Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* - - - - 2 votes

Why the Ehrhoff Trade and Ballard Bust is the Biggest Problem to Us


  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#1 Ugli Fruit

Ugli Fruit

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,879 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:38 PM

Our WCE era D-men such as Sami Salo and Mattias Ohlund were known partially for their fantastic puck-moving skills. They were good two-way d-men, and this meant that the entire team could move up the ice to attack very consistently. Vancouver played what you would call "counterattacking hockey", where the team was to move quickly down the ice and fire on goal rather than maintaining long periods of possession. This was apparent in the team's generally quick-moving, rush-based offense, led by Swedish boss Markus Naslund. This was a good combo for success.

That said, being able to transition quickly from defense to offense is the key for any attack, because without the transition, there is no offense to be had, whether that is seconds after the breakout pass or 30 seconds later, deep in the offensive zone.

The main point I am making with this little spiel is that the presence of multiple two-way puck moving d-men are very, very important for a team like the Canucks, what with their possession-risking attacking style offensively.

Let us assess the team's overall performance of the year 2010-11. I apologize for partially beating a dead horse, but Ehrhoff was a massive boost to the Canucks' attack. Why do you think we had so many comebacks that year? Our team had a good first pass into the attacking neutral zone, and we had this late in the game as the opponent tired out and felt the pressure of holding onto a lead with time barely remaining. The Sedins had amazing seasons offensively, especially on the power play. Luongo actually had a great year, even though Ehrhoff's kind-of weakness was defending.

The puck-moving d-man allowed the team to have a good chance of having a chance to attack more often than not. THIS is the main problem: we currently have no puck-moving d-men. To be honest, when Ehrhoff departed (right after 10-11, when we started having scoring problems), we really had no puck-movers.

I had this mini epiphany while watching the Canucks-Flyers game. I noticed that when teams press the defense, they panic and send it off the boards into the other zone. This, was a potential attack WASTED by the defense. This is the problem, not the offense. The offense is not getting chances to try anything, so the few opportunities they get are precious and they feel the extra pressure of just shooting. Without the puck-moving d-man, we cannot retain possession after defending, so we must return to defending. When we fail to create an offensive chance, the lack of a puck-mover results in the other team getting the puck and us having to defend.

This is what Ballard was brought in for. I guarantee you that if Ballard just played his game normally, we would have won the Cup. Our scoring would have been miles better with Ballard's transitional abilities on full display. Too bad that AV locked him in his doghouse like that poor woman for 11 years. AV come on man. That was the cup at stake.

The conclusion: We need a top-4 puck-moving defenseman. The NHL is SOOOOOOO fast nowadays and our transition always gets ripped in half by the horrid first pass.
  • 3

Formerly known as LordofBrussels

There we have it folks, we have literally blamed everyone for everything at this point


Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image


#2 MikeyBoy44

MikeyBoy44

    ⊂(◉‿◉)つ

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,605 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:40 PM

I wouldn't mind giving up hamhuis for one.
  • 0
Posted Image

#3 Dayman

Dayman

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 574 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:41 PM

Bigger loss imo


Posted Image
  • 1

#4 Darkstar

Darkstar

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,292 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 06

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:42 PM

I've been saying this for about two years now. The Canucks need a defenseman who can move the puck and until they get one, they have no chance in hell of ever making it past the first round. There hasn't been a single team in the league in the past 5+ years that won the cup without a d-man who can move the puck efficiently.
  • 3

Formerly known as TheEhrhoffEffect


#5 Sergei Shirokov

Sergei Shirokov

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,592 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 08

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:43 PM

Actually, I think most of our d-men one to six can move the puck pretty effectively. Ehrhoff was awesome because he was so damn fast.

Our defense is fine, we need a top-six forward.
  • 1

#6 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:44 PM

No such thing as the Ehrhoff trade, unless you're referring to the one that brought him here, and that's obviously not what you're talking about.

Not much you can do when there are GMs like Regier out there who throw crazy money and terms at UFAs.

Ehrhoff's 10 year deal.... can't match that derp factor.

Edited by oldnews, 15 October 2013 - 05:49 PM.

  • 2

#7 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,896 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:47 PM

No such thing as the Ehrhoff trade, unless you're referring to the one that brough him here.


Actually we traded his rights for a 4th,
  • 3

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!

CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#8 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:50 PM

Actually we traded his rights for a 4th,


Yes, technically you are right.

Dealt just before free agency to NYI.
Dealth the next day by the NYI.
Negotiation rights when it was clear he wasn't signing either place - but for all intents and purposes, he was leaving via free agency.

Edited by oldnews, 15 October 2013 - 05:56 PM.

  • 1

#9 Ugli Fruit

Ugli Fruit

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,879 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:55 PM

Actually, I think most of our d-men one to six can move the puck pretty effectively. Ehrhoff was awesome because he was so damn fast.

Our defense is fine, we need a top-six forward.


Dude. You literally read my whole post and I know this because you mention the point about puck-moving d-men. After that, you act like you never seen my post before and give literally the opinion to which I am opposed.
  • 0

Formerly known as LordofBrussels

There we have it folks, we have literally blamed everyone for everything at this point


Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image


#10 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 05:57 PM

Actually we traded his rights for a 4th,


Yes, technically you are right.


However, much like the Hamhuis signing here, trading Ehrhoff's rights for a 4th was the equivalent of getting something for nothing. Ehrhoff probably (very likely, almost definately, like 99.999*%) wasn't going to re-sign here unless he was made an offer by the Canucks in the range of what he got from Buffalo.

And, it was/is his best chance to win a Cup, so good on him for following his dream.

regards,
G.
  • 2
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#11 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:00 PM

However, much like the Hamhuis signing here, trading Ehrhoff's rights for a 4th was the equivalent of getting something for nothing. Ehrhoff probably (very likely, almost definately, like 99.999*%) wasn't going to re-sign here unless he was made an offer by the Canucks in the range of what he got from Buffalo.

And, it was/is his best chance to win a Cup, so good on him for following his dream.

regards,
G.


::D
  • 0

#12 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:19 PM

::D


What I meant is: Ehrhoff will likely be traded to a contending team (sometime over the term of his current contract), and that will be his best chance. ;)

Buffalo ain't going anywhere, anytime soon, and I think that was fairly obvious even at the time he signed there. It's just surprising to me that they crashed and burned this quickly.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#13 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:24 PM

What I meant is: Ehrhoff will likely be traded to a contending team (sometime over the term of his current contract), and that will be his best chance. ;)

Buffalo ain't going anywhere, anytime soon, and I think that was fairly obvious even at the time he signed there. It's just surprising to me that they crashed and burned this quickly.

regards,
G.


I thought you were referring to his comment when he signed there....that it (wasn't for the money but) was for the opportunity to win a Cup...
  • 0

#14 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,149 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:24 PM

From 1st overall and best PP in the league to middle of the NHL pack in two years.

The .org told Ehrhoff he had to accept Bieksa dollars if he wanted to stay here.

If I was a dman that led the league and tallied a 50 point year while Bieksa had 22 points I might have a small problem with that.

Edited by nuck nit, 15 October 2013 - 06:25 PM.

  • 3

#15 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:42 PM

From 1st overall and best PP in the league to middle of the NHL pack in two years.

The .org told Ehrhoff he had to accept Bieksa dollars if he wanted to stay here.

If I was a dman that led the league and tallied a 50 point year while Bieksa had 22 points I might have a small problem with that.


To be fair nuck, there could also be some truth to the position that the rest of the NHL figured out the Canucks' system and with little to no change they were doomed to poorer results, regardless of who was on the team. I do give Ehrhoff credit for being an able puck mover, but he might not have made that much of a difference in this situation.

As to his personal point production, I think the team was/is full of d-men with scoring potential (Bieksa, Edler, Salo). That these guys produced less during the two years Ehrhoff was here could be seen as testament to Ehrhoff getting more ice time with the Sedins and on the 1st unit power play, no?

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#16 Wheels22

Wheels22

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,130 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:48 PM

Bigger loss imo


Posted Image


Can you imagine if Rome had that hair when he played with us?.. AV would have needed new pants after every game...
  • 2

#17 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:51 PM

To be fair nuck, there could also be some truth to the position that the rest of the NHL figured out the Canucks' system and with little to no change they were doomed to poorer results, regardless of who was on the team. I do give Ehrhoff credit for being an able puck mover, but he might not have made that much of a difference in this situation.

As to his personal point production, I think the team was/is full of d-men with scoring potential (Bieksa, Edler, Salo). That these guys produced less during the two years Ehrhoff was here could be seen as testament to Ehrhoff getting more ice time with the Sedins and on the 1st unit power play, no?

regards,
G.


The quote from Snow at the time he turned around and re-dealt Ehrhoff's rights was that the offer he made Ehrhoff was "well north" of what the Canucks offered Bieksa - which was 5 years, 23 million - and wasn't enough - as it turned out, Ehrhoff got 10 years and 40 million - in other words, sayonara Christian, best of luck with your Cup aspirations.

Edited by oldnews, 15 October 2013 - 06:53 PM.

  • 0

#18 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:54 PM

I thought you were referring to his comment when he signed there....that it (wasn't for the money but) was for the opportunity to win a Cup...


I was. I just twisted it for my own ironic purposes. :)

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#19 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:56 PM

The quote from Snow at the time he turned around and re-dealt Ehrhoff's rights was that the offer he made Ehrhoff was "well north" of what the Canucks offered Bieksa - which was 5 years, 23 million - and wasn't enough - as it turned out, Ehrhoff got 10 years and 40 million - in other words, sayonara Christian, best of luck with your Cup aspirations.


Yup. But even if he had been signed, I'm not 100% sure that he would have made as much difference as some folks like to believe.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#20 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:57 PM

Otherwise, congrats to the Sabres on finally getting a win.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#21 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,925 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 15 October 2013 - 07:04 PM

this hasn't been a mystery
  • 0

#22 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 07:04 PM

I was. I just twisted it for my own ironic purposes. :)

regards,
G.


that's what I liked about it.
  • 1

#23 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,590 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 07:05 PM

Yup. But even if he had been signed, I'm not 100% sure that he would have made as much difference as some folks like to believe.

regards,
G.


agree again.
  • 1

#24 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,149 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 07:45 PM

*
POPULAR

Gillis offered Christian the same 22 point Bieksa contract and he asked to be paid more.
Ehrhoff stated he wanted to stay here but nobody wants to get hosed and their nose rubbed with Gillis ultimatums.
As a fifty point producer anchoring the #1 PP in the league the basis of his request was fair.
Gillis refused to pay him his worth and immediately cut him loose,which tells the story.
The Gillis press machine was grounded to a thud today over in the Hodgson camp.
One would think those that ate all the .org spin would be not spewing the Gillis press machine ancedotes on a day such as this:

I’m no detective, but it would appear contract negotiations between the Vancouver Canucks and defenseman Christian Ehrhoff aren’t going so well. My first clue? After Ehrhoff flatly rejected a similar offer to the five year, $4.6 million deal Kevin Bieksa agreed to the day prior, the Canucks traded him to the New York Islanders.
http://vansunsportsb...-going-so-well/

What is noteworthy is that Gillis never utilised the asset when he had no intentions to pay him what he was worth to begin with.

We need more Gillis/Booth ,Ballard,Luongo and Sundin contracts like a hole in the head but for crying out loud,Gillis has relegated the highest scoring,best team in the league into glorified muckers in just two years time.

From first to bottom third in the league takes some doing but you do it well,Mike.Now wear it.
  • 5

#25 CanuckBoss

CanuckBoss

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 460 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 13

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:08 PM

im still pretty chocked that we let Erhoff walk
mainly because of Edler and Erhoff chemistry, it was something up and coming
our one, two punch combo and i felt like they were just heating up
and then you have Hammer and Juice building there own solid chemistry
who ever saying we couldnt afford him is in denial
his cap hit is 4mill, peanuts in todays cap world for a D like him

i felt like after the cup run, signing Erhoff and Raffi was a no brainer

out gm'd?

Edited by CanuckBoss, 16 October 2013 - 12:21 AM.

  • 0

#26 Dragonfruits

Dragonfruits

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,680 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 08

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:12 PM

people forget about that 10 years attached to that 4 million cap and even that 4 million cap for a glorified offensive defenseman who's stats were inflated by the Sedins best years

people also forget that the guy can barely play defense isn't physical at all he can put up points that's it and that's a 3-4 million defenseman at best its not the fault of Gillis that he got greedy and was looking for a payday
  • 2

#27 canuckfan85

canuckfan85

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts
  • Joined: 08-February 13

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:15 PM

1. letting erhoff walk
2. no getting any immediate help from hodgson and scneider trade.

not sure why gillis still has a job...maybe he is less stupid than the other options???
  • 0

#28 SILLY GOOSE

SILLY GOOSE

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,975 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:31 PM

Uhh Bieksa and Edler are very mobile defensemen. Hamhuis is struggling but when he is on he can move the puck very well as well. Tanev is making even bigger strides this season taking control of the play.
  • 1

sig.jpg


#29 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,379 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:48 PM

We need more Gillis/Booth ,Ballard,Luongo and Sundin contracts like a hole in the head but for crying out loud,


But isn't the contract which Ehrhoff signed the kind of contract that you don't like?

Certainly the term is the worst part of the Buffalo deal. Spread over a six year term the team would have been looking at a $6+ million per year deal for Ehrhoff. With the full ten year deal Buffalo is looking at a $4 million per year cap hit even if he retires sometime in the latter part of that deal.

I don't like Ehrhoff that much.

regards,
G.
  • 2
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#30 N7Nucks

N7Nucks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,088 posts
  • Joined: 20-June 13

Posted 15 October 2013 - 08:54 PM

Actually, I think most of our d-men one to six can move the puck pretty effectively. Ehrhoff was awesome because he was so damn fast.

Our defense is fine, we need a top-six forward.

Defence is slower then a crawl, too many times they get pylon'd and aren't near fast enough on PP to push the opponents D back even when 5 on 5, hence Ed's always entertaining drop pass.

We need one fast puck moving D man per line to be honest. Bieksa and Garrison are too slow to be paired, Weber and Stanton are a solid 3rd set, Hammer and Tanev looked real good tonight but neither have real speed. Honestly if it were possible I'd move Bieksa or Edler or even try package Booth for a puck moving D-man.
  • 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.