[Report] Burrows' Said No To Waiving NTC

[William_Clarkson]

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

But the Great Gillis gave him that contract...

[b3.]

I wouldn't worry about Burrows, last season was beyond difficult due to his injuries. If he stays healthy this season, his stats will be close to the expectations that come with his salary.

[nux4lyfe]

Burr is clutch, one bad season due to a crap load of injuries and people crap all over him...If players older then Burr get a chance, why shouldn't he?

[Outsiders]

Burrows Will bounce back one bad year and everyone wants him gone it's unbelievable a Has everyone forgot what he's done for us over the years? My god

[N4ZZY]

I'm in the camp that Burr will have a good year this up coming season.

He had to deal with so many injuries last season, it was hard to get on track.

Hoping that he proves his doubters wrong, and has a good season.

[The Analyst]

There's no doubt in my mind that this year will be a big improvement on last year. But from an unbias point of view, Burrows needs to be moved. I understand that it's tough to move a family. I choose family over salary myself. But all that aside, Burrows is still an asset that have value and it makes the most sense to move his either this season or next. It's not that we don't want him, but if he can net us a reasonable return, I'm all for it.

Of course he could refuse to waive his NTC. That's his right. If I were Benning, I would present him with good offers that he would be willing to waive for.

I look at it as if I was in Burrows shoes. I'd waive for Montreal or New York Rangers. And I'd probably choose New York over Montreal.

[Bure to Mogilny]

I'm in the camp that Burr will have a good year this up coming season.

He had to deal with so many injuries last season, it was hard to get on track.

Hoping that he proves his doubters wrong, and has a good season.

Burrows Will bounce back one bad year and everyone wants him gone it's unbelievable a Has everyone forgot what he's done for us over the years? My god

These two posts basicly are the best posts in the thread. /end thread

Seriosuly whys it still open? Its embarasing what some people who clame to be canucks fans are saying against him

[VanGnome]

For the record, I'm not against Burrows, and never really have been.

I just believe that right now, at this stage of things, a return for Burrows does more for the Canucks than holding on to him for a year or two, or even just riding out his contract.

Two good prospects + a pick would be ideal to help speed along the retool

[N4ZZY]

For the record, I'm not against Burrows, and never really have been.

I just believe that right now, at this stage of things, a return for Burrows does more for the Canucks than holding on to him for a year or two, or even just riding out his contract.

Two good prospects + a pick would be ideal to help speed along the retool

i respectfully disagree that burr would do more for the canucks than holding onto him.

he had a rough year last year. he's been a dependable top six forward (even top nine forward). he's value at this point is zero. he wouldn't get very much in a trade.

BUT. if he plays well this year, has a bounce back year - he may have more value, and as a result, get more assets in return (should burr decide to waive).

for the team to have success - in the sense, where our youth (i.e. shink, horvat, mccann, jensen, gaunce, etc) has some veterans teaching them how to be professionals, and how to play to have success. burr is a character guy. he came into the league undrafted, almost let go by the team (started on the fourth line early in his pro canuck career), and he managed to work his way up the line up, and become an eventual 30 goal scorer in the NHL. he's an invaluable asset to the team, in the sense, where he's got so much to offer the young guys coming up/in to the team.

[Watermelons]

Burrows Will bounce back one bad year and everyone wants him gone it's unbelievable a Has everyone forgot what he's done for us over the years? My god

Exactly. JE14 posted this picture in the Vrbata signing thread and I thought I'd just bring it up here to remind everyone how good Burrows has been since 2009. The picture shows the top goal scorers in the NHL since 2009 (the season when Burrows was placed on the Sedins line if I'm correct). If Burrows didn't have to deal with so many injuries last season and had a little bit more puck luck (he hit the post like every other game?) he'd easily have more than 125 goals. That puts him in the company of Malkin, Eric Staal, Kopitar, Kovalcuk and the almighty Kesler who was worshiped by CDC not too long ago. Not too shabby huh.

[AFrame14]

I can really appreciate what JB is trying to do. It's time to get rid of the stale core. Surprised someone actually wanted him

Really? Burrows has lots of value. Everyone had terrible seasons last year aside from a few. Plus e was injured a lot. I think burr can score 20 goals and be a solid agitator. You are a fool to value him so low. I look forward to see him playing with bonino and having a bounce back season. And if he is on the third line, 4.5 mil isn't that bad anymore. Cap is rising. Look at what bolland and clarkson make. They are third liners

[messier's_elbow]

you... want to send Burrows down to Utica?

Wow now that's a GREAT asset management right here.

Summer can't end soon enough so the kids can go back to school and spend less time on internet

I agree this is getting ridiculous... I dont think 50% of the people in here watch the actual games. They are just Botchford sheep ect...

[VanGnome]

Exactly. JE14 posted this picture in the Vrbata signing thread and I thought I'd just bring it up here to remind everyone how good Burrows has been since 2009. The picture shows the top goal scorers in the NHL since 2009 (the season when Burrows was placed on the Sedins line if I'm correct). If Burrows didn't have to deal with so many injuries last season and had a little bit more puck luck (he hit the post like every other game?) he'd easily have more than 125 goals. That puts him in the company of Malkin, Eric Staal, Kopitar, Kovalcuk and the almighty Kesler who was worshiped by CDC not too long ago. Not too shabby huh.

There's no denying what he's done.

It's about what he can yet do. If you scroll up to a monster diatribe post of mine, I posted some stats, hell I'll post it again here:

Prior to establishing his role on the 1st line with the Sedin's his point production was pretty average. Since being with the Sedins, his elevated point production 5v5 has only been proven with the Sedin's.

The problem that presents is one of predictability. Everyone and their dog has the book on Sedins + Burrows, not only 5v5 but the year before last on the PP as well.

Burrows has been supplanted, in theory by Vrbata, at least to start the season. If Vrbata sticks and clicks with the Sedin's, I don't believe Burrows provides enough value on the 2nd line, and I'm not even taking last season into account.

I'm not confident that Burrows is capable of 50-60 points not playing with the Sedin's, and if we wait this year out at least until the deadline, it could really backfire. 50-60 points is where Burrows needs to be production wise to be good value in addition to his defensive and PK abilities for the 4.5m cap that we are currently on the hook for.

Conversely, if a good offer is presented to Benning he needs to look long and hard at it in order to potentially avoid a boat anchor of a contract if Burrows is only as good for 30 points while playing a good 2 way game... essentially an overpaid Higgins by 2.0m.

Just my thoughts

[ocnucksfan]

i am just shock that how many people don't know how contract works, but they still decide to voice their opinion on how bad Burrows' contract is...

seriously dude, arbitration? do you even know what that is?

No im not 100% clear on how arbitration works. I wouldnt be asking if I was, would I? My statement wouldn't be followed by a fancy fking "?" if i new how exactly it worked. Since your so up on everything why don't you answer my question? Instead of trying to seem superior in intelligence by insulting me, dipsht.

Sick of the immature little pricks on this site that act like fking "know it alls" but instead of offering insight or intelligence they insult that of others. Welcome to the internet i guess, I should know better than to get angry at idiots online.

As far as the subject goes,

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Vancouver+Canucks+seek+slash+Mason+Raymond+salary+arbitration/6778024/story.html

This was during the old CBA. Is it still possible under the new CBA? Obviously we have 20 players taking their clubs to arbitration right now, asking for more money based on their level of play. Does it still work the other way?

[messier's_elbow]

This is the worst thread ive ever seen on CDC its disgraceful.

[THERETOOL]

No im not 100% clear on how arbitration works. I wouldnt be asking if I was, would I? My statement wouldn't be followed by a fancy fking "?" if i new how exactly it worked. Since your so up on everything why don't you answer my question? Instead of trying to seem superior in intelligence by insulting me, dipsht.

Sick of the immature little pricks on this site that act like fking "know it alls" but instead of offering insight or intelligence they insult that of others. Welcome to the internet i guess, I should know better than to get angry at idiots online.

As far as the subject goes,

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Vancouver+Canucks+seek+slash+Mason+Raymond+salary+arbitration/6778024/story.html

This was during the old CBA. Is it still possible under the new CBA? Obviously we have 20 players taking their clubs to arbitration right now, asking for more money based on their level of play. Does it still work the other way?

dont waste a moment of your time tripping on rude fools .. this message board is full of tough guys that would never dare talk to you that way in person

[VanGnome]

This is the worst thread ive ever seen on CDC its disgraceful.

Feel free then to move along then, especially if nothing of consequence or worth is being added. There is a legitimate concern to possible negative equity that Burrow's contract presents.

It's not, at least for me, a matter of his worth as a player but a matter of his worth relative to the cap space being consumed by his contract.

There is also a significant amount of emotional attachment to fan favorite players among people on this forum, I'm not insinuating you as one of them at all, but it's typically a sign of people who really don't understand the fundamentals of the business; as much as it's a sport that we are all entertained by watching.

Let me be clear, Burrows on his last contract was positive equity for the team, I think the more reasonable follow up contract would have been the same term, however @ 3.0-3.5m if he was adamant on a NTC.

An aging Burrows on a 4.5m cap hit contract who's recent production is only substantiated by playing with two specific teammates out of a possible 11 is disconcerting. And that's something that no one with any knowledge of the game and business can argue against.

[Understand]

Burrow was the reason why we went to the final in 2011. Burrow scored some BIGGEST goals in team history.

Burrow is a Canucks forever!

[VanGnome]

Burrow was the reason why we went to the final in 2011. Burrow scored some BIGGEST goals in team history.

Burrow is a Canucks forever!

Sigh,

Burrows is the reason we got past the 1st round and Chicago (which we nearly didn't in large part due to some monumental collapses).

Kesler was the reason we got past Nashville in the 2nd round.

Kevin Bieksa is the reason we got past San Jose in the 3rd round.

Burrows has scored some big, clutch goals in the past, but past glories does not help the team's chances of improving or winning in the future. Players regardless of who they are, must always perform to the level their contracts dictate, otherwise they hamper the team and affect its ability to win.

Fan enamorment is all well and good, but ignorance is no excuse to misrepresent fact or believe that the past has any bearing on the future of any professional sports team.

[Gerbera]

Feel free then to move along then, especially if nothing of consequence or worth is being added. There is a legitimate concern to possible negative equity that Burrow's contract presents.

It's not, at least for me, a matter of his worth as a player but a matter of his worth relative to the cap space being consumed by his contract.

There is also a significant amount of emotional attachment to fan favorite players among people on this forum, I'm not insinuating you as one of them at all, but it's typically a sign of people who really don't understand the fundamentals of the business; as much as it's a sport that we are all entertained by watching.

Let me be clear, Burrows on his last contract was positive equity for the team, I think the more reasonable follow up contract would have been the same term, however @ 3.0-3.5m if he was adamant on a NTC.

An aging Burrows on a 4.5m cap hit contract who's recent production is only substantiated by playing with two specific teammates out of a possible 11 is disconcerting. And that's something that no one with any knowledge of the game and business can argue against.

Is not like Canucks have really any options.

Sedins have their best years when Burrows are playing on their line. Without the Sedins, the Canucks don't have any players that are legitimate 1st line scoring threats. The only way the Canucks can hope to stay competitive (at that time) is to try to keep the Sedins as productive as possible and that is by continuing to give the Sedins the winger they have the most chemistry with in their careers. Also, Canucks are really lacking in Right Wingers and they have tried Hansen with him and the results are not great. Kassian is still young and didn't really do very much at that time.

Burrows is also underpaid during the last contract and it is without choice that the Canucks have to pay him. 4.5 mil is high for a 3rd line winger, but I view Burrows at the minimum a 2nd line winger with good chemistry with Sedins at the time he signed that deal. You also have to remember, at that time, we have Kesler on the roster still and Kes and Burr have some good chemistry before Burrows is promoted to play with the Sedins.

Is really easy to look at everything with stats and what not and say a player is overpaid. Sure, without the Sedins, Burrows at most might be a 2nd line winger. But if you consider the other stuff he brings to the ice, such as being an excellent PK winger and playing a 2 way game, the chemistry Burrows had with the Sedins, his chemistry w/ Kesler, the lack of available forwards to replace him on the 1st line winger. Canucks really need to sign and keep him on the roster and he demanded a 4.5mil contract and Canucks pretty much have their hands tied.

All in all, this is just another example of how the prospect pool for Canucks have been so weak for a long time that they can't produce a player good enough to play on the 1st line. Hopefully Benning can fix this problem.