Baggins Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Probably Salo.....but Ballard should be ahead of Rome, alberts...gragnani on depth chart. If I had to pick one of our top 3 he could compete with I'd say Edler...solid? Yes. The all star 2-way dman legend locals have made him out to be? That's just a fu**ing joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 He hasn't? Ballard was a screw up last season. Period. He got the ice time and pressbox time he earned. This season he played better. As a result he was tried on the right side with Edler. He failed. He even said himself he wasn't comfortable on the right side. That puts him behind Edler and Hamhuis on the left side. Which = 15 minutes or less per game. Your top offensive d-man and top shutdown d-man will always, I repeat, ALWAYS get the most ice time. I don't know why that's so tough for you ice time whiners to figure out. I said last summer if he can't adapt to the right side to fill Ehrhoffs spot he should be moved. He couldn't. It's time to move him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I think that's unfair. You don't pay all that money and then handicap a guy by playing him on his "wrong" side. Would Bieksa change sides, or Hamhuis? No they wouldn't. Ballard is a thoroughbred D on the left..........and mediocre at best D on the right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 How is it unfair? Some guys can play either side. Look no further than Salo who prefers right side but also plays well on the left side. If Ballard wants more minutes he has to play right side and was given that opportunity. He failed. If anything it was giving him a fair shot at the top four. Obviously if Ballard can't play right side he has to play left side. He can't replace Edlers offense or Hammers defense on the left side. That leaves the bottom pair. Again, how is that unfair? He's on the bottom pair because that's where his ability in comparison to the rest of our D puts him. There's nothing unfair about that. It's also the reason he should be traded. His $4.2m cap hit is wasted in a bottom pairing d-man playing 15 minutes or less per game. That's $4.2m that could be spent on a right side top d-man to pair with Edler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 How is it unfair? Some guys can play either side. Look no further than Salo who prefers right side but also plays well on the left side. If Ballard wants more minutes he has to play right side and was given that opportunity. He failed. If anything it was giving him a fair shot at the top four. Obviously if Ballard can't play right side he has to play left side. He can't replace Edlers offense or Hammers defense on the left side. That leaves the bottom pair. Again, how is that unfair? He's on the bottom pair because that's where his ability in comparison to the rest of our D puts him. There's nothing unfair about that. It's also the reason he should be traded. His $4.2m cap hit is wasted in a bottom pairing d-man playing 15 minutes or less per game. That's $4.2m that could be spent on a right side top d-man to pair with Edler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I like Ballard but it does come down to the question of where do you play him and the cap hit. Maybe the Canucks should try him on wing like they did Rome. His speed and passing ability and grit would probably worked on the 2nd line with Kesler and Booth as nothing else worked, Raymond seemed a little to gun shy coming back from his injury. If you cant trade Ballard why not try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TACIC Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 Well Ballard knows how to skate when he has the puck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkpoet Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 There are two things wrong with Ballard: 1. AV 2. Rick Bowness He is a great hockey player but just does not gel with the system Bowness/AV are laying out. If he were cheaper I'd say definitely keep him, but at 4+Mill, he needs to be playing more important minutes, and that's not going to happen here. UNLESS by some chance AV is let go and MacT comes in. Ballard is MAcT's type of player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrancoL Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Perhaps the Predators would be interested in his services? If Ryan Suter, Francis Bullion and Hal Gill leave Nashville during the offseason, and if Weber seems likely to part, then Keith Ballard could help reinforce the Predator's defense corp. A multiplayer/pick trade for RFA Colin Wilson would be intriguing since he has good offensive skills and can play 2C/LW while Kesler recovers from injury. He was a healthy scratch for 10 of the final 12 games of regular season (apparently for defensive lapses) and 9 of the Preds' 12 playoff games. He performed well offensively, but was penalized for his defensive play. I suspect that he may face similar scrunity under A.V. though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TACIC Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 Why didn't we leave Ballard in florida Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 There are two things wrong with Ballard: 1. AV 2. Rick Bowness He is a great hockey player but just does not gel with the system Bowness/AV are laying out. If he were cheaper I'd say definitely keep him, but at 4+Mill, he needs to be playing more important minutes, and that's not going to happen here. UNLESS by some chance AV is let go and MacT comes in. Ballard is MAcT's type of player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 the canucks need to resolve the ballard situation.he is paid 4.5 mill to sit in the press box or be on the 3rd pair.gillis needs to do something.any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANUCKLELION Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 How will changing coaches change anything? Anybody coming in will already know three things: 1 - Edler is the top offensive d-man and plays left side 2 - Hammer is the top shutdown d-man and plays left side 3 - Ballard can't play right side So where does that put Ballard in the pecking order for ice time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6string Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 so he played his best hockey finally against l.a.in the playoffs and now the ballard band wagon is overflowing, i for one am tired of inconstinency that both him and raymond and to some extent david booth have proven to be. he's too expensive for another look-see approach, it's time to move on with what we have in the organization or player movement to fill the role vacated by erhoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 so he played his best hockey finally against l.a.in the playoffs and now the ballard band wagon is overflowing, i for one am tired of inconstinency that both him and raymond and to some extent david booth have proven to be. he's too expensive for another look-see approach, it's time to move on with what we have in the organization or player movement to fill the role vacated by erhoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotesMagotes Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 It's no secret we need a D man to eat up a lot of minutes playing an offensive role, and that player isn't Ballard. We need someone who can play the right side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_fo_life Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 I love Ballard, but 4.5 is too much. I think he'll stay and other salaries will be dumped. If AV can utilize him properly he's one hell of a defenceman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6string Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Theres no one at this point in our organization that can fill Erhoff's role. Connauton maybe, but maybe in 5 years? not Joking. Ehrhoff is one of the best offencemens dmans ever to play for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 The Canucks will trade Ballard, only if they need the cap space for a new top-4 d-man... or two. If the Canucks and Suter did agree to terms (yeah, yeah, no chance w/e ) then trading Ballard would make sense. Also, assuming that Salo does want to come back for the same cap hit he had last season to fill out the bottom pairing, Ballard would not be as necessary as he is at present. Should the Canucks acquire a d-man in a package deal for one of their goalies, the Canucks might want to send a d-man back and Ballard could fit in this scenario. One thing I do not see is Ballard being traded for a pick, merely as a means to get rid of his contract. He is far too valuable to the team. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logic Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 well the thing i dont understand is that we only let erhoff go for a 4th rounder.odd considering gaustad was worth a 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.