Vancouver Canucks

Who's this guy? Tom Sestito Position: Face puncher Shoots: L Height:6’5" Weight: 228lbs Born: Rome, NY (near Utica, which is convenient) History: Inexplicably claimed off waivers from Philadelphia after the Canucks waived Aaron Volpatti, a slightly-less-poor man’s Tom Sestito. What'd he do? He punched seven faces – Brian McGrattan (loss), Ryan Reaves (draw), Mike Rupp (loss), McGrattan again (loss), Jordan Nolan (win), Jay Harrison (win) and Stu Bickel (loss). He also had awful possession numbers and added a goal in his 23 games as a Canuck, posting a -3 rating with 53 penalty minutes. Allegedly also struck fear in the heart of opponents, which is super important, apparently, since he got two years guaranteed the other week. So was he any good? No. I’m on record as not seeing the point in Sestito. I’m sure he’s a chill bro, but the Canucks have more pressing needs than a 13th forward or goon, so tying up the cap space now, in an offseason that will require some dancing around the cap, is silly. He’s also not very good, even as far as scrappers go, and I think the Canucks would have been better served earmarking the money for a better player who can also fight (they exist). What'd we like? This was pretty funny: And then, there’s the face punching: Cool. So what did we hate? Nothing about the man himself, just the principle that a team needs a guy like that, and is willing to guarantee him money. I don’t see the argument that he’s from near Utica and is thus pegged for the AHL, because even though his deal is small enough that it won’t count against the cap if he’s sent down, if that were the handshake agreement they could have waited until when cap flexibility isn’t as key. Also, he’s pretty bad. So what now? Nothing, really. He’s got a two-year extension to play the fourth line, fight some dudes, and perhaps be the hometown guy for the new AHL outfit. It’s not bad work if you can get it. Follow @BlakeMurphyODC

John Tortorella did a great job with the Rangers. The Rangers are, simply put, not a highly skilled team ala Boston, Vancouver, Chicago or even Toronto or Ottawa. JT squeezed every last ounce of ability out of that roster and inspired the team to play better as a group than the sum of their parts. Under JT players like McDonaugh, Stepan, Moore, Brassard, Stralman, Callahan ... all saw huge improvements in their games and became the foundation of the team. The Rangers overall talent is not anywhere close to the Canucks. The defense had Girardi and McDonaugh. Stall was hurt and the other guys, Moore, Del Zotto, Stralman, are not even close to the Bieksa, Hamhuis, Garrison, Edler group that Vancouver has. Up front, Gaborik and Richards were great last year and terrible this year. No two ways about it. JT played guys like Brassard, Stepan and Boyle instead and took the Rangers as far as they could possibly go before the Bruins simply outclassed them. In Vancouver he will have a ton of fire power, and if he can keep Kesler healthy and find some penalty killers and grit on the 3-4th lines, the Canucks will be a much tougher team/playoff team. JT's Ranger teams were meritocracies, he got more out of average players than most coaches and was not afraid to play young guys. His teams were tough, stood up for each other, and he took a stand against players who were simply not about the team - see Sean Avery. He will do great in Vancouver and give the team a needed kick. John Tortorella did a great job with the Rangers. The Rangers are, simply put, not a highly skilled team ala Boston, Vancouver, Chicago or even Toronto or Ottawa. JT squeezed every last ounce of ability out of that roster and inspired the team to play better as a group than the sum of their parts. Under JT players like McDonaugh, Stepan, Moore, Brassard, Stralman, Callahan ... all saw huge improvements in their games and became the foundation of the team. The Rangers overall talent is not anywhere close to the Canucks. The defense had Girardi and McDonaugh. Stall was hurt and the other guys, Moore, Del Zotto, Stralman, are not even close to the Bieksa, Hamhuis, Garrison, Edler group that Vancouver has. Up front, Gaborik and Richards were great last year and terrible this year. No two ways about it. JT played guys like Brassard, Stepan and Boyle instead and took the Rangers as far as they could possibly go before the Bruins simply outclassed them. In Vancouver he will have a ton of fire power, and if he can keep Kesler healthy and find some penalty killers and grit on the 3-4th lines, the Canucks will be a much tougher team/playoff team. JT's Ranger teams were meritocracies, he got more out of average players than most coaches and was not afraid to play young guys. His teams were tough, stood up for each other, and he took a stand against players who were simply not about the team - see Sean Avery. He will do great in Vancouver and give the team a needed kick.

If you believe the internet (and who doesn’t?) then you believe John Tortorella will be the next coach of the Vancouver Canucks. The opinions on this potential move vary from ‘worst decision ever’ to ‘might possibly work’. But I’m yet to find someone who thinks it’s the perfect fit. There are a lot of reasons for that. Mostly it comes down to the fact that the man who coached the New York Rangers appeared to be a ranting lunatic. He yelled at players, he benched stars and loved to openly hate the media. Do you honestly see Ryan Kesler taking well to being torn a new one? Or being benched? I definitely don’t. Could tough love work on Roberto Luongo? If he doesn’t start to cry, his overprotective fan base definitely will. (I know, I know he won’t be here, but still.) Most importantly Kevin Bieksa has come out and said “I don’t think we need somebody to come in a crack the whip.” Torts is a notorious, public whip cracker. So does Gillis and Aquilini you take the risk here and tell the team ‘you don’t know what you really need’ and give them Tortorella anyway? Based on what? His strategy? Let’s take a look at that too. With the Rangers, Torts relied heavily on Lundqvist. Too heavily. A goalie can’t carry a team on his shoulders. We’ve seen that fail time and time again. And the last thing Vancouver needs is a coach who comes in and lays it all at the feet of the starter goalie. Who is our starter next season anyway? And blocking shots? Vancouver isn’t made up of young bendable players anymore. It’s mostly mid-career, breakable players (I’m looking at you Ryan Kesler) so standing in front of slap shots isn’t the smartest move for this team. And this team has too many strong goal scorers… who aren’t scoring. We need a coach that can fix that problem, not one that gets Henrik Sedin to lay down in front of a shot. I’ve always thought that the Canucks were an overly emotional team. They need a coach that can harness that and focus that, not one that adds even more unfocused emotion to the room and the bench. Dan Bylsma was able to do that with the Pens when he first got there, although he seems to have lost that magic touch. Torts, in my opinion, can’t do that.. Sure the Canucks seem to do well when they think the hockey world hates them, but I don’t think they’d do well thinking their own coach hates them.

I admit to not being as fully engaged in Canuck news, but I didn't miss us signing another goaltender, did I? It seems that Mike Gillis has found one by signing Joacim Eriksson ( pronounciation please, native speakers, or maybe he'll get on twitter like our other Swedish goaltending prospect and we can find out there... ) a 6'1", 190 pounder who was drafted in 2008 by Philadelphia, 196th overall in the 7th round. You never know with goaltenders and draft rankings, but in the top Swedish league last year, he had a 1.67 GAA and .931 save %, on his way to a 21-9-0 record with 5 shutouts. Two things I like. In his eliteprospects page, they laud his being athletic and having great reflexes, and the second, when you read that page ( and the SEL is like soccer in Europe, you can be relegated, and their are higher and lower divisions. He was in the top level, for your information... ) you see that he improved every year. Oh, and a bonus observattion ( three! ) , check out those numbers in 10 playoff games last year : 1.06 GAA and a .952 save % Screw YOU and your "goaltender factories" Finland.

Okay, so the 2013 New York Rangers were a bit of a mess. They couldn't score. They played a defensive block-every-shot system that relied too heavily on their goaltender and wore on their players. They traded struggling star Marian Gaborik and benched a former Conn Smythe winner for two playoff elimination games. A far cry from the "Safe is Death" mantra he touted in Tampa Bay, watching John Tortorella's Rangers actually made death seem like a desirable option. But that in no way means he's a bad coach, and doesn't really have anything to do with the Vancouver Canucks. Tortorella was spotted at Rogers Arena on Tuesday, reportedly interviewing with Mike Gillis for the vacant head coach position. This scenario was correctly predicted by Elliotte Friedman the week before in his 30 Thoughts column: Does John Tortorella get an interview in Vancouver? Canucks GM Mike Gillis said in his season-ending media conference that breaking up the team's core wasn't high on his list of priorities. Vancouver has, what, a three-year window with that group? Tortorella took a beating last week. But other NHL executives don't dislike him as much as the media does. They will tell you he is perfect for a "win-now" situation. There's been this comfortable notion since Alain Vigneault was fired that the Canucks should hire a true "players coach". Someone who would walk in and with a few face-to-face meetings and a couple marks on a lineup card get the club back on track and develop all the young players into stars. There's only one problem with that idea: the Canucks don't have any young players. At least, not any who are ready to shoulder significant roles with the club. They're not Paul MacLean's Senators. Perhaps more than any other team in the league, the Canucks are in a "win-now" situation. That's why they didn't hire Dallas Eakins, an impressive-yet-inexperienced option. Most dismissed Tortorella as a realistic option for the Canucks as soon as he was dismissed by the Rangers. The grave dancing from the New York media and the perception that his players were sick of him didn't help Torts' image. But as Friedman points out above, being disliked by the media doesn't blacklist you from anyone within the game. Dealing with reporters and winning hockey games have zero correlation. When Tortorella joined the Rangers, they were a young team lacking offensive firepower and discipline in their game. The low event, throw-yourself-in-front-of-every-shot style Tortorella implemented was born out of necessity. All any NHL coach can do is work with what they have, and Torts didn't have much. That's not the case in Vancouver. If Tortorella's firing in New York came from failing to adapt his system once he had more offensive firepower, he should know exactly what he has in Vancouver. The core is skilled and experienced. They're in need of a new message, and there's little doubt that when he's at his most effective John Tortorella knows how to deliver a message. After experiencing a great deal of relative success and flirting with history, this core group of Canucks players is starting to get a little soft around the midsection. They were able to enjoy an atmosphere in which they policed themselves while the coach put them in the best possible position to succeed. They earned that right from Alain Vigneault. Now they need to earn it from somebody else. Earning it from Tortorella would be a hell of a task, and it may be enough to push this group over the top. The other aspect of this is that with Tortorella at the helm, the Canucks would instantly become the most hatable team in the NHL again. The last time they held that distinction they were pretty effective. At best, the Canucks hav a 2 – 3 year window with their current core. That timeframe just happens to match up perfectly with Tortorella's shelf life as a coach. Mike Gillis could go with a safer option, but consider what safe did to the New York Rangers. Then, consider what rejectin

WHO IS THIS GUY? Andrew Alberts Born: June 30, 1981 in Eden Prairie, Minnesota Position: Defence Shoots: Left. Height: 6'5" Weight: 218 pounds. Looks bigger than that in real life. Nickname: A-Train Contract Status: Unrestricted free agent 2012-13 cap hit: $1,225,000 History: Was drafted 179th overall in round 6 by the Boston Bruins in 2001. WHAT DID HE DO? With the great Aaron Rome let go to free agency in the summer of 2012, Alberts finally got more of a shot at cracking the top 6. Historically, with Vancouver's depth on defence, Alberts often found himself on the outside looking in. That did not change much this past season. Alberts was always on a short leash. In 2012-13 Alberts played 24 games out of a possible 48 games. He registered 1 assist. He was a -7. He had 32 penalty minutes. 6 of those were minor penalties. He received a couple of misconduct penalties in there as well. He blocked 31 shots, which was 7th-best on the team, and he only played half the games. SO, WAS HE ANY GOOD? I would say "yes". From a fan perspective, I thought he played a responsible, simple game in general. I can remember a time when I would sweat a lot when Alberts would handle the puck in his own zone. He was prone to turnovers. He was also injury-prone and took a lot of dumb penalties. I thought he went out and did his job this past season better than he had before. For the most part. He cracked down on boneheaded minor penalties. He blocked shots to a better degree than most Canucks did. I thought his breakout passes were better. On a team where the majority of the defencemen love to pinch in and be a part of the scoring, I really like guys like Andrew Alberts, who clean up in their own end and keep it simple. Lunch pail guys. COOL, SO WHAT DID WE HATE? That's a tough one. I didn't really hate what I saw from Alberts. At least, not until I researched his stats. The stats reminded me of something that pissed me off not only about Alberts, but the team in general: HITS. For a man of Alberts' stature, I expect more than 39 registered hits in 24 games from him. Remember this? Woo! Or this? Damn it. Where did the nasty Alberts go? He's turning into Marek Malik for f***'s sakes. The friendly giant. Nobody is going to like Alberts' -7 rating either. That is worst on the team, tied with Zack Kassian and Dale Weise. Looking at Alberts from advanced statistics point of view, he was forgettable. Corsi. Corsi Relative Quality Of Competition. Decent in the Corsi QOC. The team did not score much when he was on the ice. Strangely, Dan Hamhuis was the only defenceman who had a worse average (goalie / team) save percentage when he was on the ice. Alberts has a lower PDO than most Canucks, which means he is probably better than he was in 2012-13 statistically. Or whatever. I'm not going to Corsi school so **** you! SO, WHAT NOW? Unrestricted free agent on July 1 unless the Canucks re-sign him. Alberts has beastly size but doesn't use it enough. Would a new coach redirect him? Yes. Is Mike Gillis going to keep him because he wants the Canucks to be bigger? I don't know. All I know is that with the Canucks needing to trim cap space, Alberts' $1,225,000 contract that he had is too much given his role here. Alberts would need to take a pay cut, which I am assuming he won't. I guess I just answered my own question.

Who's this guy? David Jonathan Booth. Good ol' DJB, not to be confused with the Dark Jedi Brotherhood, an online Star Wars fan club that creates characters who follow the Dark Side of the force. Booth has Skywalker hair anyway. Position: In the "B" section of the ER Left Wing Shoots: It's coming right for us! Left Height: 6'0'' Weight: 200 lbs Born: November 24, 1984 in Detroit, MI. Shortly after delivery, he shot his first Thanksgiving turkey. History: Drafted in the 2nd round (53rd overall) by the Florida Panthers in the 2004 NHL Entry Draft. In that round Vancouver had no pick because they moved it to Pittsburgh in exchange for Johan Hedberg the previous season. Instead the Pens took Alex Goligoski and Vancouver waited until the 91st slot in the third round to roll the dice on some bag of bones named Alexander Edler. What'd he do? Cam Barker played more minutes this season than David Booth. Hold up, I jumped too far ahead. Lemme back up. After spending his summer shooting things and explaining to others why he enjoys shooting things, Booth showed up at training camp and - along with Mason Raymond - was projected to be leaned on heavily for production to help offset the loss of the still-injured Ryan Kesler. What could possibly go wrong? Well fair reader, seeing how this is the Vancouver Canucks we're talking about and small tragedies quietly await them behind every corner, it took only a few days of training before Booth knocked himself out 4-6 weeks with a groin injury suffered from allegedly over-training. With the steady aplomb of a marksman, fans surmised crazy things happen, Booth will heal and return with a vengeance, almost at the same time as the Keslord himself (so just ignore this unfortunate turn of events makes the Canucks effectively a one line team). Perhaps vengeance was too strong a word, but return Sir Booth did on February 19th in a losing effort against Chicago. Four games later he notched his first assist against Los Angeles and five games after that he tallied his first score (see below!) against Nashville. The collective enjoyment fans bathed in knowing the Canucks had their second line again was short-lived as during the very next game against Detroit Booth wrecked his ankle - as random an injury as you'll see - while racing out an icing (in those fancy threads too) and his 2012-13 tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury ended...signifying nothing. Well "nothing" isn't really fair either. He played a total of 12 games and added three points (1G, 2A), or roughly $1.42 million in cap space per point. So, OK, a little more fury... So was he any good? Booth played one-fourth of a season that was already cut in half, so comparing stats from the previous year as I usually do is pointless. The guy was cursed, pure and simple. Just to put some comical stank on Booth's mess is that in his short time with healthy ankles and a sound groin he played with three different centers (Maxim Lapierre, Chris Higgins and Jordan Schroeder) and his most frequent linemate was Zack Kassian. Sure AV had to fold him into the mix gradually from the bottom six, but still that's not a recipe for offensive success either. What'd we like? Here's 100% of his goals during the 2012-2013 campaign. Booth was credited with three hits this season. Here's a third of it. Booth has a sister. Here's 100% of her. Cool. So what did we hate? Sorry, what? So what now? When Booth arrived in 2011, it why easy to see why Gillis jumped at the chance to add him to the top six and advanced stats after his first year proved it. But sprinkling rare moments of of 'power forward' here and 'chemistry with Kesler' there doesn't blind most to the blaring clown horn that's been Booth's stint so far in Vancouver. Sure it's not his fault Kevin Porter can't control his own knees or that injuries seem to follow him like a shadow, but his arrival coincided with a stark downturn in the team's once bright, immediate fu

The Bruins-Blackhawks Stanley Cup Final will begin on Wednesday at 5:00 PST on NBC, CBC and RDS. This is the first time that original six teams have met in the Finals since 1979, when the Montreal Canadiens defeated the New York Rangers in 5 games to win their 4th Stanley Cup in a row. Chicago and Boston have not faced each other in the playoffs since 1978. That was an opening round series that the Bruins won. So this series has beauty to it in that it is a rarity. The Bruins and Hawks have never met in the Finals before. Never. Original 6 teams. Never. The last time these guys played against each other was October 15, 2011: Yea, Tim Thomas was an excellent goaltender. But Tuukka Rask was waiting in the wings to get his shot and he got it after Timmah decided to go on a sabbatical, or whatever the f*** he did. I see many of you want a napalm death to occur before this series even starts. I don't quite blame you in the sense that of all the god damned teams to play in the Finals...how the hell are Canucks fans supposed to watch this? My answer: for the same reason that you look when you drive past a car crash. If you are bitter to the point of tuning out this series so be it. But you are going to miss an excellent exhibition of NHL playoff hockey. I like the angle many have to pull for Chicago in that they will play a less goonish style and play a more skilled style of hockey with a smaller roster on average to succeed, as this benefits the current Canucks' status as a hockey team and its direction that was taken. The Bruins are labelled as a bunch of goons who break the rules to the point of the refs just giving in and not calling penalties on them because they obstruct that often. I tend to agree with that stance however....historically as the NHL Playoffs have gone on the refs tend to put the whistles away. It is what it is. NHL general managers need to adjust to this. If you think the refs are going to change their stance I am willing to wager you are a fool. Don't worry. The Canucks will adapt as the "reset"...just in time for the rules to change again. Anyways....here are some stats to chew on. BRUINS CATEGORY BLACKHAWKS 12-4-1 PLAYOFF RECORD 12-5-1 Won 5 STREAK Won 2 5-2 ROAD RECORD / HOME RECORD 9-1 3.12 (2) GOALS PER GAME AVERAGE 2.76 (6) 1.88 (1) GOALS AGAINST PER GAME AVERAGE 1.94 (3) 1.77 (1) 5 ON 5 GF / GA 1.44 (2) 15.6 (10) POWER PLAY % 13.7 (12) 86.5 (6) PENALTY KILL % 94.8 (1) 56.0 (1) FACEOFF WINS % 47.0 (14) 240 (3) ROAD HITS / HOME HITS 332 (2) 256 (2) BLOCKED SHOTS 217 (5) 65 (14) MINOR PENALTIES TAKEN 73 (16) Don't get all hopped up on the Bruins' futility on the power play. That is not their bread and butter, and was not in 2011 either. 5 on 5 is the key for both teams, as Chicago is surprisingly not all that hot on the PP either. Both have killed penalties effectively and 5 on 5 the two teams are near deadlocked. But hey, it's the Stanley Cup Finals. Anything can happen. Chicago has home ice to start the series, because they dominated all shortened season long. It will be interesting to see, given that these 2 teams rarely play against each other, how much of a feeling out process there will be. It's one thing to watch the video, but it all can change when they hit the ice. INDIVIDUAL STATS For the Hawks: Marian Hossa, Patrick Sharp and Patrick Kane all have 14 points in 17 games. Patrick Sharp and Bryan Bickell lead Chicago with 8 goals each. Corey Crawford has played 17 games so far, has a 12-5 record, 1 shutout, 474 shots against, a 1.74 goals against average, and a .935 save percentage. To say he has blossomed over the past couple years is an understatement. For the Bruins: David Krejci has 21 points in 17 games. Nathan Horton has 17 points in 16 games. Milan Lucic and Brad Marchand have 13 points in 16 games. Krejci and Horton lead the Bruins in goals scored with

The Bruins-Blackhawks Stanley Cup Final will begin on Wednesday at 5:00 PST on NBC, CBC and RDS. This is the first time that original six teams have met in the Finals since 1979, when the Montreal Canadiens defeated the New York Rangers in 5 games to win their 4th Stanley Cup in a row. Chicago and Boston have not faced each other in the playoffs since 1978. That was an opening round series that the Bruins won. So this series has beauty to it in that it is a rarity. The Bruins and Hawks have never met in the Finals before. Never. Original 6 teams. Never. The last time these guys played against each other was October 15, 2011: Yea, Tim Thomas was an excellent goaltender. But Tuukka Rask was waiting in the wings to get his shot and he got it after Timmah decided to go on a sabbatical, or whatever the f*** he did. I see many of you want a napalm death to occur before this series even starts. I don't quite blame you in the sense that of all the god damned teams to play in the Finals...how the hell are Canucks fans supposed to watch this? My answer: for the same reason that you look when you drive past a car crash. If you are bitter to the point of tuning out this series so be it. But you are going to miss an excellent exhibition of NHL playoff hockey. I like the angle many have to pull for Chicago in that they will play a less goonish style and play a more skilled style of hockey with a smaller roster on average to succeed, as this benefits the current Canucks' status as a hockey team and its direction that was taken. The Bruins are labelled as a bunch of goons who break the rules to the point of the refs just giving in and not calling penalties on them because they obstruct that often. I tend to agree with that stance however....historically as the NHL Playoffs have gone on the refs tend to put the whistles away. It is what it is. NHL general managers need to adjust to this. If you think the refs are going to change their stance I am willing to wager you are a fool. Don't worry. The Canucks will adapt as the "reset"...just in time for the rules to change again. Anyways....here are some stats to chew on. BRUINS CATEGORY BLACKHAWKS 12-4-1 PLAYOFF RECORD 12-5-1 Won 5 STREAK Won 2 5-2 ROAD RECORD / HOME RECORD 9-1 3.12 (2) GOALS PER GAME AVERAGE 2.76 (6) 1.88 (1) GOALS AGAINST PER GAME AVERAGE 1.94 (3) 1.77 (1) 5 ON 5 GF / GA 1.44 (2) 15.6 (10) POWER PLAY % 13.7 (12) 86.5 (6) PENALTY KILL % 94.8 (1) 56.0 (1) FACEOFF WINS % 47.0 (14) 240 (3) ROAD HITS / HOME HITS 332 (2) 256 (2) BLOCKED SHOTS 217 (5) 65 (14) MINOR PENALTIES TAKEN 73 (16) Don't get all hopped up on the Bruins' futility on the power play. That is not their bread and butter, and was not in 2011 either. 5 on 5 is the key for both teams, as Chicago is surprisingly not all that hot on the PP either. Both have killed penalties effectively and 5 on 5 the two teams are near deadlocked. But hey, it's the Stanley Cup Finals. Anything can happen. Chicago has home ice to start the series, because they dominated all shortened season long. It will be interesting to see, given that these 2 teams rarely play against each other, how much of a feeling out process there will be. It's one thing to watch the video, but it all can change when they hit the ice. INDIVIDUAL STATS For the Hawks: Marian Hossa, Patrick Sharp and Patrick Kane all have 14 points in 17 games. Patrick Sharp and Bryan Bickell lead Chicago with 8 goals each. Corey Crawford has played 17 games so far, has a 12-5 record, 1 shutout, 474 shots against, a 1.74 goals against average, and a .935 save percentage. To say he has blossomed over the past couple years is an understatement. For the Bruins: David Krejci has 21 points in 17 games. Nathan Horton has 17 points in 16 games. Milan Lucic and Brad Marchand have 13 points in 16 games. Krejci and Horton lead the Bruins in goals scored with

Who's this guy? Keith Ballard Position: D Shoots: L Height:5’11" Weight: 208lbs Born: Baudette, MN, United States of MURICA History: Has always been a favourite of mine for being nearly the same dimensions as me (I’m 5’10", 200lbs and also a stay-at-home defenseman, albeit a righty). I can only assume my 200lbs are distributed the same way his are. Oh yeah, the Canucks for him for Steve Bernier, Michael Grabner and a pick that ended up being Quinton Howden, who went pointless in 18 games this year like a LOSER. What'd he do? Almost nothing, in terms of the scoresheet. Ballard tallied a pair of assists, a -2 rating and 29 penalty minutes in his 36 games. Ballard was also just sixth on the team in minutes for defensemen, spending most of his time on a surprisingly effective third pairing with Chris Tanev. But a decent sixth D-man is probably not worth $4.2M, the amount Ballard is scheduled to earn in each of the next two years, leading some to speculate that he’s a buyout candidate for a team pushing close to the salary cap. That could open up $2.8M in cap room, and the Canucks have a ready replacement in Frankie Corrado. So was he any good? Umm, kind of, but not really? I find it difficult to evaluate Ballard separate of his price tag, which perhaps isn’t fair now that the deal is a sunk cost of sorts. But he’s straight-up not worth his price tag, and that clouds things. His possession indicators improved from his past couple of years, although part of that was due to a drop in competition quality and an uptick in offensive zone starts. Offensively, he’s just not a 20- or 30-point guy like he was in Phoenix and Florida, although even then he wasn’t strong in terms of driving possession. He’s fine as a third-pair guy, but I actually think he might have dragged down Tanev at times or used him for support. What'd we like? *file footage not found* Cool. So what did we hate? Inconsistency. The odd gaffes in his own end. Eating up offensive-zone face-offs because he wasn’t as trustworthy in his own end. Holding back Chris Tanev. $4M at times sitting in the press box. So what now? Look, he’s not a bad dude or a terrible player, but he’s overpaid. For a team with a few good young defensemen and some cap issues, Ballard is an unnecessary luxury. I’d be very surprised if he isn’t bought out or dealt with the team eating some of his salary. But still…he provides me hope that one day my body and boring style of play could be NHL-worthy (note: no). Follow @BlakeMurphyODC