wallstreetamigo Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 He might be, but that doesnt make his points anymore valid. Ballard has really played well this season, which is great. But he has 0 offensive game to speak of. And as much as I dont care how much someone makes as long as they are playing well, 4.2 for Ballard is far too much for a 7-8, especially when this team is running extremely short on C's now. I like Ballard, he is fast, fiesty and has found his game (defensively) but if moving him means clearing up space for another top 6 C, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5minutesinthebox Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Ballard has a Ntc. If MG wants to trade him, Ballard and his agent will know about this already. It seems they have no clue why he was scratched in the last two games tho. When a huge av supporter like myself question av's move. No, disgusted with it, then I think there is a real problem here. Ballard has been doing everything the team asked him to do without complain. He degrade himself from a top 4 defenseman in any team to a healthy scratch over someone like Rome, and this is what he gets????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I'm not going to go into that depth (I spend enough time on here as it is) but the lack of significant point difference because of that extra time for Rome doesn't excuse Ballard from not producing enough in the same style of 5 on 5 role while he's been here. I'd be interested to see your take on that extra time and why it benefited Rome much more though so that we shouldn't be critical of Ballard's offensive production in his 3 years here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooBie604 Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Although I like to give the coaching staff the benefit of the doubt because a lot of decisions are not just affected by games we see but what goes on behind the scenes. For all we know Ballard is late for practice or refuses to follow a health regimen set out by the staff. However, I am very miffed about this decision to sit him as well because he has been playing pretty good this season. A couple bad games and he's bench just doesn't make any sense. I am really curious as to why he's in the doghouse again. It can't be because of what we've seen on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I usually respect AV's decisions. I thought the "Alberts over Ballard" decision in LA was smart, but against Calgary? Overrated or Underrated, AV needs to give his head a shake, you don't treat a character player like that. I'm sorry, but Alberts is useless, especially at $1,000,000/year. Give Ballard the reigns next game or respect will be lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 You already know how much I respect your opinion on anything hockey related but how many times do I have to give you a + in one thread here? People do not look past the numbers to see exactly what those numbers mean.....because it is too hard. It's easier to just pretend like you know something because you can read stats based on the entire year..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Although I like to give the coaching staff the benefit of the doubt because a lot of decisions are not just affected by games we see but what goes on behind the scenes. For all we know Ballard is late for practice or refuses to follow a health regimen set out by the staff. However, I am very miffed about this decision to sit him as well because he has been playing pretty good this season. A couple bad games and he's bench just doesn't make any sense. I am really curious as to why he's in the doghouse again. It can't be because of what we've seen on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nashi Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I guess Ballard is our Wade Redden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 We all seem to be assuming he was benched cause he is the doghouse. For all we know there is another reason (I think someone in this thread said something along those lines - showcasing, pending trade, or one of the reasons you say). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 ya, you showcase your product with benching him and it can't be a pending trade because Ballard has a NTC. He and his agent would have known about this before he becomes a healthy scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Management and AV are really making this team look bad lately. First our star rookie demands a trade out of here, then they force a player into early retirement despite him saying he's fine. Now a second player in less than a year might be demanding a trade? (third if you believe Luongo asked for one) This organization is slipping right now. You don't treat players like this, otherwise good luck tying to sign new players in the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I hope this is about a trade, otherwise it is very poor player management. Seriously. Alberts and Barker are not better Dmen than Ballard. If Ballard asks for a trade, then any value that has increased during the season will be wiped out. It's pretty hard to get much when every team knows that he wants out. On the other hand, if this was just about giving Alberts some playing time and having a look at Barker, then it is not an issue. I really can't see AV sitting any of the other D's, so Ballard gets the press box. If he doesn't play in the next game, I don't know what to think (back to paragraph one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Your royalty cheque is in the mail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papayas Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I meant showcasing someone else (Alberts?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I hope this is about a trade, otherwise it is very poor player management. Seriously. Alberts and Barker are not better Dmen than Ballard. If Ballard asks for a trade, then any value that has increased during the season will be wiped out. It's pretty hard to get much when every team knows that he wants out. On the other hand, if this was just about giving Alberts some playing time and having a look at Barker, then it is not an issue. I really can't see AV sitting any of the other D's, so Ballard gets the press box. If he doesn't play in the next game, I don't know what to think (back to paragraph one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Management and AV are really making this team look bad lately. First our star rookie demands a trade out of here, then they force a player into early retirement despite him saying he's fine. Now a second player in less than a year might be demanding a trade? (third if you believe Luongo asked for one) This organization is slipping right now. You don't treat players like this, otherwise good luck tying to sign new players in the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I will finally get to see Ballard play on the PP. Although it will be with Datsyuk and Zetterberg instead of the twins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5minutesinthebox Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I absolutely think Ballard should be traded. He does not deserve what he is getting at all. Offense for D comes from opportunity. Ballard plays a limited role and knows that as soon as he makes a defensive mistake he will be benched.......does that seem like an environment where he would be willing to take any chance at all offensively? The guy had 28 points his last year in Florida. And you expect that all of a sudden he lost his offensive game that much without it being at least partially to do with his role and opportunity in VAN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 you don't showcase a 7th/8th defensman at the cost of our core player's confident, especially when that certain player has been one of our most reliable defensman this season. it's like healthy scratching Burrows so we can show case someone in our farm team. It's illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Omfg wtf is wrong with av... Ballard has been one of our best dmen and he got benched over eddy hamhuis garrison and Albert's who have all played worse than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.