Nuxfanabroad Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Seeing some teams losing D-men, especially Ottawa today. What would be fair to receive from them(don't know much about their prospects). Tough to break up a good thing; but Tanev is so solid he'd probably smoothly move on with another pairing. It helps us to prepare for next year's Cap adjustment. As Gillis stated in the Luo potential move, we should only do this if a team will overpay. Right now it appears Ottawa might. Would like to see a proposal or two(with a slight overpayment), from any who know their prospects(supposedly well-stocked) well-thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerIce Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Craig Anderson has been a beast this year, there's no way they're trading for Luo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Don't forget about Colorado, Erik Johnson is out now indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted February 14, 2013 Author Share Posted February 14, 2013 Powerice-No, as per title, I'm suggesting Ballard to Ottawa. @Vintage: Yeah, these D-injuries are piling up, making our genius gm appear rather prescient. So does he take a chance(smite while the iron's hot)? Or is it too risky to deal Ballard? With the guys we have, #7-10, I say make a deal if Ottawa would overpay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightHawkSniper Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Don't forget about Colorado, Erik Johnson is out now indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Don't forget about Colorado, Erik Johnson is out now indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted February 14, 2013 Author Share Posted February 14, 2013 Nighthawk:What you have to recognize though, is the effect upon supply/demand. More teams are losing D to injury, thus, there are less to potentially deal. Remember what they say about a bucket of ice(w/cooler!) in the desert. Furthermore, you've got a shortened season where gm's have to think fast. It appears a perfect storm, with Gillis predicting like a meteorologist! There are strong similarities with the current D AND goaltender-shortage, league-wide. I can hear Gillis'cell ringing as we type... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Wow... a trade involving Ballard. That's never happened on CDC. Don't get me wrong - I'm all for trading off underachieving high-paid players in preparation of next season's lowered cap. But I still don't think Ballard has a ton of trade value... despite his solid play this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Italia2006 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 With the horrible injury to Karlsson, do you think that the Senators may pay a reasonable price for him? I think Ballard has played well this year and is a top 4 dman on many teams. Ballard is not in the category as Karlsson but he would help the Sens out a lot and they have a lot of cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AriGold Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 /topic/339980-deal-ballardottawa-det-la-losing-d/">http://forum.canucks...et-la-losing-d/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Italia2006 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 No way we are trading with Col or LA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Italia2006 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 /topic/339980-deal-ballardottawa-det-la-losing-d/">http://forum.canucks...et-la-losing-d/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Although I do believe this is a. the best time to trade him for a higher return and; b. a better alternative to the all but certain decision to buy him out in the off-season for no other reason than cap reasons. I worry that if we DO trade him, a devastating injury may happen shortly after, being a detriment to our defense. Not to mention we do not necessarily have a replacement that is near the skill that Ballard possesses. I would prefer not to see Alberts or Barker as a permanent fixture in our top 6 this season. Maybe Vandermeer could suffice, I don't know.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 I'd rather keep Ballard, he's quietly been one of our best guys on the blueline. We shouldn't trade any of our defencemen anyway or we'll be lacking depth once again. I like having Barker and Vandermeer as backup options, but only if one of our top-6 get injured - until then they hopefully won't play a game. Honestly the Canucks have the best top-6 in the NHL without a doubt, and you win defences with championships, so why bother trading away our great depth? Ballard is playing like a 3-4 million dollar guy now which he hasn't been doing his whole tenure as a Canuck, let's not trade him now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightHawkSniper Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Why wouldn't we trade with Colorado? They're not a threat to us in anyway and they have a guy that we could really use. Ryan O'reilly would look sweet in a Canucks jersey. We would have to give more than just Ballard but that would be a pretty sweet starting point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mookie Wilson Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Sam division, play them more than any other team, knowing how ex-players of many teams play well against former teams...do I need to continue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Unless we get a return we can't refuse, I say keep Ballard for this season. I don't trust any of our scratched D in a permanent role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerines Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 If we trade Ballard and somehow pick up another dman in a Luongo deal let's say Carlson for example, then I think it would make sense. If not than I say keep Ballard. Hammer juice Edler carlson Garrison tanev Imagine that for a starting 6? One can dream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Nothing less than 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.