Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Alex Burrows - Where does he fit in 2016/17?


Jamie Huscroft

Recommended Posts

On 7/19/2016 at 2:39 PM, Pears said:

Forwards:

 

Sedin - Sedin - Eriksson

_____ - Horvat - Rödin

Baertschi - Sutter - Hansen

Burrows/Etem - Granlund - Virtanen

 

PK:

Sutter - Burrows

Edler - Tanev

 

Horvat - Hansen

Hutton - Gudbranson

id like to see Virtanen- Horvat- Etem    or try ?   Burrows is back up now when players are injured or when  players are fed up w the Sedins lol those 3 can still can it togther lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its trade to a team that needs a penalty killing specialist.

 

Caps - I am thinking maybe Tom Wilson, just because of the large amount of penalties he takes

 

Preds - Austin Watson, former number one pick, might be better suited with the future Canucks on 3rd or 4th

 

I think Benning should be selling Burrows as the PK specialist he is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just can't see how the Canucks can really accommodate both Burrows & Dorsett on the roster.

 

ESPECIALLY if Benning does land that scoring, gritty winger he said he's looking for.

 

Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson

New Guy-Sutter-Rodin

Baertschi-Horvat-Hansen

 

or some mix of that is probably your top 9.

 

Then you've got Etem, Virtanen, Granlund, Megna, Burrows, Dorsett, Gaunce, Grenier, and Zalewski fighting for the 4th line.

 

A few of those guys are going to Utica for sure but even if you subtract Gaunce, Grenier, & Zalewski, you've still got Virtanen, Etem, Megna, Granlund, Burrows, & Dorsett to fill 3 spots.

 

Financially, you'd almost have to have both Burrows and Dorsett playing and leave Virtanen, Etem, and Megna out but that doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

And that'd be a 8 million dollar 4th line that nets maybe 30 goals collectively over 82 games. Yikes.

 

If one of Burrows or Dorsett isn't traded, I won't be all too surprised if one or both winds up on waivers. Especially if the young guns show up to camp ready & earn their spot.

 

Just makes sense from a developmental AND financial standpoint to go with the younger, cheaper, still has upside guys over the older, more expensive options when both will likely provide you roughly the same thing in terms of production at either end of the ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He fits on another team if he wants to play in the NHL.  He has always been one of my favorite players and I want to remember him for how he was.  Hard working, team first, never say die and clutch. Always deserving of his roster spot and cap hit / salary.

 

I don't want to remember him as the guy who stuck around too long and took a spot from someone more deserving of an opportunity, just like when he got his chance.  Even if he is close to what he once was, it's still time to move on.

 

As some have said, waive him and let him be a player coach / leader in Utica if he is willing.  If he wants an NHL spot I wish him the best, it's time for someone else to develop at the NHL level and get the opportunity he received.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching burr this past season you can tell he still his the vision and hockey since he's just a step to slow. I don't know how many times I saw him stick out trying to intercept a pass, like he used to be so great at, with it just slide by the end of his stick. I hope with a full summer of conditioning he will get that step back and excel once again. But for now or he can't hes still a good adgatator which is always nice four a bottom six.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Smyl he'll be valuable to our organization in the future but not anymore as our main agitator/checker..everyone esp the ref's have his number...if they need a penalty they just have to nudge Burr.

I'd like to go with youth as pp killer-checker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Odjick_fan said:

I think its trade to a team that needs a penalty killing specialist.

 

Caps - I am thinking maybe Tom Wilson, just because of the large amount of penalties he takes

 

Preds - Austin Watson, former number one pick, might be better suited with the future Canucks on 3rd or 4th

 

I think Benning should be selling Burrows as the PK specialist he is

Caps are keeping Wilson - they think he can be a future Joel Ward.

 

Austin Watson is pretty inconsistent - if anyone I would go for Sissons.  He's likely their Gaustad replacement for next year though.  And the Predators are all about staying young.  Their group is now 28 and under save for Rinne, Ribeiro and Fisher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boddy604 said:

I just can't see how the Canucks can really accommodate both Burrows & Dorsett on the roster.

 

ESPECIALLY if Benning does land that scoring, gritty winger he said he's looking for.

 

Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson

New Guy-Sutter-Rodin

Baertschi-Horvat-Hansen

 

or some mix of that is probably your top 9.

 

Then you've got Etem, Virtanen, Granlund, Megna, Burrows, Dorsett, Gaunce, Grenier, and Zalewski fighting for the 4th line.

 

A few of those guys are going to Utica for sure but even if you subtract Gaunce, Grenier, & Zalewski, you've still got Virtanen, Etem, Megna, Granlund, Burrows, & Dorsett to fill 3 spots.

 

Financially, you'd almost have to have both Burrows and Dorsett playing and leave Virtanen, Etem, and Megna out but that doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

And that'd be a 8 million dollar 4th line that nets maybe 30 goals collectively over 82 games. Yikes.

 

If one of Burrows or Dorsett isn't traded, I won't be all too surprised if one or both winds up on waivers. Especially if the young guns show up to camp ready & earn their spot.

 

Just makes sense from a developmental AND financial standpoint to go with the younger, cheaper, still has upside guys over the older, more expensive options when both will likely provide you roughly the same thing in terms of production at either end of the ice.

Remember the controversy WD created by saying this year will be about winning and not development.  It came out wrong but the sentiment is still that this year, players will only make the team if they can contribute to winning.

 

I don't think the vets were too impressed by the amount of young players last year.  Before the Nashville game Daniel was saying how happy he was to get the vets back because there were too many young players on the team instead of just 2 or 3 and that it was really tough.  Getting more vets back will allow them to play lower in the lineup.  

 

Not sure he is going to change his mind over the summer.  I fully expect Burrows and Dorsett playing regular minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mll said:

Caps are keeping Wilson - they think he can be a future Joel Ward.

 

Austin Watson is pretty inconsistent - if anyone I would go for Sissons.  He's likely their Gaustad replacement for next year though.  And the Predators are all about staying young.  Their group is now 28 and under save for Rinne, Ribeiro and Fisher.

I referred to the Capitals because their top penalty killers are no longer employed with them, specifically Laich and Richards.

 

And yes Scissons would be better.  I put Preds because their PK pretty much stinks.

 

We have some really good players on PK - Sutter, Hansen, Dorsett, Horvat, Etem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If GMJB adds that elusive goal-scoring top-6 LW to the depth chart (Hartnell or Kane, preferably), I don't see a spot for #14 at all:

 

LW:

D. Sedin

Hartnell/Kane/TBD

Baertschi

Etem/Gaunce

 

RW:

Ericsson

Hansen

Grenier/Virtanen 

Dorsett (assuming he isn't traded)

 

Seriously, where does he fit in, except at RW3? But, if GMJB lands that LW2 and Dorsett is at RW4, does the organisation REALLY want to retard the development of both Grenier and Virtanen to make room for the downward-trending Burrows?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mll said:

Remember the controversy WD created by saying this year will be about winning and not development.  It came out wrong but the sentiment is still that this year, players will only make the team if they can contribute to winning.

 

I don't think the vets were too impressed by the amount of young players last year.  Before the Nashville game Daniel was saying how happy he was to get the vets back because there were too many young players on the team instead of just 2 or 3 and that it was really tough.  Getting more vets back will allow them to play lower in the lineup.  

 

Not sure he is going to change his mind over the summer.  I fully expect Burrows and Dorsett playing regular minutes.

Rookies is one thing. But benching players like Etem & Virtanen is another. Etem is a ways off being a rookie anymore & Virtanen is being pumped up as a "Next Chapter" guy. Does it really make sense to have them not playing so guys they know won't be productive are? It'd be a different story if this was 60+ point Burrows we were talking about or even a guy like Hansen but it's not, it's bottom 6 guys that we all know arent in any long term plans regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing so many posters feeling that there is no room in the lineup for a smart, versatile, character player like Burr reminds me of a time some years back. It was a time when the Canucks had a much stronger D-corps, with no real number 1 D but a whole bunch of good 2, 3, and 4 D's.

 

It seemed like there was no room for one of them, a heart and soul guy who looked like his best days were behind him. Everybody, including me, figured he was gone for sure. But a long string of injuries to Canuck Dmen kept enough room in the lineup and the salary cap that at the end of the season he was still here.

 

And then in the playoffs, when heart and soul guys really shine, that surplus trade-bait Dman scored a huge (I think it was an OT series-winning?) goal that brought much joy and a whole bunch more entertainment to all the Canuck fans.

 

Now I realise that it is unlikely that the team has rebuilt to the point that they will still be playing next June, but they could easily make the playoffs, when having a guy like Burr on your depth chart could be useful. And the point of this piece of rambling free-association is that the Canucks always have lots of injuries, and will almost certainly need way more than 12 forwards and 6 D. Anyone want to bet that the 20 players who before training camp are penciled in to play the opening game of the season will all be healthy enough to start?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On July 19, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Butters Stoch said:

At this point he's an expensive 3rd/4th liner and leader but we're keeping him out of respect for all he's done for us over the years.

In Alex's first 2 seasons he barely scored at all but he always found ways to be valuable. Once things started to click for him offensively he was given his shot with the Sedins and was excellent.  No matter what stage of his career he has been in he has always found was to contribute.

 

Burr is the opposite of a guy like Vrbata.  If Radim isn't scoring it's very hard for him to contribute as scoring is all he really brings to the table.  Even at his peak, I never saw scoring as Alex's main contribution.  Will he score 20 goals again?  Probably not.  But no matter what position he is put in he won't ever take a shift off and he will find a way to be an asset.  His hockey IQ and work ethic have always outweighed his skill.

 

If Burr was a 2M cap hit, I think there would be a lot less questions regarding his position on the team.  I also think that it's important to remember that when he was at his peak he could have made a lot more $ by leaving and he didn't.  He allowed management to differ $ to help the team be competitive.  He will be a very good 3rd/4th line player and will be very good on PK.  He will help the team more than he hurts them and will take a sincere interest in helping younger guys get better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Fakename70 said:

If GMJB adds that elusive goal-scoring top-6 LW to the depth chart (Hartnell or Kane, preferably), I don't see a spot for #14 at all:

 

LW:

D. Sedin

Hartnell/Kane/TBD

Baertschi

Etem/Gaunce

 

RW:

Ericsson

Hansen

Grenier/Virtanen 

Dorsett (assuming he isn't traded)

 

Seriously, where does he fit in, except at RW3? But, if GMJB lands that LW2 and Dorsett is at RW4, does the organisation REALLY want to retard the development of both Grenier and Virtanen to make room for the downward-trending Burrows?

 

 

Burrows plays over Gaunce & Grenier until they prove they are NHL players and I don't think that Dorsett will be here.  A healthy Burrows is still a better player than Etem and Virtanen as well.  That said, they will all get their minutes.  

 

The organization over-hypes young players to stir up more excitement for the team.  Virtanen was a top 10 pick with real top 6 potential so I get that, but Guance and Grenier are guys who've proven that they can be SLIGHTLY above average in the AHL.  These guys might not ever be regulars on the big team.   If they are it is very unlikely that they will be more than bottom 6 character guys.  The Canucks will certainly not remove a more skilled, more valuable experienced 2-way forward from the line up in order to give mid-level prospects a chance to play.  They will get their opportunities but they'll have to earn full time spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...