Thread: Proposal: Vancouver - Columbus
View Single Post
09-24-2012, 03:29 PM
Registered User
Cogburn's Avatar
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,374
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
did I say last year. the fact he got injured hurts the the canucks fans case, during the cup run he was a healthy scratch and AHLERS played in front of him..Tanev and Alberts say hello for this case


capital letters make you look silly, immature and just help reinforce the view that many fan bases have that canuck fans are unable to discuss a point without acting like a two year old. The facts are only SOME (done only because I know not all canucks fan believe it) Ballard is no longer a top 4 d-man and he has a bad contract. Ballard when he played was the whipping boy for many canuck fans in the fact when the pressure was on he made bad passes and could not see the ice that well. Ballard has 3 y at 4.25m left. The fact the canucks went so hard at Garrison in the off season tells you a lot about how the canucks view him and his potential. In two season he has been a healthy scratch and injured. Vancouver (some) can put up the argument, but back it up with facts and not opinion.


question: How many times did Ballard play 20+minutes in a game last year? How many times did Ballard crack double digits in pts in his two years with the Canucks?--I believe the answer is zero.


3 years at 4.25m for a player playing under 20minutes a game and not scoring pts is not a good thing. No one will pay 4.25mill for a 5-6 d-man who has both been injured and healthy scratch for two years


Fact: Canucks shopped heavily to get another top 4 d-man on their roster and signed Garrison Opinion: If Ballard was still a top 4 d-man why did the canucks go so hard for another top 4 d-man when they had Ballard. Canuck fans have a love in with Tanev and a few other guys on the farm who will be pushing for minutes on the ice and Ballard is most likely to suffer from this

feel free to rebut this facts with your facts and not opinions

two requests:
1) No caps for complete sentences please (make you look silly)
2) Argue the facts and not opinions
We have a coaching staff that believes in playing defenders, and wingers, on a set side. This is why Ehrhoff, and Bieksa, and Salo, and Rome, and now Garrison are getting tons more ice time then they would normally, compared to players like Edler and Ballard, who are behind the Mitchells and Hamhuis's on our team because they play left, and according to our coaching staff, can only play left.

Also, when comparing alleged top 4 defenders and saying one of 5 gets fewer then 20 minutes a night is just....bad logic. With 3 lines, and 5 top 4 defenders, of course one of them will get fewer then 20 minutes unless all three pairings are rotated equally.

As for the shopping for a new D/signing Garrison....we needed a healthier, faster, right side defender due to AV's insistance that Ballard/Edler/Hamhuis are worse on the right side then Rome.

Circumstances play into Ballard not getting the time he's earned, it wasn't his play last year.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote