Ballard's agent to talk to management

[5minutesinthebox]

I think we might classify "plenty of opportunity" a bit differently.

The issue is that Ballard's strength has always been joining the rush and take risks to create offense....until AV tried to turn him into a plug.

I don't get why people think playing for Florida means players don't actually have the skill but are somehow magically transformed beyond their abilities.

Honestly posts like yours make me wonder if you understand that a big part of offense for D has to do with opportunity and confidence. Ballard has been turned into the complete opposite player of what he was when he came here......again, any player who can do that deserves a ton of credit........look how long they have been trying to teach D to Edler......

[theminister]

Here is what I know of Ballard based on watching him play his entire career....not based necessarily on only stats of course. The more minutes he plays and the more important minutes the better he plays offensively, defensively, and physically. To put him in a 3rd pairing limited role with zero leash to be creative offensively (as AV has done here) is putting him in a position to fail.

[Ray_Cathode]

Then let's take that point on the flip side...Alex Edler has 7 PP points this season through 22 games, and none in 5 games, with players who have previously been the best units in the league meaning he has 5 even strength points. How is that acceptable without a shake-up?

The last point is all I'm saying. The responsibility for his lack of production is shared, no doubt. The coaching staff just doesn't get a free pass on this just the same as Ballard doesn't obviously.

[theminister]

How can you call something a strength when he has show no penchant for it? He has in the past liked to take risks on offence, and thats one of the reasons why he looked to bad at times. He never finished his chances, and then would end caught up ice. Ive watched it over and over again.

Its posts like yours that make me wonder if you have actually watched Ballard play. Ballard has played nearly 16 mins a game for 19 games Thats 317 mins of ice time (15 mins of PP time) and has 1 assist. And dont compare Edler to Ballard, Edler plays much tougher minutes against much tougher opposition.

The reason why we compare his time in Florida to here is that there is was considered a top 2 dman. He came here and simply hasnt outplayed anyone in the top 4 to deserve those minutes, and barely played well enough over the last 2 seasons (this one excluded) to warrant a spot in the line up at all.

If AV has turned Ballard into the opposite of what he was, then hats off to AV because Ballard has never looked better with this team than he has this year.

[wallstreetamigo]

So why reward him with a two game benching?

[elvis15]

Then let's take that point on the flip side...Alex Edler has 7 PP points this season through 22 games, and none in 5 games, with players who have previously been the best units in the league meaning he has 5 even strength points. How is that acceptable without a shake-up?

The last point is all I'm saying. The responsibility for his lack of production is shared, no doubt. The coaching staff just doesn't get a free pass on this just the same as Ballard doesn't obviously.

[disisdayear]

Lol if we get Ballard for Alfredsson straight up, I'm gonna tAke you to the most expensive steak house Vancouver has to offer

[wallstreetamigo]

But then how many even strength points does Ballard have? 1. That's 1 of his total 1 points even strength.

Edler's still producing more than him 5 on 5, same with Hamhuis (8 ES points), Bieksa (5), Garrison (4) and even Tanev (4). Not all those players can be getting significantly better minutes, with better team mates and lesser opposition, to warrant the difference and suggest Ballard should be top 4 ahead of them or be immune from the press box. That's especially true when you consider Tanev - who isn't considered to be an offensive D at all while Ballard is expected to have more of those qualities - has been paired with Ballard almost exclusively until the more recent games.

It can't all be contributed to luck, or who each payer plays with, or how the coaches deploy a player - although those things factor in, we agree on that. What we don't agree on is how much of that hangs on Ballard and how much the Canucks should bear the responsibility.

[CanucksJay]

Guys, there's absolutely no logic to it.

AV defenders were out in full force during the Kings game saying it was all about size and Alberts gave them a better chance

(This is despite the fact Ballard was one of our better d-men against the Kings in the playoffs last season)

And then Flames game happened where AV dressed Barker and Alberts over a sh!t team that lacks size and toughness.

Ballard was much better suited for yesterday's style of play and I think EVERYONE of us knows it INCLUDING the AV supporters.

AV missed his chance last night when he could have dressed Ballard. Say we lost to a crappy Flames team with Ballard going back in. Then AV and his supporters could say "see, Ballard makes the team worse"

now they can't say that and it blew up in AV's face.

Any AV supporters out there that think Barker and Alberts was a better decision over Ballard for yesterday's game?

[Lockhart]

I'm so tired of AV, I would have fired him after the LA series.

[theminister]

But then how many even strength points does Ballard have? 1. That's 1 of his total 1 points even strength.

Edler's still producing more than him 5 on 5, same with Hamhuis (8 ES points), Bieksa (5), Garrison (4) and even Tanev (4). Not all those players can be getting significantly better minutes, with better team mates and lesser opposition, to warrant the difference and suggest Ballard should be top 4 ahead of them or be immune from the press box. That's especially true when you consider Tanev - who isn't considered to be an offensive D at all while Ballard is expected to have more of those qualities - has been paired with Ballard almost exclusively until the more recent games.

It can't all be contributed to luck, or who each payer plays with, or how the coaches deploy a player - although those things factor in, we agree on that. What we don't agree on is how much of that hangs on Ballard and how much the Canucks should bear the responsibility.

[thad]

Instead of trading ballard the canucks should get rid of AV! If this was just a class with one player then I would consider it being a fault with the player but AV has proven time and time again that he is not doing is job! So I say keep the player fire the coach!

[Kryten]

Those who disagree:  People who don't rely on advanced stats.

Those agree with me:  The coach.  The GM.

Maybe advanced stats aren't totally useless afterall, Kryten.  (You forgot ebonics.)

[WestCoastCanucks]

I would have done it a LONG time ago if I were him. Shows you how classy the guy is that he's never said anything bad or pouted once in his time here until it got to playing Cam fricken Barker over him. AV's treatment of Ballard is nothing short of pathetic. It's mindboggling actually. I hope Ballard gets traded and has an opportunity to play for a coach that isn't holding some personal vendatta against him. I bet he'll be a good dman wherever he goes next.

[Apples]

I really hope he asks for a trade. A least we can get someone back that actually plays in the lineup

[wallstreetamigo]

Yes. Yes, they can. And they have.

What I continue to say is that the coaching staff has certainly not used every tool in their arsenal.

If they were receiving the desired results from all sectors then there is no need to do anything different, as it was in 2011. Ballard did not deserve any more PP time or offensive free reign. That is not true of the last two years.

Ballard does not need to be getting more minutes than our top 4 to be given chances to produce offensively. This is a disconnect in our discussion. He could still be getting 2+ minutes of PP time and be around 18 minutes average.

[CanucksJay]

With Ballard, Edler, Bieksa we have THREE solid guys that can push the tempo of the game.

Why does our 3rd d-pair have to play stay at home?

Why not give Ballard the creativity to push the puck up the ice.

I mean at the end of the day, his forward pairings will most likely be Hansen, Higgins, Kassian, Lapierre etc

Those guys have enough talent to put the puck in the net.

We don't need to be a cookie cutter EA Sports NHL team that has 2 scoring lines, a checking line, and a goon 4th line.

We should be able to score from all 4 lines ESPECIALLY with the amount of talent on our Blue line that can help create offense.

The other team should be seeing wave after wave of our attack with guys like Ballard Bieksa Edler joining the rush.

it should be a relentless offesnive pressure game

F me. AV needs to go

[DIBdaQUIB]

Stats and observatiions being posted here seem to support both arguments.

To me it is a mis-allocation of resources. MG brought in an offensive, high minute playing, PP puck moving D man. AV immediately relegated him to a 3rd pairing strictly defensive role with perhaps the opportunity to move up the chart (unlikely once the signed Hamhuis).

MG brought in the wrong guy for what AV wants and/or AV is not using Ballard in the role MG wanted. It's a no-win for Ballard and he has never really had a chance to do what he is good at. MG should owwn-up to the mistake and trade him or force AV's hand and utilize him in the manner that was intended when they got him.

RIght now, it looks like another poorly treated player by the Nucks management through no fault of his own.

[hsedin33]

Sorry, I just don't see what Ballards 4.2 million brings the Canucks. He's not big, he doesn't score, his hip checks are gone, he's an okay defense men, but that's about it. There are other defense men for 4.2 that are much better and bring more to the table then he does. I won't be sad to see him moved and hopefully we can bring in someone who has a special ability like a shut down guy or a power play specialist. If anything its cap releif for next season.

[CanucksJay]

Ballard has to be moved by next year so it's not a one or the other scenario. Coach V has also proven time and time again he can get players to exceed all expectations and become better than they were projected. Just because Ballard hasn't done that doesn't mean the coach is failing. Maybe he didnt get a good enough chance to showcase what he's got but we had a serious contending team and didn't have the patience for that. We also won 2 presidents trophies and went to game 7 of the finals while locking Ballard in the doghouse. Maybe it's unfair to him but the teams we iced had great years.

CDC's hate for AV will never go away. If we win AV sucked and the team won in spite of him. If we lose it was all AV's fault and he chews too much gum. One really has to take this site with a grain of salt, lots of posters are knee jerk reacting armchair GM's. AV has proven time and time again he's a very good coach but people tune out all the success and results because we didnt win the cup. It's frustrating and understandable but people are too quick to put the blame on the coach... Firing the coach takes more than a midseason slump, something every team goes through every year. AV is doing his job and getting results, it's just not good enough for the fans of a team that hasn't win the cup before.