Burrows? Do We Really Need Him?

[smokes]

10 hours ago, Alflives said:

The one thing you both seem to have in common is you talk about Burr in the past tense.  With players, when we (as fans) are discussing their past accomplishments, as defense of current, or future play, that player's time is most likely done.

What about all those threads and posts about the Sedin's past accomplishments? Usually when we refer to things that happened in past, we use the past tense. It's called English.

[clam linguine]

On 1/24/2016 at 5:05 PM, Alflives said:

He can't skate well enough to keep up.  It's sad to watch him play now.  I don't want to see him play here any more.  Please JB, buy Burrows out July first, and end the suffering.  It's the merciful act that is the most difficult.  

Burrows looks fine out there. He is better than half the players on the team and he isn't half the player he was. If a lead needs to be held in the last minute, Burrows is still the first choice. A  perfect fit in the bottom of the line up.

 

Edited January 26, 2016 by clam linguine

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, clam linguine said:

Burrows looks fine out there. He is better than half the players on the team and he isn't half the player he was. If a lead needs to be held in the last minute, Burrows is still the first choice. A  perfect fit in the bottom of the line up.

 

Among our forwards he's....

3rd in blocked shots, 4th for hits, tied 2nd for takeaways, and has the highest differential between giveaways and takeaways (+12). He's also 7th in goals, points and ice time.

I'd say he's better than fine considering the role he's playing now.

[messier's_elbow]

25 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Among our forwards he's....

3rd in blocked shots, 4th for hits, tied 2nd for takeaways, and has the highest differential between giveaways and takeaways (+12). He's also 7th in goals, points and ice time.

I'd say he's better than fine considering the role he's playing now.

Yeah, he hasn't played horribly this season. He's not worth 4.5 but he's still a good player. 

[bad alice french]

I finally take a minute to look over a few pages on this post as I've been glancing over it for close to a year with no interest. To all you Burr bashers… where the #$ck is your loyalty? This is still a very useful and fiercely loyal player you're talking about. Everyone wants younger and newer but for christ's sake will you please stop for a second and, once again, take a look at Edmonton. Every, and i mean every, team needs a leadership nucleus and that group needs to be composed of respected, hard working, experienced players that lead by example on and off the ice. Players that have been there in the face of serious pressure and adversity. These are glue type players that keep things together when times get tough. I miss Juice and he'll end up being right up there with the likes of Jovo, Ohlund, Salo and even the twins as one of my faves of all time. We miss him most nights. Guys like Burrows and even Hansen are in that category. He brings a lot to the team and until we have another player that has buried the Hawks during the most pivotal game in modern franchise history, I'm sticking with my boy.

[Alflives]

9 hours ago, smokes said:

What about all those threads and posts about the Sedin's past accomplishments? Usually when we refer to things that happened in past, we use the past tense. It's called English.

Yes, I accept we discuss the twins past feats as well.  However, with Burrows it's a means to mask his current poor play.  I think Burr was a really good player too, but that's in the past.  We see little glimpses of the player he once was, but that's it now.    

[Alflives]

9 hours ago, smokes said:

What about all those threads and posts about the Sedin's past accomplishments? Usually when we refer to things that happened in past, we use the past tense. It's called English.

Yes, I accept we discuss the twins past feats as well.  However, with Burrows it's a means to mask his current poor play.  I think Burr was a really good player too, but that's in the past.  We see little glimpses of the player he once was, but that's it now.    

[snucks]

Burrows was always a guy AV used to get others going. Now WD is using Burrows to help his Vey and its working. Burrows is said to be valuable in the room too. He is useful to help along struggling young guys. Vey though is 24 but Burrows makes him better.

Edler is the veteran on the D but he is not helping the young guys. Maybe the young guys are helping him but as the statistics show, he leads with Henrik in give aways. Maybe Benning should look for a veteran D man to help the D like Burrows does with the forwards.

[Baggins]

3 hours ago, Alflives said:

Yes, I accept we discuss the twins past feats as well.  However, with Burrows it's a means to mask his current poor play.  I think Burr was a really good player too, but that's in the past.  We see little glimpses of the player he once was, but that's it now.    

I think you're confusing "play" with "production". Burrows is still playing well, he's just not producing like he did.

[Positive Canuck]

Are we ready to et salary to move Burr ? or waive him to Utica and let him teach the youth ?
Burr and Higgy can be mentors and after they retire maybe coaching in the A.
No doubt they both were warriors for us but the games moved on and Burr looks half step behind almost useless out there.

[alt kilgore]

4 hours ago, Alflives said:

Yes, I accept we discuss the twins past feats as well.  However, with Burrows it's a means to mask his current poor play.  I think Burr was a really good player too, but that's in the past.  We see little glimpses of the player he once was, but that's it now.    

Whats your point?

The Sedins being talked about in the past tense is the exact reason some discuss Burrows that way. Obviously their best days are behind them as well. This happens every year, on every team...especially with 30+ players on the tail ends of their contracts. Its not like we have a Lecavalier contract on our hands.

Not saying you do but it seems like some fans want to hold Burrows to higher standards and if he is not playing like the 2009 - 2011 Burrows until the final day of his contract, then he's a bust.

[Alflives]

13 hours ago, smokes said:

What about all those threads and posts about the Sedin's past accomplishments? Usually when we refer to things that happened in past, we use the past tense. It's called English.

The Twins are still great players. Burr is not.  It's that simple.

[tirefire]

He'll always be the dragon-slayer.  Not that he should rest on his laurels. However, he is still an effective player.  Maybe he's overpaid for his current role and point production, but add in the bargain he was back then and it all evens out.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

8 minutes ago, kilgore said:

Whats your point?

The Sedins being talked about in the past tense is the exact reason some discuss Burrows that way. Obviously their best days are behind them as well. This happens every year, on every team...especially with 30+ players on the tail ends of their contracts. Its not like we have a Lecavalier contract on our hands.

Not saying you do but it seems like some fans want to hold Burrows to higher standards and if he is not playing like the 2009 - 2011 Burrows until the final day of his contract, then he's a bust.

It's not that he's a bust, it's that we now have younger, cheaper, higher upside options that can replace the current play off Burrows.  No one on this team can replace the offense that the twins bring.

It's the reason Higgins got waived, it's the reason Hamhuis and Prust are heading out the door and it's the reason discussion is being brought up about Burrows.  This is team is in a transition, moving out aged vets for younger pieces is part of the process. 

It’s inevitable that one day Burrows will no longer be on this team.  We need to decide (in best interest for the team) when that part is to happen?  End of current contract?  After an extension contract? This trade deadline? This off season? Next year’s trade deadline?

[ForsbergTheGreat]

dbl post

Edited January 26, 2016 by ForsbergTheGreat

[Hairy Kneel]

He's kind of like Prust in so much as checking at a slower pace. And not being the type of fierce checker he used to be. His role was not a scorer like the twins. We need that role by someone and if Burr can't burr anymore we can switch him up for a younger big body from Utica ie.someone with front net presence (remember when he could do that?). Add the cap were saving (and spend on D?) and voila..love ya Burr but times change and he knows it (re:Higgins)

[alt kilgore]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

It's not that he's a bust, it's that we now have younger, cheaper, higher upside options that can replace the current play off Burrows.  No one on this team can replace the offense that the twins bring.

It's the reason Higgins got waived, it's the reason Hamhuis and Prust are heading out the door and it's the reason discussion is being brought up about Burrows.  This is team is in a transition, moving out aged vets for younger pieces is part of the process. 

 

It’s inevitable that one day Burrows will no longer be on this team.  We need to decide (in best interest for the team) when that part is to happen?  End of current contract?  After an extension contract? This trade deadline? This off season? Next year’s trade deadline?

You're right, not too many would call him a bust. But some fans here would call him a bum.

I agree that we have younger, cheaper options but like I said, this happens on every team. We simply cannot waive every vet on the team ie. Higgins. And Higgins is no Burrows. We need at least a small core of vets unless you want to go the Edmonton route. And there is no one better than Burrows to help raise the kids. Its one more fricken year @ 4.5. I think we can absorb that for what he still brings to the table.

And yeah, it is inevitable he will be gone. I have said in this thread that I'd be happy for him if he was traded to a cup competitive team, and we got a great return. I'd also be happy with him staying. Even re-signing for a short cheaper extension.

[kingofsurrey]

Burrows with his current contract  / production is untradeable right now. He would be a candidate for a buy-out  though. Do the canucks have a buy out available this summer ?

[ForsbergTheGreat]

37 minutes ago, kilgore said:

You're right, not too many would call him a bust. But some fans here would call him a bum.

I agree that we have younger, cheaper options but like I said, this happens on every team. We simply cannot waive every vet on the team ie. Higgins. And Higgins is no Burrows. We need at least a small core of vets unless you want to go the Edmonton route. And there is no one better than Burrows to help raise the kids. Its one more fricken year @ 4.5. I think we can absorb that for what he still brings to the table.

And yeah, it is inevitable he will be gone. I have said in this thread that I'd be happy for him if he was traded to a cup competitive team, and we got a great return. I'd also be happy with him staying. Even re-signing for a short cheaper extension.

We have enough vet's and leadership with the Twins, Sutter, Hansen and Dorsett

I'll post this again, Where does Burr fit next year?

Sedin, Sedin, Sutter

Baertschi, Horvat, Hansen

Etem Vey Virtanen

Gaunce McCann Dorsett

 

Who does Burrows replace?  Which non waiver elidgable player to we risk sending back, all for that one "fricken" year? Grenier, Kenins.  Is it worth risking losing a young asset for nothing, all for a player who's likely giving less on ice value?  Do we also delay another year of Shinkaruk NHL development,  There's also the possibility Boeser or Rodin competing for a spot.  That lineup is also assuming we doesn’t make any UFA signings (lucic, Ladd, or Okposo) and we let go of Cracknell.  With the way Benning talked about us having cap, it sure seems like will will be in the mix of things, meaning that another less roster spot open. 

Does it really benefit Burrows or the team to have him as a depth player rotating in an out of the line up with younger players and injury relief.  Less be honest, next year is likely his last year, he will be 36 and a lot of wear on his body, is that really how Burrows is going to finish his career?

I’d be willing to find a team for him in the summer and even retain cap (50%).  We should be able to find a playoff team that could use his skills.  Give him one last real kick at the can, and still be player that has impact.  It’s that compared to rotating in and out of the lineup in Vancouver.

 

overall I wouldn't be shocked if jb put burrows name out there this TD.  But likely no deal due to his term. I expect JB will push hard to move burr around draft day and this offseason. It's the not the end of the world if he's on the roster next season but he won't finish the year with the team. 

Edited January 27, 2016 by ForsbergTheGreat

[clam linguine]

4 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

We have enough vet's and leadership with the Twins, Sutter, Hansen and Dorsett

I'll post this again, Where does Burr fit next year?

Sedin, Sedin, Sutter

Baertschi, Horvat, Hansen

Etem Vey Virtanen

Gaunce McCann Dorsett

You should be begging for us to dump the guys over 30 who have not taken a step down yet. BEGGING. But you wont...will you. You know why?  Because you haven't learned from Higgins...Bieksa.....Hamhuis.  Alex is redundant. We can get assets for the Sedins, Hansen, Edler. There...lotsa room.  I would much rather be watching Matthews 2 years from now then Henrik and Danielle rolling around the ice in their wheel chairs...lol. You are worried about losing Vey, lol? 

Yay Alex!