Thread: Proposal: Vancouver - Columbus
View Single Post
09-24-2012, 04:44 PM
Luck 6
Luck 6's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,268
vCash: 500
You seem to be ignoring my response. You want to get into a real conversation about Ballard regarding facts? Fine. Let's do it. You seem to be blatantly ignoring any facts offered up by Canuck fans, instead you're dodging around them and throwing out irrelevant facts which poorly back up your argument. Let's break down your "facts"...

Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post


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.
Well first off, you're wrong. Go check the ESPN page again. But anyways that's irrelevant and is not the basis of my argument. Both Hamhuis and Edler are superb defenders, they were 10th and 15th in Norris voting the past season. Both of these guys play the left side, and both of these guys have proven to be far less effective playing on their off side. Ballard also plays the left side, and he too is not nearly as effective on the right. There are 60mins in a normal hockey game, both Edler and Hamhuis are guaranteed to get over 20minutes per night, why don't you explain to me with your "facts" how exactly the Canucks are supposed to give Ballard 20+ mins per night too?


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
Ballard has not been a healthy scratch this past season, but yes, he has been injured. He missed 6 games with a sprained knee, 2 games with a back injury, and 3 games with back spasms. Then, the big one, he missed 27 games with a concussion. It isn't as if Ballard is injury prone, so get that idea out of your head. A concussion can happen to any player at any time, Ballard would have played 71 games last season if it weren't for a concussion.

In terms of his salary, most would agree he is overpaid. How much he is overpaid is up for debate. Personally, I feel he is about 1mil overpaid for what he brings to the table. If we signed him to a 3 year deal at 3.2mil per season I'd be happy, as I feel he's excellent top 4 insurance should there be an injury to Edler or Hamhuis. Grossman just signed for 3.5mil a year for 4 years. Personally I feel Ballard is a better player, I don't think many would argue that they are at least very comparable. Check the stats if you'd like, since this seems to be the basis of your argument. Ballard will not be able to score points when he gets 12 seconds of PP time per game, makes primarily defensive zone starts, and plays the majority of his time playing with the 3rd/4th line in a defensive roll. A portion of this you may consider to be opinion, but I've tried to be as unbias and logical as I can here.


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
See my first argument. Ballard cannot play the right side and therefore we cannot use him next to Hamhuis or Edler. Instead, we use him to anchor our 3rd pairing. Garrison can play either side effectively, most Canuck fans have him pencilled in as a Salo replacement next to Edler. How will Tanev pushing for time negatively effect Ballard? The two of them play together on opposite sides. There is no other player in the system that will push Ballard for ice time this season, call-ups will be made purely as a result of injury.

Now please, don't respond back with critisizing fact vs. opinion. If you ask me, much of what you've posted above is purely opinion or speculation on your part.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote