Even with an injury or 2, we have enough guys that can step in and play a depth role. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 For one, the Canucks have had a history of defencemen getting injured in bunches over the past few years. Depth D is never filled. There isn't anyone out there they could sign to a 2-way deal that would fill a 2nd line role. That's pretty obvious. We have tons of forwards available depth wise. Sedin Sedin Burrows Kesler Booth Higgins Raymond Kassian Hansen Lapierre Malhotra Weise Ebbett Schroeder Volpatti Gordon Desbiens All guys with NHL experience with the exception of JS. Even with an injury or 2, we have enough guys that can step in and play a depth role. Yup... Love the makeup of the 3rd line right now... Higgens - Lapierre - Hansen. That is good. So.. Sedin - Sedin - Burrows Raymond - Ebbett - Kassian Higgens - Lapierre - Hansen Weise - Malhotra - Volpatti Switching Higgens to center the 2nd line is also a short term option... slipping Ebbett or Kassian to the 3rd line wing. Still should be good out the gate. It will also help if the other teams are further behind in conditioning and chemistry at this point.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The_Don 100 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 Yup... Love the makeup of the 3rd line right now... Higgens - Lapierre - Hansen. That is good. So.. Sedin - Sedin - Burrows Raymond - Ebbett - Kassian Higgens - Lapierre - Hansen Weise - Malhotra - Volpatti Switching Higgens to center the 2nd line is also a short term option... slipping Ebbett or Kassian to the 3rd line wing. Still should be good out the gate. It will also help if the other teams are further behind in conditioning and chemistry at this point.. If that were the case, switch the 2nd and 3rd lines... Sedin - Sedin - Burrows Higgins - Lapierre - Hansen Raymond - Malhotra - Kassian Weise - Ebbett - Volpatti Thats more like it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 If that were the case, switch the 2nd and 3rd lines... Sedin - Sedin - Burrows Higgins - Lapierre - Hansen Raymond - Malhotra - Kassian Weise - Ebbett - Volpatti Thats more like it. I'm looking forward to seeing Ebbett in an offensive role tho... i think he has something to contribute... I've seen flashes of his hands like you do every once in awhile with Lapierre. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The_Don 100 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 I'm looking forward to seeing Ebbett in an offensive role tho... i think he has something to contribute... I've seen flashes of his hands like you do every once in awhile with Lapierre. True. But Higgins and Hansen are easily the 4th and 5th best forwards. No way both of them are on the third line with that line-up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 Renaud Lavoie@RenLavoieRDS From my blog: #canucks Maxim Lapierre gained 20 pounds of muscle during the lockout. He'll be way more stronger on the ice. SICK!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hockeypriest 9 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 Signing Vanderpylon is a real head scratcher... As far as Barker goes, I would not be surprised that on a one year contract, it is also his last tour with the Canucks... This guy could not even cut it on a defense starved Oilers team, come to think of it, neither could Vandermeer... I am quite happy that those dummies signed Pylon....I hope he gets lots of ice time...On a serious note, I think the only reason they signed him was because they lack balls...They lost their last two playoff series because they played with too much estrogen... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DL44 267 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 I am quite happy that those dummies signed Pylon....I hope he gets lots of ice time...On a serious note, I think the only reason they signed him was because they lack balls...They lost their last two playoff series because they played with too much estrogen... That's some brilliant writing right there. Well thought out displaying plenty of sharp wit and a real intellectual sense of humor. Bravo. On a more serious note... Someone just wake up from a slumber and haven't read up on the makeup of their team yet? Can't wait to see how your flames measure up in the size and grit departments vs the contenders. I know which roster league wide I would lay money down on for having excessive estrogen levels this year.... Keep the witty, productive posts coming... 5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Derftrocity 3 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 I am quite happy that those dummies signed Pylon....I hope he gets lots of ice time...On a serious note, I think the only reason they signed him was because they lack balls...They lost their last two playoff series because they played with too much estrogen... Agree with your comment on the lack of testicular fortitude. This is a big problem for the Canucks and an entertaining one for us Flames fans to watch. The fact of the matter is the Kings, Bruins, Blackhawks (list can go on and on) just push the Canucks around like little rag dolls was a bit too much MG or their owners and fans could handle. Unfortunately they signed some Dman who aren't even NHL caliber ready. Making their Defence depth one of the thinnest in the NHL. I'm excited for this season for the Flames. Look for us to be at the top of the division again which Canucks start rebuilding. Canucks are destined to be the Edmonton Oilers the past 6-7 years! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hockeypriest 9 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 That's some brilliant writing right there. Well thought out displaying plenty of sharp wit and a real intellectual sense of humor. Bravo. On a more serious note... Someone just wake up from a slumber and haven't read up on the makeup of their team yet? Can't wait to see how your flames measure up in the size and grit departments vs the contenders. I know which roster league wide I would lay money down on for having excessive estrogen levels this year.... Keep the witty, productive posts coming... Little sensitive are we?? I am quite aware of the sandpaper or lack there of problems with the Flames...It doesn't change the fact that the biggest issue for the Canucks is a lack of balls...I think both signings (Pylon and Barker) made by the Canucks are great moves...One gives them some toughness and the other is a very talented D-Man that was slowed by injuries early in his career that hurt his development...Barker could pan out when given a chance as he is still young... 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The_Don 100 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 I am quite happy that those dummies signed Pylon....I hope he gets lots of ice time...On a serious note, I think the only reason they signed him was because they lack balls...They lost their last two playoff series because they played with too much estrogen... If Vandermeer is getting lots of ice time, the Canucks are already in big trouble by that point. The reason is simple. D-E-P-T-H. Agree with your comment on the lack of testicular fortitude. This is a big problem for the Canucks and an entertaining one for us Flames fans to watch. The fact of the matter is the Kings, Bruins, Blackhawks (list can go on and on) just push the Canucks around like little rag dolls was a bit too much MG or their owners and fans could handle. Unfortunately they signed some Dman who aren't even NHL caliber ready. Making their Defence depth one of the thinnest in the NHL. I'm excited for this season for the Flames. Look for us to be at the top of the division again which Canucks start rebuilding. Canucks are destined to be the Edmonton Oilers the past 6-7 years! Derf!!!! I missed you all lockout. "Thank god derf.... I mean hockey is back!" I kept telling everyone. "Look for us to be at the top of the division again" Again? You mean for the first time in 7 years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Derftrocity 3 Report post Posted January 16, 2013 If Vandermeer is getting lots of ice time, the Canucks are already in big trouble by that point. The reason is simple. D-E-P-T-H. Derf!!!! I missed you all lockout. "Thank god derf.... I mean hockey is back!" I kept telling everyone. "Look for us to be at the top of the division again" Again? You mean for the first time in 7 years. Hey Donnie, I was away from the boards because I vowed to boycott the NHL and everything along with it unless they got the CBA done. I'm so happy to be back, I'm excited for the players and the owners. Both were winning parties as Hockey is finally back. I can continue on and on about that whole fiasco but we'll save that for a rainy day because the FLAMES are back on the ice. So many things to be excited about for the Flames. Our goaltending prospects in Abbotsford were spectacular. Our skill and talent down there is also shining a bright spot. I can't imagine the damage the youth are going to do the NW division. "Look for us to be at the top of the division again" AGAIN means we have done it before, The Canucks cannot say "Lets win the Stanley Cup Again" because they never have! hahahahhahaa suck on that Donnie, that taste good doesn't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
