Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
So the Canucks have 9 defensemen on the roster right now, and were forced to send Schroeder to the minors to fit under the 23-man roster.
Barker and Vandermeer were just signed, so that leaves Ballard(or maybe Alberts) as the odd man out.
I think any team with a need for defense and a good amount of cap space would be willing to take a chance that he's able to rebound, now that he's finally over his injury troubles, and if given an opportunity I think he would prove himself as a capable top-4 defenseman again.
So, either a pick(I think we could get a 2nd for him, given the amount of teams pressed for defense) or a similarly overpaid player in need for a change of scenery(maybe Bourque?) would probably be fair.
However, the Canucks don't have much leverage here, as if Ballard stays with us until the offseason, he will most likely be bought out to accomodate the cap.
So the Canucks have 9 defensemen on the roster right now, and were forced to send Schroeder to the minors to fit under the 23-man roster.
Barker and Vandermeer were just signed, so that leaves Ballard(or maybe Alberts) as the odd man out.
I think any team with a need for defense and a good amount of cap space would be willing to take a chance that he's able to rebound, now that he's finally over his injury troubles, and if given an opportunity I think he would prove himself as a capable top-4 defenseman again.
So, either a pick(I think we could get a 2nd for him, given the amount of teams pressed for defense) or a similarly overpaid player in need for a change of scenery(maybe Bourque?) would probably be fair.
However, the Canucks don't have much leverage here, as if Ballard stays withcus until the offseason, he will most likely be bought out to accomodate the cap.
no, I do not see you get a second for him--there have been better players on the waiver wire.
and, oh yeah, his contract--but of s sticky wicket with that one old chum
__________________
trying to fend off exwife number 2
45000/010113
GO SHARKS GO
Ballard is likely gone at the end of the season but is pretty valuable until then as we don't have anyone that can step up and support Tanev as well as Ballard can. Maybe Barker pulls a Higgins like AV is hoping or maybe a good replacement comes along in a Luongo trade. But until then, Ballard is staying put.
Ballard is still our best option, by far, for the left side of that 3rd pairing. He and Tanev have good chemistry, his cap hit is manageable for this season, and his trade value is lower than it should be. Trading him now also opens another hole at a time when quality defensemen are hard to come by.
We're far better off keeping him for the season, hoping he plays well enough to increase his trade value, and moving him at the draft.
Ballard is still our best option, by far, for the left side of that 3rd pairing. He and Tanev have good chemistry, his cap hit is manageable for this season, and his trade value is lower than it should be. Trading him now also opens another hole a a time when quality defensemen are hard to come by.
We're far better off keeping him for the season, hoping he plays well enough to increase his trade value, and moving him at the draft.
Agreed, next season K-Conn should be with the big club and Tanev's defensive responsibility and K-Conn's offensive abiliies makes them perfect partners, like a poor mans Hamhuis-Bieska.
no, I do not see you get a second for him--there have been better players on the waiver wire.
and, oh yeah, his contract--but of s sticky wicket with that one old chum
Problem with Ballard is he has a 4.2mil cap hit and for a third pairing he is over paid. Teams are not going to trade for players like Ballard waiting instead to see who gets bought out. I am sure VAN will be able to trade him but they won't get a 2nd for him. Fistric got a 3rd round pick and he has a low cap hit.
Ballard is likely gone at the end of the season but is pretty valuable until then as we don't have anyone that can step up and support Tanev as well as Ballard can. Maybe Barker pulls a Higgins like AV is hoping or maybe a good replacement comes along in a Luongo trade. But until then, Ballard is staying put.
Vandermeer plays LW if the team needs him to, but he is no more a LW than pretty much any other defenseman.
I really don't know if i've ever seen a supposed top 4 dman ever **** his pants as bad as Ballard did in the playoffs.
which playoffs are you talking about? in 2011 when he first arrived and no doubt had problems adjusting to the system? or last year when he was arguably the Canucks most consistent dman during their first round loss to the Kings?
He's not worth trading this season. His value is at a low and we're going to need his services for a shortened season. If he rebounds and puts a solid year, his stock will go up and Gillis should be able to get back some assets for him.
I really don't know if i've ever seen a supposed top 4 dman ever **** his pants as bad as Ballard did in the playoffs.
I don't exactly like Ballard and his contract but you have no idea what you're talking about. Ballard was solid for us in the playoffs last year. The only thing holding us from keeping him is his contract.
I really don't know if i've ever seen a supposed top 4 dman ever **** his pants as bad as Ballard did in the playoffs.
Ballard is a serviceable second pairing defenceman. He had one bad year recovering from hip surgury and his value on HF has been defined by it since. He'll never be a big point producer but he's a good skater, moves the puck out of his zone very well, blocks a ton of shots, finishes every check and will drop the gloves if so inclined. Jack of all trades, master of none.
which playoffs are you talking about? in 2011 when he first arrived and no doubt had problems adjusting to the system? or last year when he was arguably the Canucks most consistent dman during their first round loss to the Kings?
the more or less reflects how badly the rest of the team played
his minutes per game during the 4 games he played
14.23
12.49
16.35
14.52
bieska
24.32
25.56
24.31
24.10
edler
23.46
22.36
21.43
27.02
Hamuis
22.13
28.19
25.24
24.51
salo
20.11
16.32
17.05
22.04
most constant player but did not get moved up into the top 4?
When the coach shortened his bench, Ballard was on it--Edler, Bieska and Hamuis started getting double shifted
Value low now, but it also depends on how desperate the opposing team is for D-men. Ballard has top-4 experience, and anyone can tell that with 5 separate 4mil+dmen, someone has to play the 3rd pair, and have their #'s suffer because of it- therefore looking overpaid and undervalued.
At this point, Canucks have no need to trade him. Canucks don't need future picks that aren't of the lottery variety - we have fututre 1sts and 2nds etc already. We intend to contend, so ridding ourselves of D-men that should be able to handle top4 minutes in a pinch... not going to happen without overpayment. I don't see any deal involving Ballard that would benefit the Canucks enough to deal him... its not as though we will be getting offers of Ballard for a top-6 forward, so there would be no point unless we have another move lined up.
I can't see a team paying more than a 2nd or a 3rd/4th line forward, but that doesn't benefit the Canucks.
the more or less reflects how badly the rest of the team played
his minutes per game during the 4 games he played
14.23
12.49
16.35
14.52
bieska
24.32
25.56
24.31
24.10
edler
23.46
22.36
21.43
27.02
Hamuis
22.13
28.19
25.24
24.51
salo
20.11
16.32
17.05
22.04
most constant player but did not get moved up into the top 4?
When the coach shortened his bench, Ballard was on it--Edler, Bieska and Hamuis started getting double shifted
I think it should also be noted that Ballard NEVER gets playing time from AV. Regardless of whether he's performing well or not. AV is weird like that. He plays favourites.
I think it should also be noted that Ballard NEVER gets playing time from AV. Regardless of whether he's performing well or not. AV is weird like that. He plays favourites.
AV seemed to decide that ballard sucked from pretty much the minute they met.
