[Report] Burrows' Said No To Waiving NTC

[Alex the Great]

WAIVING. NOT WAVING.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I know a lot of people are down on Burrows. But seriously. Injury plagued season. Waivers? Really?

Lock this up

No man, this is a ligitimate question. Follow my thought process

#1. Burrows is old, and starting to accumilate injuries

#2. Has a NTC...(Thanks MG) and has a history of refusing to wave it (recently I will admit)

#3. Does not produce off of the Sedins line, therefore becomes a 3rd line winger ( We have a whole bunch of them)

#4. Not sure anyone picks him up as his contract is too long and too much money ( The Luongo Factor)

#5. There are alot of players right now looking to sign for a few spots and only half a league with cap space (Lowers the signing price)

#6. There are teams (Chicago, Phili, Boston, TB) who are very close to the cap or past it and will pay a premium for a team to take a player, but some teams won't because they are too closse themselves or they have an internal cap and won't go over.

#7. Vancouver will spend to the upper cap limit!

I think it is a possibility....we will see!

[DrChill]

No man, this is a ligitimate question. Follow my thought process

#1. Burrows is old, and starting to accumilate injuries

#2. Has a NTC...(Thanks MG) and has a history of refusing to wave it (recently I will admit)

#3. Does not produce off of the Sedins line, therefore becomes a 3rd line winger ( We have a whole bunch of them)

#4. Not sure anyone picks him up as his contract is too long and too much money ( The Luongo Factor)

#5. There are alot of players right now looking to sign for a few spots and only half a league with cap space (Lowers the signing price)

#6. There are teams (Chicago, Phili, Boston, TB) who are very close to the cap or past it and will pay a premium for a team to take a player, but some teams won't because they are too closse themselves or they have an internal cap and won't go over.

#7. Vancouver will spend to the upper cap limit!

I think it is a possibility....we will see!

No

[zombieksa]

That would sort of be the ultimate insult to a guy like Burrows.

[nuck nit]

Benning apparently tried to trade him already, so the die is cast.

Burrows buys himself some time to get back to form but if he is not playing with the Sedins what is his ceiling?

Hoping he bounces back and has a great year but the winds of change have swept into Rogers Arena.

[aliboy]

Burr is a top 6 player who I expect will have a very good year this year.

[Ganymede]

(BTW, I made that)

Anyways, 2 of my 3 favorite players from the finals are gone: Luongo and Kesler.

I don't want Burrows to go.

I prefer 1/3 than 0/3

I know its my homer-ism but come on, PLEASE keep Burrows GMJB!

I understand your homerism (and mine too), but I suppose one way GMJB could put his stamp on the team and place 2011 firmly in the rear-view mirror is to move players like Burr for someone else that could be in the Canucks' longer term plans.

First post, btw (not really, but my old account is now gone)

[Grape]

Better off trading him to Montreal for a 2nd round pick than waving him...

[J.I.A.H.N]

Better off trading him to Montreal for a 2nd round pick than waving him...

Yes, I agree but with his contract, I am not sure anyone bites.....1/2 of the league is having cap issues and by the looks of the Canucks budget next year, there is not a lot of room.If you can trade him, better do it now before he goes on the ice and shows he can't do it anymore. I am talking strictly from a buisness point of view.....I love his heart and what he has given us, but JB has already tried to trade him, so the cat is out of the bag in regards to what the Canucks feel.

[VanGnome]

What is there not to like about Alex Burrows? What were the Twins doing before he came along?

Burrows has one of the best hand/eye skills of any forward in the NHL. His ability to give/go is top rank. His d-zone PK is still top notch. With his injuries behind him I expect a 50 point year out of him. That said his point production is only one aspect. Is there a better clutch player on this roster? Burrows has demonstrated that ability for many years. I doubt there are many young players who

do not look to him for leadership.

Burrow's biggest draw back IMO is his age. I am a advocate for a Canuck rebuild in the 20 - 25 age group. I could see Burrows being a better mentor for that group than most but also realize that Benning has to convert his aging vets into tomorrows prospects and picks. If a good offer is made for Burrows then that is the way it has to be. I leave Benning to make the hockey judgement on any such deal with the confidence that he considers all aspects of what Alex Burrows brings to the Canucks.

This post originally started off by me saying just how fallacious that statement is, so rather than "know I'm right" and say so, I figured I would "prove I'm right" by delving into the stats, seeing as I had nothing better to do other than feed and change my daughter in between naps.

First off, what I did was a statistical analysis of Burrows, Daniel and Henrik before and since playing together as a unit (Daniel and Henrik obviously as a duo pre Burrows).

To normalize my findings and have an even set of circumstances with which to compare, I first calculated their total GPG, APG and PPG values individually, then subtracting special teams points (PP and PK) leaving only 5v5 numbers, this is to account for Burrows having basically no PP time at all throughout his career, as well as to not allow his above average PK stats to skew the comparison. To further normalize the results, I took the 5v5 GPG,APG and PPG values and extrapolated numbers based on the lowest number of games played between any given set (Sedin-Sedin-Burrows or Sedin-Sedin-X).

To be as fair as possible to Burrows, I only calculated his point totals from the 2007-2008 season on, as that was when he received an increased role as a premier 3rd line player/2nd line player playing with Kesler and significantly increased his point totals. His AHL call up season (2005-2006) and season after were spent playing on the 4th line, while the Sedins at that point had the benefit of having already become the Canucks second line behind Naslund and Bertuzzi.

The Sedin's production include their first post ELC year prior to the lockout, and before they became impact players to help better illustrate my point.

I would summarize that before and after Burrows, the Sedins were ridiculously consistent, and improving as one would expect with more PP time. Their individual goal scoring paces at 5v5 increased only marginally, whereas Burrows' goal scoring rate nearly doubled. As one would expect, the puck distribution of the Sedins increased as a function of volume.

If Burrows was attributable to the Sedins offensive output increases at 5v5 since joining their line, then it would be acceptable to postulate that Burrows would be of a more elite stature, but that doesn't reflect in his 5v5 point totals suggesting that he simply became a more consistent 2nd line player playing 1st line minutes.

To me that is woefully inefficient, and certainly not deserving of the contract he received, certainly not at the term and money AND NTC that came with it, I would believe that those numbers would be satisfied by either term and money, or lower term/money and NTC, Gillis pooched the big one on Burrows' contract due to his allegiance to the players.

Bottom line is, Burrows did not earn the contract he was awarded, he was simply guilty of being good enough at the time to be the beneficiary of playing with elite level talent.

[Absent Canuck]

I am shaking my head in disbelief that the Devils want to do us the honour of taking Burrows contract off our hands and give us a high draft pick to do it.

But even if it is true, its probably really insulting to these players. They basically did everything including crawl on their hands and knees to get Ryan Kesler to stay...................but they want to boot Burrows out of town and had to con Garrison into leaving.

I think half way into this season if Miller becomes a seive, and the rumour of Vrbata only being good on Arizona is true, lots of players -including Burr- will be begging for trade.

Just remember not to peel their skin off for asking like you did to Ryan Kesler.

P.s

I dont recall anyone on here trying to rip Bennings skin off for asking players for a trade. Just Ryan Kesler I guess.

[SuperReverb2]

As much as I have liked Burrows over the years, I think the die is already cast regarding his future with the Canucks. Benning and or Linden don't strike me as the type of individuals that would ask somebody to waive their no trade clause "just for something to do." Obviously there was a reason for the request, and I have feeling they (Linden and Benning) will keep asking until Burrows finally agrees.

Personally, I feel that Torts year end assessment of the team might have a bearing on this as well. Don't forget that Burrows was Torts "target" for the last buyout. Not sure how Benning feels about Torts, but Linden has gone on record many times saying that he has a lot of respect for the man. Although firing Torts was the right call, I'm sure Linden picked his brains for the two weeks prior to the firing, and most likely bounced a lot of that assessment off Benning when he arrived. Pretty sure ALL parties concerned agree with the aging, stale, complacent, predictable, and living in the past comments, thus the reason we see the movement and direction that has transpired over the last few weeks. Don't think Benning and Linden are done either.

Regarding Burrows and the Sedins, which is arguably where he might play this year. I've always felt that if anything on the Canucks were stale and old, AND very predictable, it was that line. Watching the Sedins cycle the puck and feed Burrows was arguably "magic" when it was fresh, new, exciting, and hard for the opposing team to predict. Unfortunately, as we have all witnessed since the cup final (and even in the final against Boston) that line has become oh so predictable and very easy to defend against. Sure the Sedins still cycle the puck well, but they are kept very much to the outside these days, allowing the defenders to tie up anybody trying to receive the puck (pass) in the middle. Not to mention the fact that the Sedins seem to be getting stapled to the boards much more these days than they ever have. Pretty sure Linden, Benning, etal don't want to watch that act again next year. Pretty sure Vrbata was signed to play with the Sedins and to bring something DIFFERENT and unpredictable to the mix. A 2 year contract is perfect for Vrbata as I would assume that Linden and Benning feel that is the length of the Sedins (as a first line) shelf life. Hopefully that will allow the team's younger players to bloom and mature and gradually assume the first line duties as the Sedins are gradually "degraded" to second and possibly third line duties.

Sorry to say, but I feel strongly that Burrows is the definite odd man out in this whole scenario. Maybe Hansen as well?

[-DLC-]

This post originally started off by me saying just how fallacious that statement is, so rather than "know I'm right" and say so, I figured I would "prove I'm right" by delving into the stats, seeing as I had nothing better to do other than feed and change my daughter in between naps.

First off, what I did was a statistical analysis of Burrows, Daniel and Henrik before and since playing together as a unit (Daniel and Henrik obviously as a duo pre Burrows).

To normalize my findings and have an even set of circumstances with which to compare, I first calculated their total GPG, APG and PPG values individually, then subtracting special teams points (PP and PK) leaving only 5v5 numbers, this is to account for Burrows having basically no PP time at all throughout his career, as well as to not allow his above average PK stats to skew the comparison. To further normalize the results, I took the 5v5 GPG,APG and PPG values and extrapolated numbers based on the lowest number of games played between any given set (Sedin-Sedin-Burrows or Sedin-Sedin-X).

To be as fair as possible to Burrows, I only calculated his point totals from the 2007-2008 season on, as that was when he received an increased role as a premier 3rd line player/2nd line player playing with Kesler and significantly increased his point totals. His AHL call up season (2005-2006) and season after were spent playing on the 4th line, while the Sedins at that point had the benefit of having already become the Canucks second line behind Naslund and Bertuzzi.

The Sedin's production include their first post ELC year prior to the lockout, and before they became impact players to help better illustrate my point.

I would summarize that before and after Burrows, the Sedins were ridiculously consistent, and improving as one would expect with more PP time. Their individual goal scoring paces at 5v5 increased only marginally, whereas Burrows' goal scoring rate nearly doubled. As one would expect, the puck distribution of the Sedins increased as a function of volume.

If Burrows was attributable to the Sedins offensive output increases at 5v5 since joining their line, then it would be acceptable to postulate that Burrows would be of a more elite stature, but that doesn't reflect in his 5v5 point totals suggesting that he simply became a more consistent 2nd line player playing 1st line minutes.

To me that is woefully inefficient, and certainly not deserving of the contract he received, certainly not at the term and money AND NTC that came with it, I would believe that those numbers would be satisfied by either term and money, or lower term/money and NTC, Gillis pooched the big one on Burrows' contract due to his allegiance to the players.

Bottom line is, Burrows did not earn the contract he was awarded, he was simply guilty of being good enough at the time to be the beneficiary of playing with elite level talent.

What a load of poo poo...don't post while changing diapers.

Beneficiary? He wasn't handed anything, everything he did out there was through hard work and determination. Throw your numbers out with the diaper.

Honestly, I appreciate your effort but the fact you did this hints that you felt you had to. Ask those of us who watch every game for the true story, we can tell you. He was being used on the PK (a lot) and also as a checker and an agitator....and was quite effective in that (PK was 1st in the league). He's versatile and just because he wasn't "producing" as far as numbers, doesn't mean he wasn't contributing, he was. That's how he EARNED the spot with the Sedins. And much of his success with them was in his crashing the net and creating chaos there. He took focus off the Sedins, who could then do their thing and cycle...some had to divert their attention to Burr so he helped create opportunities, he didn't "wait" for or benefit from them. Hogwash.

Look at the big picture (you've failed to do that)....in 2007-2008 Burr was 4th in the league overall for shorthanded TOI at 246:11. So how he was being utilized was more reflective of his numbers moreso than a failure to produce. He was counted on in certain situations and could be...that's producing in its own right. He had the best +/- on the team (at +11) and racked up PIM because his role then was an agitator and he was good in that role. So he was being used in a different way but you haven't accounted for that. He was voted "Most Exciting Player" so that would indicate he wasn't the slouch you suggest he was. Waiting in the wings for someone else to do the job so he could coast on their coattails. He was generating a buzz of his own and there's a reason he worked his way up to the first line....he played like every shift meant something.

2008-2009? More of the same. 150 PIM and a +23. So he wasn't floundering around, waiting to pounce on an opportunity handed to him from others...he was making it happen for himself. As a matter of fact, it was his shg that busted our losing streak that year and had him promoted to the Sedins line (if I recall correctly).

These other "supporting" stats allow for a team to flourish...he was part of that even if he wasn't in the limelight from start to finish...he was part of making it happen.

But I guess he should be a one man team, right?

EDIT: in looking back, this is fairly "new" thinking for you as you've had him penciled in your line up and didn't seem to share these thoughts a year ago. He had an off year...happens. He also is rebounding from injury and I'm not convinced that he's a wash up. Easy, in hindsight, to NOW call him out....bet you weren't doing that while he was breaking us out of slumps or scoring clutch goals.

Sure, I get that you have the (correct) thinking in that this is a business and we can't allow for emotion to cloud that. But your talk of Burr somehow being "gifted" with his contract? Nonsense. Earned every penny.

I better get out of this thread before I blow a gasket.

[Gaudette Celly]

But even if it is true, its probably really insulting to these players. They basically did everything including crawl on their hands and knees to get Ryan Kesler to stay...................but they want to boot Burrows out of town and had to con Garrison into leaving.

How was Garrison "conned"? They had a deal or two made for him, asked him to waive his NTC, he didn't for St. Louis but did for Tampa. As for Burrows, who knows -- maybe NJ stepped up and made an offer that Benning figured was best for the team?

JB surely expected that he would be the lightning rod for doing what needed to be done. People grow attached to players and nostalgia, and taking that away is never easy, especially for the new guy. Have to admire him for taking that upon himself to do what he feels is right for the team.

[Loadermaster]

Couldn't agree more! Burrows has been nothing but clutch for this team, ya, he had a bad year! Most of the team did under an idiot for a coach, thank Christ he's gone!! It's gonna be a much different team personel wise but I feel JB has made decent moves! Love to see Burr stay one more year at least and prove himself AGAIN!!!

[Sokratis Papastathopoulos]

He's a garbage overpaid player now. Just waive him and put him in Utica

[Disaronno]

He's a garbage overpaid player now. Just waive him and put him in Utica

It seems you have a case of the "trolling"

[Sweathog]

It seems you have a case of the "trolling"

Hardly matters now! He got banned!

[VanGnome]

What a load of poo poo...don't post while changing diapers.

Beneficiary? He wasn't handed anything, everything he did out there was through hard work and determination. Throw your numbers out with the diaper.

Honestly, I appreciate your effort but the fact you did this hints that you felt you had to. Ask those of us who watch every game for the true story, we can tell you. He was being used on the PK (a lot) and also as a checker and an agitator....and was quite effective in that (PK was 1st in the league). He's versatile and just because he wasn't "producing" as far as numbers, doesn't mean he wasn't contributing, he was. That's how he EARNED the spot with the Sedins. And much of his success with them was in his crashing the net and creating chaos there. He took focus off the Sedins, who could then do their thing and cycle...some had to divert their attention to Burr so he helped create opportunities, he didn't "wait" for or benefit from them. Hogwash.

Look at the big picture (you've failed to do that)....in 2007-2008 Burr was 4th in the league overall for shorthanded TOI at 246:11. So how he was being utilized was more reflective of his numbers moreso than a failure to produce. He was counted on in certain situations and could be...that's producing in its own right. He had the best +/- on the team (at +11) and racked up PIM because his role then was an agitator and he was good in that role. So he was being used in a different way but you haven't accounted for that. He was voted "Most Exciting Player" so that would indicate he wasn't the slouch you suggest he was. Waiting in the wings for someone else to do the job so he could coast on their coattails. He was generating a buzz of his own and there's a reason he worked his way up to the first line....he played like every shift meant something.

2008-2009? More of the same. 150 PIM and a +23. So he wasn't floundering around, waiting to pounce on an opportunity handed to him from others...he was making it happen for himself. As a matter of fact, it was his shg that busted our losing streak that year and had him promoted to the Sedins line (if I recall correctly).

These other "supporting" stats allow for a team to flourish...he was part of that even if he wasn't in the limelight from start to finish...he was part of making it happen.

But I guess he should be a one man team, right?

EDIT: in looking back, this is fairly "new" thinking for you as you've had him penciled in your line up and didn't seem to share these thoughts a year ago. He had an off year...happens. He also is rebounding from injury and I'm not convinced that he's a wash up. Easy, in hindsight, to NOW call him out....bet you weren't doing that while he was breaking us out of slumps or scoring clutch goals.

Sure, I get that you have the (correct) thinking in that this is a business and we can't allow for emotion to cloud that. But your talk of Burr somehow being "gifted" with his contract? Nonsense. Earned every penny.

I better get out of this thread before I blow a gasket.

Sorry Deb, I think you missed the point of what I was hinting at...

My post was in response to another poster suggesting that until Burrows came to be, the Sedins were middling players. The purpose of comparing Burrows' numbers to the Sedins was not to suggest that he should have been producing higher numbers.

The illustration was to point out and prove that Burrows was a benefactor of playing with the Sedins that afforded him the opportunity to stay in elite company as long as he did, or has. He was effective while playing with the Sedins, but the Sedins were quite productive before him despite a merry-go-round of right wingers taking their turn at the Fairground Hammer Game.

I'm fully aware of his other abilities, and actually pointed it out quite clearly:

this is to account for Burrows having basically no PP time at all throughout his career, as well as to not allow his above average PK stats to skew the comparison.

and

but that doesn't reflect in his 5v5 point totals suggesting that he simply became a more consistent 2nd line player playing 1st line minutes

The context of my post wasn't that Burrows didn't do a lot of other things very well aside from just producing offensively, it simply was to point out that he benefited from playing with the Sedins more so than the Sedins benefited from playing with him.

On the point about not earning the contract he was given, I think you're wrong. Burrows and his agent negotiated with the Canucks prior to the years that he amassed his elite PK stats for a far below average market rate... full well knowing his capabilities and what he could achieve given the role the Canucks asked of him.

The contract he most recently signed was bad business by Gillis, he overpaid Burrows for past deeds that likely will never be achieved again to the same level given his age, and the style of game he plays. When this contract was being negotiated, and thinking that he was worth paying 8 million dollars (6 million salary, 2 million signing bonus) in the first year, and 5/1.5 the next, followed by 4/0.5 with the last year @ 3 million (cap hit 4.5), you have to consider can an aging Burrows achieve in general to the same level at 33 as he did at 29, or at 34 as he did at 30 etc.

It's poor business to award contracts (this is for all intents and purposes a retirement contract for Burrows who will be 36 at the end of it) to players solely for what they've done, many people believe Burrows is deserving of the money he's receiving, fine but at the term and cap hit Gillis was a fool for agreeing to a NTC.

This is what I meant by Burrows not having earned the contract, he validated his previous contract with his play. Gillis agreed to the numbers and term as negotiated on his current contract believing that Burrows for the next 4 years could be the Burrows of the preceding 4 years, that's faulty logic.

During his previous contract, what earned him the 1st line duties with the Sedins took a backseat to transitioning to a more offensive minded two way game. In 2009-2010, he was 25th in SH TOI (Vancouver was 6th most penalized team in the league for minors same as 2007-2008), in 2010-2011 he was 50th (Canucks 7th most penalized) , 2011-2012 he was 47th (Canucks 8th most) and 2012-2013, the last year of his previous contract he climbed a bit to 38th (Canucks 7th).

So if he's not being relied upon as an elite PK workhorse which was his meal ticket, then he was being relied upon to provide offense he was incapable of providing as a 1st line RW, and was falsely awarded a contract based on that premise. There are many, many players in this league who are excellent at PK and defensive play who don't make the money Burrows was given. Point totals? 99 goals 5v5 over 4 years isn't too bad, even along with his diminished PK reliance, but still isn't worth $18 million over 4 years to an aging and declining player who likely cannot regain the form that got him to where he is today.

I've got no problems with Burrows as a player, given the cap hit is reflective of what he is capable of providing to the team. What I have a problem with, is his refusal to waive a NTC he has that he full well knows he likely doesn't deserve, at the risk of handcuffing this team.

Benning has no allegiance to any player, certainly not those highly coveted by the former regime. Burrows' contract is a problem, and it needs to be dealt with, if it can't then Burrows has to live up to the numbers he's being paid. If he's going to be paid 4.5m cap to play 1st/2nd line with a diminished PK role, his offence had better be in the 50-60 point range consistently, if it's not then there's even MORE negative equity for Benning to deal with.

Edit* I resent your insinuation that I don't watch every game. I have followed this team devoutly since 1989 when I was 6 years old, and have watched almost without fault every game televised for as long as I can remember.

[Papayas]

He's a garbage overpaid player now. Just waive him and put him in Utica

Outrageous comment - checked

New account - checked

So which banned user were you? Seriously, get a life instead of making new accounts to troll on a forum. It's pathetic