Keith Ballard

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

Moderator: Referees

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Jovocop » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:46 pm

Island Nucklehead wrote:
Jovocop wrote:
$4.2m for a depth that might never play another game is too much. As bad as Komisarek is, at the very least, he should be an upgrade over Alberts. Also, he is a RH defenseman that this team sorely needs. As long as Alberts is not on ice every game from now til the trading deadline, I would not mind taking Komisarek for Ballard now.


vs. Komisarek at $4.5? With a NMC? At least we can move/dump Ballard wherever we want. We take on Komi and we're stuck with him. Saving 900K dumping him in the minors isn't even an option. ADDING salary to our bottom pairing with a guy that will probably be bought out this summer? No thank you.

I'd rather dump Ballard for a draft pick than take on a worse contract that still might not play...


This is quoted from TSN's article about Komisarek:

The 31-year-old, who has no points in four games for Toronto this season, has a modified no-trade clause. He is in the fourth season of a five-year, $22.5 million contract, with an annual cap hit of $4.5 million.


I am not so sure about what it means by "modified". Anyhow, Komisarek could not crack the Leafs' top-six might not mean that he would not crack the Canucks' top-six. He does fill a need for the Canucks, a RH defenseman. Also, he could be the crease clearing defenseman that the Canucks need. I don't see much difference in terms of caps. It is slightly higher this year but it is also one year shorter than Ballard's contract. At the end of the day, it is not a good asset management to have a $4.2m defenseman sitting while playing two fringe defensemen instead. Ballard's trade value is not going to increase while sitting in the press box. The sooner the problem is addressed, the better it is for everyone.
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1692
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:47 pm

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
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3022
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Jovocop » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:59 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Jovocop wrote:$4.2m for a depth that might never play another game is too much. As bad as Komisarek is, at the very least, he should be an upgrade over Alberts. Also, he is a RH defenseman that this team sorely needs. As long as Alberts is not on ice every game from now til the trading deadline, I would not mind taking Komisarek for Ballard now.



Komisarek is fucking brutal. Garbage player who can't play in the Leafs lineup but he will play here ??? Right.

"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.


Exactly, what kind of return are the Canucks going to get for Ballard? Crosby? Weber? Nobody will give the Canucks a decent return for Ballard. I know that Komisarek sucks on the Leafs but as I said it fills a need for the Canucks. It is still better than having a $4.2m defenseman in the press box with his trading value going down further every game.
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1692
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Arbour » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:02 pm

For what its worth from NHL stats:

Games Player Giveaways
21 Edler 14
21 Garrison 10
21 Hamhuis 14
21 Tanev 8
19 Ballard 8
18 Bieksa 13

Alberts and Barker listed at 0.

As far as Komisarek goes why would we want a player who can't even crack the Leafs lineup?
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:54 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:04 pm

I don't give a shit if anyone wants to give a decent return for Ballard or not. A 7th round pick or a 1.5 million dollar slug is better value than Komisarek. He fucking sucks !!!! I don't care if he is rh or not the guy can't skate, he has zero offence to his game, he is a punching bag and makes the same money as " Balltard " :lol: :lol: :lol: I said it again. where's the drum roll ?
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3022
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:17 pm

Topper wrote:I have long suspected there is something with Ballard toeing the party line or practice work ethic that puts him in AV's doghouse. Recall his first season when he was scratched. The team statement was he wasn't healthy and a couple of days later Ballard says he's been a healthy scratch.


That and that....

Further, he was mostly terrible for 2 years and really not all that great this year.

Sure he has been fine in 3rd pairing min, but for those who remember Eherhoff looked like Paul Coffey a few years back when he was playing on the 3rd pairing.

Ballard is simply a massively over paid player, who's a few months from a buy out. The trade was a dud but the bigger problem is that GMMG did not seem to push for a trade after his first year when it was clear Ballard wasn't going to work out.

I think we would be better off right now with Aaron Rome, especially given Rome can play both sides.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:20 pm

Arbour wrote:For what its worth from NHL stats:

Games Player Giveaways
21 Edler 14
21 Garrison 10
21 Hamhuis 14
21 Tanev 8
19 Ballard 8
18 Bieksa 13

Alberts and Barker listed at 0.



Most worthless stat ever.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:25 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
Topper wrote:I have long suspected there is something with Ballard toeing the party line or practice work ethic that puts him in AV's doghouse. Recall his first season when he was scratched. The team statement was he wasn't healthy and a couple of days later Ballard says he's been a healthy scratch.


That and that....

Further, he was mostly terrible for 2 years and really not all that great this year.

Sure he has been fine in 3rd pairing min, but for those who remember Eherhoff looked like Paul Coffey a few years back when he was playing on the 3rd pairing.

Ballard is simply a massively over paid player, who's a few months from a buy out. The trade was a dud but the bigger problem is that GMMG did not seem to push for a trade after his first year when it was clear Ballard wasn't going to work out.

I think we would be better off right now with Aaron Rome, especially given Rome can play both sides.


I don't disagree he is overpaid. However he has also been completely mismanaged as an asset and he is clearly a better player than Barker or Alberts. Other than one season is Phoenix he has not been a big PP producer , but he has always put up around 25- 30 ES points. Those are great numbers and the dude can skate like the wind..... easily the best skater of this teams d -men. I remember watching him play with the Yotes and i quite liked him.

It's a round hole - square peg thing.Very few d men are allowed to carry the puck in AV's system. AV isn't going to play the guy. My point is why completely shitcan the asset. As I said it's like kicking in gold or puke colored shag carpet over top of hardwood. Play the guy, jack up his value and trade him. See Hodgson- Cody.
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3022
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Potatoe1 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:43 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:I don't disagree he is overpaid. However he has also been completely mismanaged as an asset and he is clearly a better player than Barker or Alberts.


I agree, except AV's job is winning hockey games not "Managing Assets"...

Gillis should have tried to move Ballard after his first year when it was clear he wasn't a fit.


Other than one season is Phoenix he has not been a big PP producer , but he has always put up around 25- 30 ES points.


Yeah so what the fuck happened.

He has like 10 points in like 200 games for one of the best offensive teams over that period. That is on him


Those are great numbers and the dude can skate like the wind..... easily the best skater of this teams d -men. I remember watching him play with the Yotes and i quite liked him.


Agreed.

We have not seen that player though.

And keep in mind his slide started the year before we got him. His blow upp's with the coaching staff in Florida were well documented.

My take on Ballard is that he was a bit over rated to start with and he took his foot off the gas when he signed his last deal.

I don't think he keeps himself in great shape and his over all effort isn't where it should be.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Diehard1 » Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:50 pm

The argument isn't whether he's overpaid or whether he has trade value - the issue is that he's a $4.2 million asset sitting in the press box. Trade him for a bag of pucks and you'd be better off, at least then you can use the cap space to eat a contact in a Lu deal, or trade Raymond for a more expensive winger, or add a center - many possibilities.

A guy who is eating that much cap and producing a shitty return makes no sense. At least a guy like Booth is driving play and getting lots of chances while he's on the ice even if he's snake bitten, Ballard is completely useless right now. There are lots of teams that need D especially if you eat some of his cap hit, surely he has some value around the league and if not, trade him for nothing so you can add somebody who will actually contribute.

Guess we'll see tomorrow if he's playing or not - if he's a healthy scratch for a 3rd game might as well get somebody here who AV and co will actually play.
Diehard1
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:48 am

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Strangelove » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:13 pm

Lancer wrote:Maybe Ballard's sitting out to rest some Dmen who've played lots and give the press box crew some reps during a month with a ridonkulous schedule.


Not a chance Lance, AV's stated reason for benching Ballard: "I'm icing the team that gives us the best chance to win".

Lancer wrote:I wasn't overly surprised Bieksa drew out, and rotating some of the Dmen in and out makes sense.


No way Jose, Bieksa is struggling with a sore groin PERIOD

Fact is, AV sincerely believes Mr Ballard sucks more donkey balls than Stewie! :shock:


#Canucks defenseman Keith Ballard's agent Ben Hankinson says he will be calling the Canucks today regarding his client.

Hankinson says Ballard is "obviously frustrated with being healthy scratch last 2 games".

Hankinson says Ballard is trying to be patient but it's tough being in doghouse again.



Ballard to Colorado for O'Byrne :thumbs:
____
"I like to think that this team can get its mojo back" - Ryan Miller
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7098
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Lancer » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:24 pm

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


All I'm saying is Ballard looked good early on, but so did a lot of other people in the league - people who aren't doing so hot now that the rest of the players have caught up to speed. AV or no, Ballard wasn't great the last two games.
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.
User avatar
Lancer
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1357
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Arnprior, Ontario

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby dangler » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:45 pm

Strangelove wrote:Ballard to Colorado for O'Byrne :thumbs:


now THAT would be a bold move!

Is Ballard overpaid? Sure, but there's always someone on every team that is.

Quality-wise, where would you rate Ballard as a #7 d-man in comparison with the other 29 teams #7 d-man?

He's good back-up and his deal is almost up.

Ride it out unless a sweet deal bites the Gillis right square in the ass
Last edited by dangler on Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dangler
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:31 pm
Location: Commercial Drive Coffee shop

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby Overtime » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:52 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:OK, so I'm starting a new thread. Why? Because I just don't get it.

Apparently it is true, Ballard has been a healthy scratch the last two games. I for one would like to know why.

He has been one of the more consistent D'men this season. He gets punished because he can't play the R side while others get a pass. He gets benched and Alberts gets to keep playing. He sits with Barker gets the call.


Ok, Ok, Ok, so we want to see what Barker can bring, fine. We know what Alberts brings and yes he needs to play. But why bench Ballard? And why for 2 straight games. When he fucks up he sits for games on end but others get a pass.
AV has mis managed Ballard from day one.

I'm still sore we go into game 7 of the finals with Ehrhoff barely able to lift his shoulder, can't hit and can't shoot, Edler with 2 broken fingers, can barely hold stick and can't shoot. Yet no Ballard. Not even as a forward where we had Glass playing with broken ribs, could barely skate or hit. Yet games 7 we sit a healthy D'man for some reason. Oh and lets not talk about one eye Manny drawing in over Hodgson and Ballard.

I get that Ballard is over paid to be on the bottom pairing. I get we have too many D'men making over 4 million + and all playing the left side, or playing there better. I get one will in all likelihood have to be moved. OK, fine, then move one of them. I don't get how or why he has been handled this way by the Canucks. I have no great love for the guy I just think he is better than Alberts and Barker at this point. I get that the defence is running around a lot but how do you lay the balm on one guy. Sit Edler a game or two for his brain farts. Sit garrison for a game or two for his brain farts.

Apparently Ballard's agent plans to talk to the Canucks this week. I guess Keith has had enough too. So trade him already MG. Even if all you get is a low round draft pick get his cap off the books.
I sense your concern as well H.W. I have finally committed myself to realize that a coaching change is on the verge of necessity with regards to our team. I feel unfortunately that other teams can now prepare for us predictably. This is due to a mentally lazy coaching style. A.V. has never been a coach, in my opinion, that can mix things up properly. Sure he will mix up lines but it seems to only result in some confusion to our own players. He has constantly rode on the two top lines, our pricey defense and two first class goaltenders. This is just unacceptable. He must go. He seems to want to nurture francophones and defence first types but cmon, one needs to grow out of the box.
Overtime
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 5:59 pm

Re: Keith Ballard

Postby BurningBeard » Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:42 pm

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?

:lol:
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.
User avatar
BurningBeard
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], BingoTough and 2 guests