(Value in) Hansen & Burrows success with other teams

[Pete M]

Hansen in 4 games with the Sharks is a +3 with 1 assist, Sharks are 3-1

Burrows in 6 games with the Sens has 3 goals, 3 assists for 6 points, Sens are 6-0.

 

Keep in mind, JB got good value for Burrows and Hansen.

Hopefully, these two can produce a lot with their new teams, which could bode well for JB and the Canucks to get more value for existing players in future trades.

 

Even, Vrbata is doing better with his new team.

 

Might be a case of the players needing new scenery. Other teams may see these players doing better with other teams and be more willing to make a trade that brings more value.

 

[Rocksterh8]

nah, GM's always want to give up the least amount possible.

[Alflives]

Hansen and Burrows are very good veteran players, who play their hardest every shift, and are complete professionals.  The return for them both was very good.  Goldobin and Dhalen will compete for a top nine role, and hopefully one works out.  I like that JB got two similar aged, and similar typed players.  

[cripplereh]

14 minutes ago, Pete M said:

Hansen in 4 games with the Sharks is a +3 with 1 assist, Sharks are 3-1

Burrows in 6 games with the Sens has 3 goals, 3 assists for 6 points, Sens are 6-0.

 

Keep in mind, JB got good value for Burrows and Hansen.

Hopefully, these two can produce a lot with their new teams, which could bode well for JB and the Canucks to get more value for existing players in future trades.

 

Even, Vrbata is doing better with his new team.

 

Might be a case of the players needing new scenery. Other teams may see these players doing better with other teams and be more willing to make a trade that brings more value.

 

new teams help as for vrbata he did better when he signed with us and after the first year fell asleep at the wheel

 

Burr had to go but Hansen I wish we kept, the future does look so much better with these trades tho!

[JM_]

Better line combo's, better coaches. No surprise whatsoever.

[BaerBoBoeser]

1 hour ago, Pete M said:

Hansen in 4 games with the Sharks is a +3 with 1 assist, Sharks are 3-1

Burrows in 6 games with the Sens has 3 goals, 3 assists for 6 points, Sens are 6-0.

 

Keep in mind, JB got good value for Burrows and Hansen.

Hopefully, these two can produce a lot with their new teams, which could bode well for JB and the Canucks to get more value for existing players in future trades.

 

Even, Vrbata is doing better with his new team.

 

Might be a case of the players needing new scenery. Other teams may see these players doing better with other teams and be more willing to make a trade that brings more value.

 

It's a very valid point. While most GM's are smart enough to know that hockey is a team game and who you play with, your team success etc play a role in your performance (and with all the advanced stats out there to give more insight) the success of our players being integrated into talented teams and succeeding actually helps the 'eye test'

 

While every player is different and you can't say well Burrows did great, so hey NYR, take Edler off our hands for a first round pick, it can give teams and GM's something to think about as a comparable and a reminder that perhaps the player is somewhat limited in effectiveness by his role and teammates.

 

Edler is a perfect example IMHO. People rag on him here but he does all the 'heavy lifting' for our D which is young and inexperienced and has NO HELP! Gud is hurt, Stech and Hutton are rookies/sophmores, Try is a Rookie, Sbisa while improving isn't ready for a top 4 role consistently, we don't have hammer anymore etc. He logs all the hard minutes and matchups and has a team around him that isn't very good. Now I am not saying Edler is some All Star being dragged down by his team but rather if he's in a role with more 'support' and less of ALL the hard minutes, maybe you see and get a different player?

 

Perhaps their success could teach fans here a thing or two about appreciating our vets, they may not be as 'done' as many think. We're a team in transition and that makes it harder on the vets as that support level and depth is just not there, they have to play cleanup the mistakes of the young guys alot (or play more cautious), which can limit their effectiveness. One a team with more depth and experience their talent can come out as they get to play their 'role' not have to wear alot of hats at once.

 

A very good point you've raised and it certainly helps JB in arguing that what you see isn't what you always get and you have to consider that player's effectiveness and how he fits into the OTHER lineup when thinking about trade value.

 

Edler on a team with defensive depth, playing the #2/#3 role is one HELL of an addition. On a team with a young defense like us with no real veteran help, yeah its pretty darn hard to be seen as 'the perfect number 1'

[DownUndaCanuck]

Better teams, better systems, better coaches, better linemates. I think a lot of that production from Burrows is excitement, it won't last but to be honest the Sens don't need it to. They just need him for the playoff push and then once playoffs comes around he'll have enough adrenalin to contribute there as well. As for next year you can't think his production will be maintained.

[Nuxfanabroad]

With his total games played(approaching 840), I like that Burr now has a legitimate shot at 1,000 games. A guy undrafted. Also nearing 400 pts.

 

How 'BOUT THAT, eh Torts?!

[Alexandre]

1 hour ago, BaerBoBoeser said:

It's a very valid point. While most GM's are smart enough to know that hockey is a team game and who you play with, your team success etc play a role in your performance (and with all the advanced stats out there to give more insight) the success of our players being integrated into talented teams and succeeding actually helps the 'eye test'

 

While every player is different and you can't say well Burrows did great, so hey NYR, take Edler off our hands for a first round pick, it can give teams and GM's something to think about as a comparable and a reminder that perhaps the player is somewhat limited in effectiveness by his role and teammates.

 

Edler is a perfect example IMHO. People rag on him here but he does all the 'heavy lifting' for our D which is young and inexperienced and has NO HELP! Gud is hurt, Stech and Hutton are rookies/sophmores, Try is a Rookie, Sbisa while improving isn't ready for a top 4 role consistently, we don't have hammer anymore etc. He logs all the hard minutes and matchups and has a team around him that isn't very good. Now I am not saying Edler is some All Star being dragged down by his team but rather if he's in a role with more 'support' and less of ALL the hard minutes, maybe you see and get a different player?

 

Perhaps their success could teach fans here a thing or two about appreciating our vets, they may not be as 'done' as many think. We're a team in transition and that makes it harder on the vets as that support level and depth is just not there, they have to play cleanup the mistakes of the young guys alot (or play more cautious), which can limit their effectiveness. One a team with more depth and experience their talent can come out as they get to play their 'role' not have to wear alot of hats at once.

 

A very good point you've raised and it certainly helps JB in arguing that what you see isn't what you always get and you have to consider that player's effectiveness and how he fits into the OTHER lineup when thinking about trade value.

 

Edler on a team with defensive depth, playing the #2/#3 role is one HELL of an addition. On a team with a young defense like us with no real veteran help, yeah its pretty darn hard to be seen as 'the perfect number 1'

Good points and I agree. In addition, Willie is riding these veterans hard (Sedins, Sutter, Tanev, Edler, Miller, Eriksson). He ends up overplaying them.  When you are tired it is difficult to play a 200 foot, mistake free, defensive game. This could explain some injuries, mental lapses and lethargic play by these same players. Take the third period against the Bruins for example.

[Superlative]

????

[TheGuardian_]

It's happy and sad times, happy to see them flourishing and sad they had to go. Unfortunately the ones that should have gone to get the most back didn't.

Hansen and Burrows, IMO, made up a huge part of the heart of this team, two guys never given a chance that played almost every shift like it was their last, now that is the type of players you want showing rookies how to play.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Those two players aren't the only people having success with their new teams. What about Canucks' coaching staff from 2014? John Tortorella's Blue Jackets are third in the Eastern Conference, Mike Sullivan's Penguins won the cup last year, and Glen Gulutzan's Flames are currently on a 10-game win streak.

[c00kies]

1 hour ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Those two players aren't the only people having success with their new teams. What about Canucks' coaching staff from 2014? John Tortorella's Blue Jackets are third in the Eastern Conference, Mike Sullivan's Penguins won the cup last year, and Glen Gulutzan's Flames are currently on a 10-game win streak.

I was thinking about the coaches earlier in the year. Mike Sullivan has a talented team in Pittsburgh and plays to their strength (offense). I'm not sure if the Jackets are going to be consistently good year in and year out or if it is just a flash in the pan like we've seen before from them, but they've been impressive this year. 

 

Glen is an interesting case, as a lot of Flames fans wanted him canned before this winning streak. This isn't his first shot at head coach, but he is young and is probably adapting to get the most out of his lineup. Timely goaltending has also aided the team.