Burrows? Do We Really Need Him?

[Kevo882]

Burrows has a couple more effective years as a solid checker/penalty killer/agitator who scores 10-15 goals. Is he overpaid? Maybe. But I think he deserves at least another year (hopefully healthy) to show his stuff.

[DownUndaCanuck]

Is that supposed to be haiku?

Don't try and pin Gillis' demise on Burr...scroll above to see that a guy with broken pieces is cut some slack. And goals are one part of his game...mostly timely ones. But look at the work he does in front of the net, on the PK, etc. to see that he contributes.

His lack of goals is what you're looking at...his production comes in many forms, not just what you scan for on a scoresheet.

A good penalty killer and net presence is not worth a 4M cap hit. Defensive forwards who contribute under 10 goals and play well on the PK can fetch around 1 to 2M and play on the 3rd or 4th lines. What's worst of all is that Burr was a shocking minus player while playing top minutes and still couldn't contribute.

I'm willing to see how he goes next year, but if he starts slowly he has to be out. The big minutes he plays could be better served to our highly talented young guns instead of someone who is obviously well past their prime.

[Westcoasting]

A good penalty killer and net presence is not worth a 4M cap hit. Defensive forwards who contribute under 10 goals and play well on the PK can fetch around 1 to 2M and play on the 3rd or 4th lines. What's worst of all is that Burr was a shocking minus player while playing top minutes and still couldn't contribute.

I'm willing to see how he goes next year, but if he starts slowly he has to be out. The big minutes he plays could be better served to our highly talented young guns instead of someone who is obviously well past their prime.

You would do well to listen to what Deb is saying, her knowledge of hockey far exceeds the opinions you spew. For the last couple years you have been going on about how Booth is the guy and that the defense of the Canucks is stacked and tops in the league... yeah ok, look at them now. What has Booth done since he's been here? What did our stacked defence do last year?

[-DLC-]

A good penalty killer and net presence is not worth a 4M cap hit. Defensive forwards who contribute under 10 goals and play well on the PK can fetch around 1 to 2M and play on the 3rd or 4th lines. What's worst of all is that Burr was a shocking minus player while playing top minutes and still couldn't contribute.

I'm willing to see how he goes next year, but if he starts slowly he has to be out. The big minutes he plays could be better served to our highly talented young guns instead of someone who is obviously well past their prime.

So you completely ignore his injuries then? That's what you're doing...it's nothing about "prime", it's about having to find his groove again...happens.

Let's reassess things after he's been healthy for a stretch...his timing was off but that won't last forever.

[Nuck-Shot]

Imagine if you combined burrows intangibles with a prototypical european skilled player. You would get a crosby . Gretzky . Malkin . Lidstrom . jere Lehtonen . Modano . Yzerman . Lemieux . Recchi . Ron francis. List goes on......

My point is he brings Assests to a winning team

[Devoted]

If Burrows stays healthy next season, I expect 20 goals, 40 points, excellent 2 way play and strong leadership.

At 4.5 million, Im quite okay with that.

Burr has earned his grace period and all those with the memory of a goldfish will be back on his wagon again soon.

[Metal Face Doom]

Good thing he only makes $4.5 then huh?

Still not worth it. Take him off the Sedin line and he's a 2 million dollar player.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Still not worth it. Take him off the Sedin line and he's a 2 million dollar player.

I think we all knew that Burrows' new deal was more of a "reward for services" contract. It was always going to be a challenge (especially as he declines) for him to consistently meet the production rates that are generally expected of a $4.5 million player. However, it's probably more appropriate to look at these kinds of deals in terms of career earnings/career points.

Burrows, the Sedins, Kesler, and most of the Canucks' core have bought into a team structure where Gillis asked them to accept what the team could afford to pay them instead of what the market said they were worth. For many years, this meant players taking "hometown discounts" that paid them significantly less than what the market would usually dictate. When the recent extensions came around for Burrows and the twins, the Canucks were in a position to offer them more money. This IMHO was always part of the understanding between Gillis and the team's core players. Burrows was content making $2 million/year for 30 goals/season because he knew that MG would "take care of him" on the next deal.

In terms of career earnings/points, here's where things stand:

Burrows: $15.9 million/309 points = $51,456 per point

Henrik: $46.165 million/842 points = $54,828 per point

Daniel: $46.165 million/805 points = $57,348 per point

And here are some comparables:

Matt Moulson: $13,902,500/275 points = $50,555 per point

Erik Cole: $34.46 million/493 points = $69,899 per point

Scott Hartnell: $38,357,500/537 points = $71,429 per point

Pascal Dupuis: $14,311,000/394 points = $36,322 per point

Chris Kunitz: $24,462,500/471 points = $51,937 per point

Joe Thornton: $76.425 million/1194 points = $64,007 per point

Patrick Marleau: $61.795 million/931 points = $66,375 per point

Pavel Datsyuk: $57.525 million/804 points = $71,549 per point

Patrice Bergeron: $40.296 million/495 points = $81,406 per point

So basically, you have Burrows' career earnings/points being on the lower side for a 20+ goal winger. He's not as good a deal as Dupuis (who I think would have been a fair comparable in contract negotiations), but he's right in line with guys like Moulson and Kunitz (who are generally considered to be good value). And he's well below the accepted market value for proven 20+ goal wingers in their 30s.

As for the twins, they have been well below market value for PPG+ first line players. Even if the twins average only 50-60 points/season from here on out (although I think they'll do better than that), they'll still finish out their careers as good value players (compared to what the market pays for points production).

Based on recent contracts, the current market value (for forwards) is somewhere in the $7 million/season to $9 million/season range for players who produce just over a point per game (which is roughly $100,000/point).

So the twins need to hit 70 points for market value on their new deals. But given that they've been paid under market value for so many seasons, they've pretty much earned their money no matter what they produce.

As for Burrows, recent contracts suggest that this league pays around $200,000 per goal. So Burrows would need to score 23 goals per season to be hitting market value at $4.5 million. But given how far under market value he's been to date, he's still going to be a "good deal" for his career regardless of whether or not he gets his touch back.

And that's just looking at these players purely in terms of points and goals. Burrows and the twins bring much more to this team than just their scoring line (although the team, as currently constructed, requires that they produce more offense than they did in 2013-14).

Paying "reward for services" contracts does create a stress on the team's salary cap. Obviously, when they're not producing (and the team's struggling on a whole), it's tough having $18.5 million AAV tied up in the twins and Burr. But this is also part of the cycle that all teams must go through in order to retain their veteran core players and maintain a leadership group and a sense of team identity.

The good thing is that the Sedins and Burrows don't need to hit unreasonable target numbers in order to meet the market value on their current deals.

I don't find it far fetched to think that the twins can together produce around 140 points/season (especially if they're healthy and if the coaching staff returns to a more suitable usage and system). Both Sedins (especially Daniel) had statistical drop-offs that were far greater than what could reasonably be attributed to age/decline. They should experience some "return to the mean" in their advanced stats and this will translate into better overall production. Even as aging players, there's no reason they can't put-up respectable scoring totals (especially if they get a little help from the coaches and management)

Similarly, I think that Burrows' 2013-14 numbers were largely an aberration. Although he was due for some drop-off, I believe that the degree to which he struggled was more a result of injuries, usage/system, and some horrible puck luck (his 950 PDO, 4.57 on-ice team shooting%, and 4.8 personal shooting% are all shockingly low compared to his career numbers). It's a fair assumption that he'll bounce back (even with some drop-off due to decline) and that he can probably still be counted on to produce around 20 goals per season (if healthy and with the right system/usage).

So the contracts should be fine. They won't be considered "bargains" anymore but they're not really anything out of line with current market value either. And when viewed as part of their overall career earnings/points, these deals are more than fair.

EDIT: additions and clarifications

Edited April 29, 2014 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

[RUPERTKBD]

Nice work Sid. +1

[Absent Canuck]

In terms of career earnings/points, here's where things stand:

Burrows: $15.9 million/309 points = $51,456 per point

Henrik: $46.165 million/842 points = $54,828 per point

Daniel: $46.165 million/805 points = $57,348 per point

And here are some comparables:

Matt Moulson: $13,902,500/275 points = $50,555 per point

Erik Cole: $34.46 million/493 points = $69,899 per point

Scott Hartnell: $38,357,500/537 points = $71,429 per point

Pascal Dupuis: $14,311,000/394 points = $36,322 per point

Chris Kunitz: $24,462,500/471 points = $51,937 per point

Joe Thornton: $76.425 million/1194 points = $64,007 per point

Patrick Marleau: $61.795 million/931 points = $66,375 per point

Pavel Datsyuk: $57.525 million/804 points = $71,549 per point

Patrice Bergeron: $40.296 million/495 points = $81,406 per point

So basically, you have Burrows' career earnings/points being on the lower side for a 20+ goal winger.

Nice work Sid +1

[-DLC-]

Excellent post Sid! Well done.

[RUPERTKBD]

...and you have way too much time on your hands...

[-DLC-]

OK, weird. At work, working away at my desk and this thread pops up open. Doododoodo (that's Twilight Zone music)

Not sure how/why...to be cont'd (I think it means he'll score 2 goals tomorrow).

[johngould21]

Funny how some on CDC don't want him, yet twice in a row Team Canada put him in their roster for the WC.

[wasteofskin]

Well... Its that time of year again.

RESURRECTED!!!

[oldnews]

I think we all knew that Burrows' new deal was more of a "reward for services" contract. It was always going to be a challenge (especially as he declines) for him to consistently meet the production rates that are generally expected of a $4.5 million player. However, it's probably more appropriate to look at these kinds of deals in terms of career earnings/career points.

Burrows, the Sedins, Kesler, and most of the Canucks' core have bought into a team structure where Gillis asked them to accept what the team could afford to pay them instead of what the market said they were worth. For many years, this meant players taking "hometown discounts" that paid them significantly less than what the market would usually dictate. When the recent extensions came around for Burrows and the twins, the Canucks were in a position to offer them more money. This IMHO was always part of the understanding between Gillis and the team's core players. Burrows was content making $2 million/year for 30 goals/season because he knew that MG would "take care of him" on the next deal.

In terms of career earnings/points, here's where things stand:

Burrows: $15.9 million/309 points = $51,456 per point

Henrik: $46.165 million/842 points = $54,828 per point

Daniel: $46.165 million/805 points = $57,348 per point

And here are some comparables:

Matt Moulson: $13,902,500/275 points = $50,555 per point

Erik Cole: $34.46 million/493 points = $69,899 per point

Scott Hartnell: $38,357,500/537 points = $71,429 per point

Pascal Dupuis: $14,311,000/394 points = $36,322 per point

Chris Kunitz: $24,462,500/471 points = $51,937 per point

Joe Thornton: $76.425 million/1194 points = $64,007 per point

Patrick Marleau: $61.795 million/931 points = $66,375 per point

Pavel Datsyuk: $57.525 million/804 points = $71,549 per point

Patrice Bergeron: $40.296 million/495 points = $81,406 per point

So basically, you have Burrows' career earnings/points being on the lower side for a 20+ goal winger. He's not as good a deal as Dupuis (who I think would have been a fair comparable in contract negotiations), but he's right in line with guys like Moulson and Kunitz (who are generally considered to be good value). And he's well below the accepted market value for proven 20+ goal wingers in their 30s.

As for the twins, they have been well below market value for PPG+ first line players. Even if the twins average only 50-60 points/season from here on out (although I think they'll do better than that), they'll still finish out their careers as good value players (compared to what the market pays for points production).

Based on recent contracts, the current market value (for forwards) is somewhere in the $7 million/season to $9 million/season range for players who produce just over a point per game (which is roughly $100,000/point).

So the twins need to hit 70 points for market value on their new deals. But given that they've been paid under market value for so many seasons, they've pretty much earned their money no matter what they produce.

As for Burrows, recent contracts suggest that this league pays around $200,000 per goal. So Burrows would need to score 23 goals per season to be hitting market value at $4.5 million. But given how far under market value he's been to date, he's still going to be a "good deal" for his career regardless of whether or not he gets his touch back.

And that's just looking at these players purely in terms of points and goals. Burrows and the twins bring much more to this team than just their scoring line (although the team, as currently constructed, requires that they produce more offense than they did in 2013-14).

Paying "reward for services" contracts does create a stress on the team's salary cap. Obviously, when they're not producing (and the team's struggling on a whole), it's tough having $18.5 million AAV tied up in the twins and Burr. But this is also part of the cycle that all teams must go through in order to retain their veteran core players and maintain a leadership group and a sense of team identity.

The good thing is that the Sedins and Burrows don't need to hit unreasonable target numbers in order to meet the market value on their current deals.

I don't find it far fetched to think that the twins can together produce around 140 points/season (especially if they're healthy and if the coaching staff returns to a more suitable usage and system). Both Sedins (especially Daniel) had statistical drop-offs that were far greater than what could reasonably be attributed to age/decline. They should experience some "return to the mean" in their advanced stats and this will translate into better overall production. Even as aging players, there's no reason they can't put-up respectable scoring totals (especially if they get a little help from the coaches and management)

Similarly, I think that Burrows' 2013-14 numbers were largely an aberration. Although he was due for some drop-off, I believe that the degree to which he struggled was more a result of injuries, usage/system, and some horrible puck luck (his 950 PDO, 4.57 on-ice team shooting%, and 4.8 personal shooting% are all shockingly low compared to his career numbers). It's a fair assumption that he'll bounce back (even with some drop-off due to decline) and that he can probably still be counted on to produce around 20 goals per season (if healthy and with the right system/usage).

So the contracts should be fine. They won't be considered "bargains" anymore but they're not really anything out of line with current market value either. And when viewed as part of their overall career earnings/points, these deals are more than fair.

EDIT: additions and clarifications

Great stuff SID, and that's looking at the offensive side of production, which certainly isn't al that Burrows brings.

Despite his disaster of an offensive season, his underlying numbers were still strong.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=30&f1=2013_s&f2=5v5&f5=VAN&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67#

And that is while playing with that awkward as hell cage over his face (not to mention that contraption he had to protect his broken foot...)

But what have you done for us lately Alex?

[HerrDrFunk]

The only thing I can figure about last season is that while out for a drive, Burrows ran over a Gypsy woman taking her pet leprechaun for a walk. The impact caused him to lose control of the car and drive through an antique mirror shop, smashing the entire inventory in the process.

Because seriously, I've never seen anyone do so much right and not get rewarded with goals.

[4everacanuck13]

1) Burrows is a leader and a character player on this team

2) He brings passion to the locker room

3) Not every player in the League can score a lot of goals

4) Burrows brings grit to this team

5) He had one bad season last year cause of injuries

6) Why would you trade someone who has been there through thick and thin with this team?

7) He's part of the core with Sedins, Bieksa.

8) Honestly, hes one of our better leaders.

9) You're not a true Canuck fan.

10) get out.

[alt kilgore]

I am sick of "fans" piling on Alex because of one bad year...when almost every other player had a bad year too. Most specifically Daniel, his linemate. Daniels decline on top of Burrows 3 major injuries during the year were big reasons for his lack of production.

Yes he is getting older for an NHL player, but IMO he can still be an effective player. Its because he is a smart player, and he is a fearless player.

[nuck nit]

Love Burr ,but if I am Aqua man paying out $alaries I would be choked to pay out $8m last year.

I would also seriously question if I should pay out $6.5 million for him this year and if I could get out of the contract,I would.

The league is not about warm and fuzzy feelings and past glory.

It's a business. So,yes,it is all about 'what have you done lately'.

So,Burr has to produce cuz $6.5 million is a lot of buckwheat or beer or whatever.