• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

samirjaver

[Report] Canucks had trade in place for Burrows in Feb. 2009

Recommended Posts

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/hockey/canucks-hockey/Alex+Burrows+Vancouver+Canucks+apart+contract/7239658/story.html

it's an article from last night before Burrows was signed, but:

In his last negotiation, which led up to the trade deadline in 2009, the Canucks held the hammer. They had an offer on the table from another team and were ready to trade Burrows if he didn’t sign the four-year extension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if we would have 'slayed the dragon' if he was traded. I mean, we probably would (hopefully) but wonder who it would've been. Can't ever imagine #14 in a different jersey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was probably a pretty good offer if we even considered trading Burr, too bad we will never know what it was.

Regardless, I'm glad he's still a Canuck, and will be for a long time to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember it was Burr and someone for Brad Richards. or it was burrows plus for Tampa first round pick (hedman) Glad canucks didnt trade him. Who would of scored this goal if he got traded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember it was Burr and someone for Brad Richards. or it was burrows plus for Tampa first round pick (hedman) Glad canucks didnt trade him. Who would of scored this goal if he got traded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember it was Burr and someone for Brad Richards. or it was burrows plus for Tampa first round pick (hedman) Glad canucks didnt trade him. Who would of scored this goal if he got traded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was Burrows, Bieksa and '09 first for Tampa's '09 first (Hedman). The Brad Richards proposal in '08 kinda went something like Kesler, Edler and Schneider for Richards+. Where would our team be now if we made those trades?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was Burrows, Bieksa and '09 first for Tampa's '09 first (Hedman). The Brad Richards proposal in '08 kinda went something like Kesler, Edler and Schneider for Richards+. Where would our team be now if we made those trades?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought Burke heard that at the draft, so it probably wasn't that deal that Botchford is referring to.

In any event I think, if it did happen, it should be water under the bridge now. 4.5 seems really fair and it solidifies the fact that Burrows is 4th on the pecking order behind the twins and Kesler. They are also going to be paying him that money until he's 36 or 37.

E: It's not Richards guys, he was in Dallas that season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Canucks, Burrows a long way apart in contract talks"

haha, nice story, but 24 hours later Burrows already inked.

stay tuned for more "news" from the Province

and while we are on it - don't buy the way the 2009 context is framed either - weak link source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember it was Burr and someone for Brad Richards. or it was burrows plus for Tampa first round pick (hedman) Glad canucks didnt trade him. Who would of scored this goal if he got traded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.