BurningBeard wrote:Potatoe1 wrote:I think we would be better off right now with Aaron Rome, especially given Rome can play both sides.
Whoa, whoa, whoa... Alain?
Thats it, I knew Pot reminded me of someone, he is AV, who would of thunk that?
Moderator: Referees
BurningBeard wrote:Potatoe1 wrote:I think we would be better off right now with Aaron Rome, especially given Rome can play both sides.
Whoa, whoa, whoa... Alain?
Island Nucklehead wrote:Unless things have changed since the last CBA, his cap hit is still $4.5M (total salary divided by years of contract). So a team trying to reach the floor might find that attractive (making less money but counting for more...), but a team like the Canucks would probably prefer the cap space.
The point is, Komisarek COUNTS for $300K more than Ballard.
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Lancer wrote:
Even so, I'm in the 'Ballard looked better on a crappy team' camp. I give Ballard credit in that he did play pretty good the first couple of games... just like Kassian... I wonder if it's a trend where certain players in the league (either by playing during the lockout or some kind of lockout training regimen) got a head start against the competition but the market is correcting itself - guys who looked good early on are not so noticeable in a good way anymore.
what does Kassian have to do with Ballard ? Ballard, Kassian, Booth and Schroeder have now been sandbagged by the fat frog......is that what they have in common ? But hey Alberts and Lappy will thrive
Blob Mckenzie wrote:"Balltard" has been mismanaged since he got here and that is on AV. Doh I said " Balltard " on a message board.Tee hee Mrs Grundy . As for anyone wanting Komisarek or questioning why we didn't get Kadri or Van Reimsdyk .... I swear these people need to chip the feces off their domes with an air chisel , remove their heads from their colons and come up for some fucking air.
Todd Bersnoozi wrote:Bersnoozi's drivel
wafflecombine wrote:After reading the various posts here I have to agree with the analogy - round peg vs. square hole.
I still think Ballard is a decent player and would make a decent contribution on another team... but not us. The system doesn't seem to work for him and AV definately doesn't work for him. About the only thing that really went well was his pairing with Tanev. Lots of people are saying that Tanev makes Ballard better. I disagree slightly, they make each other better. Their pairing has worked well and they have been very reliable to date.
Either way, its clear Ballard is frustrated and has reached his limit. Guess we will see if MG can find a new home for him.
Island Nucklehead wrote:
I think Gillis has been going after point-producing d-men in the hope it will cover up our lack of offense up front. It works, but only to a point. I think Ballard is being miscast here, as he's NEVER been the kinda guy to play "safe" hockey.
Potatoe1 wrote:Island Nucklehead wrote:
I think Gillis has been going after point-producing d-men in the hope it will cover up our lack of offense up front. It works, but only to a point. I think Ballard is being miscast here, as he's NEVER been the kinda guy to play "safe" hockey.
Except Ballard doesn't bring any offence either. He has 1 point in 19 games this year and has 16 points in 145 games as a Canuck.
That would be fine if he were a really good defensive player, or perhaps a tough as nails physical beast type, but he's neither of those things.
What we have is a smaller player who doesn't produce any offence, and is merely ok in his own zone.
Yes he is better then Alberts but it isn't such a drastic difference that it should be causing the uproar that it is.
And yes I think we would have been better off with Rome.
Rome's defensive game was relativity similar, he's more physical, and most importantly he can play both sides which would allow the teams top5 d-men to all pay on their natural sides.
Island Nucklehead wrote:He hasn't brought US any offence. He was averaging nearly 30 points/year prior to joining the Canucks. Hence the "miscast here" comment...
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Get a pick or a cheap plug back for the guy and call it a day. That way they will have some cap space in order to upgrade the bottom pairing when the times is right.
Potatoe1 wrote:Island Nucklehead wrote:He hasn't brought US any offence. He was averaging nearly 30 points/year prior to joining the Canucks. Hence the "miscast here" comment...
Meh,
I don't see him bringing much offence to a good team. I guess if you let him run around all over the place he might be able to get something done, but he does not have the type of tools that typically lead to offensive production in a system with any type of defensive structure.
He doesn't shoot the puck very well, he isn't much of a play maker, and his passing is well behind our current top 5 D. Sure he can play in transition and drive the net, but playing that way typically results in as much going the other way.
I also think he's regressed somewhat since getting his big contract.
I do have to say this though, I have heard from a Canucks player that Keith Ballard is probably the most gifted defenceman with his offensive game and skill. The team sees it in practice but it disappears as soon as he plays in a game. You can see his skills when he rushes the puck up the ice. He has terrific speed. In Florida and Phoenix he played a bigger role in the offence.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 6 guests