CanuckMan10 Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 I don't reccomend this right now, because it would shallow our depth slightly if we make the playoffs, BUT if at the deadline we don't look like a playoff team anymore Mtl: Alex Burrows Van: Dalton Thrower + 3rd 2015 Burr would almost positively waive his NTC to Montreal and they could slot him in at 2nd or 3rd RW for some energy and he's a clutch playoff performer. One of Kassian, Mathais or likely Vey will have to step up to play 2nd line for us and in case of injury we still have some spare parts. Why we do this: good defensive prospect, cap dump to sign Mike Green or other stud d-man in off-season. Burrows isn't playing worthy of second line anyways. Why Montreal does this: make a run at Stanley. Line up: Sedin/Sedid/Vrbata Higgins/Bonino/Vey Kassian/ Richardson/ Matthias Hansen/ Horvat/ Dorsett Tostito Call ups: Jensen, DeFazio Next year or the year after Virtanen will be able to make a run at that 2nd line spot if he continues to strengthen his game. I'm not completely sure of the value of Dalton Thrower so don't rip on me for value, but I do like the idea of getting a decent prospect and offloading 4M per season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 is Dalton Thrower worth it? If we are trading a top 6 forward for a defenseman, it should be a roster defenseman. Vey is not polished enough for full time top 6 minutes. Unless he has a blowout rest of the season There's something here, but as is I'd have to decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Where does Burrows fit in Montreal's lineup? I'd do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 I'd rather do a burrows for tinordi deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Where does Burrows fit in Montreal's lineup? I'd do this. He doesn't fit anywhere in their line-up that makes sense. Nor does his salary fit under the cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckMan10 Posted December 15, 2014 Author Share Posted December 15, 2014 They could slot him in for Sekaj or parenteau and and push one of the 4th liners out of a roster spot. Or slot him on LW. But ya they be about 1.5 mill over, we'd probably have to take on a roster player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Don't think he'd fit cap wise. What if we also took back Gonchar and turned that 3rd into a 2nd? He has a negative value but his cap comes off the books at the end of the year. We'd free up Burrows 4.5 space for the summer signings, Franson or Green come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 They could slot him in for Sekaj or parenteau and and push one of the 4th liners out of a roster spot. Or slot him on LW. But ya they be about 1.5 mill over, we'd probably have to take on a roster player. Sekac has been great for montreal this year. Burrows won't bring anything that Pareanteau doesn't. And Montreals 4th line has been very good. The trade makes no sense for Montreal. They simply don't need an overpaid bottom 6 guy. And he doesn't have the tools to push someone out of their top 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Don't think he'd fit cap wise. What if we also took back Gonchar and turned that 3rd into a 2nd? He has a negative value but his cap comes off the books at the end of the year. We'd free up Burrows 4.5 space for the summer signings, Franson or Green come to mind. Bergevin has repeatedly been quoted as saying you can never have to many NHL defencemen. He already traded a redundant bottom 6 guy with term on his contract to get Gonchar. Why would he trade Gonchar and a 2nd for a redundant bottom 6 guy with term left on his contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Bergevin has repeate been quoted as saying you can never have to many NHL defencemen. He already traded a redundant bottom 6 guy with tetm on his contract to get Gonchar. Why would he trade Gonchar and a 2nd for a redundant bottom 6 guy with term left on his contract? MTL needs a top 9 role player more than they need a 40 year old expensive D man. Burrows is a huge upgrade over Moen who is pointless this year. Burrows might not be worth his 4.5 hit but he's still a solid top 9 leader who can show up in playoffs. The Moen and Gonchar trade was also prior to MTL picking up Allen and loosing Bourque. Now MTL has a 31 cap hit tied up in 8 D, Fun fact, MTL also has 31 cap hit tied up in 13 forwards. They've lost too much upfront, I'd be willing to bet MTL is looking for some forward depth before they head into playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 You could work this(cap wise) quite easily in a 2 for 2.Something like Burr & Stants(about 5 mill)for Desharnais & Tinordi. Or Eller instead of DD.(about 4.3 mill)Maybe we'd add a 3rd? Burrows is still prob highly regarded, around the league, for his big game-prowess. With his french origins, & Mtl's success with Weisy, the Habs might bite for something similar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 MTL needs a top 9 role player more than they need a 40 year old expensive D man. Burrows is a huge upgrade over Moen who is pointless this year. Burrows might not be worth his 4.5 hit but he's still a solid top 9 leader who can show up in playoffs. The Moen and Gonchar trade was also prior to MTL picking up Allen and loosing Bourque. Now MTL has a 31 cap hit tied up in 8 D, Fun fact, MTL also has 31 cap hit tied up in 13 forwards. They've lost too much upfront, I'd be willing to bet MTL is looking for some forward depth before they head into playoffs. Bourque was relegated to the minors and Moen was scratched more than he played. Montreal has several young guys they can insert into their bottom 9. Gonchar may be 40 and expensive. But he plays 20 minutes a night, plays on the powerplay. And most importantly his contract expires at seasons end. Burrows doesn't bring a thing to the line-up Montreal doesn't have or can't get at a much lower price. Plus he has term left on his contract. He's exactly the kind of player Montreal has been moving out, not the kind of guy they'd be looking to aquire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Sekac has been great for montreal this year. Burrows won't bring anything that Pareanteau doesn't. And Montreals 4th line has been very good. The trade makes no sense for Montreal. They simply don't need an overpaid bottom 6 guy. And he doesn't have the tools to push someone out of their top 6 That's what I thought, as much as I'd like to get some good value back for Burrows. Montreal already shipped out a few players earlier in trades to make room for guys who were kept out of spots, not sure why they'd bring in someone who'd take one of those away. EDIT: and the other two posts above too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vantbl Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Montreal wont do this deal. Montreal has an abundance of third liners so they wouldn't be trading one of their better prospects for a position they already have. they also have to deal with the term burrows has for 2 years i belive and they can find much better rentals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Yeah, MTL has been clearing cap for next season already. I doubt they would take burr at 4.5. Bad contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kesler+Horvat Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Burrows for Eller + Thrower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Burrows for Eller + Thrower Once again. Makes zero sense for Montreal. I honesty don't see Vsncouver and Montreal being good trading partners for snything other than minor deals like last years Weise/Diaz deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezy Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Given their injury situation (Kunitz/Dupuis), I can see Pittsburgh making an inquiry or two about Burrows. Wonder what it would take to get Simon "Fisheyes" Despres from the Pens...do you think Rutherford would be willing to take Burrows and a farmhand in the likeness of an Archibald/Grenier (not that either would have any kind of trade value) off our hands for Despres? We could use a big d-man who looks like he can develop into something pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.