Burrows? Do We Really Need Him?

[aGENT]

Wouldn't be shocked to see him traded, wouldn't be shocked to see him retire here. Honestly, I'm fine with either as his value is likely pretty equal (leadership to prospects, PK etc vs probably a late 2nd/early 3rd pick) either way.

I could really give 2 poops about his cap hit. Cap is REALLY not a concern moving forward and if we have an overpaid vet or two on the roster it's pretty 'meh' on my care-o-meter.

[smokes]

I don't know how Burrows ended up being the whipping boy on this forum but he doesn't deserve it. He got us the 2-1 shootout and when he is not producung, he is not necessarily hurting us either. I personally hope that Burrows retires a Canuck. When you think about important goals, he has always among the ones who scores when it matters most. Burrows was never projected to be a top six player he was just there because he worked well with the Sedins and in today's NHL his cap hit is not too bad for a third or fourth line player. He has a higher salary that many yes but did anyone remember the low ball contracts he played out when he was younger and with the Sedins? I tend to think that he deserved the contract even based on service to the company. I personally don't think Burrows will be traded because you don't want to get too young too fast as with what's going on in Vancouver right now. Burrows is still effective on the defensive end and an invaluable mentor as a career long Canuck and he was mentored by Linden when he was first breaking into the league. Linden has his favorites, the Sedins, Edler, Burrows is definately one of them. 

 

So, Yes, I as a Canucks fan, really need him.

Edited January 5, 2016 by smokes

[Jack Fig]

Burrows would be a useful depth player for some playoff team. Do him a favour and send him to the Habs for free. No salary retention, no asset coming back....done deal. And $4.5M more for July 1.

 

[DarthMelvin]

5 minutes ago, smokes said:

I don't know how Burrows ended up being the whipping boy on this forum but he doesn't deserve it. He got us the 2-1 shootout and when he is not producing, he is not necessarily hurting us either.

So, Yes, I as a Canucks fan, really need him.

I agree....

The shoot out basically shows why he is here....If we could get him some mates that are hungry he could flourish. He needs chemistry and he will be golden...but for now he needs to shut his mouth and get back to basics...

[RonMexico]

1 minute ago, smokes said:

I don't know how Burrows ended up being the whipping boy on this forum but he doesn't deserve it. He got us the 2-1 shootout and when he is not producung, he is not necessarily hurting us either. I personally hope that Burrows retires a Canuck. When you think about important goals, he has always among the ones who scores when it matters most. Burrows was never projected to be a top six player and in today's NHL his cap hit is not too bad for a third or fourth line player. He has a higher salary that many yes but did anyone remember the low ball contracts he played out when he was younger and with the Sedins? I tend to think that he deserved the contract even based on service to the company. I personally don't think Burrows will be traded because you don't want to get too young too fast as with what's going on in Vancouver right now. Burrows is still effective on the defensive end and an invaluable mentor as a career long Canuck and he was mentored by Linden when he was first breaking into the league. Linden has his favorites, the Sedins, Edler, Burrows is definately one of them. 

It's purely sentimental to keep Burrows around at this point. Higgins doesn't produce but doesn't hurt the team defensively yet everyone wants to punt him asap. I would like both of them moved along.

[smokes]

Just now, RonMexico said:

It's purely sentimental to keep Burrows around at this point. Higgins doesn't produce but doesn't hurt the team defensively yet everyone wants to punt him asap. I would like both of them moved along.

Higgins is another story, I would not mind higgins being moved because he has been ineffective. At least with Burrows, you know he is on the ice. When there are highlights to the games, Burrows at least will show up once in a while if not with points then with something else. Higgins is invisible,

[ForsbergTheGreat]

15 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Wouldn't be shocked to see him traded, wouldn't be shocked to see him retire here. Honestly, I'm fine with either as his value is likely pretty equal (leadership to prospects, PK etc vs probably a late 2nd/early 3rd pick) either way.

I could really give 2 poops about his cap hit. Cap is REALLY not a concern moving forward and if we have an overpaid vet or two on the roster it's pretty 'meh' on my care-o-meter.

It's more about roster spots than cap. Is it really worth one more year of burrows and risk loosing player to waivers. 

But then again a burrows and Higgins cap him combined could equal the salary for a player like yandle or lucic. 

[Zedlee]

Obviously Higgins and Burrows are not the "future" of the Canucks, so moving them is logical at some point.  Problem is contracts and cap hits and lack of production.  I think Burrows has two more years at $4.5 per ...that is not an easy contract to move, unless we take back a bad contract...and what is really gained from doing that?   

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

It's more about roster spots than cap. Is it really worth one more year of burrows and risk loosing player to waivers. 

But then again a burrows and Higgins cap him combined could equal the salary for a player like yandle or lucic. 

I think we're moving Jensen anyway (or hoping to sneak him through waivers like Markstrom last season) and there's already room for Grenier/Kenins IMO so long as all the Vrbata's and Higgins get cleared out. Again, cap is not remotely a concern. 

Like I said, I'm neither here nor there either way. Move him or not...it makes very little difference IMO. It's not something I'd be overly concerned about.

[Jack Fig]

7 minutes ago, Zedlee said:

Obviously Higgins and Burrows are not the "future" of the Canucks, so moving them is logical at some point.  Problem is contracts and cap hits and lack of production.  I think Burrows has two more years at $4.5 per ...that is not an easy contract to move, unless we take back a bad contract...and what is really gained from doing that?   

Burrows has one more year after this. Two years would have sent me into a mental darkness.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

5 minutes ago, J.R. said:

I think we're moving Jensen anyway (or hoping to sneak him through waivers like Markstrom last season) and there's already room for Grenier/Kenins IMO so long as all the Vrbata's and Higgins get cleared out. Again, cap is not remotely a concern. 

Like I said, I'm neither here nor there either way. Move him or not...it makes very little difference IMO. It's not something I'd be overly concerned about.

I get what your saying and I agree with Jensen.  I'm thinking even swap for a D man in the same waiver position. 

That's if Higgins is moved out.  and that's also assuming we don't sign any UFA's or have any standouts at training camp.  Personally I think Gaunce is NHL ready and would provide as much output as Burrows will next year.  It's time we get on with the youth movement so that our players can start developing at the NHL level.   

[ForsbergTheGreat]

32 minutes ago, smokes said:

I don't know how Burrows ended up being the whipping boy on this forum but he doesn't deserve it. He got us the 2-1 shootout and when he is not producung, he is not necessarily hurting us either. I personally hope that Burrows retires a Canuck. When you think about important goals, he has always among the ones who scores when it matters most. Burrows was never projected to be a top six player he was just there because he worked well with the Sedins and in today's NHL his cap hit is not too bad for a third or fourth line player. He has a higher salary that many yes but did anyone remember the low ball contracts he played out when he was younger and with the Sedins? I tend to think that he deserved the contract even based on service to the company. I personally don't think Burrows will be traded because you don't want to get too young too fast as with what's going on in Vancouver right now. Burrows is still effective on the defensive end and an invaluable mentor as a career long Canuck and he was mentored by Linden when he was first breaking into the league. Linden has his favorites, the Sedins, Edler, Burrows is definately one of them. 

 

So, Yes, I as a Canucks fan, really need him.

It’s not whipping boy, it’s called asset management.  Burrows is 35 at the end of this year and will be on his last year of his contract turning 36 at the end of next.  All likely hood is that he retires.

At the same time we have Jensen, Grenier, Kenins, and Vey who all that have to clear waivers next season, with only one opening spot available (since currently only Vbrata is the only UFA).  Even if you someone get rid of Higgins to open up another roster spot you still have Virtanen, Shinkaruk, Gaunce and possibly Boeser and Rodin fighting for a roster spot as well.  That doesn’t include any potential UFA signings. 

So it really comes down to,  do we really want Burrows for one more year and risk losing some youth to waivers (who at this point can provide almost the same level of play).  And that’s without thinking of an asset (be it a 3rd or 4th round pick) coming back in.  Add in the cap spaced saved that allows this team to be in play for two big UFA’s. 

It just seems like a no brainer for him to be moved,  Just as Bieska was also moved.  The pro’s far outway the con’s.  We still have the twin’s for leadership, his play is replaceable from our youth, his cap hit can be spent on better areas and his roster spot opens up room for our youth to move up in the system.  There is really only one reason we keep Burrows, and that’s out of sentimental reasons for all he’s put into this team. 

At the same time, who’s to say that Burrows wants to spend his final year on bubble playoff like canucks, for all we know he’s want to take one more crack at the cup.  I can easily see the NYR and MTL being good spots for Burrows, a draft day deal involving a pick coming back, possibly some salary retained. 

[Caknuckle Puck]

5 hours ago, smokes said:

I don't know how Burrows ended up being the whipping boy on this forum but he doesn't deserve it. He got us the 2-1 shootout and when he is not producung, he is not necessarily hurting us either. I personally hope that Burrows retires a Canuck. When you think about important goals, he has always among the ones who scores when it matters most. Burrows was never projected to be a top six player he was just there because he worked well with the Sedins and in today's NHL his cap hit is not too bad for a third or fourth line player. He has a higher salary that many yes but did anyone remember the low ball contracts he played out when he was younger and with the Sedins? I tend to think that he deserved the contract even based on service to the company. I personally don't think Burrows will be traded because you don't want to get too young too fast as with what's going on in Vancouver right now. Burrows is still effective on the defensive end and an invaluable mentor as a career long Canuck and he was mentored by Linden when he was first breaking into the league. Linden has his favorites, the Sedins, Edler, Burrows is definately one of them. 

 

So, Yes, I as a Canucks fan, really need him.

Whipping boy? I don't care if he's scored 30 goals or 5... he talks down to players at a personal unrespectable level, bites fingers ect.. he's a joke of a hockey player if thats his way of trash talking, I cant wait for the day burrows doesn't get to wear a canuck jersey anymore, damaging our reputation year after year and I'm sick of his $&!#. JB get this done.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Haters gotta hate...  fact is, they are losers.

Burrows still has time to improve his season, he is still sixth in scoring on the team even though his play has obviously not been good.

And he finds ways to contribute, as seen by the shootout goal, or his PK play.

Let's see what the team does... the decision is Benning and Linden's.

[*Buzzsaw*]

By the way, everyone should understand the following.

Burrows didn't push for a salary boost during the years when he was scoring BIG, because he:

1)  Understood the team's CAP was tight at that point what with all the talent there

2)  Was promised he'd be compensated in his next contract for the deferred compensation he didn't receive earlier.

Look at Burrows overall stats, goals, points, big plays, etc... then look at his CAREER salary with the Canucks compared to production.

You will see he has been UNDERPAID for the production he has put on the stat sheet, not to mention the intangibles he has given the team.

And please don't give me the cr*p about how anyone who plays with the Sedins gets a free ride.  If that's the case how come Vrbata didn't slot in with the Sedins and become a 50 goal scorer?  Or everyone else who has been put with them.  Look at this year... Hansen is having a good season... but NOWHERE near as good as Burrows did when he was the same age.

[gizmo2337]

He's been playing on the fourth line with fewer minutes, much of which have been defensive minutes, so what would we expect? The coach is using him there because Burrows can play anywhere in the line-up. He's one of the most flexible players on the roster that way, and that alone makes him valuable.

Move him back up with the Sedin's again, where he belongs, and he will produce. I don't see that happening until Sutter is back though.

[HC20.0]

6 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

It’s not whipping boy, it’s called asset management.  Burrows is 35 at the end of this year and will be on his last year of his contract turning 36 at the end of next.  All likely hood is that he retires.

At the same time we have Jensen, Grenier, Kenins, and Vey who all that have to clear waivers next season, with only one opening spot available (since currently only Vbrata is the only UFA).  Even if you someone get rid of Higgins to open up another roster spot you still have Virtanen, Shinkaruk, Gaunce and possibly Boeser and Rodin fighting for a roster spot as well.  That doesn’t include any potential UFA signings. 

So it really comes down to,  do we really want Burrows for one more year and risk losing some youth to waivers (who at this point can provide almost the same level of play).  And that’s without thinking of an asset (be it a 3rd or 4th round pick) coming back in.  Add in the cap spaced saved that allows this team to be in play for two big UFA’s. 

It just seems like a no brainer for him to be moved,  Just as Bieska was also moved.  The pro’s far outway the con’s.  We still have the twin’s for leadership, his play is replaceable from our youth, his cap hit can be spent on better areas and his roster spot opens up room for our youth to move up in the system.  There is really only one reason we keep Burrows, and that’s out of sentimental reasons for all he’s put into this team. 

At the same time, who’s to say that Burrows wants to spend his final year on bubble playoff like canucks, for all we know he’s want to take one more crack at the cup.  I can easily see the NYR and MTL being good spots for Burrows, a draft day deal involving a pick coming back, possibly some salary retained. 

Any trade involving Burr, we'll have to eat salary for sure. No one will want 4.5m for a third line winger. I'd love to see him and the Twins win a cup though. Unfortunately, none of them will win with us. Next year will likely be Burr's last period. I hope he gets one more kick at the can. 

[hammertime]

I don't think next year will be his last. Has he declined sure absolutely but he's still an nhl caliber player, I would bet $10 if we waived him he wouldn't clear. I hope we re-sign him for a mill or so and he finishes his career here, he's a good mentor for the kids on how to claw your way into the league and stick.

[Caknuckle Puck]

3 hours ago, hammertime said:

I don't think next year will be his last. Has he declined sure absolutely but he's still an nhl caliber player, I would bet $10 if we waived him he wouldn't clear. I hope we re-sign him for a mill or so and he finishes his career here, he's a good mentor for the kids on how to claw your way into the league and stick.

yeah lets let him mentor our kids into attacking players personal issues and biting fingers... he's a joke and always has been

[Fizzure]

2 minutes ago, Caknuckle Puck said:

yeah lets let him mentor our kids into attacking players personal issues and biting fingers... he's a joke and always has been

Burrows got paid a lot of money to do these things. What's your excuse for being a joke?