Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

What to do with Keith Ballard


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
144 replies to this topic

#61 CityinFlames

CityinFlames

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 11

Posted 10 July 2012 - 12:49 AM

For a man drafted 11th overall he has moved around a lot, Buffalo to Colorado, Colorado to Phoenix, Phoenix to Florida, and then Florida to Vancouver where to next who knows, but just knowing the fact alone that he can't stick with a club tells a strong story for the man and his career. I think he's a great hitter and a exciting one at that, but we got D men who can do that now. I don't think he has much left to give or to show us any more, if he hasn't found his game in two years then there's no real hope he will start now. As I see it get a draft pick, plug his hole with a prospect ready to make the jump and hope for the best.

#62 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 10 July 2012 - 12:53 AM

Which brings us back to Raymond-again.


Raymond had his share of benchings, sitting in the pressbox, and being moved to the 4th line at times. The fact that he saw any top 6 time is a testament to AV's patience with him and proclivity in giving opportunities to his players in hopes of getting them going. Raymond, much like Ballard when given these opportunities don't show the consistency warranted to keep them in those top spots, in place of more deserving and other relatively consistent personnel.

Which goes back to what I was saying before.....these players earn their ice-time and are put on the bottom pairings or the bottom 6 for very good reasons that seem to escape many of fellow CDC'ers.

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#63 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,207 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 10 July 2012 - 01:29 AM

He'll play around 15 to 18 minutes a game as usual with Tanev who's numbers should be around the same. Right now we can't afford to lose any more depth on defence because if Muller and Joslin have to play at any stage in the playoffs this team will not win a Cup.

We need another 2 depth defenceman in case of injuries. Let's just say Hamhuis suffers a concussion and Bieksa injures his leg again:

Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Tanev
Alberts - Joslin

Ballard's importance skyrockets.
Posted Image

#64 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,693 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 03:57 AM

Raymond had his share of benchings, sitting in the pressbox, and being moved to the 4th line at times. The fact that he saw any top 6 time is a testament to AV's patience with him and proclivity in giving opportunities to his players in hopes of getting them going. Raymond, much like Ballard when given these opportunities don't show the consistency warranted to keep them in those top spots, in place of more deserving and other relatively consistent personnel.

Which goes back to what I was saying before.....these players earn their ice-time and are put on the bottom pairings or the bottom 6 for very good reasons that seem to escape many of fellow CDC'ers.


I don't disagree with your reasoning.
My point is that Raymond is being moneyballed out of the system.He was given every opportunity to show his potential trade value last year and failed to make a showing of worth to attract a desirable suitor.
He now has a very respectable , cap friendly contract and I believe he will be shipped out after his initial string of noteworthy performances.
It was not AV's patience.It is the fact that an asset has to be brought to full exposure for maximum return and Gillis more than likely tells AV what he wants and AV has no choice in these moneyball matters.

#65 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 July 2012 - 05:25 AM

Can you honestly tell me that AV has treated all the players he's had in his tenure here equally and fairly?

His obvious favouritism is sickening and often hinders our chances of winning (ex: the amount of chances Raymond gets).


That depends on what you consider equitable and fair. As far as I'm concerned Ballard got the ice time he earned in his first season here and played his way to the pressbox in the playoffs. He was a disaster for most of the season. He'll never outproduce Edler, nor will he ever be better defensively than Hamhuis. That means he'll be third pair with third pair ice time.

Now onto Raymond. People seem to have really short memories around here. When Raymond first came up he was moved down the lines and often benched. Sound familiar all you Hodgson, Grabner and Shirokov fanboys? I can tell you what gets AV's "favoritism" among forwards. Defensive responsibility. Raymonds defensive game was not very good when he came up and he frequently lost ice time as a result. Just as AV has done with Kesler, Burrows and Hansen as they've developed. Just as he did with Hodgson, Grabner and Shirokov. So where's the favoritism? Raymond has gotten to the point that he will get some slack for not producing because he has in the past and doesn't hurt the team defensively. AV has shown time and time again he'll give players "some time" to get out of a slump as long as they are defensively responsible. When Raymond didn't come out of it what happened? Has was moved to the 3rd line. Then the fourth line. Then spent a few in the pressbox. So where's the "favoritism"?

How about Rome over Ballard? Lets see, Ballard was a disaster while Rome played a safe simple game. Well now, I can't understand why Rome would get the ice time. It took Ballard almost half the season just to get up to speed from his hip surgery. When Edler injured his back opportunity came knocking and Ballard was awful on the PP and was a disaster with Ehrhoff. In comes Mr safe, simple Rome. Opportunity came knocking again when Hamhuis got his concussion. Again Ballard was awful with Bieksa in a shutdown role. In comes Mr safe/simple Rome again. Then came Ballards knee injury and he was just not very good in any role the rest of the season. So where's the favoritism? Rome may not be a star and he'll likely never be a regular above the bottom pair. But he plays a safe simple physical game. Which is what you need from a bottom pair guy.

The only favoritism is in your head. The favoritism towards your own chosen ones that haven't earned their ice time yet.
Posted Image

#66 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,410 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 10 July 2012 - 07:36 AM

I would keep him. He makes mistakes in our end but no more than Edler does and he also has a great hip check. Yes he is a wee bit on the expensive side....right now...but the way that the contracts have been going up (see Suter), his contract is going to start looking pretty decent soon. He is also good enough to move up if one of the top 4 dmen go down to injury.
We have enough offensive dmen and I really think that Ballard has to concentrate on being the guy who put defense first. Bieksa did that when Hamhuis arrived and turned his game around....but with the departure of Hoff, he was expected to make up for Hoffs offensive production. Then AV did a really stupid move...he put Edler and Bieksa on the ice as a pairing and they failed miserably...why?.....because both of them were jumping up on the play instead of one of them playing the 'Hamhuis' role of staying back and covering.

#67 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,392 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 08:16 AM

When Raymond didn't come out of it what happened? Has was moved to the 3rd line. Then the fourth line. Then spent a few in the pressbox. So where's the "favoritism"?


Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Raymond only get scratched ONE GAME on March 19th and then went from pressbox to 1st line with the Sedins for the next game against Chicago?

It's like a slap on the wrist to your favorite puppy and then giving him all the toys to make him happy again
That seems like favoritism to me....

You think AV would do that for Shirokov? lol

#68 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:24 AM

I don't understand how people say he's being used incorrectly. How else should he be used? The man simply sucks at playing the right side and says himself that he's not comfortable there. Is it AV's fault to play Hamhuis and Edler ahead of Ballard?

And as for PP time, Ballard is great at skating, but he's not so great at getting shots through. Isn't that really more important than skating in PP time? I wouldn't rate Ballard over Bieksa, Edler, Salo or even Hamhuis at quarterbacking our PP. Not saying Ballard is below average with his vision and hockey sense; just saying the other guys are better at it. We have been one of the most successful PP team in the last two years (the dip in second half of last year happened to ALL teams by the way, because penalties just weren't being called - decreased by average of 3 penalties per night).

Notice how Ballard is being used on 4-on-4? A situation which actually benefits great skaters (which is why Raymond is used in these open ice situations as well).

I think AV prefers to have a very reliable third pair, rather than a high-risk/high-reward player like Ballard, who likes to skate up and join the rush and often get caught deep in the O-zone. He's a great skater, sure, but AV would prefer to have a big guy that can play positionally sound D. This is problematic, because Ballard is sort of stuck behind Hamhuis and Edler.

The reason why Ballard stays a third pair on the Canucks next season (if he does) will only be because his trade value is at all time low. Really, if you were the GM of another team, what would you offer for Ballard given his production in the most recent years?

I don't hate Ballard, but I think if you look at his skill set, and objectively evaluate his pros and cons, he just doesn't fit well with the Canucks.

Edited by keslerian one, 10 July 2012 - 09:26 AM.


#69 tjkaemingh

tjkaemingh

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 730 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 03

Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:42 AM

All good points and comments for sure everybody.

I agree with most. He is best on the left. He is behind Elder and Hammy in ability and ice time.
So the third pair makes most sense with Tanev.

He came in overpaid. 4.2 mil that first year was too much. Can't blame him for that too much. He was offered a contract (by Phx or Fla) and signed it. On his previous two teams he was a top 4 D man and go the ice time (and maybe points) and contract he deserved. Canucks are a deeper team and did not need him in the top 4 the last two years.


I do not mind his skills and ability. He just does not fit that well here on this team. Unless he settles into a "safer" style of play on the third pair this year. He is a good insurance policy to move up into the top 4 if nec.
I agree, he does cough up the puck too much in the past and Rome seemed to be the safer option.

Look at LA winning the cup this year and their D. Their D played it simple, strong, and safe. Except for Doughty who actually has the ability to do what he does exceptionally well, the other 5 D were just excellent at playing a "Rome" style D (but better than our former Rome...)
Minimal mistakes, pass it up, strong in your own end.
Our D seems a little to risky sometimes....

We will see how he works out on the third pair this year in Vancouver. I can live with him, but like I said, he does not really fit and would not be sad to see him go for somebody that can play a "Willie Mitchell": style defense.
(then we will all be crying for puck moving D again.....LOL)

#70 bluesman60

bluesman60

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,410 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 09

Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:43 AM

I don't understand how people say he's being used incorrectly. How else should he be used? The man simply sucks at playing the right side and says himself that he's not comfortable there. Is it AV's fault to play Hamhuis and Edler ahead of Ballard?

And as for PP time, Ballard is great at skating, but he's not so great at getting shots through. Isn't that really more important than skating in PP time? I wouldn't rate Ballard over Bieksa, Edler, Salo or even Hamhuis at quarterbacking our PP. Not saying Ballard is below average with his vision and hockey sense; just saying the other guys are better at it. We have been one of the most successful PP team in the last two years (the dip in second half of last year happened to ALL teams by the way, because penalties just weren't being called - decreased by average of 3 penalties per night).

Notice how Ballard is being used on 4-on-4? A situation which actually benefits great skaters (which is why Raymond is used in these open ice situations as well).

I think AV prefers to have a very reliable third pair, rather than a high-risk/high-reward player like Ballard, who likes to skate up and join the rush and often get caught deep in the O-zone. He's a great skater, sure, but AV would prefer to have a big guy that can play positionally sound D. This is problematic, because Ballard is sort of stuck behind Hamhuis and Edler.

The reason why Ballard stays a third pair on the Canucks next season (if he does) will only be because his trade value is at all time low. Really, if you were the GM of another team, what would you offer for Ballard given his production in the most recent years?

I don't hate Ballard, but I think if you look at his skill set, and objectively evaluate his pros and cons, he just doesn't fit well with the Canucks.


Good post.
Ballard is going to have to start concentrating on playing defense first if he wants to stay with this team. Neither Tanev or Ballard are that big so they are really going to have to play a smart game and cover for each other.....if they can do that, I don't care if they ever score a goal....just keep the puck out of our zone.

#71 Primal Optimist

Primal Optimist

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,640 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:47 AM

Since he got here I have thought that if Ballard is your 'worst Dman' of six on the ice: your team is so stacked its not funny. As he is, he is 4th/5th on a great team, I vote we keep him. You know why? 70.2m divided by 23 dudes is just over 3m dollars a player average Salary..we are paying him 1.5m more than the team average, since we spend to the cap year over over. Your bottom six forwards provide for all six of your starting Dmen to be in the 4.5m dollar range, by virtue of being under the team average in paychecks.
Ballard along with Hamhuis, Bieksa and Edler and now Garrison provide us 5 of 6 starting dmen who are good at their jobs and worth their money. Tanev is much much better than we think, and we are all fans of his..but his age being low means he is inexperienced, you go with Tanev at 6th man on D and in a few years he will rock it with the top like Hammer and Beeks.

Do I think we have an all around great deep D? Yes, yes i do.
Hamhuis
Bieksa
Edler
Ballard
Garrison
Tanev.

I don't see a need to bring in anyone else. But I sure will miss Salo, he would have been the cement to bind that group of talent together, but I don't blame him on taking a two year payday in another town. Tampa Bay is paying him 3.75m a year for two years. Gillis would not and should not have matched that offer, as much as I respect and will miss Sami in our jersey.

In short, we are set on D, we are deeeeeep in net, and we have a great bottom six, and 4/6ths of the top six are awesome. Two forwards that can put up points and our team would arguably be the best in the league from crease to faceoff dot. Ballard is not an issue.

1286820874m_THUMB.jpg
CDC GM League small.png General Manager

Happy Hockey Fan!!!


#72 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 July 2012 - 12:49 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Raymond only get scratched ONE GAME on March 19th and then went from pressbox to 1st line with the Sedins for the next game against Chicago?

It's like a slap on the wrist to your favorite puppy and then giving him all the toys to make him happy again
That seems like favoritism to me....

You think AV would do that for Shirokov? lol


How was Shirokov's defensive play? Did you read that part?
Posted Image

#73 Wolverinė

Wolverinė

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined: 09-July 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 01:08 PM

That depends on what you consider equitable and fair. As far as I'm concerned Ballard got the ice time he earned in his first season here and played his way to the pressbox in the playoffs. He was a disaster for most of the season. He'll never outproduce Edler, nor will he ever be better defensively than Hamhuis. That means he'll be third pair with third pair ice time.

Now onto Raymond. People seem to have really short memories around here. When Raymond first came up he was moved down the lines and often benched. Sound familiar all you Hodgson, Grabner and Shirokov fanboys? I can tell you what gets AV's "favoritism" among forwards. Defensive responsibility. Raymonds defensive game was not very good when he came up and he frequently lost ice time as a result. Just as AV has done with Kesler, Burrows and Hansen as they've developed. Just as he did with Hodgson, Grabner and Shirokov. So where's the favoritism? Raymond has gotten to the point that he will get some slack for not producing because he has in the past and doesn't hurt the team defensively. AV has shown time and time again he'll give players "some time" to get out of a slump as long as they are defensively responsible. When Raymond didn't come out of it what happened? Has was moved to the 3rd line. Then the fourth line. Then spent a few in the pressbox. So where's the "favoritism"?

How about Rome over Ballard? Lets see, Ballard was a disaster while Rome played a safe simple game. Well now, I can't understand why Rome would get the ice time. It took Ballard almost half the season just to get up to speed from his hip surgery. When Edler injured his back opportunity came knocking and Ballard was awful on the PP and was a disaster with Ehrhoff. In comes Mr safe, simple Rome. Opportunity came knocking again when Hamhuis got his concussion. Again Ballard was awful with Bieksa in a shutdown role. In comes Mr safe/simple Rome again. Then came Ballards knee injury and he was just not very good in any role the rest of the season. So where's the favoritism? Rome may not be a star and he'll likely never be a regular above the bottom pair. But he plays a safe simple physical game. Which is what you need from a bottom pair guy.

The only favoritism is in your head. The favoritism towards your own chosen ones that haven't earned their ice time yet.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Raymond only get scratched ONE GAME on March 19th and then went from pressbox to 1st line with the Sedins for the next game against Chicago?

It's like a slap on the wrist to your favorite puppy and then giving him all the toys to make him happy again
That seems like favoritism to me....

You think AV would do that for Shirokov? lol


Yeah... I think you're over-exaggerating how much "punishment" Raymond receives and how amazing Rome was as a player. If he was that effective, the Canucks would have offered him the deal the Stars did.

Rome was incompetent in the offensive zone (he couldn't get a shot through to save his life, except for the 2 game goal streak he went on) and although he might have been more stable than Ballard in the defensive zone at times, he wasn't as good as you make him out to be.


Ballard's biggest problem is that he starts to chase in his own zone and that gets him caught out of position. However, he did almost none of that during the playoffs and arguably was our most consistent defenseman.

I also don't remember Ballard getting a significant chance at the powerplay, definitely not anything close how many chances Raymond has received. You'd think a coach would give a more offensive-minded, former 40-point guy more chances instead of going with Rome time after time because he's "safe".

(And about Raymond, I love his work ethic and back-check but, sorry, that's not enough to "earn" a top-6 role that he continuously failed in.)

Kind of tough to play for Ballard and Hodgson (or anybody doing any job) when you know in the back of your head that if you do one little thing wrong, you're going to get benched.

Imagine if the Canucks had Erik Karlsson under AV... I highly doubt he'd be the player he is under Paul MacLean.

Young players, especially the more "offensive" types, need time and experience to grow and round-out as players. If they are expected to produce offensively but are going to get benched any time a mistake is made, it's not really the best environment to learn.

It's obvious AV likes to go with the safe route, use the Sedins + 10 two-way grinders. Sure we might be a better team defensively, but is it really worth the stagnant offense?

Posted Image


#74 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,392 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 02:03 PM

How was Shirokov's defensive play? Did you read that part?


I'm just pointing our an inaccuracy in your post. You made it sound like Raymond was treated without favoritism and AV gradually demoted him from 2nd to 3rd line and then to 4th and finally the pressbox because he wasn't making the most out of his ice time (Which WOULD be a fair move by AV IF that was what actually happened). However, that wasn't actually the case. Raymond was given ample opportunity to succeed and while he had stints on 3rd and 4th line because he wasn't producing, he then actually got promoted to 1st line against Columbus BEFORE his one game scratch and then game back from the pressbox back to 1st line with the Sedins against the Hawks. Does that seem fair to you?

This is basically what happened.
Raymond played like crap but he kept getting 2nd line minutes. Finally he got demoted to 3rd line and still played like crap. Then again got demoted to 4th line. And then all of a sudden, promoted to 1st line against Columbus? Does that sound like earning your ice time? He then gets scratched and AV re-adds him into the lineup on first line.

If I was another player on that team like Hodgson, Shirokov, Ballard and saw that happen, how would that make you feel? Doesn't sound very fair to me. But hey, I guess it makes sense because his defensive play is solid... :picard:

#75 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 02:04 PM

That depends on what you consider equitable and fair. As far as I'm concerned Ballard got the ice time he earned in his first season here and played his way to the pressbox in the playoffs. He was a disaster for most of the season. He'll never outproduce Edler, nor will he ever be better defensively than Hamhuis. That means he'll be third pair with third pair ice time.

Now onto Raymond. People seem to have really short memories around here. When Raymond first came up he was moved down the lines and often benched. Sound familiar all you Hodgson, Grabner and Shirokov fanboys? I can tell you what gets AV's "favoritism" among forwards. Defensive responsibility. Raymonds defensive game was not very good when he came up and he frequently lost ice time as a result. Just as AV has done with Kesler, Burrows and Hansen as they've developed. Just as he did with Hodgson, Grabner and Shirokov. So where's the favoritism? Raymond has gotten to the point that he will get some slack for not producing because he has in the past and doesn't hurt the team defensively. AV has shown time and time again he'll give players "some time" to get out of a slump as long as they are defensively responsible. When Raymond didn't come out of it what happened? Has was moved to the 3rd line. Then the fourth line. Then spent a few in the pressbox. So where's the "favoritism"?

How about Rome over Ballard? Lets see, Ballard was a disaster while Rome played a safe simple game. Well now, I can't understand why Rome would get the ice time. It took Ballard almost half the season just to get up to speed from his hip surgery. When Edler injured his back opportunity came knocking and Ballard was awful on the PP and was a disaster with Ehrhoff. In comes Mr safe, simple Rome. Opportunity came knocking again when Hamhuis got his concussion. Again Ballard was awful with Bieksa in a shutdown role. In comes Mr safe/simple Rome again. Then came Ballards knee injury and he was just not very good in any role the rest of the season. So where's the favoritism? Rome may not be a star and he'll likely never be a regular above the bottom pair. But he plays a safe simple physical game. Which is what you need from a bottom pair guy.

The only favoritism is in your head. The favoritism towards your own chosen ones that haven't earned their ice time yet.

Good post.
Thank you I enjoyed reading it.
Posted Image

#76 BigFoot44

BigFoot44

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 06

Posted 10 July 2012 - 02:37 PM

Ballard can be a top 4 guy easily on any team.

Why not sweeten the lu deal to Toronto by adding Ballard.

That way Burke will get a top 4 guy to replace Gardiner.

Then Gardiner can develop along side Tanev as our future top 4.
you don`t gotta be big to play, you just gotta play big!!!!

#77 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,769 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 10 July 2012 - 03:24 PM

I say we stuff him in a duffel bag...(he doesn't seem to mind)

Posted Image

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

11477626583_2368927097.jpg     49997_b70e6ae14ce1652fa11bd1dda624afd1.g   7649118508_ce3e8a74a1_o.jpg

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#78 HockeyHobo73

HockeyHobo73

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,519 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 04:37 PM

Who's Keith Ballard?

#79 Danthecanucksfan

Danthecanucksfan

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,306 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 05:07 PM

gillis is just going to keep him

#80 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 10 July 2012 - 05:10 PM

gillis is just going to keep him


At his house?
Posted Image

#81 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 July 2012 - 10:20 PM

I'm just pointing our an inaccuracy in your post. You made it sound like Raymond was treated without favoritism and AV gradually demoted him from 2nd to 3rd line and then to 4th and finally the pressbox because he wasn't making the most out of his ice time (Which WOULD be a fair move by AV IF that was what actually happened). However, that wasn't actually the case. Raymond was given ample opportunity to succeed and while he had stints on 3rd and 4th line because he wasn't producing, he then actually got promoted to 1st line against Columbus BEFORE his one game scratch and then game back from the pressbox back to 1st line with the Sedins against the Hawks. Does that seem fair to you?

This is basically what happened.
Raymond played like crap but he kept getting 2nd line minutes. Finally he got demoted to 3rd line and still played like crap. Then again got demoted to 4th line. And then all of a sudden, promoted to 1st line against Columbus? Does that sound like earning your ice time? He then gets scratched and AV re-adds him into the lineup on first line.

If I was another player on that team like Hodgson, Shirokov, Ballard and saw that happen, how would that make you feel? Doesn't sound very fair to me. But hey, I guess it makes sense because his defensive play is solid... :picard:


You still don't get it. He didn't "play like crap". He just didn't produce. Even when he's not producing he's defensively responsible. Although he's not helping the team offensively, he wasn't hurting the team defensively. And, as I said, a veteran will always get more slack than a prospect.

Ballrad played like crap his first season. He was often lucky to be in the lineup during the season. And when he played better this past season he still wasn't better than Hamhuis nor Edler. Which puts him where? Third pairing with third pairing ice time. I don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp.

The prospects all had problems with defensive play. What good is it to score a goal when you are responsible for two against? AV will always reward players for good play. But it typically has to be good play both directions. The prospects you're whining about went through the very same thing the veterans that came up under AV went through. That's not favoritism, that's consistency.

Raymond being moved to the top line wasn't a promotion. It was an effort to get him producing. How many have you seen a player slump and when finally breaks the goose egg he suddenly starts producing? In this case it didn't work. AV has done this before with other players. It's not like Raymond spent the rest of the season with the Sedins. That would indeed have been an unearned promotion.
Posted Image

#82 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,693 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 11 July 2012 - 01:30 AM

Ballard and Raymond are apples and oranges.

Ballard came to the team injured and has been injured during most of his time here-hip surgery,back injury,multiple concussions,MCL.

Every time his game got going he went down with an ailment/injury.

Last year Ballard was healthy and played defensively sound,protecting his team mates on a team of woosies and hit opponents like a Mack truck.

Any GM with half a scouting staff barely functioning would take Ballard in a heart beat.

He made Eddy,Bxa,Rome,Tanev and Alberts look like tepid rookies.

Ballard rocks.He and Hammer were the saving grace on D last season.

#83 HockeyHobo73

HockeyHobo73

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,519 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 10

Posted 11 July 2012 - 04:46 AM

"What to do with Keith Ballard"

Take in a good movie? Rollerblading in Stanley Park? Dinner at the Keg? Nice day at the beach?

Really depends on what you want to do too... Ballard seems pretty laid back and doesn't seem too picky on what you would want to do with him.. The only thing he doesn't want to do is earn his paycheque..

#84 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,693 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 11 July 2012 - 05:27 AM

Yeah,like 5' 10" Keith standing up to 6'3" 225 Bertuzzi Feb 2/12:
http://www.hockeyfig...m/fights/109420

Or,Keith pummeling Pavelski Jan 21/12:
http://www.hockeyfig...m/fights/109051

Do you see him sticking up for his team mates there Hokey Hobo?
See the smile on his team mates faces as he exits to the dressing room?
That is earning your keep-big time.

Maybe you missed Keith 'the laid back money grubber,waiting for his paycheque' Ballard annihilating 6' 3" Corey Perry :
http://www.hockeyfig...m/fights/106635
See Perry whack him with a two hander and when Keith pummels the living crap out of him he still lets him go when he has him down- but should really knock his teeth into the back of his throat? You mean that passive Keith Ballard,Hokey? That must be what you mean.

You do know Keith is the fastest skater on the Canucks team,right? That laid back guy you accuse of being only in hockey for a cheque?

Maybe these hip checks will wake you up from your Hokey Hollow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6jRn-iBCX0

Ballard could eat you for breakfast,Hobo,after dinner,before dinner,after rollerblading or before and especially on a nice day at the beach.

Edited by nuck nit, 11 July 2012 - 05:43 AM.


#85 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,392 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 11 July 2012 - 07:21 AM

You still don't get it. He didn't "play like crap". He just didn't produce. Even when he's not producing he's defensively responsible. Although he's not helping the team offensively, he wasn't hurting the team defensively. And, as I said, a veteran will always get more slack than a prospect.

Ballrad played like crap his first season. He was often lucky to be in the lineup during the season. And when he played better this past season he still wasn't better than Hamhuis nor Edler. Which puts him where? Third pairing with third pairing ice time. I don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp.

The prospects all had problems with defensive play. What good is it to score a goal when you are responsible for two against? AV will always reward players for good play. But it typically has to be good play both directions. The prospects you're whining about went through the very same thing the veterans that came up under AV went through. That's not favoritism, that's consistency.

Raymond being moved to the top line wasn't a promotion. It was an effort to get him producing. How many have you seen a player slump and when finally breaks the goose egg he suddenly starts producing? In this case it didn't work. AV has done this before with other players. It's not like Raymond spent the rest of the season with the Sedins. That would indeed have been an unearned promotion.


Hey as much as I want to debate here, the thread is about Ballard and we're going off on a tangent. We can take this up in the plethora of Raymond threads lol.

As for Ballard, I really hope he shines this season. He needs to play that steady boring defensive game on the 3rd unit but if one of the top 4 goes down to injury, I hope he can switch gears and excel at moving the puck, QB-ing the PP etc

#86 Kumquats

Kumquats

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,414 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 08

Posted 11 July 2012 - 07:48 AM

In my opinion he brings alot:


Great post, spoken like a true fan of Ballard. I knew who Keith was before he came to Vancouver and prayed every year since his rookie season that we get him. It makes me sad that his production dropped off so much because of injuries and whatever else was happening. I hope he can stay healthy this season and show everyone exactly what he can bring to this team.
Posted Image

#87 CookieCrumbs

CookieCrumbs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 11

Posted 11 July 2012 - 08:30 AM

Ballard is the grittiest player on our team.

I vote keep him.

#88 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 11 July 2012 - 11:06 AM

Do you see him sticking up for his team mates there Hokey Hobo?


Um....none of those fights involved sticking up for team mates.

Edit:
Bieksa stepping in for Burrows....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZi8FxYoIEw

You need learn the difference between looking after yourself and sticking up for a team mate.

Edited by Baggins, 11 July 2012 - 11:54 AM.

Posted Image

#89 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 11 July 2012 - 11:08 AM

Hey as much as I want to debate here, the thread is about Ballard and we're going off on a tangent. We can take this up in the plethora of Raymond threads lol.

As for Ballard, I really hope he shines this season. He needs to play that steady boring defensive game on the 3rd unit but if one of the top 4 goes down to injury, I hope he can switch gears and excel at moving the puck, QB-ing the PP etc


I hope he gets moved in favor of a 6'4" defensive crease clearer at half the price.
Posted Image

#90 suolucidir

suolucidir

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,221 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 05

Posted 11 July 2012 - 11:14 AM

Good post.
Ballard is going to have to start concentrating on playing defense first if he wants to stay with this team. Neither Tanev or Ballard are that big so they are really going to have to play a smart game and cover for each other.....if they can do that, I don't care if they ever score a goal....just keep the puck out of our zone.

Ballard played a lot smarter defensively when he was paired with Tanev in the past. That's why they make a good pair. Ballard seemed reluctant to hang Tanev out to dry defensively. Honestly, I'm fine with him on our third pairing, but for 4m It'd be nice if he was a bigger contributor to our special teams.
PSN: CloakOfSkill

Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists somewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.

It bugs me when people pull out the gold medal for an example... Luongo only had to outplay Brodeur.





Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.