Sign in to follow this  
StealthNuck

Alexandre Burrows | #14 | RW

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Isn't that one of the issues with WD - playing (or not playing in this case) favorites?

I wonder how the guys in the locker room see WD?  Not what they say publicly, but their honest feelings about things.  Maybe, we got a peak into how some feel when the Twins spoke out about the rookies last season?  Rookies were playing, and maybe they (in the minds of the other players) they didn't deserve it?

is here evidence that he's shown that in preseason? some of his moved were a bit of last year. where he played Dorsett in the top six like there's no tomorrow. that was weird. but i think perhaps based off of last season. every coach seems to have their "favorites" but the responsibility of the coach is not to give in to that. they are to get the best of their roster. and if that means that one of their favorites aren't doing well. time to have a talk to try and motivate said player. this is a professional league. babying players or favoring them won't do them any favors and certainly won't do the coach any favors nor the team and its culture. so either WD does his job, or he gets fired and replaced eventually. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

Burrows mentors young guys so he is on team for good!

yeah. i can see that as a role for this season. he's not going to fetch much if Benning plans to trade him at the trade deadline. probably something like a 4-5th round pick most likely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

yeah. i can see that as a role for this season. he's not going to fetch much if Benning plans to trade him at the trade deadline. probably something like a 4-5th round pick most likely. 

Can a team like ours (not exactly talent laden) afford to have a roster spot for a guy, because he's a good mentor?  The guy needs to be able to play too, no?  I think Burr is being kept out of pre-season games because management doesn't want the fan backlash they will get seeing Burr's poor play, compared to the exiting play of guys who get sent down.  That's my tinfoil hat idea.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bur will stay with the Canucks as the #13.  Look how long they hung onto Higgy before sending him to Utica.  It's a big deal for a team to 'turf out' a vet that has given the team his heart and soul.  Bur is favoured by both fans and teammates (and management as well).

 

With due respect, Alex might be sent down later in the season, but I think they offer him a player/coach situation.  Most people would be happy with that kind of arrangement.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Can a team like ours (not exactly talent laden) afford to have a roster spot for a guy, because he's a good mentor?  The guy needs to be able to play too, no?  I think Burr is being kept out of pre-season games because management doesn't want the fan backlash they will get seeing Burr's poor play, compared to the exiting play of guys who get sent down.  That's my tinfoil hat idea.

we paid matt sundin over 5 million to play half a season to mentor kesler......turned out well in the long run don't ya think?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

is here evidence that he's shown that in preseason? some of his moved were a bit of last year. where he played Dorsett in the top six like there's no tomorrow. that was weird. but i think perhaps based off of last season. every coach seems to have their "favorites" but the responsibility of the coach is not to give in to that. they are to get the best of their roster. and if that means that one of their favorites aren't doing well. time to have a talk to try and motivate said player. this is a professional league. babying players or favoring them won't do them any favors and certainly won't do the coach any favors nor the team and its culture. so either WD does his job, or he gets fired and replaced eventually. 

Yes, I too heard Desjardins put Burrows in the same category as Sutter in terms of being established and not having to worry about their spot.  Hopefully this means that Burrows is saving it up.  It sure looks like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair we only saw the 1 pre-season game from him.  You need to give the veterans a pass when it comes to these games.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alflives said:

Can a team like ours (not exactly talent laden) afford to have a roster spot for a guy, because he's a good mentor?  The guy needs to be able to play too, no?  I think Burr is being kept out of pre-season games because management doesn't want the fan backlash they will get seeing Burr's poor play, compared to the exiting play of guys who get sent down.  That's my tinfoil hat idea.

i think Burr can still play. tmr question is if he can play well. and the answer is probably not anymore. he might be good in a more bottom six role who kills penalties. that's going to be key for the team moving ahead. he can at the same time mentor and teach players like Gaunce to be more effective in their roles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, N4ZZY said:

i think Burr can still play. tmr question is if he can play well. and the answer is probably not anymore. he might be good in a more bottom six role who kills penalties. that's going to be key for the team moving ahead. he can at the same time mentor and teach players like Gaunce to be more effective in their roles. 

It's not our money, but that's a pretty fat contract for a guy who plays 5 minutes, but is a good mentor.  Dumping Burr, Etem, and Dorsett sure would open up spots for guys who are better.  Granlund for Burr, Gaunce for Etem, and LaBate for Dorsett? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

It's not our money, but that's a pretty fat contract for a guy who plays 5 minutes, but is a good mentor.  Dumping Burr, Etem, and Dorsett sure would open up spots for guys who are better.  Granlund for Burr, Gaunce for Etem, and LaBate for Dorsett? 

they're not letting Dorsett go. lmao. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, N4ZZY said:

they're not letting Dorsett go. lmao. 

If Dorsett was put on waivers, would he get claimed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alflives said:

If Dorsett was put on waivers, would he get claimed?

Without a doubt. We wouldn't waive him regardless, he's currently the only forward on the opening night roster who's willing to drop the gloves and providing toughness to a tender team. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alflives said:

If Dorsett was put on waivers, would he get claimed?

I'd say he would, though his contract would surely be a deterrent. 

 

Actually, I just looked it up and realized I has his mixed up with Sbisa's deal. While 2.65 is too much, he's not massively overpaid.

 

With regards to Burrows, I thought he looked good and energetic tonight. Gives me hope for him being a huge checking forward for us, similar to how Hansen was one of the best third liners in the league a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Alflives said:

Isn't that one of the issues with WD - playing (or not playing in this case) favorites?

I wonder how the guys in the locker room see WD?  Not what they say publicly, but their honest feelings about things.  Maybe, we got a peak into how some feel when the Twins spoke out about the rookies last season?  Rookies were playing, and maybe they (in the minds of the other players) they didn't deserve it?

 

Alf we can't have it both ways. People blame Willie when he doesn't play the rookies and then when he does. In any case these selections are "management" selections and not wholly down to the coach. 

When JB says "if a youngster performs and shows he is ready "we" will find a spot for him" he is not saying that decision is wholly down to Willie is he?

 

As for playing favourites, again Willie has to watch how he is perceived. There are a lot of people, who don't necessarily contribute on here who would go ape$&!# if "Willie" left Burr out of his plans. Yet again JB AND TL have stated Burr is there to mentor the younger players, what is Willie going to say to them? "I don't want Burr in the line-up just to mentor players" I don't think so, do you? 

Willie in my opinion doesn't play favourites he plays players who graft their ass off, make few mistakes, take few penalties and stick with the systems. Bo and Hutton realised that and so do Stecher, Gaunce and LaBate (Kennins and Kassian didn't)  

Burr has always been that player and I suppose management think he deserves to be given a chance to get his mojo back in a stronger more settled and physical team.

 

I keep coming back to what anyone will have observed over the years. Vets don't knock their pan out in these games. They know they have a long season ahead and they don't want to get injured before they have played themselves into match fitness. In this light, we often can't really properly assess their PS performance. It's probably a fact that coaches realise and live with.

 

Your point about the vets reaction to youngsters (very raw youngsters like McCann for example) being put in the team was one I raised at the start of last season. I made the point that it was obvious vets were enthusing through gritted teeth when dimwits like Murph were "telling" them "how great it was to have these barely grown prospects playing in the team"

Why? because it stands to reason one youngster (like Bo) can be accommodated but when there are 3 or 4 all running out of gas and making mistakes, it's the vets who have to cover and take up the slack, it's the vets who then end up shedding their own game to cover situations caused by these boys and it's the vets who get criticised when things don't pan out. You read it all on here last year, the youngsters could do no wrong and any little thing they did right was magnified, while their shortcomings were ignored and any little thing a vet screwed up on was blown out of all proportion.

 

So I'm in agreement with your last part, sometimes the rookie didn't deserve it but it was management who forced them into the team due to injuries, inability to go to Utica and lack of players, not Willie.

 

PS did you see the embarrassed reaction from Ruutu in his interview with Murph where Murph implied he was over the hill at 33. Murph should have known better, it's not a player's age that determines how effective he will be but his fitness, attitude and smarts. Willie knows that and highlighted Ruutu's play and determination in the Sharks post game interview.

Edited by alfstonker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shayster007 said:

Without a doubt. We wouldn't waive him regardless, he's currently the only forward on the opening night roster who's willing to drop the gloves and providing toughness to a tender team. 

 

And although some people can't bring themselves to acknowledge it, he's a damned good player, quick and can finish when given the opportunity. He is also great with the young  guys and gives 100% every night. 

Now if we can expose a guy who plays like that for $2.5M to waivers, we must have a better team than I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alflives said:

It's not our money, but that's a pretty fat contract for a guy who plays 5 minutes, but is a good mentor.  Dumping Burr, Etem, and Dorsett sure would open up spots for guys who are better.  Granlund for Burr, Gaunce for Etem, and LaBate for Dorsett? 

 

Woah there Alf, did I fall asleep and just wake up mid season? Did you just base all that on 2/3 pre-season games? 

I am all for giving youngsters a chance but I am not for ditching good vets before we know we have got the right replacements. 

I have not been impressed by Granlund, Gaunce will shore up our 4th but should it be at the expense of Etem and is LaBate (good though he has been) a better option than Dorsett? Maybe, but he needs to get 9 games to show he can do it when the going gets tough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2016 at 8:58 PM, Alflives said:

If Dorsett was put on waivers, would he get claimed?

In my opinion it's a maybe. This team has a need for speed and skill.  If the role is a tough guy grinder, I want someone with size and speed.  Dorsett has neither.  Again, just like Burrows a great guy but the level of play isn't there.  There must be guys who are good team guys that can actually play.  And for less than these two are paid.  Burrows looks slow and ineffective.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Borvat said:

In my opinion it's a maybe. This team has a need for speed and skill.  If the role is a tough guy grinder, I want someone with size and speed.  Dorsett has neither.  Again, just like Burrows a great guy but the level of play isn't there.  There must be guys who are good team guys that can actually play.  And for less than these two are paid.  Burrows looks slow and ineffective.

 

Dorsett is one of the fastest skaters on our team.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.