Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Ballard's agent to talk to management


  • Please log in to reply
658 replies to this topic

#61 Canucks fan in chicago

Canucks fan in chicago

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Joined: 01-January 12

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:19 PM

So you're saying a defenceman is worthless if they don't put up points? For real?


When Ballard was acquired to be an offensive d-man top 4 guy, yes.

Who pays 4.2 million for a defenceman who's mediocre defensively and horrible offensively?
  • 1

#62 Tanev's Smirk

Tanev's Smirk

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,427 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:21 PM

Who pays 4.2 million for a defenceman who's mediocre defensively and horrible offensively?


Florida

Edited by Tanev's Smirk, 04 March 2013 - 12:24 PM.

  • 0

#63 Wheels22

Wheels22

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:23 PM

Canucks should find patrik Stephan and sign him, he's a former 1st overall so that means he knows how to play and is AWESOME!!!1!

Have any of you actually seen barker play? Really? Ballard is similar to barker? Barker doesn't use his body, and he's lazy as fauk. We didn't pick him up as a PTO because he's some top 4 everyone would want....


I said potentially take Ballard's spot.. It's a a theory.. Stop being a douche
  • 0

#64 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,792 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:23 PM

When Ballard was acquired to be an offensive d-man top 4 guy, yes.

Who pays 4.2 million for a defenceman who's mediocre defensively and horrible offensively?


Ummm... he has never been put into that role since he got here, so I think you are wrong in that logic. We got Hamhuis right after and that pushed Ballard out of the top 4 before he played a game.
  • 1
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#65 CanuckGAME

CanuckGAME

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 06

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:24 PM

When Ballard was acquired to be an offensive d-man top 4 guy, yes.

Who pays 4.2 million for a defenceman who's mediocre defensively and horrible offensively?


It's kinda hard to put up points when you are not in the top 4, get no pp time, and play next to no minutes, and get benched or scratched every time you **** up.... How is a player supposed to thrive? I'd say he's pretty damn good defensively. One of the best hitters we have.
  • 1

#66 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,713 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:26 PM

It's starting to look like things maybe coming apart in Lotus Land.

1) The way the Cody H deal went down was kind fo ugly
2) Manny's situation looks like it could have been handled better and is still an issue
3) the goalie situation, which is a hold-over form last year's SC exit
4) Some of Kesler and his agents comments and disagreements publicly with management
5) The apparent bias against Ballard - no room for error compared to other D
6) Hearing from the rookies that teh coach doesn't talk to them and explain what is rexpected of them but puts them in positions they can't succeed (Schroeder on 4th line C)

Just some examples bu the say where there's smoke there's fire. Seems to me there is far too much drama and personnel conflict/disconnect. along with questionable treatment of certain players.

Let's not forget Linden and Naslund , two of the greatest Nucks ever, both had issues with management.

Lots of little things can add up to a big thing and maybe it explains the disconnected team we are seeing on the ice. THe players are aware of all these things (and more) and are not immune to it.


This, Kesler and everyone else gets a free pass after they have surgery, but Ballard never did from day 1.....he never complained, and played better and more physical then most of our d this season and is a healthy scratch now?

I'm glad his agent is finally speaking up.

AV is a cancer and should leave.

Everyone seems to be so big on guys impact on the dressing room that's why everyone wanted to keep Malholtra even though he was playing like a plug, what's the difference with Ballard? I'm sure all the guys love him.

And to the people complaining he doesn't put up points, it's kind of hard when you don't get any pp time, and Aaron Rome does over you.
  • 1

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#67 Avicii

Avicii

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,363 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:27 PM

Those of you who are using the overpaid chip are just dumb.

MG did not sign Ballard to that contract.. Even if he is overpaid, who cares.. If you sit him, that's 4.2 million sitting in the press box. That's still on your cap.. So why bench him at all, especially if he's doing well?

Most of you are talking as if benching a player clears his cap hit...

Edited by Django, 04 March 2013 - 12:28 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


#68 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,311 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:28 PM

I think everyone is looking at this in the wrong light, we should be be pretty thankful that we can scratch Ballard while we have Bieksa injured, to me this is a great sign as to the depth of the Canuck's blueline.
  • 1
Posted Image

#69 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,179 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 11

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:28 PM

*
POPULAR

Posted Image


What, you got no better response than a picture of a baby crying? You're weak.

The poster you quoted is right, by the way. None of what he/she said was false. The handling of several of this team's quality personnel over the last few years has reached an embarrassing level.

Edited by NuxFan09, 04 March 2013 - 12:29 PM.

  • 7

#70 Quoted

Quoted

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Joined: 17-September 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:28 PM

It's kinda hard to put up points when you are not in the top 4, get no pp time, and play next to no minutes, and get benched or scratched every time you **** up.... How is a player supposed to thrive? I'd say he's pretty damn good defensively. One of the best hitters we have.


Yup - if that is the role he was brought in to fill, it's pretty hard to blame the player if they aren't ever played that way. But, there is clearly more to this story I suspect.
  • 0

#71 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,500 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:28 PM

Posted Image


Ugly baby! Your's?!
  • 0

#72 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,500 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:29 PM

Maybe he's talking to Gillis about an extension :bigblush:


I thought you were supposed to do that by Twitter on Hockey Night in Canada?
  • 0

#73 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,039 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:30 PM

That is underpayment IMO.

Schneider, Ballard

Hamonic, Nielsen 2nd


That's an overpayment imo, and I'd prefer Nelson over Nielsen.
  • 0

#74 etsen3

etsen3

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,533 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 10

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:31 PM

I'm an AV supporter but even I'm wondering wtf he's thinking. Ballard has been one of our more consistent defensemen this year, why was he scratched?
  • 0

#75 Raffi Torres's Smirk

Raffi Torres's Smirk

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 13

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:31 PM

If you love someone, set them free...


  • 0

#76 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,039 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:32 PM

Who pays 4.2 million for a defenceman?


The Islanders. Visnovsky and Streit are both UFAs - they have only 28 million in committed cap next year.
  • 1

#77 NuxFan09

NuxFan09

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,179 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 11

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:32 PM

I think everyone is looking at this in the wrong light, we should be be pretty thankful that we can scratch Ballard while we have Bieksa injured, to me this is a great sign as to the depth of the Canuck's blueline.


Uh, not when the players he's being scratched for are much, much worse than him. That's kinda the whole point of this. Ballard is being irrationally scratched in favour of a career 7th defenseman and a guy whose career has fallen so far by the wayside that he played in the minors last season (Barker). That speaks nothing about the team's depth on D.
  • 0

#78 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,168 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:32 PM

*
POPULAR

And those flashes are of what exactly - a reliable depth defenceman? He's had 15 points in 131 games for the Canucks after having been a 20-30 point guy elsewhere. Not all of that is on playing time, although obviously being dropped from PP minutes would affect it.

He's needed to be better with the chances he's been given, and while he's been pretty reliable in bottom pairing minutes particularly this year, he hasn't been good enough otherwise to warrant keeping his $4.2M once the cap goes down for next year. I don't fault the Canucks for at least trying Alberts and Barker for a game or two so we can see if they're good enough to keep as depth or if we need to upgrade for when next year rolls around.

I've got no problem with keeping him for this year, but also understand how he'd want a better opportunity than 3rd pairing and occasionally sitting a game. We'd have to move him sometime, so I wouldn't be offended if Gillis moved him this season if he felt he wasn't an option going forward. Ballard's been a good enough team guy by all accounts to deserve that if Gillis can make a deal.


What bothers me the most is that he hasn't been tried as an offensive option. The knock on him from AV is that he isn't consistent enough in the defensive zone.... fine, ok.... then at least try him out as the puck carrier on the PP. Edler has looked so slow and plodding, eating up PP time by going back behind the net and lackidasically bringing it out, while Ballard is a much better skater and passer.

This is AV's real failing... putting players in positions for them to be successful.
  • 8

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#79 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:34 PM

AV is such a joke, if Ballard is traded we're not winning a cup with Barker/Alberts in our top 6.

Connauton will also be called up to play at some point in the season. Well, that's what he told his girlfriend apparently.. Managment told him he'd be called up at some point in the season to play. If he's good, he needs to be that rookie that shines for us. If he can't, then well our defense is terrible without Ballard.

I almost forgot Corrado.. Don't think he's ready though.

If we have a roster spot open up for whatever reason, I can see Connauton getting an opportunity. He's in much the same situation as Schroeder was last year, where he'd been playing well and we had to see what he could do at the NHL level sooner or later. Connauton has 10 points in the last 11 games with the Wolves as of March 1st.

Corrado, on the other hand, won't factor in at all this season. He can't be recalled from Junior while they're still playing, and now that he's been traded to Kitchener, he's expected to have a decent playoff run with them.

I didn't see Barker play last night and I know Ballard played well this season, but wouldn't Barker bring the same things to the team than Ballard would? Only cheaper.

Ballard, even with his struggles since coming here, has been better than Barker with the Oilers and Wild by all accounts. That doesn't mean Barker can't turn it around, and their playing styles are a little different, but Ballard should continue to be a better player.

Ballard's smaller, but more physical. He's a better skater than Barker as well, and has good mobility in his own end to defend to a point. Barker is slower and lacks footspeed, which is why he hasn't succeeded as much as people expected against NHL talent, and he's big but doesn't use him size.

Who offers the best value might be the better question, considering their contracts. We just don't know what Barker can bring and if he'll have the same chemistry and consistency that Ballard has shown this year.

If you think that the only way to judge a player is based on his points output you need to go back to NHL 13.

Not only that, but how is Ballard suppose to get points when he's playing under AV's system?

I mentioned earlier Ballard has 15 points in 131 games with Vancouver so far. Aaron Rome has played in basically a similar role (#5/6/7 D-man, with lesser minutes and little to no PP time) yet he had 19 points in 138 games with Vancouver. Rome is not known at all as a D-man who should be good at offence.

When Rome is on a better PPG pace that Ballard (a $4.2M D-man who'd previously had 20-30+ point years) that's a sign that you aren't good value for your contract.

Ballard does bring other things to the table: he's physical for being a smaller player, has great mobility and is a fantastic team guy (one of my favourite guys on the team off-ice). Considering his skillset (and price point) more is expected of him offensively even in the limited minutes he receives.

What bothers me the most is that he hasn't been tried as an offensive option. The knock on him from AV is that he isn't consistent enough in the defensive zone.... fine, ok.... then at least try him out as the puck carrier on the PP. Edler has looked so slow and plodding, eating up PP time by going back behind the net and lackidasically bringing it out, while Ballard is a much better skater and passer.

This is AV's real failing... putting players in positions for them to be successful.

It's not that Ballard hasn't been given chances before, even if they were short lived. I can easily understand how it'd be hard to get back into a groove like that, but when Hamhuis and Edler are ahead of him on the depth chart and putting up 80+ points between them each year, you can hardly fault AV for not using Ballard in other situations.

Edited by elvis15, 04 March 2013 - 12:43 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#80 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,713 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:35 PM

What bothers me the most is that he hasn't been tried as an offensive option. The knock on him from AV is that he isn't consistent enough in the defensive zone.... fine, ok.... then at least try him out as the puck carrier on the PP. Edler has looked so slow and plodding, eating up PP time by going back behind the net and lackidasically bringing it out, while Ballard is a much better skater and passer.

This is AV's real failing... putting players in positions for them to be successful.


Yup, Schroeder on the 4th line, Kassian on the 4th line, Never tried Hodgson with Kesler and Booth but he's already gave Schroeder a shift with them. Ballard...Edler on the right side....etc.
  • 0

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#81 EagleShield

EagleShield

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • Joined: 18-February 13

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:36 PM

Most equitable solution for both really. Ballard deserves better than to be a 5/6 guy or a healthy scratch, and better treatment; and we need to be paying less for a 5/6 guy, and we need a RHD.
  • 0

#82 Vancanwincup

Vancanwincup

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 539 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 12

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:36 PM

I think everyone is looking at this in the wrong light, we should be be pretty thankful that we can scratch Ballard while we have Bieksa injured, to me this is a great sign as to the depth of the Canuck's blueline.


True, There is so many ways to look at this situation. I also think that the management is wanting to know how the other D men will play. Ballard is usually playing bottom pairing and has the highest potentail as being the odd man out next year, so the best choice to sit to get the other D men playing some games.
  • 0

#83 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,515 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:37 PM

Those of you who are using the overpaid chip are just dumb.

MG did not sign Ballard to that contract.. Even if he is overpaid, who cares.. If you sit him, that's 4.2 million sitting in the press box. That's still on your cap.. So why bench him at all, especially if he's doing well?

Most of you are talking as if benching a player clears his cap hit...

And most of 'you' are talking as if benching him was clearly AV playing favourites and there could be no other logic.

When he's a prime candidate for cap relief when it drops for next season, you have to see what else you have on your team to replace him, or look for an alternative. It's unlikely we see Ballard here next season, no matter how well he's played this year or how much people like him.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#84 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,168 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:38 PM

If we have a roster spot open up for whatever reason, I can see Connauton getting an opportunity. He's in much the same situation as Schroeder was last year, where he'd been playing well and we had to see what he could do at the NHL level sooner or later. Connauton has 10 points in the last 11 games with the Wolves as of March 1st.

.......

I mentioned earlier Ballard has 15 points in 131 games with Vancouver so far. Aaron Rome has played in basically a similar role (#5/6/7 D-man, with lesser minutes and little to no PP time) yet he had 19 points in 138 games with Vancouver. Rome is not known at all as a D-man who should be good at offence.

When Rome is on a better PPG pace that Ballard (a $4.2M D-man who'd previously had 20-30+ point years) that's a sign that you aren't good value for your contract.

Ballard does bring other things to the table: he's physical for being a smaller player, has great mobility and is a fantastic team guy (one of my favourite guys on the team off-ice). Considering his skillset (and price point) more is expected of him offensively even in the limited minutes he receives.


I hope to heck that Connauton doesn't see time this year. He's an adventure in his own zone.

Even in limited minutes, Rome has gotten more PP than Ballard did. When he's being told he needs to be flawless in his D coverage or he will get benched then it's easy to see why he isn't pushing into the offensive zone when 5 on 5. His lack of production is less an indicator of his play than the way he is being coached, IMHO.

Edited by theminister, 04 March 2013 - 12:39 PM.

  • 2

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#85 Down by the River

Down by the River

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,384 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:40 PM

Feel bad for Ballard, him and Tanev are arguably our two most consistent dmen this year.
  • 1

OMG we could've had McKeown!

I think Virtanen was a terrible pick given that he's out for 6 months which will hinder his development. You don't pick someone at #6 under that circumstance, along with the fact that he was given a 3/5 IQ (aka he's dumb). 

God dammit Benning. WHY VIRTANEN? Terrible move.

Down by the River - Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young.


#86 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,455 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:41 PM

I don't get why alot of you say Ballard has been constintly good but its a known fact he had 3 turn overs and was minus 2 in the Coyotes game. So are the smart Canuck fans implying that Ballard was scratched bc AV thinks he's ugly? There has much more to it than the way the guys look. I think we, as a fan, tend to think we are smarter or know what's going on more than the staff


Here is the thing about consistency........the longer the sample period, the more accurate the comment.....so basing it on one bad game with a couple of fluke goals (and basing it on +/- at all as it is a team stat) makes me wonder why you think he should be scratched after one bad game.
  • 0

#87 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,334 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:42 PM

I think everyone is looking at this in the wrong light, we should be be pretty thankful that we can scratch Ballard while we have Bieksa injured, to me this is a great sign as to the depth of the Canuck's blueline.


That sounds too logical for some here on CDC. ;)
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#88 Merci

Merci

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,320 posts
  • Joined: 25-May 09

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:43 PM

Luongo + Malhotra + Ballard = 12 million in cap space.

That is the equivalency of have two top 6 forwards being payed 6 million each.


Luongo is going to be traded eventually and we will improve.
  • 2

Keslerific, on 25 May 2014 - 4:47 PM, said:

Gaunce is wayy cooler though, Gaunce is the kind of guy you want to bring with you to Costco

 

vPTJpcO.jpg


#89 snolan

snolan

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,452 posts
  • Joined: 27-March 04

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:46 PM

I think regardless of outcome it can be said Ballard was playing well enough not to be scratched, he needs to get out of Van I don't think he's ever been given a fair shake here.

The bottom line I believe is he doesn't fit into AV's defensive system, he coughs up the puck too much and AV won't use him in offensive situations which is where Ballard is useful.
  • 0

CMON GUYS HAVE SOME FAITH! WE ARE GOING TO WIN. ANYONE CAN QUOTE ME ON THAT IF THEY WANT. YOULL SEE

-- 1st Period of Game 2 VS the Kings, 2012 Series

#90 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,455 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 04 March 2013 - 12:46 PM

When Ballard was acquired to be an offensive d-man top 4 guy, yes.

Who pays 4.2 million for a defenceman who's mediocre defensively and horrible offensively?


Are you trolling? Because if you are not you are failing.....
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.