HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   San Jose Sharks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=43)
-   -   Speculation: Burns, future forward for life? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1402651)

landshark 04-12-2013 11:44 PM

Burns, future forward for life?
 
So? there's a hole or two in the Shark's top six, thinking of next season more than this one. this season Burns is putting up the numbers, i'd like to see him stay at forward. Sharks seemingly have enough D, with Hannan and a healthy Demers for the remainder of the season. (Who knew we got Sergei Federov's big, hairy, younger-but-bigger brother from another mother in that trade from Minnesota? Strictly a bonus his name is "Burns" in my book.) Anyway, I see him in the top-six for good this season and beyond,

for the Sharks. :naughty:

I'm more interested in whether or not folks here think he's gone forward for good. This year i'm pretty sure he's in the top six for good baring a need for him on D due to injuries, which is why i'm glad they picked up Hannan. But beyond that i assume Hannan is gone in the offseason and that allows more time for some prospects (Acolatse, Tennyson, Petrecki etc) to fill in for cheap on that 7th D knowing Burns is that Ace in the hole. There's plenty of guys we could double-shift as forwards, but when a Dman gets dinged and can't play during a game, having Burns lined up as a forward must be a coach's dream.

You guys think, given D not being injured, the Sharks will be able to continue to ice Burnsie as a forward next year?

Havlat - Cooch - Burns
Shep/Gali/Nieto/Wingels/Hertl?-Thornton-Marleau
Shep/Gali/Nieto?/Wingels/Hertl?-Pavs-Torres (yes, resign him, duh. scary scoring punch on the third line/PK)
Shep/Gali/Nieto??/Wingels/Hertl???-Desi-Burish (**** that, if Neito and Hertl are ready buy Burish out!)
Shep/Gali/Nieto??/Wingels/Hertl???/Desi/Burish in the pressbox

Vlasic-Boyle
Stuart-Demers/Braun
Irwin-Demers/Braun
Acolatse? (hopin' for this guy with Murray gone)/Petrecki?/Tennyson/Doherty?/Pelech/Konrad?!?

Niemi
someone not named Niemi

i think that gets them in the playoff w/o a lot of player turnover. Let the new TMac try his hand at adapting his game w/ help from Big Bird and Jimmy Johnson with Burns at forward all year; hopefully at forward all year. Might be scary if he practices as forward? or would that ruin it? :sarcasm:?

MarleauApologist 04-12-2013 11:47 PM

No

Number 1 defenseman>>>>>>>>>>>>Top Line Winger

Right now the current team needs a guy like Burns, but long term, if he can play at that all star 45 point level, we need to keep him.

hockeyball 04-12-2013 11:49 PM

As long as he's playing at a ppg+ pace, you don't have a choice.

But he won't, he'll come back to earth, and they'll move him back to defense when he goes on a drought for awhile.

landshark 04-12-2013 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great 88 (Post 63851711)
No

Number 1 defenseman>>>>>>>>>>>>Top Line Winger

Right now the current team needs a guy like Burns, but long term, if he can play at that all star 45 point level, we need to keep him.

Hmm, I think Boyle has another year in him playing at a level high enough to allow the Sharks to not need Burns as a Dman. I hadn't thought about Boyle's potential age-related deterioration. thanks.

Gene Parmesan 04-12-2013 11:52 PM

What if Burns prefers to play forward?

landshark 04-12-2013 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeyball (Post 63851771)
As long as he's playing at a ppg+ pace, you don't have a choice.

But he won't, he'll come back to earth, and they'll move him back to defense when he goes on a drought for awhile.

Dang it, what if he's just that good? i only really think that might be the case because he came up as a forward. Provides something the Sharks don't have. Might not have next season, depending on prospects...

landshark 04-12-2013 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan (Post 63851871)
What if Burns prefers to play forward?

Thought about that... free from all those defensive responsibilies again... but aware of them now that he's played as a dman. Which i think only adds to his value as a top six forward.

Gene Parmesan 04-12-2013 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeyball (Post 63851771)
As long as he's playing at a ppg+ pace, you don't have a choice.

But he won't, he'll come back to earth, and they'll move him back to defense when he goes on a drought for awhile.

And then who replaces him up front?

Gene Parmesan 04-12-2013 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landshark (Post 63851925)
Thought about that... free from all those defensive responsibilies again... but aware of them now that he's played as a dman. Which i think only adds to his value as a top six forward.

His defense positioning is still hit or miss..he makes up for it in raw physical ability. Its an interesting situation.

landshark 04-13-2013 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan (Post 63852035)
His defense positioning is still hit or miss..he makes up for it in raw physical ability. Its an interesting situation.

Practice/riding the bike again at forward with a newly found defensive awareness might rectify that situation? or not enough pure hockey-smarts?

magic school bus 04-13-2013 12:09 AM

If you want Burns to keep playing forward, you're probably going to have to keep McLellan. Just something to think about.

Pinkfloyd 04-13-2013 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landshark (Post 63851801)
Hmm, I think Boyle has another year in him playing at a level high enough to allow the Sharks to not need Burns as a Dman. I hadn't thought about Boyle's potential age-related deterioration. thanks.

Really, it's Burns' defensive play that they will miss if they keep him at forward. They don't have a pairing capable of playing legitimate shutdown minutes while being an offensive threat. Burns is capable of top level two-way play from a d-man. Boyle is not.

The current blue line with Burns has certain matchup issues that may cost them down the line if other things don't bite them in the rear first.

hockeyball 04-13-2013 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landshark (Post 63851885)
Dang it, what if he's just that good? i only really think that might be the case because he came up as a forward. Provides something the Sharks don't have. Might not have next season, depending on prospects...

You know what, I hope your right because if he keeps this pace up he is without a doubt the best winger in the game today. Seriously, a PPG+ winger basically does not exist at the moment. I think that's pretty high expectations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan (Post 63851953)
And then who replaces him up front?

Who replaces him on defense? The gap in skill of those replacing him on defense right now is about equal to the gap in skill that will replace him as a forward.

SactoShark 04-13-2013 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan (Post 63851871)
What if Burns prefers to play forward?

He doesn't. He said he feels more comfortable playing defense.

No I don't have a link. And I have no idea where I saw / heard that stated. You're just gonna have to trust me. I'm a good guy, so that shouldn't be a problem. I wouldn't lie to you. Honest.

Mafoofoo 04-13-2013 12:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeyball (Post 63852749)
Who replaces him on defense? The gap in skill of those replacing him on defense right now is about equal to the gap in skill that will replace him as a forward.

Weber. :sarcasm:

Evincar 04-13-2013 12:32 AM

Im pretty sure we acquired him because he was a defenseman so I hope this is temporary.

sjshark91 04-13-2013 12:36 AM

Play him were we win with him playing there.

DuckEatinShark 04-13-2013 12:37 AM

I think it's much easier to acquire a top line forward than a top pairing defenseman through free agency. That's why I prefer Burns to go back to defense after this season, and try to get Thornton a goal-scoring winger.

However, our defense is fine as is, so I don't care where Burns plays. But when Stuart/Boyle get older, Burns is definitely needed back on defense, since Vlasic does not have nearly enough offense to be a #2. I don't see Demers as a top-pairing defenseman in his future and Braun/Irwin are not reliable defensively.

WTFetus 04-13-2013 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeyball (Post 63852749)
Seriously, a PPG+ winger basically does not exist at the moment. I think that's pretty high expectations.

There are a ton of PPG+ wingers this season. Kunitz, Ovechkin, Kane, Hall, Kessel. Players like St. Louis, Patrick Kane, and Ovechkin were PPG+ in previous seasons as well.

Gene Parmesan 04-13-2013 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuckEatinShark (Post 63853229)
I think it's much easier to acquire a top line forward than a top pairing defenseman through free agency. That's why I prefer Burns to go back to defense after this season, and try to get Thornton a goal-scoring winger.

However, our defense is fine as is, so I don't care where Burns plays. But when Stuart/Boyle get older, Burns is definitely needed back on defense, since Vlasic does not have nearly enough offense to be a #2. I don't see Demers as a top-pairing defenseman in his future and Braun/Irwin are not reliable defensively.

Its not easy to find a top line winger or #1 defenseman. Who knows if Burns is even a true #1..he has the tools to be. Burns will most likely be back to defense next year but until then hes a winger and pretty damn good one.

StalockSuperfan 04-13-2013 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WTFetus (Post 63853791)
There are a ton of PPG+ wingers this season. Kunitz, Ovechkin, Kane, Hall, Kessel. Players like St. Louis, Patrick Kane, and Ovechkin were PPG+ in previous seasons as well.

As of tonight: St. Louis, Kunitz, Kane, Ovechkin, Hall, Kessel. That's six. Not "a ton." Six. Out of 30 teams with about 8 wingers on each team. Burns can't keep this up.

landshark 04-13-2013 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeyball (Post 63852749)
You know what, I hope your right because if he keeps this pace up he is without a doubt the best winger in the game today. Seriously, a PPG+ winger basically does not exist at the moment. I think that's pretty high expectations.

Thanks. he just looks so... so... happy, and absolutely all over the ice. maybe Patty can catch that, cooch caught that bug.

landshark 04-13-2013 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd (Post 63852545)
Really, it's Burns' defensive play that they will miss if they keep him at forward. They don't have a pairing capable of playing legitimate shutdown minutes while being an offensive threat. Burns is capable of top level two-way play from a d-man. Boyle is not.

The current blue line with Burns has certain matchup issues that may cost them down the line if other things don't bite them in the rear first.

but if a little time spent with game experience and practice and he can put the defensive side together as a forward, with his wheels, skills, i think it might be better overall because of the propensity to play power vs. power for forward lines. it's not like the Sharks have fielded a 3rd line as a shutdown against the other team's first or second line in awhile... ricci, korky, scott thornton?

landshark 04-13-2013 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WTFetus (Post 63853791)
There are a ton of PPG+ wingers this season. Kunitz, Ovechkin, Kane, Hall, Kessel. Players like St. Louis, Patrick Kane, and Ovechkin were PPG+ in previous seasons as well.

So which one should the Sharks acquire to compensate for Burns' production as a forward? seems like the Sharks are more likely to get over the 2/3 goal hump w/ Burns at forward unless the Sharks acquire someone for next year to replace his presence in the top six, he is a presence, more so than Patty or JT often times.

preferred experience as an F1 please

landshark 04-13-2013 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuckEatinShark (Post 63853229)
I think it's much easier to acquire a top line forward than a top pairing defenseman through free agency. That's why I prefer Burns to go back to defense after this season, and try to get Thornton a goal-scoring winger.

However, our defense is fine as is, so I don't care where Burns plays. But when Stuart/Boyle get older, Burns is definitely needed back on defense, since Vlasic does not have nearly enough offense to be a #2. I don't see Demers as a top-pairing defenseman in his future and Braun/Irwin are not reliable defensively.

Does Burns, as a forward, "need" Thornton?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.