Tribute Alexander Edler

[F A N]

My memory of Edler is that I spent years saying he was the closet thing we had to a #1 Dman. But unfortunately with his back injury he never really got there. He could have been dominant defensively (memories of the LA series) but his body doesn't allow him to keep that up.

Edler is actually a bit difficult to evaluate. Many coaches kept him on PP1. The eye test says he wasn't very good but statistically there's support at he actually was the best option. I think defensively, he didn't defend as well as Salo down low but Edler's overall physical traits and steadiness allowed him to absorb heavy defensive minutes and make out ok. I wish Edler had 2-3 seasons where everything really came together for him because at his best and with a good partner he could have been a top 5 calibre Dman.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

A lowkey dirty player

Love it when it’s on your team

 

[Caboose]

Great Canuck, but my biggest memories of him will always be unmet potential.

He had a very good career, don't get me wrong, but he could have been so much better. I will never forget his impact coming into the Canucks, they way he stepped up at the offensive blueline and drilled players like a cleaner Kronwall, while providing that great offense and defense was a sight to behold. That player could have rivalled Quin as the greatest Canuck Dman ever.

He will still go down as having an argument for being the Canucks second best defenseman of all time, but that early version of Edler could have won Norris Trophies if he continued on that development curve

 

[LandfiII]

An argument could be made for him to be 3rd best d-man the Canucks have ever had. Certainly top 5. The only two I would clearly place above him are Hughes and Ohlund.

Hughes
Salo

Whoever

 

[jd22]

Hughes
Salo

Whoever

If Salo could play 95% of a games in a season year in year out, yes. But you're not helping your team any being injured constantly.

I do distinctly remember Salo scoring 2 goals in 16 seconds in the exact same way, though. That was awesome. Just ripping clappers all day.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Are folks really sleeping this hard on Ohlund?

He was an absolute force for us.

Hughes
Ohlund
Edler
The rest

 

[LiveeviL]

A very good D-man, at least for this team (and for the region Jämtland in Sweden where only the Lundqvist brothers and Edler are the NHL players). is back injury made his style of play - as-I see it - take another trajectory. He was probably destined for being a more physical player if not his body had said no.

 

[kaczor]

Edler and Ohlund are my favourite (recent) Canucks
Pure class in both cases.

 

[VanJack]

Before Hughes came along, you could have made the case that Edler was the best d-man in franchise history. Not bad for a third round pick out of Sweden. Too bad he couldn't have finishes his career as a Canuck.

Does he go up on the Rogers Arena Ring of Honor? You could make the case that he should.

 

[rypper]

Will I commit to a statement? Maybe I will, but also just as equally, maybe I won't.

 

[F A N]

Are folks really sleeping this hard on Ohlund?

He was an absolute force for us.

It's a tough one. Edler is currently the Canucks' leader among defensemen in games played, goals, assists, and points. That gives him the upper hand over Ohlund in the best Canucks defenseman discussions. But I think you can make a strong case that Ohlund was better over the same age. Personally, different eras aside, if I had to pick one to draft, I would draft Ohlund.

Just as Edler's back injury ruined Edler's ultimate ceiling, Ohlund's early eye injury ruined his as well. Perception wise, I think Ohlund is seen by some/many of us as better because he was hyped from the day he was drafted and delivered the moment he stepped on the ice for the Canucks. He also quickly emerged as the Canucks best Dman and arguably still was the Canucks' best Dman even at Jovo's height. Coincide with the fact that Ohlund was arguably the most important defensemen during the height of the WCE era and the feeling is that Ohlund was the best Canucks Dman throughout his time here. There also wasn't a salary cap throughout most of his career. Ohlund was that workhorse every one wanted throughout his career here.

Contrast that with Edler who kind of took his time to cement himself. In 2010-2011, he was certainly very good already but there's no doubt that Hamhuis and Bieksa was our top pairing with the perception being that Hamhuis was our most important defenseman. And if it wasn't Hamhuis that title probably went to Ehrhoff. Edler also played in an era where there was a salary cap so there were genuine discussions about whether the team should trade him before his NTC kicked in. I think that kind of affects the perception (although the same can be said of younger fans who never watched Ohlund here at his best).

 

[geebster]

Having seen both play and having more nostalgia for Ohlund, to me it's pretty clear that Edler is the 2nd best D man this team had. He had more offensive upside, was a bigger part of our teams transition and neutral zone dominance and he was solid in his own end and a similar hitting threat.

Ohlund was better defensively and was part of a worse core and was therefore more important as a leader and as a piece, but that is more circumstance. If Edler was on those WCE teams he'd have been very effective too.

Overall my take is: Ohlund mattered more to the WCE team than Edler did to the 2011 team, but Edler was better.

Hughes > Edler > Ohlund > rest of em