Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Fred
CC Legend
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Fred » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:10 am

Don't under estimate Tallon and Florida. He loaded up with picks in the last draft and I suspect he has a team that is on the up swing. His problem is he wasn't in the position to get a Stamkos type player. Yzerman is fortunate he took over a team with Lecavalier, St Louis, Stamkos and Hedman. BUt I have to believe DT will have some succes down in Florida. When Grabner was waived I'm not sure which teams were ahead on the Islanders in the pecking order ? if any
cheers

dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by dr.dork » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:36 am

Fred wrote:Don't under estimate Tallon and Florida. He loaded up with picks in the last draft and I suspect he has a team that is on the up swing. His problem is he wasn't in the position to get a Stamkos type player. Yzerman is fortunate he took over a team with Lecavalier, St Louis, Stamkos and Hedman. BUt I have to believe DT will have some succes down in Florida. When Grabner was waived I'm not sure which teams were ahead on the Islanders in the pecking order ? if any
Tallon did fine in Chicago, didn't he ? He assembled a team that won a cup which is more than you can say for most GMs. Yes, he had some monumental screwups from the point of view of salary management, but the fact is they still won a cup. He probably needs to be paired with someone who can actually add and give cap related advice.

On the Grabner front, it wasn't a dumb trade. We will see how Ballard does later in the year when it really matters. Farhan "wouldn't have given up Grabner", but he would have given up Mason Raymond and Hodgson. :lol:

It is also too early to determine if Grabner will ever make it into the top 6 on a reasonable team.

User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by the toucan kid » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:55 am

Tallon did fine in Chicago, didn't he ? He assembled a team that won a cup which is more than you can say for most GMs. Yes, he had some monumental screwups from the point of view of salary management, but the fact is they still won a cup. He probably needs to be paired with someone who can actually add and give cap related advice.
Tallon basically built a winner, but built it so that it had to be immediately dismantled. I guess it looks good on him, but he made some dumb moves, and those contracts deserved to get him fired.

I agree though, Farhan seems to always want something for nothing in his fantasy scenarios. Alas, we did have to give something (Grabner) to get something, but I think it was the right type of move at the right time.

User avatar
LotusBlossom
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 2448
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:53 pm
Location: Metro Vancouver
Contact:

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by LotusBlossom » Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:14 pm

I like the Ballard deal, give the guy some time, he did after all just come off hip surgery in the off-season and suffered a concussion.

He blocked a couple of shots last night and was better at clearing the zone than Hamhuis did.
parfois, je veux juste laisser tinber un coude volant sur le monde

User avatar
nucklehead_88
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:55 pm
Location: Maple Ridge B.C.

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by nucklehead_88 » Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:32 pm

LotusBlossom wrote:I like the Ballard deal, give the guy some time, he did after all just come off hip surgery in the off-season and suffered a concussion.

He blocked a couple of shots last night and was better at clearing the zone than Hamhuis did.
:thumbs: . i like it too, and people forget about the injuries. the last few games he's looked solid. not being spectacular, bu tnot being a goat either.
"HE WILL PLAY, YOU KNOW HE'LL PLAY, HE'LL PLAY ON CRUTCHES...."

Jim Robson

Farhan Lalji

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:12 pm

Island Nucklehead wrote:So who WOULD you have traded to land Ballard? You've been advocating getting even more top-4 d-men in other threads. If you want to acquire these types of players you do have to give up assets. A late first round pick and Grabner is a decent price to pay for Ballard. Bernier was a bonus for us to get rid of his salary. I'm just curious, Farhan, that's all. Give to get.

Despite Ballards poor/unlucky start to the season, I still do this trade again. I think the biggest loser here is Florida. Bernier is hurt, and they lost Grabner for nothing. Tallon should be kicking himself, not Gillis.
It's a good question: I also agree that in order to receive, you have to give. I'm not sure why Toucan Kid thinks that I feel otherwise. :?

As for drdork's comment - I wouldn't mind trading ANYONE on our roster outside the twins. If trading Hodgson and/or Raymond brings in a superstar, I'd be open to atleast hearing the idea.

As far as Ballard goes, I'm not sure who I would have given up instead of Grabner....maybe Schneider instead? (and since Schneider is worth more than Grabner, we could get a little more back in return). Then again, I would hate to give up Schneider as well (lol). In retrospect, I think it was a good deal but I'm just disappointed that GRABNER was the one that went. I liked how he played with Raymond and Kesler last year.

It's a tough call. With Sammy and Burrows on our top 6 for RW, Grabner was probably expendable. To answer the question, I probably would have parted ways with Hansen if possible (although given Hansen's lack of upside, I'm not sure if Florida would have gone for it).

User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by the toucan kid » Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:08 pm

It's a good question: I also agree that in order to receive, you have to give. I'm not sure why Toucan Kid thinks that I feel otherwise.
Basically because your proposals are usually something like, what we can afford to give up for what we need to get. It don't work that way.

Farhan Lalji

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:28 pm

the toucan kid wrote:
It's a good question: I also agree that in order to receive, you have to give. I'm not sure why Toucan Kid thinks that I feel otherwise.
Basically because your proposals are usually something like, what we can afford to give up for what we need to get. It don't work that way.
I see your point, but it's not like I go around suggesting 'Rick Rypien for Rick Nash' or whatever.

Having said, I probably do need to be a bit more objective when creating trade proposals. A part of my problem however is that I don't understand the needs of other teams (since I don't follow any other team). This is what leads to my natural bias kicking in.

dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by dr.dork » Thu Nov 25, 2010 5:54 pm

Farhan Lalji wrote: Having said, I probably do need to be a bit more objective when creating trade proposals. A part of my problem however is that I don't understand the needs of other teams (since I don't follow any other team). This is what leads to my natural bias kicking in.
You might also want to pull out a calculator. We're pretty much at the cap, Salo would put us $4M over (all this is approximate). So Rypien for Nash while perhaps a really fare trade on paper (for us anyway) it would put us about $12M over the cap. It might also be interesting to note that the BJs currently have the most wins in the west and are tied with Detroit for the most points in the west. So they might not be too interested in messing with that.

Same thing applies to your Iginla speculation btw, and there is also the little issue of Calgary being an interdivisional rival and Iginla being traded to Vancouver would get both Sutters strung up from the tallest tree in Calgary.

Farhan Lalji

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Thu Nov 25, 2010 7:33 pm

dr.dork wrote:
Farhan Lalji wrote: Having said, I probably do need to be a bit more objective when creating trade proposals. A part of my problem however is that I don't understand the needs of other teams (since I don't follow any other team). This is what leads to my natural bias kicking in.
You might also want to pull out a calculator. We're pretty much at the cap, Salo would put us $4M over (all this is approximate). So Rypien for Nash while perhaps a really fare trade on paper (for us anyway) it would put us about $12M over the cap. It might also be interesting to note that the BJs currently have the most wins in the west and are tied with Detroit for the most points in the west. So they might not be too interested in messing with that.

Same thing applies to your Iginla speculation btw, and there is also the little issue of Calgary being an interdivisional rival and Iginla being traded to Vancouver would get both Sutters strung up from the tallest tree in Calgary.
lol - nice attempt at trolling doc. :lol:

(or did you actually think I suggested a Rypien for Nash deal? :? ).
Last edited by Farhan Lalji on Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by the toucan kid » Thu Nov 25, 2010 10:22 pm

and Iginla being traded to Vancouver would get both Sutters strung up from the tallest tree in Calgary.
... a worthy endeavor.

User avatar
Cannie
CC Veteran
Posts: 143
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Chilliwack, via Perth, Australia

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Cannie » Thu Nov 25, 2010 11:18 pm

Grabner = Tambellini. And I like the local Canadian boy with family ties to the Canucks organization vs. Austrian wildcard tradeoff.

Ballard was solid last night vs. the Avalanche. One of the great things about watching the games live (I'm a partial season ticket holder) is watching full shifts of certain players. Ballard brings a lot to the table: a proactive, durable, agile, truculent ;) d-man who plays the game at the NHL level.

Let's also give him points for accepting the healthy scratch in an intense hockey market. He fully admitted that his game wasn't worthy of a top 6 position on a deep defense corps. Character guy, by all accounts.

And ffs Florida took Bernier off our hands, addition by subtraction.

Would Tambellini have 5+ goals with the Islanders this year given their lack of depth at wing? Grabner's production is not so impressive - they've lost 14 games in a row!

Cannie
:towel: :towel: :towel: GO CANUCKS GO!!! :towel: :towel: :towel:

dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by dr.dork » Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:27 am

Farhan Lalji wrote: lol - nice attempt at trolling doc. :lol:

(or did you actually think I suggested a Rypien for Nash deal? :? ).
No. But I was just using it as an example. Salary cap, how the other team is doing, players with NTCs, use your noodle (at least a little bit) before suggesting a trade. But I didn't think you were serious about Nash for Rypien. I'm not quite that dumb...

Having said that, I did like Grabner on the second line for that spell. He is fast. I think he was expendable because he has a history of being lazy and those leopards never really change their spots. He could prove me wrong, but either way I don't think I would blame MG for giving up Grabner and a pick for Ballard. We didn't have much else to offer. Schneider was a possibility, I suppose, but there may have been no interest there.

Farhan Lalji

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:45 am

dr.dork wrote:
Farhan Lalji wrote: lol - nice attempt at trolling doc. :lol:

(or did you actually think I suggested a Rypien for Nash deal? :? ).
No. But I was just using it as an example. Salary cap, how the other team is doing, players with NTCs, use your noodle (at least a little bit) before suggesting a trade. But I didn't think you were serious about Nash for Rypien. I'm not quite that dumb...

Having said that, I did like Grabner on the second line for that spell. He is fast. I think he was expendable because he has a history of being lazy and those leopards never really change their spots. He could prove me wrong, but either way I don't think I would blame MG for giving up Grabner and a pick for Ballard. We didn't have much else to offer. Schneider was a possibility, I suppose, but there may have been no interest there.
Personally? In response to Island Nucklehead's question from earlier on, I would have offered Hansen instead of Grabner. Hansen is a better overall player than Grabner, but I just love Grabner's upside....and the "Burrows-like" flashes of brilliances that he displayed (I always felt that in this regard, Grabner reminded me of the 07' version of Burrows). Then again - the "potential for upside" may have been the reason why the Panthers asked for Grabner.

User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7950
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Who likes the Ballard deal now?

Post by Island Nucklehead » Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:50 am

Farhan Lalji wrote: Then again - the "potential for upside" may have been the reason why the Panthers asked for Grabner.
Bingo. They saw the same thing we did... a potential 25-30 goal guy. The problem is there are more guys that DON'T reach that level than do (Cannie brings up Tambellini - excellent point). We got Tambo for nothing, and Grabner already had no space on this roster (until Samuelsson's production nose-dived).

Ultimately we gave up a two question marks for a guy with a bona-fide track record.

Post Reply