Bowness on AV...err, I mean the Fans

[ClamRussel]

So who specifically was the hardest on Ballard last year...for playing well then having one bad shift...the fans??? ...the media?? ...or the head coach? Perhaps its coming through subconsciously, ...but no one was harder on Keith than AV and Bowness knows that. Perhaps he was as well.

“You know how easy it is to play in one of those markets where there’s no real attention on the game, the sport, the league, the team?” Canuck associate coach Rick Bowness said when asked of Ballard’s apparent transformation. “Then all of a sudden you come to a market where every shift is scrutinized. People put unrealistic expectations on a player, then they just look for a mistake.

“If Keith had eight good shifts and then made a mistake, all anyone wanted to talk about was that one mistake ... because the expectations were wrong. Sometimes it takes players time to adjust to a market like that and overcome those pressures.”

[Eddy Punch Clock]

^ That's a complete joke.

I agree about the scrutiny in a large Canadian market but that simply wasn't the case with Ballard. Managements treatment of the anti-Rome was unlike anything Canuck fans have witnessed in Vancouver. I think most fans we're baffled about how Ballard was being treated.

Maybe Bowness was just referring to BD and SC.

[mathonwy]

Obligatory Grabner comment..

[dhabums]

It's become pretty clear, even on this site, that if Keith Ballard cured cancer tomorrow there would be people complaining about how he has made it hard for oncologists to find employment.

[porp]

I don't see fans being critical of Ballard. Well, maybe fans who only know how to think the game by reading the opinions of a limited number of Vancouver "sports reporters." Bleh.

True, Ballard might not have been up to the level of conditioning (and, perhaps, the size) expected of Canucks players by Canucks coaching staff especially given his then-recent recovery from a back injury, but he was mis-used, under-used, and seemingly prejudiced against by the coaching staff to the detriment of the team's game on the ice. As people have pointed out, Ballard is an evidence centerpiece for a potential Gillis/Vigneault rift.

I've been too busy to really watch the games (yet) this season (hopefully rectified soon... ish), but how's Ballard been so far?

Andrew Alberts did far better on this team his second year here, and gossip was that he improved his conditioning and gotten to know the Canucks system better. Has Ballard gotten AnAl with the Canucks yet?

[Island Nucklehead]

Ballard was bad his first year here. The coaches didn't let him play his way out of it, but this is a team that doesn't have the luxury of letting players play their way through it. They expect wins, and execution. Ballard rarely provided that last season, that's why he sat.

The Canucks obviously knew about his health and conditioning, and Ballard said everything right throughout the season. It's the media and the fans that are making a big deal of nothing. He's played very well this season, from what I've seen.

[ukcanuck]

he does have the worst plus/minus on the team so far...in 5 games he has been on for 4 more goals against than he has for. considering the low point last year in the finals, when the team called up Baumgartner from his summer holiday to be ready ahead of Ballard...If I'm Ballard i would not want the worst minus at any point this year.

[Meds]

So who specifically was the hardest on Ballard last year...for playing well then having one bad shift...the fans??? ...the media?? ...or the head coach? Perhaps its coming through subconsciously, ...but no one was harder on Keith than AV and Bowness knows that. Perhaps he was as well.

“You know how easy it is to play in one of those markets where there’s no real attention on the game, the sport, the league, the team?” Canuck associate coach Rick Bowness said when asked of Ballard’s apparent transformation. “Then all of a sudden you come to a market where every shift is scrutinized. People put unrealistic expectations on a player, then they just look for a mistake.

“If Keith had eight good shifts and then made a mistake, all anyone wanted to talk about was that one mistake ... because the expectations were wrong. Sometimes it takes players time to adjust to a market like that and overcome those pressures.”

Well that explains the problem with Luongo too!

[Hockey Widow]

Ballard should have been dressed for game 7. It was a mistake to sit him when we had so many hobbled out there. Even if he dressed as an extra forward it would have been better since we got nothing from our 4th line anyway.

[Orcasfan]

Why the love affair with Ballard from some posters? Like every other D man, Ballard is expected to do his job competently. In the Canucks system, the first priority of the D is defending. That's why the team led the league in least goals against last year. Of course, that area tends to be Ballard's weak spot! His +/- stats are not to be ignored. Sure, everyone loves his hip-checks, but what about his D zone coverage, let alone his turn-overs?

All that said, I think we may start to see some improvement in his play this season...it better happen, because the guy is definitely on a short leash! I just wonder how coachable he is at this stage of his career.

Do you remember why Bieksa was on the trading block a while ago? It was his defensive play and his turn-overs that were driving the coaches (and fans) crazy! But when he was paired with Hamhuis, we saw that big improvement in his defense! Maybe the same could happen with Ballard. Personally, I think he should be paired with Salo who could be a great influence on his D zone play.

[Hank]

Why the love affair with Ballard from some posters? Like every other D man, Ballard is expected to do his job competently. In the Canucks system, the first priority of the D is defending. That's why the team led the league in least goals against last year. Of course, that area tends to be Ballard's weak spot! His +/- stats are not to be ignored. Sure, everyone loves his hip-checks, but what about his D zone coverage, let alone his turn-overs?

All that said, I think we may start to see some improvement in his play this season...it better happen, because the guy is definitely on a short leash! I just wonder how coachable he is at this stage of his career.

Do you remember why Bieksa was on the trading block a while ago? It was his defensive play and his turn-overs that were driving the coaches (and fans) crazy! But when he was paired with Hamhuis, we saw that big improvement in his defense! Maybe the same could happen with Ballard. Personally, I think he should be paired with Salo who could be a great influence on his D zone play.

It's not a love affair with Ballard, it's the ridiculous and constant amount of hate from coaches and some posters that prompted this article from TG and rebuttals on this forum. Even Bones has back-pedalled because as much as the coaching staff might still not like him, they need him right now. Tanev is not ready for big minutes and we've seen what happens when Rome and Alberts is asked to play bigger than their roles... not good.

We've all watched the first 5 games, so to toss out +/- numbers at this point to indicate some kind of defensive liability is silly. Bieksa is paired up with Hamhuis exclusively and is a -3, Dan is a +1. We all know how poor Samuelsson is defensively and yet his numbers don't reflect that. If you get caught on the ice while your goaltender is letting in soft, cheesy goals then that doesn't bode well for the other 5 players on the ice. There were two instances in Philly where some guys got minuses from horrible horrible line changes while the Flyers were in transition. Edler has not been good so far this year and was struggling for 27 minutes against Detroit. 27 minutes! Christian Ehrhoff is a team leading worst -3 in 4 games. And Bieksa was Special Kev for 4 years before management considered trading him. If you looked at his minutes during those 4 years, you'll see AV giving Bieksa plenty of chances.

+/- are sometimes not the best indicator... sometimes.

Look, no one is saying Ballard the greatest ever. He is a quality d-man who was not treated properly last year. We all want him to play much better because the truth is, we don't have a choice, we don't have the depth as last year and you know there will be injuries to come. He has been good, not great and we should expect him to be much much better. But so far he has not been worse than some of our other d-men. It's tough to make comparisons though when he hasn't been put in the same situations.

[sagebrush]

Early season D stats give a very rough indication of performance - after taking into consideration the work of defensive partners and forward's assistance.

Relative to defensive partners (according to +/-), Bieksa has been the worst performing Canuck defenseman - not Ballard. It's too early to panic about Ballard.


Prior to coming to Vancouver, Ballard was noted as a hard hitting shot blocker. He has had to adjust his game. It's hard for a defenceman to be assertive when you don't have confidence in your defence partner, and assistance from the forwards. Team positioning and work ethic has not been great (notable exceptions = Higgins & Burrows).

The early stats on give-away/take-away actually favours the bottom pairings.

As far as Bowness' explanation of Ballard's performance goes - it reads like BS designed to placate the media. Ballard had more on his plate than dealing with a new hockey market.

[Eddy Punch Clock]

^ For arguments sake though, I wonder how many of the goals that Ballards was on the ice for were ones that the goalie really should have had. Luongo and Schneider have both had some.

Plus/minus is such a hard stat to draw a conclusive decision from. Especially with such a small sample size.

[sagebrush]

^ For arguments sake though, I wonder how many of the goals that Ballards was on the ice for were ones that the goalie really should have had. Luongo and Schneider have both had some.

Plus/minus is such a hard stat to draw a conclusive decision from. Especially with such a small sample size.

Agreed - that it is premature to conclude much from +/- alone (especially at this point). However, when you take together the: +/- relative to D partner; hits & blocks relative other pairings; take away - give away relative other pairings, it paints a broader picture. Of Ballard playing more cautiously than in the past (as a noted hitter/blocker).

This may be good, considering Ballard's recent history, and coach's confidence. Another factor is the play of his partners. I was impressed with Tanev's progress last year, but he was brutal so far this year, with the Canucks.

[coco_canuck]

Whatever the reasons are, and there are many, Ballard wasn't good enough last year. That's a fact everyone can agree with. Whatever amount of blame we may put at the feet of the coaching staff, Ballard has to accept some as well. He was the team's most inconsistent d-man last year and had a hell of a time picking up the system.

I don't buy the personal vendetta argument, and I can see where the coaching staff was coming from with the handling of Ballard. They had good reason to be skeptical of his play and the coaching staff either couldn't find the justification to play him more or they didn't think it was merited.

I disagree with the way the Canucks handled Ballard. Yes, he was slow to come around, and yes his minutes should have been limited early, but for a team that understands the value of defensive depth, they should have worked with him more closely and put him in more positions to succeed.

So far this year his minutes have been down except the other night against Edmonton, but I'm still weary of how the Canucks coaches plan to use him. He hasn't been significantly better or significantly worse than the other top 4 d-men on this team since the season began, but like everyone else, he should be allowed to work his way through this and be given a fair chance to have a bigger role on this team.

Ballard has looked much better and comfortable than he did last year, but he has to improve. Unlike last year, I hope the Canucks stay patient with him and give him a better chance to succeed.