HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

More Luongo Talk

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2012, 04:50 PM
  #701
SufferingCatFan
Registered User
 
SufferingCatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: fort lauderdale
Country: United States
Posts: 1,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
Again stat watching. Just because a player isn't putting up points doesn't mean he isn't playing well

Ballard is a square trying to fit into a circle hole. Take him even at his best and he isn't better than edler or hamhuis. He can't play the right side (coach tried it and he failed) so that means no matter what the guy is stuck on the 3rd pairing here.

Now our coach isn't the brightest. All he wants from his 3rd pairing is a simple chip along the boards game. Do something else you get benched or scratched. I recall situations where Ballard went end to end and right after it he would be benched for a long period of time in the game whether the rush worked or didn't work. Kind of hard to adjust when your used to 20+ min playing time and the coach doesn't want you using one of your best traits.

This is a coach that stuck with the stupid drop pass which every team had figured out last playoffs after Boston up until over half way through the season and then brought it back in the playoffs where it didn't work and just kept using it until game 4ish. The coach finally started letting Ballard rush the puck that game onwards as well as I noticed he was doing it more often and was not getting benched for it as our coach finally clued in that it was working fine and he was getting desperate.

Knowing him though he'll go back to benching Ballard for the things he does best this coming season.

This is a coach that can't figure out the obvious from game 1 against Boston I told anyone and everyone all the canucks need to do is work the pick around and use a lot of slap passes to beat Thomas. Especially utilize edler ehrhoff and salo as they have bombs and Thomas will aggressively challenge them think shot leaving a tap in for the pass reciever. Game 7 they finally try it where tanev slap passed it to a 4th line scrub who whiffed on the empty net he had. Even though he whiffed i hoped it meant the team would be doing it more often with a more skilled player recieveing the pass but nope. I acrually shouted finally when this happened as every game i had been pleading for coach av to recognize the type of goalie Thomas is and use it against him

Also little nitpick Ballard actually makes 4.2M not 4.5 and most #3-4 d-men make that today if not more. I strongly believe on another team or with a different coach Ballard could be worth that under the 70M cap although still a little pricey for the canucks but not by much. Under the 60M cap on another team i think he could easily be a 3-4 guy unless of course he gets stuck with a coach trying to change his game and takeaway some of his strongest traits

Only thing I see Ballard is not too good at which a #3 guy needs is consistency defensively. He had that back in Phoenix I remember him being a rock against the canucks back then and I don't know how he was in Florida besides being a top pairing guy. I'm sure with a confidence boost and benign allowed to play his game can bring that consistency back as well
A couple of quick points. It is Jovo who makes $4.5 million. If the cap goes to $60 million, expect a lot of changes in salary structure, including 5-6 d-men. I expect that the stars will still get their money, but we will see a lot of reductions among 3rd-4th line forwards, 5-7 d-men and 2nd stringers in goal

SufferingCatFan is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 05:16 PM
  #702
blankall
Registered User
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverback91 View Post
Again stat watching. Just because a player isn't putting up points doesn't mean he isn't playing well

Ballard is a square trying to fit into a circle hole. Take him even at his best and he isn't better than edler or hamhuis. He can't play the right side (coach tried it and he failed) so that means no matter what the guy is stuck on the 3rd pairing here.

Now our coach isn't the brightest. All he wants from his 3rd pairing is a simple chip along the boards game. Do something else you get benched or scratched. I recall situations where Ballard went end to end and right after it he would be benched for a long period of time in the game whether the rush worked or didn't work. Kind of hard to adjust when your used to 20+ min playing time and the coach doesn't want you using one of your best traits.

This is a coach that stuck with the stupid drop pass which every team had figured out last playoffs after Boston up until over half way through the season and then brought it back in the playoffs where it didn't work and just kept using it until game 4ish. The coach finally started letting Ballard rush the puck that game onwards as well as I noticed he was doing it more often and was not getting benched for it as our coach finally clued in that it was working fine and he was getting desperate.

Knowing him though he'll go back to benching Ballard for the things he does best this coming season.

This is a coach that can't figure out the obvious from game 1 against Boston I told anyone and everyone all the canucks need to do is work the pick around and use a lot of slap passes to beat Thomas. Especially utilize edler ehrhoff and salo as they have bombs and Thomas will aggressively challenge them think shot leaving a tap in for the pass reciever. Game 7 they finally try it where tanev slap passed it to a 4th line scrub who whiffed on the empty net he had. Even though he whiffed i hoped it meant the team would be doing it more often with a more skilled player recieveing the pass but nope. I acrually shouted finally when this happened as every game i had been pleading for coach av to recognize the type of goalie Thomas is and use it against him

Also little nitpick Ballard actually makes 4.2M not 4.5 and most #3-4 d-men make that today if not more. I strongly believe on another team or with a different coach Ballard could be worth that under the 70M cap although still a little pricey for the canucks but not by much. Under the 60M cap on another team i think he could easily be a 3-4 guy unless of course he gets stuck with a coach trying to change his game and takeaway some of his strongest traits

Only thing I see Ballard is not too good at which a #3 guy needs is consistency defensively. He had that back in Phoenix I remember him being a rock against the canucks back then and I don't know how he was in Florida besides being a top pairing guy. I'm sure with a confidence boost and benign allowed to play his game can bring that consistency back as well

So what you're saying is there is a conspiracy against Ballard?

Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Salo, and even Gregnani are all allowed to play their game and rack up points. However, Ballard is relegated to getting benched unless he chips the puck up the boards every time.

That doesn't make any sense. If Ballard was making good plays, he'd be getting more opportunities, not being benched.

blankall is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 05:21 PM
  #703
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
So what you're saying is there is a conspiracy against Ballard?

Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Salo, and even Gregnani are all allowed to play their game and rack up points. However, Ballard is relegated to getting benched unless he chips the puck up the boards every time.

That doesn't make any sense. If Ballard was making good plays, he'd be getting more opportunities, not being benched.
AV does actually hate Ballard from a personality point of view. He's too laid back for AV.

Gragnani was getting playing time so that we could keep his rights as an RFA...as soon as he indicated he wanted a raise, he was gone. AV used to coach him in junior.

Hamhuis was promised powerplay time when he was a FA to get him to come over.

Edler is a legitimate top 10 offensive player, Salo has a bomb, and Bieksa gets ice time for being tough, when he wasn't on the PP he got no points.

DJOpus is online now  
Old
12-31-2012, 06:35 PM
  #704
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
So what you're saying is there is a conspiracy against Ballard?

Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Salo, and even Gregnani are all allowed to play their game and rack up points. However, Ballard is relegated to getting benched unless he chips the puck up the boards every time.

That doesn't make any sense. If Ballard was making good plays, he'd be getting more opportunities, not being benched.
1st of all did u even read what i said? Only person u listed not in the top 4 was gragnani and ill get to him in a bit.

If Ballard was in the top 4 I believe our coach would let Ballard play his game as ehrhoff was allowed to rush the puck. However he is on the 3rd pairing which our coach seems to want to be a safe pairing. Why else would our coach give Aaron freaking Rome power play time? The guy listened to av and did exactly what our coach wanted from the 3rd pairing. Keep everything simple chip the puck along the boards never try to get fancy. The coach loved that Rome did that so he rewarded him with pp time and often. Want to tell me why Rome ever saw the ice during power plays if I am soo wrong?

Gragnani was a swing for the fences and its clear as day if u see how gillis has been drafting. He sees a player have a small sample where they raised their game to an elite level and thinks that could be their potential. Look at Alex grenier. Overager who burst onto the scene in the q and ripped it up buhh had less than a season in the q under his belt even as an overager yet still gillis saw what he did once he made it finally and thought he could be a gem.

David hoznik said to be raw and has always been pretty bad. Stepped up his game to an elite level in the playoffs and gillis drafts him. After the draft what do u know hoznik regresses back to his regular poor performance.

Gragnani is no different gillis saw him go above a ppg in the playoffs for the sabres and because of that saw upside. On top of that our coach was his coach in junior. This is why he was allowed to play his game as they hoped he could turn into ehrhoff based on how he raised his game in the playoffs to an insane level prior and our coach knew exactly what gragnani can and can't do while he is still not sure with Ballard as he hasn't had much time to coach him once he found him a spot on the team that he fit into.

Maybe use some insight and fully read posts and you would see what is actually going on with the defense here

Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 06:54 AM
  #705
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
Hmm...In what way is Meszaros comparable? Mezsaros was 24 at the time of his trade. He was a former calder candidate who wasn't living up to his potential on an awful Tampa team. Ballard is 30 and coming off a concussion. At the time of the Meszaros trade, the cap was also increasing, so a 4 million gamble on a top 4 defenceman was realistic. Meanwhile, now the cap is significantly decreasing and Ballard has become a 6/7 d-man.



Incorrect, Ballard is not a 6/7 d-man. There's a case to be made that he did better than Salo last year defensively. If you can say that, then there's no way he's a 6/7 dman.



Ballard signed his contract in 2008-2009 under a 56.7m US cap. 4.2m per for 6 years, under a smaller than 60m cap, so I'm not sure how a 60m cap is going to be catastrophic for his contract?



Meszaros should have garnered more in trade, yet we saw the Ballard was the one able to pull in a 1st and Grabner, despite being 28 at the time, to Mesz's 24... Meszaros was a struggling PMD with a 4.2m contract, yet he only pulled a 2nd. This should give you an indication of how Ballard was valued by GMs around the league two years ago.




Quote:
If Ballard is able to rebound and put up good numbers for the rest of the season, then yes, his trade value will singficantly increase. However, as it stands now, he's coming off a major concussion. Concussions, currently, are the value killer, and the norm is for players to come back much worse than prior to their concussions.

And no...I didn't just stat check him. I live in Vancovuer and see 20+ Canucks games a year. You rarely see Ballard contribute, as he's just no on the ice that much.



Is he concussed right now? I thought he came back off of his concussion to rebound at the tail-end of last year? Why would him having a concussion that long ago be relevant now? Especially when he has come back and played well?


On Ballard's contribution: The way the Canucks utilize Ballard and their 3rd/4th liners has a direct impact on his point totals. AV uses an asset deployment strategy that has the widest zone start spread in the league. With Ballard, if the team staples him to the 3rd and 4th line forwards, then gives him a 44.5% Ozone start percentage, odds are he's not going to generate a lot of offense. Specifically when all said defensive forwards want to do is push the puck up the ice and get off to allow the Sedins or Kesler to take further advantage of their Ozone deployment.



He has to produce more. I don't disagree there, but how much more is the question. Given all the circumstances, I don't expect more that 14-18 points. He gets no PP time. He seldom plays with the twins. And his ice time is supplanted by Edler and Hamhuis. Tough to rack up the points in that environment.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 07:13 AM
  #706
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Ballard signed his contract in 2008-2009 under a 56.7m US cap. 4.2m per for 6 years, under a smaller than 60m cap, so I'm not sure how a 60m cap is going to be catastrophic for his contract?
Ballard signed the contract with 1st pairing status, currently he's not 1st pairing d-man.

Having a 1st pairing d-man with 4.2M cap hit is not a problem cap-wise. Having a 4th-6th d-man with 4.2M caphit is an issue cap-wise.

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 08:09 AM
  #707
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Ballard signed the contract with 1st pairing status, currently he's not 1st pairing d-man.

Having a 1st pairing d-man with 4.2M cap hit is not a problem cap-wise. Having a 4th-6th d-man with 4.2M caphit is an issue cap-wise.


What does "1st pairing status" mean? Did he get paid on ability or didn't he?



If he did, then what people are saying now is that his actual ability has diminished to the point where before he was a 1st pairing Dman, he is now a 4-6th dman. Is this the argument? Or is the argument that he is now stuck behind 3-4 better dmen, suffering in production accordingly, but people think his actual ability remains the same? Because what's being done here is that some are inferring a talent drop from a drop in production... which doesn't account for his shift in environment.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 08:32 AM
  #708
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
What does "1st pairing status" mean? Did he get paid on ability or didn't he?
That's a good question. Ballard got his contract from the Panthers when he was a first pairing d-man there. And he probably was worth his money there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
If he did, then what people are saying now is that his actual ability has diminished to the point where before he was a 1st pairing Dman, he is now a 4-6th dman. Is this the argument? Or is the argument that he is now stuck behind 3-4 better dmen, suffering in production accordingly, but people think his actual ability remains the same? Because what's being done here is that some are inferring a talent drop from a drop in production... which doesn't account for his shift in environment.
The argument is that any team willing to trade for Ballard is counting on him to become one of the top3 d-men in the team. Ballard is 30, he has 2 years left on his contract after this one.

If they see his lack of production being the result of lack of icetime, they will ask why the lack of icetime? Was Ballard being misused? Was the Canucks defense core really that good that Ballard simply wasn't good enough? Is Ballard on a downslope?

Maybe you're right, maybe some team will take a chance and trade a 3rd for Ballard. We'll see.

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 08:46 AM
  #709
kihei
Registered User
 
kihei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,452
vCash: 1127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Bozak and Franson for Luongo?? As much as i don't want to aquire Lu in a shortened season......can't pass that up!!!
I could. Franson and a 2nd would be tops for me, and I would hope (and expect) that to fall through.

kihei is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 08:48 AM
  #710
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
That's a good question. Ballard got his contract from the Panthers when he was a first pairing d-man there. And he probably was worth his money there.



The argument is that any team willing to trade for Ballard is counting on him to become one of the top3 d-men in the team. Ballard is 30, he has 2 years left on his contract after this one.

If they see his lack of production being the result of lack of icetime, they will ask why the lack of icetime? Was Ballard being misused? Was the Canucks defense core really that good that Ballard simply wasn't good enough? Is Ballard on a downslope?

Maybe you're right, maybe some team will take a chance and trade a 3rd for Ballard. We'll see.



Lack of ice time = playing behind two better LHDs in Hamhuis and Edler. That's it. Ballard, like most Dmen, is not equally adept at playing his "off-side", and he wasn't going to beat Edler or Hamhuis on his "strong side", so where does he play? Bottom pair LHD - where he's been playing.



Just as another example of what the market is like for capable Dmen: A 35 year old Filip Kuba, who prior to this past year put up a whopping 16 points and a -26 rating, got a 4m dollar 2 year deal... From the budget conscious FLA panthers no less. Why? The dearth of good FA Dmen, and the fact that he turned in a 32 point +26 season in OTT before departing. Simply put, there is always a market for capable Dmen and GMs take the long view.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 09:41 AM
  #711
AwesomePanthers
Go Cats Go
 
AwesomePanthers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Norway
Posts: 8,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kthsn View Post
The most obvious one would be Florida or have you missed the Tallon asking ownership about Luongo's contract?
Riiiight..

Don't know why I clicked on this thread again, so much BS..

AwesomePanthers is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 10:04 AM
  #712
Fogelhund
Registered User
 
Fogelhund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,129
vCash: 500
With a little luck this CBA will get resolved within a week, and then we will all know whether Luongo is getting moved and what his value is.

Fogelhund is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 10:34 AM
  #713
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Lack of ice time = playing behind two better LHDs in Hamhuis and Edler. That's it. Ballard, like most Dmen, is not equally adept at playing his "off-side", and he wasn't going to beat Edler or Hamhuis on his "strong side", so where does he play? Bottom pair LHD - where he's been playing.
Without actually going through all teams, I'm pretty certain that most teams don't have equal number of LHDs and RHDs. And the importance of having both LHD and RHD in the same pairing is mostly during PP, it plays much smaller role on ES.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Just as another example of what the market is like for capable Dmen: A 35 year old Filip Kuba, who prior to this past year put up a whopping 16 points and a -26 rating, got a 4m dollar 2 year deal... From the budget conscious FLA panthers no less. Why? The dearth of good FA Dmen, and the fact that he turned in a 32 point +26 season in OTT before departing. Simply put, there is always a market for capable Dmen and GMs take the long view.
Would Kuba get that contract now with the new CBA rules?

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 11:59 AM
  #714
kthsn
Registered User
 
kthsn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwesomePanthers View Post
Riiiight..

Don't know why I clicked on this thread again, so much BS..
What's wrong with Lebrun as a source?

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...ida-ownership/

kthsn is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 12:00 PM
  #715
MISC*
Negged.
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,691
vCash: 500
Luongo

For

Hemsky
Gagner


I would. Adds a tonof depth up front.

MISC* is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 01:49 PM
  #716
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MISC View Post
Luongo

For

Hemsky
Gagner


I would. Adds a tonof depth up front.
We've been down the smaller center and injury prone winger route already.
We have Schroeder and Raymond who fill similar roles.

Add something of significant value to trade our best available asset to a division rival who has an offence equal to that of a Top 5 team.

mstad101 is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 02:19 PM
  #717
FerrisRox
Registered User
 
FerrisRox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
All of these teams have been reported as intested, with TO and EDM making serious offers (don't know what that means). FLA cleared taking on his contract as well. It was reported CHI offered Bolland +, so as you can see buying out Luongo would make no sense what so ever.

Plus with the Buyout option it means Vancouver can now take on another terrible contract, so his value may actually go up.
Reported by who? This is utter nonsense.

FerrisRox is offline  
Old
01-01-2013, 11:39 PM
  #718
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrisRox View Post
Reported by who? This is utter nonsense.
TSN and sportsnet. Believe what you want.

racerjoe is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 02:08 AM
  #719
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,873
vCash: 500
assuming there is a season and amnesty clause giving each team a free buyout where they have to still pay the player what a normal buyout would cost but there's no cap hit for the buy out I came up with this...

Toronto only has mike komisarek who is a buyout candidate who's contract doesn't end the upcoming offseason but they need him as they don't have a replacement ready. Seeing how they want to shed salary if they get Lou it makes no sense to send one of those contracts out when they already have the cap space right now to fit Lou on their team without moving anyone else off the roster

So I came to this 3 way idea where luongo goes home and Florida gets to shed salary while Toronto gets an upgrade

To Florida:
Roberto luongo
Carter Ashton

To Toronto:
Jose Theodore
Andrew Alberts

To Vancouver:
Scottie upshall/Ed jovanovski
Shawn matthias
Keaton ellerby
Florida 1st round pick

Theodore is not going to re-sign with luongo in Florida and looking at their prospect pool they seem bare at left wing so they get Ashton in return for him. They also can re-sign whichever player they send over to the canucks to a cheap 1M contract. They deal from their strengths prospect/center/defense and add to their weakness left wing

Leafs get a former all star and vezina caliber goalie on a dirt cheap contract who is still a very capable starter today. Add some depth to their defense as well with a capable #6-7.

Canucks add a young big defender and a young big center who could fill in on the 3rd line. Also add what should be a late 1st in a deep draft. They amnesty whichever contract is worse to Florida and that player re-signs in Florida for cheap adding value back for them

Ched Brosky is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 02:21 AM
  #720
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Without actually going through all teams, I'm pretty certain that most teams don't have equal number of LHDs and RHDs. And the importance of having both LHD and RHD in the same pairing is mostly during PP, it plays much smaller role on ES.


AV and Bowness play Dmen on their strongside. Last year, Tanev, Bieksa and Salo manned the right side. As a result, Ballard was stuck behind Hamhuis and Edler on the left side. This year, it remains to be seen how the addition of Garrison changes that. Maybe they force Ballard to his offside? Or maybe they keep him on the left side with Tanev. Too soon to say.




Quote:
Would Kuba get that contract now with the new CBA rules?



Would any Dman making 4m+ get that same contract under the new environment? Can't say either way. But the fact remains, Kuba _did_ get that contract just now, from a budget squad. That is inarguable.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 02:49 AM
  #721
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 53,675
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
4.2 million good?

2 years of bad play is enough to tank anyone's value, and it'll now be three years sicne Ballard had a good year. To put this in perspective. Gomez had 59 points three seasons ago. Are potential suitors going to look at that performance or are they going to focus on the last two years?

Edit:

And also just looked....In what way did Ballard look good in the "tail end" of last year. He put up 3 points in his last 20 games and rarely beat out guys like Alberts for ice time. He then suffered a major concussion in February of 2012. A history of concussion does not add to a player's trade value.

You received Ehrhoff (who was playing much better than Ballard is now) for a song, when the Sharks needed to clear space. How much value do you think Ballard will have when the cap drops?
talking value of Ballard with some canuck fans is a waste of time. For whatever reason some believe their number 6 d-man who plays under 14minutes of easy minutes a game (top 4 play all the tough minutes) has high value--only to them. His contract, him being a healthy scratch during their drive season and injured for most of last year has hurt his value to other teams fan bases and my sugestion is to either not engage in any topic of Ballard's value or just hit the ignore option for those posters who are doing the hard sell for him--my life has become a lot easier and stress free since I stopped trying to deal with their fan base and they have been nice enough to ignore me as well

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
Heaven wont take me and hell is afraid I'd take 0ver
jumptheshark is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 02:56 AM
  #722
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Would any Dman making 4m+ get that same contract under the new environment? Can't say either way. But the fact remains, Kuba _did_ get that contract just now, from a budget squad. That is inarguable.
Kuba signed 1st of july, I doubt he would get that deal right now.

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 03:18 AM
  #723
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 4,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
talking value of Ballard with some canuck fans is a waste of time. For whatever reason some believe their number 6 d-man who plays under 14minutes of easy minutes a game (top 4 play all the tough minutes) has high value--only to them. His contract, him being a healthy scratch during their drive season and injured for most of last year has hurt his value to other teams fan bases and my sugestion is to either not engage in any topic of Ballard's value or just hit the ignore option for those posters who are doing the hard sell for him--my life has become a lot easier and stress free since I stopped trying to deal with their fan base and they have been nice enough to ignore me as well
So far, Ballard's only value has been his chemistry with Tanev. Complimenting a rookie isn't much return on 4.2 million.

I agree Ballard and Luongo have limited market appeal, so much that it may make more sense to keep them.

The whole NHL landscape will be much altered soon, so if there is urgency in making a trade it is unrealistic to expect significant return. Gillis denies this, though and has said he won't be doing any fire sales. Based on this and his track record at the deadline, I wonder if he doesn't stand pat and attempt to wring a last run out of this group?

JuniorNelson is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 04:43 AM
  #724
The Newfoundlander
#TradeKessel
 
The Newfoundlander's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniorNelson View Post
So far, Ballard's only value has been his chemistry with Tanev. Complimenting a rookie isn't much return on 4.2 million.

I agree Ballard and Luongo have limited market appeal, so much that it may make more sense to keep them.

The whole NHL landscape will be much altered soon, so if there is urgency in making a trade it is unrealistic to expect significant return. Gillis denies this, though and has said he won't be doing any fire sales. Based on this and his track record at the deadline, I wonder if he doesn't stand pat and attempt to wring a last run out of this group?
Personally I feel Luongo has to be moved, I think it'll be a huge distraction if Luongo and Schneider are a duo for a prolonged period of time, + Luongo has let it known he wants out.

The Newfoundlander is offline  
Old
01-02-2013, 04:48 AM
  #725
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
talking value of Ballard with some canuck fans is a waste of time. For whatever reason some believe their number 6 d-man who plays under 14minutes of easy minutes a game (top 4 play all the tough minutes) has high value--only to them. His contract, him being a healthy scratch during their drive season and injured for most of last year has hurt his value to other teams fan bases and my sugestion is to either not engage in any topic of Ballard's value or just hit the ignore option for those posters who are doing the hard sell for him--my life has become a lot easier and stress free since I stopped trying to deal with their fan base and they have been nice enough to ignore me as well




Yet you are here, in a Lu thread (A Canuck player BTW) that has diverged into discussing Ballard's value..? Why? You have chosen to engage = hypocritical.


Is going from Grabner +1st to a 3rd rounder not a reduction in value? Where is the hard sell here that you speak of?


Misinformed and unable to evaluate the impact of environment on a players play. This is what I get from your post on Ballard. However, I am not surprised given your past posts about the Canucks and even your sig... It all adds up.



- Concussion = not concussed anymore, played well at the end of last year.
- Reduced minutes = playing behind Hamhuis and Edler, and being unable to switch to the right side.
- Low production = Doesn't get PP time, plays primarily with bottom6 Canuck depth that is utilized in a defensive first fashion. How's he going to rack up the points?
- Is a 6th dman = Based on what metric? Ability, minutes, or contribution? It's not the latter two, so someone is going to have to make a case that he has lost his ability to be the #1 he was on PHX and FLA. I'm all ears/eyes.



The charges have been well answered. Accept them or not at your own volition.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Kuba signed 1st of july, I doubt he would get that deal right now.



So GMs could not predict that the cap would shrink at July 1st? These professionals that are paid to project/prognosticate could not even guess that the cap may somehow shrink in CBA talks, and that Kuba shouldn't get paid a 4m contract as result? Or, perhaps Tallon isn't a complete fool and he took into account both a cap increase/decrease when offering said contract to Kuba? I'm going with the latter, you can choose to believe the former. I guess I give GMs the benefit of the doubt.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Closed Thread

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 02:07 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.