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 stays a Canuck for the 2011-12 season.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-21-2011, 03:29 PM
  #51
dingdong
Registered User
 
dingdong's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieMFRoyal View Post
It's interesting that he admits it, but some fans still feel the need to make excuses for him. Typically ****ing clueless…..IMO. If he can’t beat out a 21 year old rookie, who is two years removed from playing junior A hockey in Ontario, lets blame it on the coach not giving him more minutes. Ballard was given plenty of opportunity to prove himself; unfortunately, it appears, that is exactly what he did.
SHHhhhh, I hear there are GMs from other teams on this forum....

dingdong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 03:29 PM
  #52
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieMFRoyal View Post
IMO. If he can’t beat out a 21 year old rookie, who is two years removed from playing junior A hockey in Ontario, lets blame it on the coach not giving him more minutes.
So how does your theory work with respect to an *INJURED* Tanner Glass playing ahead of other players like Hodgson? Anyhow, my problem wasn't Tanev being in but rather Alberts being in ahead of Ballard who has played well with Tanev.

As for giving him all the chance in the world to succeed... If that were truly the case, he should've been paired up with Hamhuis for a few games during the part of the regular season when the division title was no longer in doubt. See how that works out.

IMHO, you have to at least try and attempt it considering the assets you gave up to trade for him in the first place (not to mention his $4+ million fairly long-term deal which you want to avoid a situation where you're stuck with it).


Last edited by Barney Gumble: 06-21-2011 at 03:57 PM.
Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 04:03 PM
  #53
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieMFRoyal View Post
It's interesting that he admits it, but some fans still feel the need to make excuses for him. Typically ****ing clueless…..IMO. If he can’t beat out a 21 year old rookie, who is two years removed from playing junior A hockey in Ontario, lets blame it on the coach not giving him more minutes. Ballard was given plenty of opportunity to prove himself; unfortunately, it appears, that is exactly what he did.
Let's say it's 50% coach 50% player - you can't succeed on the ice if you don't get that tap on the shoulder enough.

Ballard has owned up, taken responsibility, committed to improvement. And he didn't play nearly as badly as people think, despite his limited minutes. What has AV done? His actions and lack of accountability speak for themselves.

mossey3535 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 04:32 PM
  #54
You Know
Registered User
 
You Know's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Why would Gillis move Ballard now? He has little to negative value from most of the opinions on here.

Hamhuis isn't coming back until November. Cap hits of those two players - 4.5/4.2

You play Ballard and give him a chance with an off-season to train and recooperate. If you're going to trade him for a bag of pucks or dump him in the minors why not do that in November or December when Hamhuis comes back from injury and you need that much cap space?

Why not at least give him training camp since you could put him on waivers, and even send him to the minors, before the season started if need be?

Why not keep him until after all the big UFAs are signed and someone is left without the D they figured they would be able to sign and slot into their lineup?

Or after teams have a few injuries in the first two months of the season?

It makes absolutely no sense to dump him now given the state of Vancouver's defense. Just like it made not sense to dump Bieska despite the chorus we heard on here one week from now, last year.

You Know is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 04:52 PM
  #55
rye&ginger
Registered User
 
rye&ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieMFRoyal View Post
It's interesting that he admits it, but some fans still feel the need to make excuses for him. Typically ****ing clueless…..IMO. If he can’t beat out a 21 year old rookie, who is two years removed from playing junior A hockey in Ontario, lets blame it on the coach not giving him more minutes. Ballard was given plenty of opportunity to prove himself; unfortunately, it appears, that is exactly what he did.
Hip injury surgery pre season = major injury
Concussion in season = major injury
Strained MCL on a slewfoot = major injury

The guy never got going, and once he was healthy he fell into a rut and never got out of it.

He's played 5 seasons on some bad teams. Lets see what he can do next year when he's some what more adjusted. Throwing him under the bus right now is hasty.

No doubt that he did not earn more ice time this year as a top 4 d-man. It may be easier to trade him later anyway.

rye&ginger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 04:55 PM
  #56
Biggest Canuck Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Kelowna, BC
Posts: 10,448
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Biggest Canuck Fan
The Danger is AV throwing him under and not using him.

If there is no guarantee he will play, he simply must be moved to add more depth or scoring to offset the other losses.

Biggest Canuck Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 05:13 PM
  #57
EskemoJoe
Registered User
 
EskemoJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Auckland
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 338
vCash: 500
Anyone who is screaming TRADE BALLARD!!!! is insane.

You dont trade stock when it is at its lowest value, you will get nothing for him. The least you can do is let him play and regain some capital and then deal him at the deadline if you want more depth upfront.

EskemoJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 06:16 PM
  #58
ihaveyuidonttouchme
Registered User
 
ihaveyuidonttouchme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,392
vCash: 50
Pair him with Tanev for 3rd pairing...problem solved. I thought that pairing worked pretty well (in SJS series) imo anyways..

ihaveyuidonttouchme is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 06:37 PM
  #59
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
Let's say it's 50% coach 50% player - you can't succeed on the ice if you don't get that tap on the shoulder enough.
Tanev, Alberts, Rome and Salo all played much better with those same minutes. Blaming the coach is silly.

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 06:40 PM
  #60
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EskemoJoe View Post
Anyone who is screaming TRADE BALLARD!!!! is insane.

You dont trade stock when it is at its lowest value, you will get nothing for him. The least you can do is let him play and regain some capital and then deal him at the deadline if you want more depth upfront.
Good point.

CpatainCanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 07:03 PM
  #61
crobro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 635
vCash: 500
outside of ballard being damaged goods when aquired by mike gillis

its not ballards fault being in the doghouse.

its a power struggle between the coach and the gm

AV is very loyal to his french canadian players and was not consultated when steve bernier was part of the package to aquire keith ballard.

benching ballard has been coach vees way of letting his feelings known about trading players he feels are an integral part of the team.

thats all it is.

crobro is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 07:10 PM
  #62
Dirkph
Mancrush = Malhotra
 
Dirkph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EskemoJoe View Post
Anyone who is screaming TRADE BALLARD!!!! is insane.

You dont trade stock when it is at its lowest value, you will get nothing for him. The least you can do is let him play and regain some capital and then deal him at the deadline if you want more depth upfront.
While I agree that trading Ballard while his value is at an all time low is stupid, it doesn't really affect the Canucks that much.

Management spends to the cap. If they don't get what they want for Ballard, it isn't a big deal for them as they can spend money through FA to regain lost value.

If you also take into consideration that the Canucks are in the window of time to win the Stanley Cup, moving Ballard for immediate help should be of the utmost importance.

Dirkph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 07:32 PM
  #63
Biggest Canuck Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Kelowna, BC
Posts: 10,448
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Biggest Canuck Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by crobro View Post
outside of ballard being damaged goods when aquired by mike gillis

its not ballards fault being in the doghouse.

its a power struggle between the coach and the gm

AV is very loyal to his french canadian players and was not consultated when steve bernier was part of the package to aquire keith ballard.

benching ballard has been coach vees way of letting his feelings known about trading players he feels are an integral part of the team.

thats all it is.
If true even more reason to fire AV.

Biggest Canuck Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 08:04 PM
  #64
Anzes Eyes
5th line centre
 
Anzes Eyes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCM View Post
And I think AV deserves some credit. Yeah he mismanaged Ballard but do you honestly think he'll do it again? It was an odd situation and at the time Rome and Alberts' size was more important.

Gillis will surely have a talk with AV and coming into this year it looks like Ballard will hold a more regular spot in the line-up.
AV mismanaged his way to a presidents trophy, best GAA, a Jack Adams trophy Nomination and a Stanley Cup Final.

Ballard has to look in the mirror. From my scouting, Ballard is not a problem physically, it is the decisions he makes and his lack of communication with his D partner. Parking him in the press box only won us games.

Anzes Eyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 08:39 PM
  #65
Biggest Canuck Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Kelowna, BC
Posts: 10,448
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Biggest Canuck Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by 25EvaJ View Post
AV mismanaged his way to a presidents trophy, best GAA, a Jack Adams trophy Nomination and a Stanley Cup Final.

Ballard has to look in the mirror. From my scouting, Ballard is not a problem physically, it is the decisions he makes and his lack of communication with his D partner. Parking him in the press box only won us games.
Therefore you trade him or bury the salary to shore up the 2nd line and d, which has been my argument all along.

You simply cannot risk potentially having 4.2 sitting in the pressbox when you need that on the ice at critical times.

Biggest Canuck Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 08:59 PM
  #66
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EskemoJoe View Post
Anyone who is screaming TRADE BALLARD!!!! is insane.

You dont trade stock when it is at its lowest value, you will get nothing for him. The least you can do is let him play and regain some capital and then deal him at the deadline if you want more depth upfront.
Many people have lost everything riding stocks to the floor because they didn't know when to cut their losses. I'm not suggesting that it's time to cut our losses with Ballard, I just think you have to be sure that the situation is going to improve.

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 09:18 PM
  #67
wholesickcrew
Registered User
 
wholesickcrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crobro View Post
outside of ballard being damaged goods when aquired by mike gillis

its not ballards fault being in the doghouse.

its a power struggle between the coach and the gm

AV is very loyal to his french canadian players and was not consultated when steve bernier was part of the package to aquire keith ballard.

benching ballard has been coach vees way of letting his feelings known about trading players he feels are an integral part of the team.

thats all it is.
I hope this is satirical.

wholesickcrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 09:21 PM
  #68
hackey
You're Not Bored...
 
hackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: You're Boring
Posts: 2,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EskemoJoe View Post
Anyone who is screaming TRADE BALLARD!!!! is insane.

You dont trade stock when it is at its lowest value, you will get nothing for him. The least you can do is let him play and regain some capital and then deal him at the deadline if you want more depth upfront.
Keith Ballard is a proven veteran defenceman in the league and anyone interested in him knows what he's capable of.

He is still relatively young so he will be pegged as a player not fitting into Vancouver's system and nothing else, this happens

He as an asset is viewed as where and how Ballard can fit into their team and they do not care as much how he didn't fit into Vancouvers team.

There are also teams who has to make it to the Cap Floor of $48M, so Ballards $4.2M would be welcome

hackey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2011, 09:56 PM
  #69
Catamarca Livin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EskemoJoe View Post
Anyone who is screaming TRADE BALLARD!!!! is insane.

You dont trade stock when it is at its lowest value, you will get nothing for him. The least you can do is let him play and regain some capital and then deal him at the deadline if you want more depth upfront.
Call me insane. He did not play while healthy in the SCF. He makes 4.2 million against the cap. Trade him for any draft pick sign Eric Brewer and you are ahead. The problem with keeping him is that the team(coach) have zero confidence in him. You should not go into the season planning to showcase players inorder to increase their trade value. Not when there are similar defenseman available for no assets. Trading a player at his lowest value is not a big deal when you can sign a player without giving up any value. Hamhuis, Samuelsson, and Torres with obtained for nothing but paying their salary. Lapierre and Higgins for third round picks. If the Canucks are unable to sign Bieksa and Ehrhoff then maybe keeping Ballard has some merit. However keeping him as a 5 or 6 or 7 or 8th defenseman will not raise his value at all and will hurt the team's performance.

Catamarca Livin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:50 AM
  #70
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Tanev, Alberts, Rome and Salo all played much better with those same minutes. Blaming the coach is silly.
Ballard 15:54
Tanev 13:47
Rome 17:25
Alberts 15:10
Salo 20:21

Alberts and Tanev played comparable minutes. 'Much better' is your opinion, which I respect but disagree with. Rome and Salo played much more - in the case of Salo I'm ok with that but Rome playing an average of 2 minutes more per game has always got my guff up.

Forget Ballard playing less than Rome. Why is Rome playing more than Alberts? That was another major mistake IMO.

mossey3535 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:03 AM
  #71
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,033
vCash: 250
Mentioned this before, but Rome should never have been playing ahead of Alberts. AA has been an NHL D-man for far longer, and made no sense at all. Just another WTF moment from the coaches...

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:11 AM
  #72
Nazzy-19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
Mentioned this before, but Rome should never have been playing ahead of Alberts. AA has been an NHL D-man for far longer, and made no sense at all. Just another WTF moment from the coaches...
I said this in Game 1 of the series against Nashville. It made no sense to me how Alberts was the guy to go with in Game 7 against Chicago, on the brink of the biggest choke in history, and then Rome was back in for Game 1 against Nashville.

I understand that in certain situations, different players can offer better attributes depending upon the style of team the opponent is, but Rome is not one of those players.

Nazzy-19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 02:53 AM
  #73
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 25EvaJ View Post
AV mismanaged his way to a presidents trophy, best GAA, a Jack Adams trophy Nomination and a Stanley Cup Final.

Ballard has to look in the mirror. From my scouting, Ballard is not a problem physically, it is the decisions he makes and his lack of communication with his D partner. Parking him in the press box only won us games.
Well consider this than, when Ballard was taken out of the lineup after the 1 game he did get to play in the Final, the Canucks only won 1 game, while being out scored 8 to 1.

Vancouver lacked a Dman who could skate with Boston's forwards majority of the time. Most of the Boston forwards were able to skate around Alberts and Salo, while also making Ehrhoff look silly by making him turn to the inside on the defensive side.
Ballard being such a smooth and quality skater could have been a great help when battling Marchand or Peverly. Both of whom skating circles around our D n were able to create plays for the Bergeron's n Recchi's.

Also we should not forget that Vancouver lacked any type of offensive game from the back end, when this was supposed to be a huge asset in the Vancouver's game.

mstad101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 03:21 AM
  #74
GCM
Stork
 
GCM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,022
vCash: 500
Some of you are a lost cause. Most of the "arguments" against Ballard are covered in my opening points.


Hamhuis is injured to start the year, that pretty much guarantees Ballard stays with us.

Then in the event that we wish to trade him with Hamhuis returning (which I'd disagree with) at least he'd have had a month to bump up his value.

GCM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 03:50 AM
  #75
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstad101 View Post
Well consider this than, when Ballard was taken out of the lineup after the 1 game he did get to play in the Final, the Canucks only won 1 game, while being out scored 8 to 1.

Vancouver lacked a Dman who could skate with Boston's forwards majority of the time. Most of the Boston forwards were able to skate around Alberts and Salo, while also making Ehrhoff look silly by making him turn to the inside on the defensive side.
Ballard being such a smooth and quality skater could have been a great help when battling Marchand or Peverly. Both of whom skating circles around our D n were able to create plays for the Bergeron's n Recchi's.

Also we should not forget that Vancouver lacked any type of offensive game from the back end, when this was supposed to be a huge asset in the Vancouver's game.
Except he wasn't. When given a chance he played bad - very bad - against Boston

Moreover Ballard throughout the season provided very little offense from the back end - much less then players like Bieksa, Ehrhoff, Edler, Salo or even Hamhuis. I think that instead of talking about what he was suppose to provide you have to look at what he did provide.

Ballard is dreadfully overpaid for his role on the team and his 4.2 would be huge in getting the help the team needs elsewhere. You can't have arguably your 7th or 8th defenseman (because, in fact, that is what he was by the end of the season) chewing up that kind of salary. That is cap insanity.

The idea that AV was the source of Ballard's problems is IMO looking for excuses. He, by his own words, had a very poor year and deserved his demotion. Could be the injuries affected play or his inability to get ready for the season held him back (although you have thought that by the playoffs any rust would have worn off) But thinking AV had some sort of feud with Ballard is not supported by any evidence other than AV made the choice not to play him. And, that decision was borne out by poor play of Ballard. Ballard had consistent coverage problems in his own play and his play was often way too individualistic. There was even some laziness in Ballard's play, especially in his tendency to drift long passes out of his own end and in his lack of commitment to supporting the play.

I can see the argument that with Hamhuis on the IR to begin the season you might keep Ballard around. However, the Canucks might find better ways of using the 10 % over cap space than keeping Ballard around. For example, might be able to bring in a forward to replace Raymond, who will probably miss more time.

I would think you move Ballard as soon as any kind of reasonable deal is possible. He has frankly played himself out of the top 6 and getting rid of his salary would give the Canucks a lot more manoeuvrability and flexibility moving ahead.

orcatown 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 04:46 PM.

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.