GreyHatnDart Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 He also has incredible tenacity and fantastic hockey sense, which hasn't changed with age. Preachin to the choir my friend. There's a reason I proudly sport my Burrows jersey game in game out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 The entire 2nd line has been in a slump. Funny that Burr should score 2 goals as soon as he changes linemates. Selective reasoning. The 2nd line also got on the scoresheet when Burrows was dumped from it. His style of play has never dictated him as a scorer. He's a grinder who's good defensively and agitates the other team. He's lost a step as he's aged making him a little less effective in that role but effective nontheless. Four straight seasons of 26-35 goals says otherwise. But you are right, he has lost a step and it's cost him the effectiveness he once had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 Selective reasoning. The 2nd line also got on the scoresheet when Burrows was dumped from it. Four straight seasons of 26-35 goals says otherwise. But you are right, he has lost a step and it's cost him the effectiveness he once had. Playing as a go to the net agitator who forechecks hard and can put his stick on the ice. I'm not taking away from his skill set, I'm one of his biggest supporters. I'm saying, he was never, not once, touted as a prolific point producer. He gelled with the Sedin's, there's no doubt, but I would never say he carried that line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 Playing as a go to the net agitator who forechecks hard and can put his stick on the ice. I'm not taking away from his skill set, I'm one of his biggest supporters. This is not a unique skill set at his cap hit. The team gets the same thing from Hansen, Matthias and Dorsett who are much more cap friendly and produce similar numbers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 I think it really depends on how you look at success. Many of those players did have success with the twins. Just because it didn't last multiple years doesn't mean they didn't have successful stints with the twins. After all now that Burrows is off that line were not going to write off his previous success because it didn't last forever. King was in the rookie of the year talk the first half of the season he played with the twins (hit a bad stretch after, but he did have success)Bertuzzi also had success, he was put on the third line with them, Shortly after he was moved up to the first line to play to create the WCE.Klatt also had success with the twins and place 2nd line with them. Never forget him scoring that OT winner against the wild. Adveson was really clicking with twins before he had that career ending knee injuryLinden played with them at the end of the year and in the 2007 playoffs, where they put up good numbers. Kassian we saw have success with the twinsKesler last year was put on the twins line up until christmas and the team hit the injury bug. They were having a great year together. So again it's what you define as success. Burrows kind of success? only burrows can really say that.sedins can make alot of players look good but burrows is the only one that really made the sedins better as a line...hes been the only one to truly fit right in with the cylce game and not just stand in front of the net... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 This is not a unique skill set at his cap hit. The team gets the same thing from Hansen, Matthias and Dorsett who are much more cap friendly and produce similar numbers. None of them park themselves in front of the net and take the constant cross checks and whacks that he does. He's mastered it and can hang in there despite it all. Dorsett - maybe. You are only seeing what you want to see and a lot of it happens away from the play. Go take in a game or two to get the full story. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 None of them park themselves in front of the net and take the constant cross checks and whacks that he does. He's mastered it and can hang in there despite it all. Dorsett - maybe. You are only seeing what you want to see and a lot of it happens away from the play. Go take in a game or two to get the full story. Ability to take abuse in front of the net is not unique to Alex Burrows. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Watch the guy in Jan for he gets them in bunches, often heating up mid-season, as other players start to wear down & drift/struggle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Brashear.........no need to bold it. LOL I think it really depends on how you look at success. Many of those players did have success with the twins. Just because it didn't last multiple years doesn't mean they didn't have successful stints with the twins. After all now that Burrows is off that line were not going to write off his previous success because it didn't last forever. King was in the rookie of the year talk the first half of the season he played with the twins (hit a bad stretch after, but he did have success) Bertuzzi also had success, he was put on the third line with them, Shortly after he was moved up to the first line to play to create the WCE. Klatt also had success with the twins and place 2nd line with them. Never forget him scoring that OT winner against the wild. Adveson was really clicking with twins before he had that career ending knee injury Linden played with them at the end of the year and in the 2007 playoffs, where they put up good numbers. Kassian we saw have success with the twins Kesler last year was put on the twins line up until christmas and the team hit the injury bug. They were having a great year together. So again it's what you define as success. Burrows kind of success? only burrows can really say that. Definition is certainly important. I would say my definition is maintained success. IIRC King actually wasn't successful with the twins. He was moved up to the second line with them after doing pretty good and then didn't do much of anything. I believe the best thing to come out of that trio was a good name for a line. I wouldn't call what Bertuzzi or Klatt were successful. Bert was a very good player and didn't see any real improvement. (some would argue it was an awful experiment really) The argument is that anyone can have success with the twins. My argument is that that is simply not true. By my definition 3 players have had real success with the twins. Arvedsen did look good with them and I would add him to the list. He looked legit with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Ability to take abuse in front of the net is not unique to Alex Burrows. Seems to be unique to other players who have been tried there though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Seems to be unique to other players who have been tried there though. Taylor Pyatt did the same thing. It was about the only thing he was good for on that line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new look 'nucks Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 After watching last nights game, it became apparent what Burrows' new role on this team may end up being. He seemed to really take well to the chance to play with Horvat (judging by his first intermission interview). He may be well suited to stay on the 4th line and 1st unit PP, assuming the team can continue to roll 4 lines. If they can, his minutes would not drop off to significantly with PP time, and he would be a great winger for Horvat to have with him on a regular basis. I am as big a Burrows fan as the next guy. He has always given his heart and soul to this team, but I can also admit (unlike some) that his roll has clearly changed on a nightly basis for this team. But if he can be a leader of sorts on the 4th line, or even 3rd if Horvat moves up, his value is still high for this team. I dunno, it just looked like he was rejuvenated playing with Bo, and Bo having that veteran leadership beside him could work out for both of them. Either way, the line-up they had going last night for the most part looked pretty good, but it was just one game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Taylor Pyatt did the same thing. It was about the only thing he was good for on that line. Holy sh!t Taylor Pyatt. Ughhhh I don't miss those days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new look 'nucks Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Holy sh!t Taylor Pyatt. Ughhhh I don't miss those days. But he was so pretty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 But he was so pretty... Those eyes doe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Ability to take abuse in front of the net is not unique to Alex Burrows. LOL....aren't many things that are unique to players but the fact is it's what they do/don't do that determines their worth, not $$ (which is a formality). And someone who "contributes" by being a distraction or freeing up others TO score is part of helping with scoring. So he may not always pot the goals but if he's helping so others can, that counts too. He has struggled....but it would be a big hole to fill if he was gone. Very versatile and willing to be used in a number of roles. Sure, this team may have to reinvent themselves on occasion as things gets staled/figured out by other teams but as long as you have them willing to do so and they work out where they are placed, I don't think you can ask for more than that. So it's not unique to him, but not everyone is effective at it. Or even willing to park themselves there and take the abuse he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 There's no concern to what he brings as a player. The only concern is his $4.5 million cap hit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 This is not a unique skill set at his cap hit. The team gets the same thing from Hansen, Matthias and Dorsett who are much more cap friendly and produce similar numbers. Out of curiosity, how much is a 2nd line player worth in your mind and what do you expect for point production? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 I want to know if at 11 this guy grows a new arm or has a horrible accident at a nuclear power plant and grows extra fingers. He does the same thing as Clutch, when he has to count to 11.... ...he leaves his fly unzipped. There's no concern to what he brings as a player. The only concern is his $4.5 million cap hit This is the way contracts sometimes work out. No-one was "concerned" when Burrows was massively underpaid at 2 million per, (except maybe for his agent) but now that he's not scoring like he did back then, we begrudge him a salary commensurate with what he's done for the team over the course of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 (edited) There's no concern to what he brings as a player. The only concern is his $4.5 million cap hit Why are you concerned about that? I mean if that's you're concern than there's so many reasons to stop complaining. We aren't doing anything with the 750K that he's making over what he should be. A player like Burrows should be making just under 4 mil. Having said that we also got an extremely underpaid Burrows for a lot of years. You think those two things might have something to do with each other? If you're not worried about what he's doing on the ice and the "only" concern is his cap hit then you're just being nit picky because you need something to complain about. Edited December 24, 2014 by EmployeeoftheMonth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now