oldnews Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Just a few facts for the "Burrows is a third liner" crowd, and those misinformed by the "Burrows depends on the Sedins" theory. Burrows played 77.4% of his even strength shifts with the Sedins last year - he scored 63.6% of his points playing with them. Burrows played 7% of his even strength shifts last season with Higgins and Kesler - he scored 15.2% of his points with them. Burrows, Lapiere, Henrik - 5.2% ice time, 12.1% production. Burrows, Raymond, Henrik - 3% ice time, 6.1 % production. In fact, virtually every other line combination that Burrows was a part of scored a greater percentage of points relative to playing time - meaning that Burrows, remarkably, was actually more productive, five on five, playing with any other line combination than the with the twins. Burrows also scores the vast majority of his points 5 on 5 (in fact, one of the best in the NHL) - 44 of his 52 points last year at even strength, 47 of his 48 points in 2010/11, and 61 of 67 points in 2009/10 - including 81 of his 89 goals over that span. In other words there is absolutely nothing padded about Burrows stats - not padded by powerplay points, not padded by playing with the Sedins - very clearly an outstanding, top-six top-line forward, regardless of who he plays with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Like I said I could be wrong but he just hasn't proved it without them. Obviously Burrows is good and has become better now after playing with the twins but when evaluating your own team no good can come from overvaluing your assets or not seeing the truth. If anything you bump your players down, not up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookieCrumbs Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 From what the reports/rumours coming out in the last day or two say, it seems like Kadri/Bozak is all but inevitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TmanVan Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Sounds good to me. Hopefully Kadri could come here and prove Toronto should have given him more of a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 From what the reports/rumours coming out in the last day or two say, it seems like Kadri/Bozak is all but inevitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Burrows IS a 3rd liner. Kesler is the best 3C in the game and an average 2C. Yes I said it. I said it because it is my belief that the Canucks are missing a 2C. In the grand scheme of things, he can be considered a top 6 on most teams. So yes, there are 3 legitimate top 6 players on the Canucks; the rest are bottom 6. The defense is laughable. no legitimate 1D, no legitimate 2D, though Edler comes close. It is comprised of performing 4Ds that collectively look good on regular season paper but blank out in the playoffs. Outside of the Sedins, Kesler and Luongo, the Canucks have an excellent supporting cast and no legitimate threat. This is why they were "exposed for what they are"; a mediocre team with a great goaltender. Now let's get rid of that great goaltender. 1D, 2C, and known playoff grit and secondary scoring is what's needed. Not a goaltender change. I find this view extremely near sighted. As I said in a previous post, it's like saying Moby Dick is a great whale book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Luongo for Bozak, a guy who is a UFA in seven months, and Kadri? Can someone explain how they see Kadri (Kyle Wellwood 2.0) fitting in? Is he going to bump Kesler to the third line? Is Kadri a third line center? Is he better than Schroeder? Not imo - and I'd be willing to bet the Canucks would not trade Schroeder for Kadri one for one. If Kadri, oddly enough, were considered to fit here, then where would Bozak fit? Two more centers who'd essentially overlap each other? This deal makes no sense. Where are these reports/rumours coming from? Not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Burrows is really a third liner until he proves he can contribute without the dynamic duo. Not that he can't he just hasn't yet. I guess he could do it but if you take out the Sedins a top 6 with Burrows, Kelser, Booth, and Higgins looks pretty weak to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 DP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 How do you know that Schneider won't even be less reliable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Grabner: 6'0", 185 Upshall: 6'0", 200 Those 15 pounds can be accounted for by the fact that Upshall's 4 years his senior - not that it's really important, anyway, as it relates to Grabner's game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TmanVan Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Luongo for Bozak, a guy who is a UFA in seven months, and Kadri? Can someone explain how they see Kadri fitting in the scheme? Is Kyle Wellwood 2.0 going to bump Kesler to the third line? Is Kadri a third line center? Is he better than Schroeder? Where are these reports/rumours coming from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 The real problem here is what are the Canucks going to do with two backup goaltenders? Where are we going to get a legitimate #1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riviera82 Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 The sheer idiocy of some people on this board amazes me. 'We have no 1D.' Last time I checked Hamhuis is a 1D on any NHL team, a 2D on just a few. 'Kesler an average 2C.' Last time I checked it was just two years ago he won the Selke as the BEST TWO-WAY CENTER/FORWARD IN THE GAME. My God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TmanVan Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 dp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 The real problem here is what are the Canucks going to do with two backup goaltenders? Where are we going to get a legitimate #1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 seriously???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 Luongo for Bozak, a guy who is a UFA in seven months, and Kadri? Can someone explain how they see Kadri (Kyle Wellwood 2.0) fitting in? Is he going to bump Kesler to the third line? Is Kadri a third line center? Is he better than Schroeder? Not imo - and I'd be willing to bet the Canucks would not trade Schroeder for Kadri one for one. If Kadri, oddly enough, were considered to fit here, then where would Bozak fit? Two more centers who'd essentially overlap each other? This deal makes no sense. Where are these reports/rumours coming from? Not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 seriously???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_Hockey_101 Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 (I'm mimicking the claims that Burrows is a third liner, Kesler is a average 2nd line C, the D is laughable, Higgins is weak, etc...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.