racerjoe Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I have never been in the Ballard hater camp. My only problem with him is on our team he is not a top 4 guy with our current guys. Basically he struggles on the right side, and he is not better than alex and Dan. So where does he fit? If we can fit him in on the third pairing I would love to keep him it just comes down to cap management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkyfresh Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Edler-Wideman Hamhuis-Bieksa Ballard-Carkner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ugli Fruit Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Plus/minus stats are not exactly relevant stats, the underlying ones tell the real story. He played against the plugs (3rd and 4th) lines majority of his shifts, averaged the smallest icetime, and was still on the ice for 2 goals against at even strength (Tanev = 0). His useless penalty in gm 2 led directly to the GWG for LA. He was a -5 chance differential in the entire series, only Salo and Hamhuis were worse (and Hammer/Salo played more mins against toughest/tough competition). Given that he hadn't played hockey in months, they probably aren't horrible numbers - but he should have been replaced by Rome IMO (things I never thought I'd say). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soshified Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Ballard was our 3rd/4th best Dmen this year. Though, if only his caphit was at least one million lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underachieving Hero of CDC Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 He looked much better during the playoffs. Why not give him a shot next year? Its not like his trade value could possibly get any lower than it is right now anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunningWild Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 There was a thread a couple days ago that said Ballard was +1 on chance differential and Tanev was even. Edler, Bieksa and Hamhuis were all -10~ and Salo was -5. Say what you will but this stat is not an exact art and from what I've seen on the numbers and on the ice, he was without doubt one of our better D-men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Ballard needs to go. For one simple reason: his style of hockey is far better appreciated in the open coast-to-coast eastern conference rather than the west, where it is a grindfest. Ballard, in my books, is a better skating, slightly less offensive but slightly better defensive Christian Ehrhoff. Unfortunately, we don't need a player like that, particularly in our bottom pairing.Edler, Bieksa and Hamhuis are better defenemen than Ballard (one series notwithstanding) and IMO, the offence that Ballard brings to the table is far less needed from our D-men than a Willie-Mitchell-esque solid defensive defenceman. Our greatest problem this year on the back end, was that Hamhuis wasn't 100%. I don't care what the Canucks establishment says- he may be fit to play, but Hamhuis, IMO has still not regained his core strength pre-Lucic hit. He's been outmuscled to the puck a lot more this year and IMO, a full offseason will see Hammers return to his old ways: one of the elite defensive D-men in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6string Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ballard is hard to deal with that fat contract, i've seen enough of him and would of shipped him out a long time ago. yes, he looked fine at times in the playoffs but he is just like mason raymond, ya never know from one game to the next what you are gonna get and we can't afford that if we are serious about making a run to the cup with this core! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Line Juggler Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 This coming season is make it or break it for Ballard. Obviously we want him to fulfill the promise Gillis originally saw in him. If he doesn't play in the top 4 next year then he is an absolute bust! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaku Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I have never been a Ballard fan. 4.2M/ year for 7 points a year. IMO he hasn't been worth the money that they have been paying him. I'm still on the whole we shouldn't have traded Grabner bandwagon. He has been useless since coming to Vancouver. If he can prove me otherwise in the next little while, that he deserves the 4 mil a year, I say that he should be shipped for something worth while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 He was good for a third pairing defenceman.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 He was good for a third pairing defenceman.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Garret's moustache Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I wouldn't mind keeping him if he earned what he is worth to us. For the Canucks, Ballard is worth no more than 3 million, maybe on the lightning he's worth his 4.2 million dollar cap hit... IMO that is just an obscene amount for a 3rd pairing Dman... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Ballard needs to go. For one simple reason: his style of hockey is far better appreciated in the open coast-to-coast eastern conference rather than the west, where it is a grindfest. Ballard, in my books, is a better skating, slightly less offensive but slightly better defensive Christian Ehrhoff. Unfortunately, we don't need a player like that, particularly in our bottom pairing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugemanskost Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Ballard looked fine against LA, despite what the statistics say. If he can play 18-20 minutes at the level he played in the 1st round, he is worth his salary. Ballard can skate, move the puck effectively, play the PP (if allowed!), and defend physically. He and Tanev were the Canuck's best pairing, in my eyes. I say keep him and play the crap out of him. The more ice he sees, the better he plays. Tanev / Ballard looks like a good pairing moving forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uber_pwnzor Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 In 194 games with the Canucks, Ehrhoff scored 113 points. In 126 games with us to date, Ballard has 15 points. Slightly less offensive? That's like saying Manny Malhotra is slightly less offensive than Henrik Sedin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Ballard has to go despite being one of our best D against LA. Reason is, AV will NEVER give him a chance at teh top 4 and that is where he has to play. He is not a shotdown guy and wasn't intended to be. The act that AV played a faltering Edler and an injured inneffective Bieksa ahead of Ballard confirms that Coach Chew, doesn't like how Ballard plays and doesn't trust him. Personnally, I'd rather keep Ballard and get a new coach that will make better personnel decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwo Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 What did you guys think of his post-season performance? I thought he looked absolute fantasic and did exactly what we thought he could do, all while getting 3rd pairing minutes. He was energetic, smart, and played with speed and power. Would you trade him in the offseason or try him out for the first 15 games or so with top 4 minutes? All opinoins are welcome:P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester@wraiths.ca Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 In 194 games with the Canucks, Ehrhoff scored 113 points. In 126 games with us to date, Ballard has 15 points. Slightly less offensive? That's like saying Manny Malhotra is slightly less offensive than Henrik Sedin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 But then again, Erhoff got as much PP time in one game as Ballard was given in a season here... They aren't the same type of player but Ballard is more well rounded and HAS shown that in Phoenix and Florida where he got PP time. It wasn't until getting the joy of being coached by AV that he suddenly wasn't capable of playing on a PP unit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.