[Report] Torts wanted to buy out Alex Burrows

[Dogbyte]

In all fairness it was just yet another horrible contract handed out by Gillis. No need to throw Torts under the bus for it. It's an albatross, not as bad as Edler or Luongo but still another roadblock for the Canucks to deal with.

People get so attached to players on this site that their ability to think is compromised.

And that article was absolutely terrible. Maybe he didn't talk to Green because it was both their first years and with all the NTC's who cares who is on the farm team?

[Salmonberries]

Torts was a freakin' jackass.

[Absent Canuck]

In all fairness it was just yet another horrible contract handed out by Gillis. No need to throw Torts under the bus for it. It's an albatross, not as bad as Edler or Luongo but still another roadblock for the Canucks to deal with.

People get so attached to players on this site that their ability to think is compromised.

And that article was absolutely terrible. Maybe he didn't talk to Green because it was both their first years and with all the NTC's who cares who is on the farm team?

There is a lot of throwing Torts under the bus right now. I find it easy to believe he flipped out on Booth, all to find out he was early. Its called an honest mistake.

Flipping out is not the method I would use to coach players but Gillis knew what he was getting when he hired him.

As far as buying out Burrows goes, Torts did not have any say in it, so I find it hard to believe he would be saying it at all unless it was while pulling his hair out at the guy had 100 shot and zero goals . That seems like the kind of thing Torts would say in the heat of the moment. Just as dozens of fans did on CDC at the time.

I think we as fans would far rather believe an evil entity has arrived to ruin our beloved heroes than the fact they might not be as good as they used to be. In the end the truth might be a bit of both.

[Dogbyte]

It's called the parabolic effect of a player's career. Burrows had three seasons where he was on an upward trajectory...he spent three more years at his peak...over the last two seasons, he's been on a downward trajectory, which may have been accelerated/exposed because of what appears to be a strained relationship he shared with Tortorella. While his game was ascending, Burrows was a solid third/fourth liner (check out his TOI). Now that he's on the decline, IMHO, the expectation would be that he's back to being a third/fourth liner. Does having a 33 year old 3rd/4th liner taking up 4.5M of cap space make sense to anyone? Doesn't to me. Canucks have enough vets outside of Burrows to bring on the younger players.

Burrows has given us his heart and soul...he scored arguably the biggest goal of the modern era...made the most of his opportunities...but here's what he got back in return: (1) a $2M contract extension at a time when it was entirely uncertain that he'd turn out to be the perfect fit with the Sedins -- this gave him, who at the time was a third/fourth liner serious sense of security, which I'm sure was of great importance to him; (2) the opportunity to play with the Sedins (earned, mind you) which gave him a chance to elevate his game (and also the play of the Sedins).

I like Burrows, but I love the Canucks. Players are interchangeable and evolutionary parts of the team that I love. Burrows, as useful as he may still be, is a depreciating asset. If Linden is serious about giving the fans a team with long term prospects of success, players like Burrows have to be moved at the appropriate time...IMHO, the appropriate is now. If Linden wants to give us a team that will consistently be slightly above average, then he and the new GM will keep Burrows. I'm hoping that Linden has greater aspirations for the Canucks than year-after-year of playoff mediocrity.

I'm happy Tortorella is out, but one thing I agree with him is that we have to let go of 2011...it's in the past...we didn't achieve the ultimate goal, so we need to stop celebrating making it to the 7th game of SCF by hanging onto certain players who took oh so close, but did not close out the deal.

Great post. I like everything about Burrows but he makes way to much money. I think you'll continue to see him struggle points wise as the Sedins decline. No more free points for Burrows. I would be ecstatic if he hits 20 (goals) but I if I was a dragon slayer die hard I would prepare myself for the possiblility that his years of 25-30 goals per year and 55 points are in the rearveiw mirror.

There is a lot of throwing Torts under the bus right now. I find it easy to believe he flipped out on Booth, all to find out he was early. Its called an honest mistake.

Flipping out is not the method I would use to coach players but Gillis knew what he was getting when he hired him.

As far as buying out Burrows goes, Torts did not have any say in it, so I find it hard to believe he would be saying it at all unless it was while pulling his hair out at the guy had 100 shot and zero goals . That seems like the kind of thing Torts would say in the heat of the moment. Just as dozens of fans did on CDC at the time.

I think we as fans would far rather believe an evil entity has arrived to ruin our beloved heroes than the fact they might not be as good as they used to be. In the end the truth might be a bit of both.

I think it's hilarious that the majority of this fan base just jumps on the conclusion that it was all Torts doing. I mean of course it seems logical that a proven NHL coach comes in and completly destroys a team in one year. They act as if they just put out an add on Kijiji and Torts answered for the cheapest amount. Of course nothing else was wrong with this team and you'll see us easily win the divsion next year with a new coach.

[Neversummer]

Good first move Trevor!

[Baka]

Buy out? I have a hard time believing that. Every playoff team would of inquired about him if he was made available so why the eff would the owners be talked into buying him out? No wonder this team sucked, they probably tuned him(Torts) out after December.

I doubt every playoff team would have inquired. At the deadline Burrows had 0 goals and 5 assists on the season added to the fact that he is 33 and had 3 years left at a 4.5 million cap hit. Even if he still could offer help defensively and be a veteran locker leader it would be near impossible for any team to justify wasting that much cap to gain that alone.

Most bought out players are still decent hockey players but are older guys who are no longer playing anywhere near their contracts so no one wants to touch them. However most of those players also had NMC and forced the clubs hand. Burrows would always be waived and someone may have taken him. Buying him out would for sure have been jumping the gun, but his value was definitely in the toilet because of his age and contract.

[peaches5]

It's pretty hard to believe all the fans that are falling for this crap Torts was not the reason why this team could not win a god damn game in 2014. This is just a smokescreen so that the core can be kept together and possible "squeak" into the playoffs next year and possibly make it to round 2 but no further.

This team needs a rebuild not a retool 1 or 2 players will not put the Canucks at Chicago, LA or ST.Louis' level.

The ownership is panicking and does not want a rebuild I mean literally 3 years of what was suppose to be 6+ and I could of gotten any season tickets seat I wanted, literally, they would even let me upgrade to more seats if I wanted to. The amount of people that cancelled their season tickets must of been over 50% and now they are scrambling to prevent a "rebuild".

[Down by the River]

Torts doesn't look at any tape, whereas just the other day Selanne talked about how teams' abilities to review video has been the number one reason offensive opportunities have been taken away.

I've said this over and over, I like Torts as a person, but he was an arrogant, short-sighted coach who thought he knew everything and refused to adjust the style of play he preferred, despite that style not working with this team.

[bigbadcanucks]

It's pretty hard to believe all the fans that are falling for this crap Torts was not the reason why this team could not win a god damn game in 2014. This is just a smokescreen so that the core can be kept together and possible "squeak" into the playoffs next year and possibly make it to round 2 but no further.

This team needs a rebuild not a retool 1 or 2 players will not put the Canucks at Chicago, LA or ST.Louis' level.

The ownership is panicking and does not want a rebuild I mean literally 3 years of what was suppose to be 6+ and I could of gotten any season tickets seat I wanted, literally, they would even let me upgrade to more seats if I wanted to. The amount of people that cancelled their season tickets must of been over 50% and now they are scrambling to prevent a &q

There's enough blame to go around..MG didn't provide the players that we needed to be competitive (with or without injuries); Tortorella was a nutbar (e.g., vs. Flames)...Aquilinis for the meddling (even though it's their team)...players for failing to execute...Pat O'Neill and his staff for bad job on skate sharpening...Mike Burnstein and his staff for failing to magically get injured players back into the lineup...zamboni guys for cutting the ice so that it was uphill for the Canucks...the hot dog vendor for burning the franks...did I miss anyone?

One thing for sure peaches5, the on-ice product (which reflected in the results) is enough for anyone to consider spending their entertainment dollaros somewhere else. I gave up my seats in 2012-2013 just before the lock out...haven't looked back, though I feel I shouldn't complain so much because I don't have a dog in the fight (i.e., capital investment in the team by way of season tix).

I'm now like those two old dudes on the Muppets complaining from afar.

[Dogbyte]

Torts doesn't look at any tape, whereas just the other day Selanne talked about how teams' abilities to review video has been the number one reason offensive opportunities have been taken away.

I've said this over and over, I like Torts as a person, but he was an arrogant, short-sighted coach who thought he knew everything and refused to adjust the style of play he preferred, despite that style not working with this team.

Can you explain further? It sounds like such a cop out? What he supposed to change? Tell people not to play defence or block shots?

Is coaching hockey with any style really that different besides go out and win, play good offence, play good defence, dont' take bad penalties ... etc? How the players don't get any blame and they do infinitely more than the coach ... like play the game.

[-DLC-]

The coach sets the tone. If he's yelling on the bench, poking them and pointing his finger maybe it had the opposite effect of what he was going for? I liked/supported him but, in seeing what went down and knowing what I now know, they played the way he yelled at them to play. And it wasn't how they'd done it in the past, he changed that.

You don't use your top scorers to block shots and penalty kill and play them till they're worn into the ground. They are not machines.

The players are instructed by the coach in how to play, he owns that part.

I think there was friction (already)...sounds like it. You need unity and the team to all be on the same page. MG's gone, Lu's gone, Kes was being talked about - now Burr. We'll never be able to assign blame in this game but the way things completely disintegrated with someone new in place would suggest he played a role in that.

[Dogbyte]

You make good points Deb but really if getting angry on the bench, fingerpointing, shotblocking, and asking your superstars to take on a larger important role on the team kills your team I think it's pretty safe to assume this core is not what they think they are.

These are NHL players right, not 12 year old kids in peewee?

I would be more inclined to believe Torts was directly linked to the downfall had we not

Been treading water for several years now without MG making the necessary changes

Been surrounded by a nasty goalie controvery for 3 years

Have an aging core which has been downtrending

Moved to arguably the toughest division in hockey

Had 6th most man games lost to injury

In my opinion the writing was on the wall I wouldn't have blinked an eye had AV been retained and we ended up in the same position. Personally I think AV would have gotten a bit more out of them due to experience, but not much.

I have to agree the Sedins didn't look as good with more minutes played but Torts really must have been surprised when he learned that Gillis' plan was to actually rely on Higgins, Hansen, Sanotrelli, and Burrows for primary/secondary scoring. Sad state of affairs for any coach.

[Down by the River]

Can you explain further? It sounds like such a cop out? What he supposed to change? Tell people not to play defence or block shots?

Is coaching hockey with any style really that different besides go out and win, play good offence, play good defence, dont' take bad penalties ... etc? How the players don't get any blame and they do infinitely more than the coach ... like play the game.

I've definitely been one poster who has said that coaches get too much blame, so I'd be hypocritical to say that it was all Torts' fault. However, a professional coach should be dedicated to trying to think the game better than the man he's coaching against, and Torts seemed either unwilling or unable to think the game the way other coaches can.

Not watching video, not learning about who you have in the minors, staying at home in Point Roberts and allowing the assistant coaches to run practices, not practicing the PP, emphasizing a style of play inconsistent with the personnel on your team (that resulted from Tortorella's failure to review tape and be aware of the types of players he was coaching).

The Sedins (or at least one of them) admitted that during that losing streak they completely forgot how to forecheck. Towards the end of the losing streak, it was the assistant coaches, not Torts, running drills with the team on how to get back to forechecking.

Although 24/7 doesn't give us a complete sense of Torts' strategy, his constant message was for his team to play north-south. The Sedins are east-west players. They don't have the greatest speed so they rely on moving the puck laterally to open up space, they can't just plow through teams. Torts didn't seem to understand this and did not set up a system for his best players to have success.

When Mike Babcock coached TC at the Olympics, they didn't play Detroit Red Wings hockey. Babcock thought about a system that would best fit his personnel, and it was perhaps the best and most dominant hockey I've ever seen a Canadian team play (better than 2010 IMO). This is a sign of a great coach. He doesn't have a system, he has a knowledge-base, and he uses his knowledge of hockey and knowledge of his players to develop the best fitting system.

[Absent Canuck]

The coach sets the tone. If he's yelling on the bench, poking them and pointing his finger maybe it had the opposite effect of what he was going for? I liked/supported him but, in seeing what went down and knowing what I now know, they played the way he yelled at them to play. And it wasn't how they'd done it in the past, he changed that.

You don't use your top scorers to block shots and penalty kill and play them till they're worn into the ground. They are not machines.

The players are instructed by the coach in how to play, he owns that part.

I think there was friction (already)...sounds like it. You need unity and the team to all be on the same page. MG's gone, Lu's gone, Kes was being talked about - now Burr. We'll never be able to assign blame in this game but the way things completely disintegrated with someone new in place would suggest he played a role in that.

Torts certainly had his hand in driving the team down further than it should have been . I agree with you.

Its also my opinion that he had a fresh set of eyes and was directed to take this team to the cup finals. What if the guy did what he thought was the only way to get there given our talent level?

Milk what he could out of the twins and ryan Kesler. It certainly backfired

[The Colt 45s]

Buyout Burrows but keep Booth. Proof that Torts is a madman.

[The Colt 45s]

People do need to get over the fact that Torts lived in Point Roberts. The issue for him and all Americans playing/working in Canada is taxation--you get dinged twice. If he lived in Vancouver he would have had to pay Canadian and American taxes. By having a residence in the US, and living in it for more than six months of the year, he saved a couple hundred thousand dollars.

[sabatoge95]

Lot of rumours about Torts floating around after he got fired. Where were these accusations when he was still coaching the team?

[Dogbyte]

I've definitely been one poster who has said that coaches get too much blame, so I'd be hypocritical to say that it was all Torts' fault. However, a professional coach should be dedicated to trying to think the game better than the man he's coaching against, and Torts seemed either unwilling or unable to think the game the way other coaches can.

Not watching video, not learning about who you have in the minors, staying at home in Point Roberts and allowing the assistant coaches to run practices, not practicing the PP, emphasizing a style of play inconsistent with the personnel on your team (that resulted from Tortorella's failure to review tape and be aware of the types of players he was coaching).

The Sedins (or at least one of them) admitted that during that losing streak they completely forgot how to forecheck. Towards the end of the losing streak, it was the assistant coaches, not Torts, running drills with the team on how to get back to forechecking.

Although 24/7 doesn't give us a complete sense of Torts' strategy, his constant message was for his team to play north-south. The Sedins are east-west players. They don't have the greatest speed so they rely on moving the puck laterally to open up space, they can't just plow through teams. Torts didn't seem to understand this and did not set up a system for his best players to have success.

When Mike Babcock coached TC at the Olympics, they didn't play Detroit Red Wings hockey. Babcock thought about a system that would best fit his personnel, and it was perhaps the best and most dominant hockey I've ever seen a Canadian team play (better than 2010 IMO). This is a sign of a great coach. He doesn't have a system, he has a knowledge-base, and he uses his knowledge of hockey and knowledge of his players to develop the best fitting system.

It all depends on how accurate of a picture that actually paints. I know in his presser Torts alluded to the fact that the average joe has no clue what the system is. People make it seem like he was a beligerant homeless guy that was drunk everyday and ignored reason. People were also loving him at different points of the year.

It just seems like the team has going downhill for about 3 years now. All of the sudden we don't make the playoffs and we blame it all on the new coach. Pretty convenient for those wanting to point blame.

Well written but Team Canada is a whole different situation and Babcock is no doubt one of the best coaches in the world.

[Down by the River]

People do need to get over the fact that Torts lived in Point Roberts. The issue for him and all Americans playing/working in Canada is taxation--you get dinged twice. If he lived in Vancouver he would have had to pay Canadian and American taxes. By having a residence in the US, and living in it for more than six months of the year, he saved a couple hundred thousand dollars.

Living in Point Roberts is fine, but when you are not showing up to practices and having assistant coaches running things, it looks bad. GMMG and the Aquilinis even offered to make Torts a little 'home-away-from-home' in Rogers arena that Torts declined.

Again, I have no special knowledge, so I will never know the full story, so I don't want to come across as if I know exactly what went on behind the scenes.

[Down by the River]

It all depends on how accurate of a picture that actually paints. I know in his presser Torts alluded to the fact that the average joe has no clue what the system is. People make it seem like he was a beligerant homeless guy that was drunk everyday and ignored reason. People were also loving him at different points of the year.

It just seems like the team has going downhill for about 3 years now. All of the sudden we don't make the playoffs and we blame it all on the new coach. Pretty convenient for those wanting to point blame.

Well written but Team Canada is a whole different situation and Babcock is no doubt one of the best coaches in the world.

In my experience, there are certainly enough intelligent fans out there that at least some could come to understand Torts system if he ever talked about it, but he never really did. This left fans to infer what Torts' system was based on how the team played, and the inferences draw didn't help Torts.

TC is definitely a different situation and holding Torts to the standard of Babcock is likely unfair. I certainly couldn't expect Torts to do to the Canucks what Babcock did to Team Canada (not to mention the fact that Babcock had much more to work with). My argument is just that a good coach, like Babcock, assessed his teams strengths and then implemented a system. In contrast, Torts seemed to have his mind made up with regard to what type of system he wanted the Canucks to play. This mindset is not a good one, IMO, because he had yet to get to know his own players.