HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Several notable prospects but little depth in Vancouver Canucks' system

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-06-2012, 08:24 PM
  #101
jigsaw99
Registered User
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Didn't the Canucks have the option to give either our 1st round pick in 2010 or 2011?
2011 had just as good late 1st propects. Jensen...

jigsaw99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 08:40 PM
  #102
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 新香
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Ehrhoff spent a lot of time on the bottom pair with O'Brien that first year. It doesn't matter where you play in the lineup, or what style you play, no good team is going to let you go out there and play a high risk game. Ehrhoff didn't. The problem with Ballard is he played on bad teams that put up with it.
Hoff has a flat out better hockey IQ than Ballard, though. It's a reason why Ballard works well with Tanev but not so much with Rome or Alberts. When you have a guy who plays on instincts you want a cerebral player complimenting him (i.e. Bieksa-Hamhuis).

Not that Ballard and Ehrhoff are just "different types" - Hoff is by all accounts the better player - but some players compliment others better than others.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 10:34 PM
  #103
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyC View Post
Hoff has a flat out better hockey IQ than Ballard, though.
If Ballard can't figure out how to play the way our coaches want he's never going to be effective. All this talk about him not fitting our system is B.S., the Canucks are asking him to do what he needs to do to be a good player. Gap control, positioning, puck management etc. aren't optional on a good team.


Last edited by Scurr: 11-06-2012 at 10:41 PM.
Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 05:46 AM
  #104
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,985
vCash: 500
Keith Ballard is just not a very good hockey player, and this isn't going to change. He's been crap for 3 straight years and isn't just going to magically flick a switch and turn into something decent.

Positionally mediocre, always chasing and reacting to the play instead of being in control. And doesn't contribute offensively because he's such a poor passer of the puck.

Basically he can skate pretty well and occasionally have a rush that looks nice. Other than that, he's a mediocre #6 defender. $800k player making $4.2 million.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 01:38 PM
  #105
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Keith Ballard is just not a very good hockey player, and this isn't going to change. He's been crap for 3 straight years and isn't just going to magically flick a switch and turn into something decent.

Positionally mediocre, always chasing and reacting to the play instead of being in control. And doesn't contribute offensively because he's such a poor passer of the puck.

Basically he can skate pretty well and occasionally have a rush that looks nice. Other than that, he's a mediocre #6 defender. $800k player making $4.2 million.
Were you one of the people claiming Bieksa would be addition by subtraction a few years ago?

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 02:32 PM
  #106
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,154
vCash: 500
^^

What MS said. What I would like to know is when people say AV misuses or has some weird vendetta against Ballard, if they can qualify that at all.

He just isn't a very good defenseman in ANY system. It boggles the mind how hard posters are on some players for no apparent reason yet after a long period of mediocre or bad defending for our team Ballard still gets a pass.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 02:48 PM
  #107
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Were you one of the people claiming Bieksa would be addition by subtraction a few years ago?
Yup. Not going to deny that.

And just because Bieksa had an absolutely miraculous turnaround (thanks, Hamhuis) doesn't mean Ballard will.

Just as the fact that Alex Burrows went from the ECHL to NHL 35-goal scorer doesn't mean that Anthony and Archibald will do so, also.

Bieksa is an utterly bizarre case. Spent 3 seasons as statistically the worst top-4 defender in the NHL and then immediately did a 180 when paired with Hamhuis. But at least in Bieksa's case he always had spurts of excellent play surrounded by much larger spurts of dire play. Ballard is just consistently a 4/10.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 03:02 PM
  #108
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Yup. Not going to deny that.

And just because Bieksa had an absolutely miraculous turnaround (thanks, Hamhuis) doesn't mean Ballard will.

Just as the fact that Alex Burrows went from the ECHL to NHL 35-goal scorer doesn't mean that Anthony and Archibald will do so, also.

Bieksa is an utterly bizarre case. Spent 3 seasons as statistically the worst top-4 defender in the NHL and then immediately did a 180 when paired with Hamhuis. But at least in Bieksa's case he always had spurts of excellent play surrounded by much larger spurts of dire play. Ballard is just consistently a 4/10.
What stat(s) are you looking at?

I don't know that people appreciate the slim margin of error for an NHL defensemen. The difference between hero and goat can be one play. It's not like Ballard is a train wreck every shift or he doesn't have the talent to play in the league. A lot like Bieksa a few years ago, he tends to make one terrible play a game. If he develops the habits that the coaching staff is asking him to, not only can he avoid that one big mistake, he'll start making a great play every game or two.

Bieksa isn't a bizarre case, he was never as bad as people said he was. Same goes for Ballard.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 03:06 PM
  #109
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
 
RandV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,378
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Cee View Post
^^

What MS said. What I would like to know is when people say AV misuses or has some weird vendetta against Ballard, if they can qualify that at all.

He just isn't a very good defenseman in ANY system. It boggles the mind how hard posters are on some players for no apparent reason yet after a long period of mediocre or bad defending for our team Ballard still gets a pass.
But he was a good defenseman in Phoenix and Florida. Good enough to convince Florida to make him the key piece in their Oli Jokinen trade (when Jokinen was still a legit star center), and again for Mike Gillis to give up a 1st rounder + extra's for him.

It's circumstantial evidence vs people's personal scouting opinion from his time in a Canucks jersey. Personally I'm not one that trusts the eye here, calling him nothing more than a $700k 6th/7th dman doesn't explain why he was so much more before he got here.

RandV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 03:14 PM
  #110
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Cee View Post
^^

What MS said. What I would like to know is when people say AV misuses or has some weird vendetta against Ballard, if they can qualify that at all.

He just isn't a very good defenseman in ANY system. It boggles the mind how hard posters are on some players for no apparent reason yet after a long period of mediocre or bad defending for our team Ballard still gets a pass.
Why blame AV? Again, the blame should go to Bowness. He's the guy in charge of the blueline. He was the guy that you hoped would know what Ballard can or cannot do given his prior experience coaching him.

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 03:37 PM
  #111
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 15,694
vCash: 500
It's crazy to think about how such a small thing - slightly overrating Keith Ballard's utility - led to such a misfire for this franchise - dumping a first and Grabner and Mitchell who then goes to LA and became a huge part of their Cup win.

Not blaming Gillis for this by any means, it's just bizarre to see what an effect it had.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:31 PM
  #112
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Why blame AV? Again, the blame should go to Bowness. He's the guy in charge of the blueline. He was the guy that you hoped would know what Ballard can or cannot do given his prior experience coaching him.
Ballard can do everything the Canucks want, that's not the problem. He doesn't lack talent. Unfortunately because of injury and his lack of confidence it hasn't come as fast as people expected. That does not mean it's not going to happen.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 05:05 PM
  #113
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit View Post
It's crazy to think about how such a small thing - slightly overrating Keith Ballard's utility - led to such a misfire for this franchise - dumping a first and Grabner and Mitchell who then goes to LA and became a huge part of their Cup win.

Not blaming Gillis for this by any means, it's just bizarre to see what an effect it had.
I'm pretty sure the idea to move away from Mitchell and to Ballard was due to a few things, the Canucks had doubts on Mitchell's recovery from the Malkin hit which left him with a quite bad concussion, while also demanding a 2 year deal. Not mention Mitchell was not fitting into the skating defence Gillis had been putting together.
Ballard on the other hand already carried a long term contract, was known to have a physical edge to his game, and was a proven skating Dman who liked to carry the puck.

I honestly like what Ballard brings to the table, beyond Bieksa; Ballard is our second most physical defenceman. The two are similar in many aspects of the game and I believe Ballard to really be able to grab another gear as shown by his performance last spring. Also throughout the Run to the Finals he was a consistent physical force from the back end. The hip check on Jamie McGinn still makes my spine tingle, the guy can flat out throw the hip and doesn't shy away from dropping the gloves.

mstad101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 06:47 PM
  #114
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstad101 View Post
I'm pretty sure the idea to move away from Mitchell and to Ballard was due to a few things, the Canucks had doubts on Mitchell's recovery from the Malkin hit which left him with a quite bad concussion, while also demanding a 2 year deal. Not mention Mitchell was not fitting into the skating defence Gillis had been putting together.
Ballard on the other hand already carried a long term contract, was known to have a physical edge to his game, and was a proven skating Dman who liked to carry the puck.
It's not surprising that the first two major free agent defensemen Gillis acquired had a history of not getting injured given our problems of maintaining a healthy blueline.

Course, just typical 'Canuck-luck'; these two guys promptly miss a big chunk of games their first years as a Canuck.

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 08:57 PM
  #115
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
It's not surprising that the first two major free agent defensemen Gillis acquired had a history of not getting injured given our problems of maintaining a healthy blueline.

Course, just typical 'Canuck-luck'; these two guys promptly miss a big chunk of games their first years as a Canuck.
Ballard was coming off of hip surgery the summer we traded for him. But then he gets a concussion then that weird knee twist that should have left him a gimp. I still think he can play, he has the tools.



How is something not broken or torn here?

craigcaulks* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 12:41 AM
  #116
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigcaulks View Post
then that weird knee twist that should have left him a gimp.
Yeah I seem to recall that was a result of a cheapshot (slew-foot).

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 01:54 AM
  #117
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,318
vCash: 500
If we didn't have Jensen I'd be so sour about our prospects.

TacitEndorsement is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.