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

Keith Ballard bought out

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-04-2013, 06:48 PM
  #451
Jack Tripper
Vey Falls Down
 
Jack Tripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,191
vCash: 888
really liked him as a person, and at the beginning really liked him as a player...i remember an early preseason game in edmonton his first year where he was all over the ice and looked to be a dynamite acquisition

he still has the tools, hopefully he can regain his confidence in minnesota (which i think he will)...he's easily a bottom pairing d-man on an average nhl team and can move up to play top-4 minutes when injuries dictate

Jack Tripper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 07:33 PM
  #452
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 21,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Who cares about his Corsi numbers? At $1.5M, I'm sorry, Keith Ballard is a total steal. He's going to hit, he's going to block shots, and he's probably going to be given some room to join rushes, maybe even play on the PP in Minnesota.
Seriously?

"Who cares if he's an atrocious possession player, because when they're constantly pinned in their zone when he's on the ice, he'll BLOCK LOTS OF SHOTS!"

As well, given that every other Canuck defender was allowed join the rush in what's been a very offense-oriented team over the past 3 seasons, the notion that for some reason Ballard wasn't allowed to is ludicrous. And he did rush the puck plenty - it just never led to anything because the rest of his skills are so poor.

And if he plays on the PP, well, that sucks for the Wild.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Tripper View Post
he still has the tools, hopefully he can regain his confidence in minnesota (which i think he will)...he's easily a bottom pairing d-man on an average nhl team and can move up to play top-4 minutes when injuries dictate
Not picking in you in particular, but this is the sort of thing that drives me nuts. You see it written all the time, but what on earth is it based on?

A guy like Booth who has had struggles over the past couple years, yeah, this is true. You can see the skills, you can see him have great games, you can see him have stretches of games when he's productive. Even though we haven't been getting value, you can still have some degree of optimism that he can come back and score 20-25 goals, because, yes, his skills are still there.

But Ballard? This guy has been *consistently* undersized, ineffective, and chasing the play since he's been here. Looked like nothing other than a marginal NHL defender. Rarely had standout games, never had a productive 5-game or 10-game stretch. Showed few legitimate tools that would make you think he could be productive again.

Exactly what makes him different from Mike Komisarek and Colby Armstrong? Because nobody says 'oh, they've still got the tools' for those guys - it's obvious that they're just guys who burned out early and can't compete at a high level anymore.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 07:37 PM
  #453
Wilch
Unregistered User
 
Wilch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Under your bed
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 11,870
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Tripper View Post
he still has the tools, hopefully he can regain his confidence in minnesota (which i think he will)...he's easily a bottom pairing d-man on an average nhl team and can move up to play top-4 minutes when injuries dictate
Like Booth, Ballard is a toolbox without tools.

Both seem to be in above average to great physical condition, both are decent skaters (not great due to average agility), but just don't have the hockey sense or vision to put it all together.

Wilch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:08 PM
  #454
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilch View Post
Like Booth, Ballard is a toolbox without tools.

Both seem to be in above average to great physical condition, both are decent skaters (not great due to average agility), but just don't have the hockey sense or vision to put it all together.
Fair enough. But those who compare Barker's skill with Ballards and state Barker was better are complete idiots. AV, for whatever reason, threw common sense out the window when he played plugs ahead of Ballard. Very bizarre decision making imo.

Castle1* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:21 PM
  #455
Alexistheman
Registered User
 
Alexistheman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Surrey
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,473
vCash: 500
Good luck to Mr.Ballard, all the best, and I hope he can prove all the haters wrong. Playing in his hometown might give him the extra something he needs.

Alexistheman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:24 PM
  #456
alternate
It's Miller time!
 
alternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
I doubt it. There were zero signs in 3 years here that he was a good player.
He and Tanev were our best pairing for an good chunk of games to start the season. He has had some good stretches, you've just chosen not to see them.

End of the day, AV's system unfortunately played to Ballard's weaknesses and away from his strengths. Not uncommon for players to be "system players" in that they require a certain system or philosophy to really thrive. We need the cap space and Ballard is the obvious choice, but he's still a useful NHL player. How quick he was picked up testifies to that.

I thought he handled him self with class and hope he re-finds his game.

As for "make AV look stupid"...pretty hard to argue with the results of AV's tenure even if it ultimately came up short.

alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:29 PM
  #457
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 21,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alternate View Post
He and Tanev were our best pairing for an good chunk of games to start the season. He has had some good stretches, you've just chosen not to see them.

End of the day, AV's system unfortunately played to Ballard's weaknesses and away from his strengths. Not uncommon for players to be "system players" in that they require a certain system or philosophy to really thrive. We need the cap space and Ballard is the obvious choice, but he's still a useful NHL player. How quick he was picked up testifies to that.

I thought he handled him self with class and hope he re-finds his game.

As for "make AV look stupid"...pretty hard to argue with the results of AV's tenure even if it ultimately came up short.
Ballard and Tanev was never our best pairing.

You hear about this from the LA series as well, where Ballard played 13 sheltered minutes/game without really hurting the team and would get one scoring chance and was suddenly our 'best defender'.

Guys playing 25 minutes are going to make more mistakes than guys playing 15 because they're out there so much more, and against better players instead of scrubs.

Playing decently well in 15 minutes doesn't make you the 'best pairing'. If you gave Edler that icetime against those players, he'd absolutely destroy those minutes.

And I agree that he handled himself with tons of class, and would have really liked for him to have turned it around here and play well. Good for him if he does elsewhere.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:32 PM
  #458
arsmaster*
semantic romantic
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 25,746
vCash: 500
Ballard has never been part of our best pair, ever.

He looked impressive with Tanev to start the year against sheltered competition. Not a good player, he was our 9th defensman this past year.

Blocked shots are a stupid reason to think a players good at defense....we masked it while he was here, but most of Ballard's blocks are due to his ineptitude to clear the puck and his own giveaways.

Ballard isn't a steal, unless he's making the league minimum. Ballard at $1.5m isn't a steal, it's about in line with what players like him get in free agency after scoring 17 points in his last 162 games.

He's an 8 point defensman over the course of a season, who has barely scraped by winning his matchups against lesser competition.

Time to move on and be happy for both the Canucks and Keith Ballard.


edit ^^^^^^^

LOL!

arsmaster* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:33 PM
  #459
Brain Sergeant
Squirrel!
 
Brain Sergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David71 View Post
wonder whose input was it to aquire ballard.
That was a Gilman trade through and through.

Brain Sergeant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:37 PM
  #460
Jack Tripper
Vey Falls Down
 
Jack Tripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,191
vCash: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Not picking in you in particular, but this is the sort of thing that drives me nuts. You see it written all the time, but what on earth is it based on?
it's based on his play as a top pairing d-man while he was injury-free in phoenix and florida and stretches of play last season

like another poster said (and analagous to the booth thread), i never claimed he had the toolbox, but i don't see his problems being as serious as flameouts like komisarek, armstrong, or other players who simply can't compete at a nhl level anymore...

in the right situation, if he played like his did for the first 25 games for the canucks in 2013 he's fine as a 1.5 million depth d-man...you can repeat like a broken record that there's nothing to base this on but you only have to look back at stretches of last season where he logged more than serviceable minutes when he was healthy

Jack Tripper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:51 PM
  #461
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
at a certain point, i think you just have to accept that other people saw a different player in ballard than you did.

and i think you maybe also would be better off just let people say their goodbyes without trolling the thread with the same laundry list like a certain someone with the sedins, or a certain someone else with luongo, or a certain someone else with burke (where did that guy go, anyway?), etc. etc.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:54 PM
  #462
LolClarkson*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Tripper View Post
i remember an early preseason game in edmonton his first year where he was all over the ice and looked to be a dynamite acquisition
Tony Gallager said the same thing.

Is that you Tony ?

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:56 PM
  #463
LolClarkson*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle1 View Post
Fair enough. But those who compare Barker's skill with Ballards and state Barker was better are complete idiots. AV, for whatever reason, threw common sense out the window when he played plugs ahead of Ballard. Very bizarre decision making imo.
Its hard not to agree with this.

Even some of my freinds who are not huge hockey fans made comments about Barkers bad play.

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:58 PM
  #464
alternate
It's Miller time!
 
alternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Ballard and Tanev was never our best pairing.

You hear about this from the LA series as well, where Ballard played 13 sheltered minutes/game without really hurting the team and would get one scoring chance and was suddenly our 'best defender'.

Guys playing 25 minutes are going to make more mistakes than guys playing 15 because they're out there so much more, and against better players instead of scrubs.

Playing decently well in 15 minutes doesn't make you the 'best pairing'. If you gave Edler that icetime against those players, he'd absolutely destroy those minutes.

And I agree that he handled himself with tons of class, and would have really liked for him to have turned it around here and play well. Good for him if he does elsewhere.
Okay, fair enough, so let me rephrase: Ballard-Tanev handled their minutes better than the other pairings did to start the season. Sure they were easier minutes, but all teams have those easy minutes and need defenders that can win them.

You're making it sound like he doesn't even belong in the league. He's a solid player, but isn't very schematically versatile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Blocked shots are a stupid reason to think a players good at defense....we masked it while he was here, but most of Ballard's blocks are due to his ineptitude to clear the puck and his own giveaways.
"most"? C'mon.

Ballard isn't a steal, unless he's making the league minimum. Ballard at $1.5m isn't a steal, it's about in line with what players like him get in free agency after scoring 17 points in his last 162 games.

He's an 8 point defensman over the course of a season, who has barely scraped by winning his matchups against lesser competition.

Time to move on and be happy for both the Canucks and Keith Ballard.
[/QUOTE]

IMO he'd be good value at $3 - $3.5m by the end of the season.

alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:03 PM
  #465
denkiteki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,302
vCash: 500
If nothing else, Ballard defines being a professional NHL player. Despite being treated unfairly (at least in my opinion and probably opinion of quite a few other 'nucks fan) by AV, he never once complained to the public (or for that matter, there wasn't any news of him complaining at all... and its pretty hard to hide anything when it comes to Canucks + hockey).

denkiteki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:10 PM
  #466
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 21,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
at a certain point, i think you just have to accept that other people saw a different player in ballard than you did.

and i think you maybe also would be better off just let people say their goodbyes without trolling the thread with the same laundry list like a certain someone with the sedins, or a certain someone else with luongo, or a certain someone else with burke (where did that guy go, anyway?), etc. etc.
Probably fair enough.

The opinions posted here on Ballard really blow my mind because so much of it is so obviously incorrect. It's like having everyone you talk to tell you the sky is green and the earth is flat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alternate View Post
Okay, fair enough, so let me rephrase: Ballard-Tanev handled their minutes better than the other pairings did to start the season. Sure they were easier minutes, but all teams have those easy minutes and need defenders that can win them.

You're making it sound like he doesn't even belong in the league. He's a solid player, but isn't very schematically versatile.
I've said several times that he's probably an OK #6-7 defender. He's very marginal, and after his play for the past three years, I'm at a loss as to how that's a controversial opinion. 'Solid player' is *really* over-stating it, IMO. He's quite simply not solid defensively at all, and if he's scoring at the rate he's scored at for the last 3 seasons, he's an exceptionally marginal asset. At any price.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:30 PM
  #467
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,891
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
I did not think much of Ballard as a player but I do think perhaps AV went a bit far at times. I took no issue with playing Aaron Rome over Ballard, because I think Rome was pretty decent here overall (fans seemed to mostly dislike him for not being a name-player than any sort of rational reason, IMO,) but I can't really justify AV playing Cam Barker over Ballard as he did at some points near the end of last season. That is quite the stretch. And playing Corrado was a gamble as well (although I heard AV always prefers bad veterans and doesn't give chances to rookies! What an odd dichotomy...)

Rotting Corpse* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:37 PM
  #468
Outside99*
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
I really wish for Ballard that his career gets back on track as he maintained a pro attitude here despite struggling to fit into AV's way. I recall him talking passionately about watching game tape with Tanev and I thought dayum (probably got benched by AV 2 games later), its not for a lack of effort.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:42 PM
  #469
yoss
Registered User
 
yoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,925
vCash: 50
Never thought he got a fair shake from AV during his time here, but without wanting to get into that I wish him well wherever he ends up going. I personally was a fan, stood up for teammates and thought he played really solid overall for the first half of this last season.

I could see a fresh start somewhere else being good for him and his career after his time in Vancouver.

yoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:49 PM
  #470
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,891
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
I really wish for Ballard that his career gets back on track as he maintained a pro attitude here despite struggling to fit into AV's way. I recall him talking passionately about watching game tape with Tanev and I thought dayum (probably got benched by AV 2 games later), its not for a lack of effort.
I can imagine how frustrating it must be to constantly try to figure something out and not be able to get there. We certainly should not conflate performance with personality; Ballard is by all accounts a great individual and grade-A teammate, and he ought to be commended for that. It does not make him a great player nor does it mean we should feel sorry for him; for all the whining about his "mistreatment" he is handsomely compensated and his positive attitude will lead him to having a longer leash than a combination of similar performance and worse attitude likely would.

I think that fans want him to be a good player so badly because they liked his character and attitude. While fair, a want of something does unfortunately not make it so. Irrespective of his best heart and desires, Keith Ballard was simply not a good player for us and is another indictment of our pro scouting department, who perhaps made the same mistake.

Too often fans want to attribute poor performance to "lack of effort" or some sort of character flaw. Sometimes poor performance is just poor performance. There is no reason to read any sort of personality problem into poor performance, nor is there any reason to read good performance into good personality.


Last edited by Rotting Corpse*: 07-04-2013 at 09:55 PM.
Rotting Corpse* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:05 PM
  #471
Outside99*
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfred Dramatad View Post
I can imagine how frustrating it must be to constantly try to figure something out and not be able to get there. We certainly should not conflate performance with personality; Ballard is by all accounts a great individual and grade-A teammate, and he ought to be commended for that. It does not make him a great player nor does it mean we should feel sorry for him; for all the whining about his "mistreatment" he is handsomely compensated and his positive attitude will lead him to having a longer leash than a combination of similar performance and worse attitude likely would.

I think that fans want him to be a good player so badly because they liked his character and attitude. While fair, a want of something does unfortunately not make it so. Irrespective of his best heart and desires, Keith Ballard was simply not a good player for us and is another indictment of our pro scouting department, who perhaps made the same mistake.

Too often fans want to attribute poor performance to "lack of effort" or some sort of character flaw. Sometimes poor performance is just poor performance. There is no reason to read any sort of personality problem into poor performance, nor is there any reason to read good performance into good personality.
Sometimes it is lack of effort, sometimes its apparent lack of effort but I agree that wasn't his problem. But the coach and player were oil and water (nothing wrong with either?) and I agree its on pro scouting for not recognizing this.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 11:39 PM
  #472
Chet Donnelly
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Chet Donnelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,492
vCash: 500
Finally. Too bad Francesco Aquilini is too greedy to buy out Luongo.

Chet Donnelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 11:57 PM
  #473
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenrikSedin33 View Post
Finally. Too bad Francesco Aquilini is too greedy to buy out Luongo.
How much would it have cost him to buy him out? I hated the situation/result, but probably too much to be considered "greedy" for it.

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2013, 12:02 AM
  #474
Chet Donnelly
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Chet Donnelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
How much would it have cost him to buy him out? I hated the situation/result, but probably too much to be considered "greedy" for it.
Luongo would've cost many millions of dollars but the Aquilini family are billionaires. Can't they help the franchise they own become a better team?

Chet Donnelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2013, 12:10 AM
  #475
Intoewsables
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,188
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
How much would it have cost him to buy him out? I hated the situation/result, but probably too much to be considered "greedy" for it.
$1,502,593 per year for the next 18 years (or just over $27 million in total).

http://capgeek.com/buyout-calculator...07&buyout_d=20

Intoewsables 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 02:34 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.