Alex Burrows - Where does he fit in 2016/17?

[Stanley's Kup]

When he was in his prime he could do no wrong but now that he's aging (as we all are) seems he consistently gets chucked under the bus. Although he doesn't put out the numbers as he once did he can still play an active role being the agitator, in your face, type player which got him on the map to begin with. Let's cut him some slack and see how Willie uses him this season.

[Fakename70]

2 hours ago, kylecanuck said:

 

 

Reason im talking about Vrbata is because you started using him as an example, so I stuck with it. 

 

Definition of competitive - "As good as or better than others in a comparable nature."

 

i think the Canucks have fit that billing in the time I specified without going back into details for ya. 

 

 

Useless - of no use or not serving it's purpose; unavailing futile. 

 

Vrbata was brough in to put up points with the sedins at first, I do recall that media story yes. That doesn't mean if your play no longer warrants first line play, or your coach sees it as more necessary to get another line going, that you can mail it in. He grabbed some passes from henrik and daniel in his first season but so did Taylor Pyatt and Anson Carter while they played in that spot.  The guy played two heartless seasons here, why so much love for him?

 

I cant remember him even cracking a smile while scoring a goal, I just remember a  tight lipped nod to his teamates. 

 

 

As for the "what have you dont for me lately with burrows"....Quoted from our head coach

 

“He’s one of the best players I’ve ever coached,” said Willie Desjardins. “Just his attitude to the game. The thing you like about Alex is his respect for the game and what he feels. It’s always about finding ways to win and he’s always at optional skates helping the young guys."

 

im happy if this is all he does for this team this comming season, and even resigned beyond. 

 

 

What has your hero Vrbata and higgins done lately?

 

 

"Competitive" = Friendly, sugar-coated way of saying "No Championships".

 

"Two heartless seasons" - 

Team leader in goals, third in scoring. Yeah, what a bum. And, while we're at it, let's string him up because he didn't smile, too. I'll say this; CDC logic rarely disappoints when it comes to the entertainment factor. I bring him up in response to CDC'rs like you and others who think he's the devil personified and/or believe after leading the team in goals when being fed from the likes of the twins and Nick Bonino the first year, to rookies and sophomores the next, that he's washed up. Fact is, I cringed at the person in this forum who today suggested we wait to see how Willie uses Burrows this upcoming season. If this last season with Vrbata or two seasons ago with Vey is any indication...

 

If Burrows is so good at leading the younger players around by the nose, let him do it as an Assistant coach at the minor league level, not a guy who it could be argued, shouldn't even be on the NHL roster. 

 

And, you can look up for yourself how he compared to Higgins while they were teammates without me going back into details for ya. Your hero may have the more impressive numbers, but, the bulk of that was done in Higgins first 2-3 years here. Remember, Chris had only 14 regular season games his first year after he was acquired, and played only half a season due to injury 2 years later. But, I get it: the injuries affecting production factors-in only when discussing Burrows from 2012-2014. Yet, he played 9 more games from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 and still somehow managed 11 LESS points. I don't care how much Trev and Willie gush over him, he should've been right behind Higgins when he was shown the door. 

 

 

 

[kylecanuck]

18 minutes ago, Fakename70 said:

"Competitive" = Friendly, sugar-coated way of saying "No Championships".

 

"Two heartless seasons" - 

Team leader in goals, third in scoring. Yeah, what a bum. And, while we're at it, let's string him up because he didn't smile, too. I'll say this; CDC logic rarely disappoints when it comes to the entertainment factor. I bring him up in response to CDC'rs like you and others who think he's the devil personified and/or believe after leading the team in goals when being fed from the likes of the twins and Nick Bonino the first year, to rookies and sophomores the next, that he's washed up. Fact is, I cringed at the person in this forum who today suggested we wait to see how Willie uses Burrows this upcoming season. If this last season with Vrbata or two seasons ago with Vey is any indication...

 

If Burrows is so good at leading the younger players around by the nose, let him do it as an Assistant coach at the minor league level, not a guy who it could be argued, shouldn't even be on the NHL roster. 

 

And, you can look up for yourself how he compared to Higgins while they were teammates without me going back into details for ya. Your hero may have the more impressive numbers, but, the bulk of that was done in Higgins first 2-3 years here. Remember, Chris had only 14 regular season games his first year after he was acquired, and played only half a season due to injury 2 years later. But, I get it: the injuries affecting production factors-in only when discussing Burrows from 2012-2014. Yet, he played 9 more games from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 and still somehow managed 11 LESS points. I don't care how much Trev and Willie gush over him, he should've been right behind Higgins when he was shown the door. 

 

 

 

 

 

Well your our definition of competitive isn't only wrong in fact it also such a sad way to view things buds. I cant imagine expecting a stanly cup each year, and being dissapointed time and time again....we will win the cup, relax, it's just not this day my friend  I don't hate anyone let alone Vrbata, just to

mention him with burrows and dedication is silly. 

 

 

Im guessing you're the guy that is wanting Evander Kane as well because he can put up points. lets get yakupov too, maybe pick up Voynov so we can have a whole bunch of heartless goal scorers! Id rather have a coach gush over his players then try to show them the door. 

 

 

Yes, that is what I hope happens and after this season burrows steps into a defensive coaching spot or PK specailist in Utica next year. It also shows a lot of character and ethics letting someone who has played their career with one organization to finish out his last year. I could see all the urge for replacing him if we where legit contenders, but we aren't. 

[kingofsurrey]

Just now, kylecanuck said:

 

 

Well your our definition of competitive isn't only wrong in fact it also such a sad way to view things buds. I cant imagine expecting a stanly cup each year, and being dissapointed time and time again....we will win the cup, relax, it's just not this day my friend  I don't hate anyone let alone Vrbata, just to

mention him with burrows and dedication is silly. 

 

 

Im guessing you're the guy that is wanting Evander Kane as well because he can put up points. lets get yakupov too, maybe pick up Voynov so we can have a whole bunch of heartless goal scorers! Id rather have a coach gush over his players then try to show them the door. 

 

 

Yes, that is what I hope happens and after this season burrows steps into a defensive coaching spot or PK specailist in Utica next year. It also shows a lot of character and ethics letting someone who has played their career with one organization to finish out his last year. I could see all the urge for replacing him if we where legit contenders, but we aren't. 

I feel the opposite.

 

I would keep Burrows if we were pushing for a Cup. He might be useful depending on injuries for a playoff run.

 

As a struggling developing or youth club - likely finishing  25-30th next year, we  have ZERO need for Burrows this year. 

 

Burrows will only delay  the development of our younger players by taking valuable minutes of icetime  / special teams roles / leadership opportunities..   We don't need another 9  goal scorer on our team on the last year of his NHL career. 

[kylecanuck]

17 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

I feel the opposite.

 

I would keep Burrows if we were pushing for a Cup. He might be useful depending on injuries for a playoff run.

 

As a struggling developing or youth club - likely finishing  25-30th next year, we  have ZERO need for Burrows this year. 

 

Burrows will only delay  the development of our younger players by taking valuable minutes of icetime  / special teams roles / leadership opportunities..   We don't need another 9  goal scorer on our team on the last year of his NHL career. 

 

 

I hear ya and it does make sense to make some room for the rookies. I dont think any of our rookies will be replacing his leadership, goals and points probably. 

 

Who replaces him is what im wondering. Virtanan sounds like he will be in Utica, which I think is the best spot for him for at least half the season. This would now be two spots to fill. Rodin at this point is a huge question mark, can he produce in the top six because I think he is too soft for the bottom. 

 

 

We do have Gaunce and Grenier as replacements, with no real NHL experience can we trust one let alone two raw prospects? It's also nice to carry a extra forward and be ready for injuries to a aging team. 

 

Im ok replacing him if its the right fit and not just to get another rookie on the team. 

[Fakename70]

2 hours ago, kylecanuck said:

 

 

Well your our definition of competitive isn't only wrong in fact it also such a sad way to view things buds. I cant imagine expecting a stanly cup each year, and being dissapointed time and time again....we will win the cup, relax, it's just not this day my friend  I don't hate anyone let alone Vrbata, just to

mention him with burrows and dedication is silly. 

 

 

Im guessing you're the guy that is wanting Evander Kane as well because he can put up points. lets get yakupov too, maybe pick up Voynov so we can have a whole bunch of heartless goal scorers! Id rather have a coach gush over his players then try to show them the door. 

 

 

Yes, that is what I hope happens and after this season burrows steps into a defensive coaching spot or PK specailist in Utica next year. It also shows a lot of character and ethics letting someone who has played their career with one organization to finish out his last year. I could see all the urge for replacing him if we where legit contenders, but we aren't. 

If you had bothered to notice, I bring up Vrbata as compared to Burrows only in the context of him producing the first year and the coaching staff playing him with different, younger players the second, and not understanding the drop in production. No such excuse for Burrows, as he's been trending downward 3 of the last 4 years regardless who he plays with. 

 

You're equating "competitive" with "successful". I didn't say they weren't competitive. I questioned your proclaiming the Canucks to be the most competitive team in the league for almost a decade. That's what you said, remember? And, as I replied, it depends on one's personal definition of the words. Personally, the achievements you listed aren't THAT impressive minus a Cup. Competitive, sure. If the expectation is to simply qualify for the playoffs more often than not. I wouldn't necessarily call it a "successful run", though. Certainly not in comparison to Chicago or Los Angeles, for starters. There's nothing wrong with a fan expectation of a championship and being genuinely irritated that the team (CDC, in particular) - before the season even starts - is focused primarily on "mentoring". Sounds like those who don't see anything wrong with that mindset have given up already and apparently don't mind yet another wasted non-playoff season for the twins as their career winds down. 

 

And, you can see my screen name. I would suggest you do a CDC search on the latest Evander Kane discussions and first see how I've already weighed-in on the topic before you go thinking you've got me pegged. 

 

 

[Hairy Kneel]

Burr was pretty ineffective last year..I think Grenier could be a good checker defensive replacement.

Plus all those penalties we always have to kill game after game.

Zalewski Gaunce Cassells all could get a shot to step into his role.

[NHTyrany]

7 hours ago, IbanezRG said:

 

One of the first things you learn in Business is that Ethics and how you treat people always comes first. 

I don't know what your definition of Ethics is but I don't think it's unethical to pay someone more than $20M. It's a business and both parties have obligations and rights. Was it ethical to buy out Higgy? I think I get what you're saying and frankly I have no problem if Burrows stays but this talk about respect and ethics is a little to much to stomach. The industry has it's own code and I challenge anyone to dictate how it would be unethical or wrong for Burrows to be traded, waived, or whatever. He's a multimilliore player who knows how to look after himself. I wonder  what he would say to all the people wanting to dictate what he deserves from the Nucks. Let the actual parties decide as we are all too far away from the relationship to have any reality of the situation.

[Toyotasfan]

I doubt he will score more than 8 goals this coming season. But good for the Canucks if I'm wrong.

[kylecanuck]

2 hours ago, Fakename70 said:

If you had bothered to notice, I bring up Vrbata as compared to Burrows only in the context of him producing the first year and the coaching staff playing him with different, younger players the second, and not understanding the drop in production. No such excuse for Burrows, as he's been trending downward 3 of the last 4 years regardless who he plays with. 

 

You're equating "competitive" with "successful". I didn't say they weren't competitive. I questioned your proclaiming the Canucks to be the most competitive team in the league for almost a decade. That's what you said, remember? And, as I replied, it depends on one's personal definition of the words. Personally, the achievements you listed aren't THAT impressive minus a Cup. Competitive, sure. If the expectation is to simply qualify for the playoffs more often than not. I wouldn't necessarily call it a "successful run", though. Certainly not in comparison to Chicago or Los Angeles, for starters. There's nothing wrong with a fan expectation of a championship and being genuinely irritated that the team (CDC, in particular) - before the season even starts - is focused primarily on "mentoring". Sounds like those who don't see anything wrong with that mindset have given up already and apparently don't mind yet another wasted non-playoff season for the twins as their career winds down. 

 

And, you can see my screen name. I would suggest you do a CDC search on the latest Evander Kane discussions and first see how I've already weighed-in on the topic before you go thinking you've got me pegged. 

 

 

 

What is your screen name, fakename70? What does that have to do with anything, whatsoever that has been discussed? Also what is it suppose to tell me about the real you, im struggling to read deeper. 

 

 

 

Im sorry, I didnt realize you where so hung up on that one statement. I honestly ment to say one of the most competitive teams for a decade, not the most. My mistake, to of thought they where the best team at all let alone for a decade without winning a cup. Just ridiculous..... 

 

 

Im not ok with not winning the cup, please don't get that idea. I in fact have the notion that with this current line up we are playoff bound this season. I just think we are stronger with burrows in out lineup then higgins and/or Vrbata

 

 

this quote is what got me interested in this thread actually, it was you talking a out burrows getting special treatment and higgins and Vrbata not because they dont take a pay cut. 

 

 

 

"He's not "owed" anything any more than Vrbata was, as it relates to him reportedly being told when he signed here that he'd have the twins as linemates. Isn't that what his detractors at CDC say? But, Burrows deserves "special consideration" because, unlike Higgins and Vrbata, he took a pay cut to stay. Ok..."

 

 

 

Burrows is owed, and he is getting what is was owed. This is also a message to future players that you can rely a bit more on the promises made here. Reputation is important in the league, it's not a video game slugger

 

 

[JCM7]

20 hours ago, Fakename70 said:

So, when Burrows has trouble getting back up to speed after injuries, it's understandable, but not Higgins? Did he not miss time, too? When healthy, did he not have comparable numbers? YOU might not want to acknowledge it, but, the reaction from fans just like you surely play a sizeable role in him not being given the same treatment as Higgins, even if it'd be justified from a production standpoint. And, no, it doesn't sit well with me if he's being kept around because he gave the organisation a hometown discount. Not if he's in decline. Which he is. Sorry. 

He's not "owed" anything any more than Vrbata was, as it relates to him reportedly being told when he signed here that he'd have the twins as linemates. Isn't that what his detractors at CDC say? But, Burrows deserves "special consideration" because, unlike Higgins and Vrbata, he took a pay cut to stay. Ok...

 

He'd better outplay Grenier and Virtanen in camp then. Going to be a head shaker if he doesn't, but is awarded a spot anyway as a "mentor". 

I agree completely with the last part.  As much as I stick up for Burr, if other players prove to be more effective he should fall behind them on the depth chart.

 

I am a fan of Chris Higgins as well.  I wish things had gone better for him.  I did think he looked better after he returned from Utica, but I think it was pretty clear that there wasn't going to be a spot for him this year.

 

One thing important to note with Burrows is that since he is 35 the rules for a buyout change significantly.  If the Canucks had bought him out they would have to pay him m $2mil of the $3mil remaining on his contract and they would still be charged with a $3.5mil cap hit.  So even from a numbers standpoint Higgins at 33 was a more desirable buyout.  With Higgins they still have to pay him $1.67mil of his remaining $2.5 however they are able to spread this equally I've 2 years and only this amount is charged against the cap.

 

Its funny.  I think pubic opinion of Alex Burrows is very divided.  Some people love him and some definitely don't.  Lots of players give hometown discounts.  What Alex did goes way beyond this.  He was 28 when he signed that 4 year deal at $2mil per year.  He had just had a massive breakout season and could have gotten at least double somewhere else.  He knew that he would be 32 when the contract expired so it was very big risk.  This was huge for the team.

 

I think that he'll have a better year than last year.  If he doesn't, it was a very good career and I'm glad he was a Canuck.

[mll]

19 minutes ago, JCM7 said:

I agree completely with the last part.  As much as I stick up for Burr, if other players prove to be more effective he should fall behind them on the depth chart.

 

I am a fan of Chris Higgins as well.  I wish things had gone better for him.  I did think he looked better after he returned from Utica, but I think it was pretty clear that there wasn't going to be a spot for him this year.

 

One thing important to note with Burrows is that since he is 35 the rules for a buyout change significantly.  If the Canucks had bought him out they would have to pay him m $2mil of the $3mil remaining on his contract and they would still be charged with a $3.5mil cap hit.  So even from a numbers standpoint Higgins at 33 was a more desirable buyout.  With Higgins they still have to pay him $1.67mil of his remaining $2.5 however they are able to spread this equally I've 2 years and only this amount is charged against the cap.

 

Its funny.  I think pubic opinion of Alex Burrows is very divided.  Some people love him and some definitely don't.  Lots of players give hometown discounts.  What Alex did goes way beyond this.  He was 28 when he signed that 4 year deal at $2mil per year.  He had just had a massive breakout season and could have gotten at least double somewhere else.  He knew that he would be 32 when the contract expired so it was very big risk.  This was huge for the team.

 

I think that he'll have a better year than last year.  If he doesn't, it was a very good career and I'm glad he was a Canuck.

The 35+ rule only applies if the contract started when the player was already 35 and it's the full cap hit that would apply.  Burrows is not in that situation.   

 

He signed before 35 and the buyout calculation is exactly the same as it is for Higgins - it's the cap hit less the salary savings with the buyout spread over 2 years.  You can do the calculations for yourself on CapFriendly - they show the details of the calculation and you'll notice that it's exactly the same principle.  Burrows has a front loaded contract while Higgins had the same salary through his contract so the maths works out differently

[iceman64]

On 7/19/2016 at 3:28 PM, Jamie Huscroft said:

Of course he will. I think people need to lower expectations of him though. Though his game with the puck has declined, away from the puck he still has some use. 

Do you even watch hockey or sit the day after and read whatever is said.. Burr was never brought in to be a huge scorer in the first place but he surprised a lot of people, he's still one of the best 3rd line players in the nhl and plays it extremely well and still has the talent to play on any line asked of him.

 

And news flash, if the nucks didn't have all the injuries last year we would have made the playoff's. Now we have a good sniper in Lou to join with the twins and JB has started to stock better for depth to help if the injury bug bites that hard again.

 

That's not even mentioning that Train (Tryamkin) should be better this year and Gud showed up on the scene to add some grit and toughness.

[Jamie Huscroft]

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

Do you even watch hockey or sit the day after and read whatever is said

I watch lots of hockey, and not just the Canucks, but hey, good try, Fella. 

 

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

Burr was never brought in to be a huge score

You don't say? I thought all undrafted, ball hockey stars who get a shot in the American League and work their way up were destined to be huge scorers. Damn. My bad. Can you ever forgive me? 

 

Burrows was a huge scorer, not just in totals, but when he scored the goals. It's why he went from a $750k a year player to a $2.5 million to a $4.5 million per year player. Remember 28, 35, 26 and 28 goal seasons? I'd call that being a huge scorer. Once that turned into 13, 5, 18 and 9 goals a year it was clear that he wasn't the player he once was. Easy, simple. He's good defensively, on the PK and I'll even toss in "good in the room". Which, if you paid attention to what I had said, was my point. 

 

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

And news flash, if the nucks didn't have all the injuries last year we would have made the playoff's.

Lol, no, we wouldn't have. But I love your optimism.

 

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

That's not even mentioning that Train (Tryamkin) should be better this year and Gud showed up on the scene to add some grit and toughness.

Should be better. Should. 

 

And what if he isn't? I'm excited about Tryamkin, but I'm not betting the farm on a guy who has played 13 games in the NHL. We'll see how he looks in camp and during the preseason. Put him in every situation, with every D partner you can and see where he's best suited. Until then, I'll err on the side of caution and just wait and see. 

 

 

[gizmo2337]

Alex Burrows fills many needs on this roster, and the shootout is one of them! You can skip to about 2:40 if you are impatient. He will bounce back this year.
 

 

[gizmo2337]

Not my video, but a nice collection of his trademark move. Amazing that a guy could use a shoot-out move on the fly in the game. Even more impressive... sometimes he actually takes that forehand wrist shot for the double fake.

 

 

 

[Jamie Huscroft]

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

 

 

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

 

 

6 hours ago, iceman64 said:

And news flash, if the nucks didn't have all the injuries last year we would have made the playoff's.

 

 

Injuries kept them out of the playoffs, right? And one could argue that the injuries to certain players stopped the Canucks from being able to score goals and inevitably win games. Right? 

 

Here's what some players, "core" players goal totals may have been had they stayed healthy all year. I used goals scored divided by total games played and multiplied it by 82 games.

 

For example: Baertschi - 69 games played 15 goals - at an 82 game pace (15/69*82) it brings his regular season total to 17.8 goals (rounding up) it puts him at 18 goals in 82 GP. 

 

Baertschi - 17.8 - 18 goals (+3)

Vrbata - 16.9 - 17 goals (+4)

H. Sedin - 12.1 - 12 goals (+1)

Burrows - 9.3 - 9 goals (+0)

Edler - 9.46 - 10 goals (+4)

Sutter ** - 20.5 - 21 goals (+16)

 

That's an additional 28 goals for the Canucks, putting them in a tie with Columbus for GF at 219 putting their average GPG at 2.67 and leaving them with a -24 goal diff and allowing 2.96 GPG - Of the teams that qualified for the playoffs last year there were only 2 who had a negative goal diff. Detroit at -13 and the Flyers at - 4. 

 

I'm sorry, but adding an additional 28 goals from core players does not get you a spot in the playoffs. 

 

Edit: Double posted original post. My bad. 

 

[JCM7]

9 hours ago, mll said:

The 35+ rule only applies if the contract started when the player was already 35 and it's the full cap hit that would apply.  Burrows is not in that situation.   

 

He signed before 35 and the buyout calculation is exactly the same as it is for Higgins - it's the cap hit less the salary savings with the buyout spread over 2 years.  You can do the calculations for yourself on CapFriendly - they show the details of the calculation and you'll notice that it's exactly the same principle.  Burrows has a front loaded contract while Higgins had the same salary through his contract so the maths works out differently

I stand corrected.

 

So they would pay $2mil of the $3mil remaining (spread over 2 years), but would only see a cap it of $2.5mil this year and $1mil next year.  So it would save the team $1mil and would free up $2mil in cap space this year (however it would eat up an additional $1mil in cap space next year as well).

 

Got it.  So if the team signed another player to take his spot for $2mil, they would be back at the cap and would have paid the $2mil for buyout meaning that in reality they would have paid $4mil for a player worth $2mil.  (Just an example.  Obviously there's lots of different scenarios that could occur.)

 

As I said before, I think there is a lot more that has gone into the teams decision not to buyout than just dollars and cents.  In most cases I would probably disagree, but in this particular case I am fine with it.

 

Thanks for the buyout info.

[iceman64]

8 hours ago, Jamie Huscroft said:

I watch lots of hockey, and not just the Canucks, but hey, good try, Fella. 

 

You don't say? I thought all undrafted, ball hockey stars who get a shot in the American League and work their way up were destined to be huge scorers. Damn. My bad. Can you ever forgive me? 

 

Burrows was a huge scorer, not just in totals, but when he scored the goals. It's why he went from a $750k a year player to a $2.5 million to a $4.5 million per year player. Remember 28, 35, 26 and 28 goal seasons? I'd call that being a huge scorer. Once that turned into 13, 5, 18 and 9 goals a year it was clear that he wasn't the player he once was. Easy, simple. He's good defensively, on the PK and I'll even toss in "good in the room". Which, if you paid attention to what I had said, was my point. 

 

Lol, no, we wouldn't have. But I love your optimism.

 

Should be better. Should. 

 

And what if he isn't? I'm excited about Tryamkin, but I'm not betting the farm on a guy who has played 13 games in the NHL. We'll see how he looks in camp and during the preseason. Put him in every situation, with every D partner you can and see where he's best suited. Until then, I'll err on the side of caution and just wait and see. 

 

 

should was a better choice rather than WILL, he has 2 things to deal with that are easy to overcome. 1st involves work to get into shape for a faster game on a smaller rink, anyone can work to get in shape, if 50-60 yr old over weight men and women can do then so can he.  2nd involves just adjusting to the smaller surface of our rinks and all that takes is game time and practice on it which he will be doing starting from training camp.  Every minute spent will help him, it's not rocket science, it's adjustments that will come naturally as he plays more.

[iceman64]

8 hours ago, Jamie Huscroft said:

I watch lots of hockey, and not just the Canucks, but hey, good try, Fella. 

 

You don't say? I thought all undrafted, ball hockey stars who get a shot in the American League and work their way up were destined to be huge scorers. Damn. My bad. Can you ever forgive me? 

 

Burrows was a huge scorer, not just in totals, but when he scored the goals. It's why he went from a $750k a year player to a $2.5 million to a $4.5 million per year player. Remember 28, 35, 26 and 28 goal seasons? I'd call that being a huge scorer. Once that turned into 13, 5, 18 and 9 goals a year it was clear that he wasn't the player he once was. Easy, simple. He's good defensively, on the PK and I'll even toss in "good in the room". Which, if you paid attention to what I had said, was my point. 

 

Lol, no, we wouldn't have. But I love your optimism.

 

Should be better. Should. 

 

And what if he isn't? I'm excited about Tryamkin, but I'm not betting the farm on a guy who has played 13 games in the NHL. We'll see how he looks in camp and during the preseason. Put him in every situation, with every D partner you can and see where he's best suited. Until then, I'll err on the side of caution and just wait and see. 

 

 

Well i don't know who you watched but if you actually paid attention before saying stuff...  it was the twins who worked with Burr to help make him that player who stepped from 3rd to 1st line with them. Hank and Dank mentioned it on more than once that his play was improving every game and kes said the same thing.

 

Huge scorer?  he's capable of scoring in bunches with the "right line mates" and by the way even low draftee's can turn out huge scorers in the complete sense... look what round Pavel Dats was taken in... 

 

Burr's totals dropped because of limited time playing with the twins, but i bet that hurt him a bit being demoted and i'm not sure he ever got back to that BUT i bet he will as now he's being pushed hard and he's always responded well to adversity.

 

We would have made the playoffs barring so many injuries and especially to Sutter, and if management suggested that was a big part of why we didn't make the playoffs then sorry but i'd go with that rather than your opinion.