HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Burrows & Edler

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-12-2012, 08:59 PM
  #101
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
A St. Louis Burrows is not. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Most Vancouver fans can never be honest about their own players. Nobody is saying Burrows isn't a great player, he's just not $5M per on a long term deal great. Not at his age and size. Agree or disagree, that is my opinion.
Not one person in this thread has said he is a 5m/yr player.

Size is not an issue. I don't even get the argument there.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:01 PM
  #102
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Not one person in this thread has said he is a 5m/yr player.
Oh you are sorely mistaken. If you need to maybe go back and read the thread before making such a statement. Some people were throwing out $4.5-$5M per on 6yrs or longer.

And size should be an issue when a player plays the type of game Burrows does. Why is it so hard for us Vancouver fans to be honest about our own players. It's like we all get so bent out of shape when talking about a players weaknesses. Burrows is a small forward and plays a ruff style of game. Sooner or later he is going to break down. Do you want him making $5M playing in the 3rd 4th lines because he signed a stupid deal?

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:08 PM
  #103
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
Oh you are sorely mistaken. If you need to maybe go back and read the thread before making such a statement. Some people were throwing out $4.5-$5M per on 6yrs or longer.

And size should be an issue when a player plays the type of game Burrows does. Why is it so hard for us Vancouver fans to be honest about our own players. It's like we all get so bent out of shape when talking about a players weaknesses. Burrows is a small forward and plays a ruff style of game. Sooner or later he is going to break down. Do you want him making $5M playing in the 3rd 4th lines because he signed a stupid deal?
He's not small.

He's 6'1".

He's not frail either.

He's not Anze Kopitar, but he's not Ryan Shannon either.

I don't understand how he can be considered small. Just don't understand at all.

6 years 22.5 would be great contract for the team and the playerIMO.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:12 PM
  #104
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
He's not small.

He's 6'1".

He's not frail either.

He's not Anze Kopitar, but he's not Ryan Shannon either.

I don't understand how he can be considered small. Just don't understand at all.

6 years 22.5 would be great contract for the team and the playerIMO.
Ok, we'll have to agree to disagree on the contract. No way I sign him to a 6yr deal no matter what the cost. for me I wouldn't want them signing him for longer then 4yrs. Again, just my opinion.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:13 PM
  #105
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
Since Dmen became giants. In the NHL Burrows is undersized. When was the last time you saw Burrows on the ice and he didn't look small? I am not questioning his heart but sooner or later his style of game will catch up with him and no way should he be signed to a crazy long term deal worth $5M a season. That is all I am saying.
It doesn't matter what size the Dmen are. It doesn't change the fact that there are many NHL players who are 6'1 or under, which means it's not undersized.

Your statement is incorrect.

14s incisor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:18 PM
  #106
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
Ok, we'll have to agree to disagree on the contract. No way I sign him to a 6yr deal no matter what the cost. for me I wouldn't want them signing him for longer then 4yrs. Again, just my opinion.
I read every post - sorry one person suggested paying him 5/yr (mr. Canucklehead).

The only other suggestion even close to 5 was you. You told me my 6 year 22.5m deal was too low.

I can also admit I was wrong again, someone did suggest a 10 year deal. I completely missed that. But it was a ridiculous proposal anyways.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:18 PM
  #107
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
It doesn't matter what size the Dmen are. It doesn't change the fact that there are many NHL players who are 6'1 or under, which means it's not undersized.

Your statement is incorrect.
You are right, it is incorrect. That still doesn't mean I would sign a 32yr old Burrows to a long term deal meaking him 33 in the first year of the deal. No way. He'll end up being a 3rd-4th liner making too much money and then people around here will be calling for his head.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:20 PM
  #108
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I read every post - sorry one person suggested paying him 5/yr (mr. Canucklehead).

The only other suggestion even close to 5 was you. You told me my 6 year 22.5m deal was too low.

I can also admit I was wrong again, someone did suggest a 10 year deal. I completely missed that. But it was a ridiculous proposal anyways.
Ridiculous or not they were still mentioned. I am only going by what I read. Don't you do the same?

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:22 PM
  #109
thecupismine
Registered User
 
thecupismine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,769
vCash: 500
For Burrows, I think a 3 year deal at around 12 million would be awesome. I think eventually the plan for Burrows is to be put on the third line when Kassian is ready (2 to 3 years hopefully) to be put with the Sedins. I don't fill comfortable giving a guy like Burrows a long extension as I don't know if his level of play will be sustainable for a long period of time, especially when you consider how much punishment he takes playing the way that he does. I'd rather give him a little bit more money in the short term and re-sign him again later at age 36 to a new contract that reflects his ability at that time.

When it comes to Edler, I hope they re-sign him to a long-term deal. I'm hoping for around 5.5, but with the way contracts are right now I wouldn't be one bit surprised if it costs the team 6+ to keep him. I know signing Edler for that much would probably put a huge dent in trying to get Weber (not enough money left for him), but I'd rather go with someone we know will definitely be here than someone we hope to get.

All of this talk is kind of pointless though. I highly doubt either are signed to extensions until the new CBA is put into place. At that point the numbers will probably play out a little bit differently. We don't know how the cap will fluctuate from year to year (how exactly is it tied to revenue; what's the floor, ceiling, is it a soft or hard cap, is there any amnesty clauses, etc.) or even what it will be at next year.

thecupismine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2012, 09:43 PM
  #110
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
You are right, it is incorrect. That still doesn't mean I would sign a 32yr old Burrows to a long term deal meaking him 33 in the first year of the deal. No way. He'll end up being a 3rd-4th liner making too much money and then people around here will be calling for his head.
Fair enough. You're entitled to your opinion. I only had a problem with you calling 6'1 190 undersized.

I think Burrows will be an effective player even at an older age, due to his hockey sense and excellent conditioning; however, I think if it is a long term contract that takes Burrows past 36, the cap hit will be less than 5 million—probably no higher than 4.5, if it's long term.

And if the current trend of inflating salaries continues, 4.5/season for a solid 3rd liner isn't that bad, considering they are also rewarding a loyal player.

Personally, I think loyalty should be rewarded with loyalty.

14s incisor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 12:32 AM
  #111
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
A St. Louis Burrows is not. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Most Vancouver fans can never be honest about their own players. Nobody is saying Burrows isn't a great player, he's just not $5M per on a long term deal great. Not at his age and size. Agree or disagree, that is my opinion.
If Burrows doesn't get that money here, I guarantee you he'll get at least $5m elsewhere. If David bloody Jones can get a $4m deal, Burrows can certainly fetch $5m.

Mr. Canucklehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 12:44 AM
  #112
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveeviL View Post
Burrows' value got up a notch when the team lost Samuelsson. I partly hope that Burrows can be signed and traded, partly I am afraid that our top 6 will suffer by that and we get someone "almost a top 6", or at least not a fit with the Sedins. In Gillis I trust, I primarily hope the Lou affair give us some intricate trade with a real nice outcome.
I am actually hoping we can re-sign Samuelsson this summer, again. I'd give him 2.5million at 2years easily. He's versatile and chippy. Perfect 3rd line player that can be moved around.

shortshorts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 12:48 AM
  #113
m9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
If Burrows doesn't get that money here, I guarantee you he'll get at least $5m elsewhere. If David bloody Jones can get a $4m deal, Burrows can certainly fetch $5m.
That contract is paying for Jones at 28,29,30, and 31. His prime. Burrow contract will be paying for him at 32, 33, 34, and beyond.

Colorado is also not known league-wide as a team that players will want to go to, so its not a shock that they have to pay a bit of a premium. Vancouver if anything is the opposite.

Because of those reasons I think that even though Burrows is the better player today, Jones may end up with the bigger contract.

m9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 12:48 AM
  #114
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
A St. Louis Burrows is not. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Most Vancouver fans can never be honest about their own players. Nobody is saying Burrows isn't a great player, he's just not $5M per on a long term deal great. Not at his age and size. Agree or disagree, that is my opinion.
- St. Louis turns 37 years old in a week. He was in the running for the Art Ross trophy last season. He's a guy you'd normally think 'father time' would have more of an effect on - despite his higher, elite level skills (though nobody would call him a "generational talent") than Burrows.

- Burrows hasn't suffered a significant major injury in his NHL career (he doesn't play with 'reckless abandon' on the ice); so at this point, you can't say injuries will take it's toll on his body than say Ryan Kesler.

- Who is really "honest" about their own players? The term fan is short for fanatic.

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 12:49 AM
  #115
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
If Burrows doesn't get that money here, I guarantee you he'll get at least $5m elsewhere. If David bloody Jones can get a $4m deal, Burrows can certainly fetch $5m.
That's the thing. He can get 5million on a 4 year term from anyone, easily. However, it's just not worth the risk to keep him as a memoto..

Scoring wise, Burrows is very weak without the Sedins. He'd be a 40point scorer with elite defensive abilities on another team.

I don't know if I would pay 5millions for that. If it's 4.5million for at most 3 years, maybe..

shortshorts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 12:57 AM
  #116
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubros View Post
...

Both Edler and Burrows should be signed to similar deals that Kesler got. $5M per for 5 or 6 years. That's still good value for what they bring and they are deserving of it. The team is paying Booth and Ballard $4M+ for doing squat, anyway, for god's sake. Dump those guys by any means possible and everything is good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I read every post - sorry one person suggested paying him 5/yr (mr. Canucklehead).

The only other suggestion even close to 5 was you. You told me my 6 year 22.5m deal was too low.

I can also admit I was wrong again, someone did suggest a 10 year deal. I completely missed that. But it was a ridiculous proposal anyways.
Read every post, did you?

I stand by the suggestion that Burrows gets $5M per. Otherwise he needs a new agent.

Chubros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 01:14 AM
  #117
biturbo19
Registered User
 
biturbo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,604
vCash: 500
The concern for me with a Burrows deal, is that i would be wary of signing him beyond the length of the Sedins' tenure here. So in some significant part, it comes down to where things are headed with the Twins and how long they're planning on sticking around here in Vancouver. That's not to say that Burrows isn't a seriously valuable player in his own right independent of the Sedins, but i do think that his cap value is heavily contingent on whether or not he's playing with the Twins, versus as more of a checker (which he's also plenty capable as, but worth less cap-wise). Realistically though, Burrows will likely be beaten up physically and on the decline before the Sedins, so that complicates things somewhat as well.


As for Edler...i get the impression that Gillis will come in with an offer in the same vein as the Hamhuis+Bieksa deals, as a proportion of the cap, whatever that may be that coming year. So something along the lines of $4.6M+ cap increase %. And along with that impression, comes a fair bit of uneasiness about the situation, as Edler could easily fetch a lot more on the open market. But it all depends heavily on what sort of development we see out of Edler in the coming season. If we see him continue to grow and emerge as a true reliable #1 guy, then maybe Gillis opens up the wallet and gives him more cash, but if he plateaus at all, and continues to fit in here as a sort of 'rotational #1' alonside Hamhuis and Bieksa...then i suspect Gillis will insist on trying to pay him accordingly.

biturbo19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 01:32 AM
  #118
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
well i'm a huge burr fan obviously but I got a further appreciation for him at the Worlds. I thought (based on relative pedigree) that he might struggle and that he would only be used in a checker capacity but ends up he was one of the better overall forwards - forechecking, defensively and scoring.

I'm confident now to say Burr is an elite complimentary player - he's not the top end talent but put him on a line with such talents and he'll shine every time, not only with the Sedins.

Free agent market he gets 4-5MM for 4-5years IMO. That puts him at 36-37 years old but given his fitness level and late career start, barring injuries, I don't see too much issue with that.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 02:06 AM
  #119
Win One Before I Die
Former Booth Fan
 
Win One Before I Die's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Win One Before I Die
Burrows will retire a Canuck unless we trade him for a big upgrade (like a number one damn).

Win One Before I Die is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 03:31 AM
  #120
canucks1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 301
vCash: 500
Quote:
I'm not disagreeing with anyone about what Burrows brings to the table. That doesn't make him a 30 goal scorer. I go by end of the year results and he has only ever reached 30 goals once in his career and that was 3 years ago. Either way, I just don't see the Canucks giving him the type of money he's going to want in order to re-sign before hitting the open market.
The last 4 seasons he scored 28 goals/26 goals/35 goals/28 goals. That's average 29.25 goals a game. So You don't like calling him a 30 goal scorer, Let call Burrows a 28 goal scorers since he had at least 28 goals for 3 seasons. Is that better for you? A 28 goal scorers is worth 3yrs 4million. I think Gillis has no problem giving him that contract, That is still a little bit of a discount.

canucks1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 03:35 AM
  #121
canucks1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Gillis wants a team younger, faster and bigger. Burrows only fits one of that, faster.
I think people are just too focus on what Gillis said. EVerybody gm in league wants there team younger/faster/bigger. What is Gillis suppose to say, (I want the team smaller, slower and older). It is not possible to have all the 23 main roster that brings those elements.

canucks1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 04:14 AM
  #122
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
If Burrows doesn't get that money here, I guarantee you he'll get at least $5m elsewhere. If David bloody Jones can get a $4m deal, Burrows can certainly fetch $5m.
I agree and this is what people seem to forget or are unwilling to accept. It isn't about what he's worth to the Canucks at this point. It is about what he could get as a UFA. People don't seem to understand that this is Burrows last real contract and he's going to cash in as much as he can. The guy is a family man now, a Dad, he has more then just himself to think about this time around and no way he signs for anything less then market value. As a UFA Alex Burrows easily finds a team willing to pay him $5M, maybe even $5+M on a longer term deal. If Vancouver wants to keep Alex then great, but it's going to cost term if they want to keep the cap hit down and all I am saying is that Burrows plays a very tough style of game and nobody can keep that up for ever. People also don't seem to understand that Burrows will also be 33 in the first year of his next deal. No way I sign him to any longer then 3-4 years. All this talk about rewarding him for his service to date and signing him to a longer term deal to say thanks is, imo, dangerous.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 04:17 AM
  #123
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,899
vCash: 500
We must remember that we can't keep Burrows solely because of our emotional connection with him. That's just not how you run a team/business/organization, and I trust Gillis with the situation.

shortshorts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 04:32 AM
  #124
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortshorts View Post
We must remember that we can't keep Burrows solely because of our emotional connection with him. That's just not how you run a team/business/organization, and I trust Gillis with the situation.
Agreed. This is hard for a lot of fans but it's very true. Sometimes a team has to know when a deal just doesn't work. We all love Burrows and if he is willing to sign a 3 or 4 year deal at $3-3.5M per then fantastic. If he wants $5M or more on a longer 5, 6 or even 7 year deal then Vancouver HAS to say thanks but no thanks. That is a dangerous contract to give a then 33yr old forward who bashes and crashes every night. At some point over the next few years Burrows is going to start breaking down.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2012, 04:50 AM
  #125
Vajakki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country:
Posts: 1,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
I agree and this is what people seem to forget or are unwilling to accept. It isn't about what he's worth to the Canucks at this point. It is about what he could get as a UFA. People don't seem to understand that this is Burrows last real contract and he's going to cash in as much as he can. The guy is a family man now, a Dad, he has more then just himself to think about this time around and no way he signs for anything less then market value. As a UFA Alex Burrows easily finds a team willing to pay him $5M, maybe even $5+M on a longer term deal. If Vancouver wants to keep Alex then great, but it's going to cost term if they want to keep the cap hit down and all I am saying is that Burrows plays a very tough style of game and nobody can keep that up for ever. People also don't seem to understand that Burrows will also be 33 in the first year of his next deal. No way I sign him to any longer then 3-4 years. All this talk about rewarding him for his service to date and signing him to a longer term deal to say thanks is, imo, dangerous.
Even with his current deal, Burrows makes way more money in one year than me or you will be making in our whole lives, so I'd guess he's just fine in that regard lol.

And yes. The thing is, in my mind Burrows' value is nowhere close to 5 million. Sure someone may pay that when he's UFA, you never what's going to happen, but I wouldn't, and actually I really doubt there's a GM who is going to give that type of money to him. Everyone knows his stats are inflated because he's playing with the Sedins most of his ES time (not to take anything away from Burrows, but let's be reality here) and he would have tough time scoring 20 goals from second/third line playing with more average players.

One of Burrows good qualities is that he's a smart player and can succeed really well playing with talented players, but that is just one skill and doesn't automatically mean you're 30 goalscorer everywhere and worth huge amount of money. Also he's getting older, you could even say his prime years are over. So you have to take more than just points in consideration when comparing Burrows to for example Jones, whose linemate hasn't led the league in assists three years straight and whose team hasn't been very good during that time.

Now that doesn't mean Jones would come and instantly score 40 goals with the Sedins, no. Point being that every player has different skillset and you have to take everything in consideration. Signing Burrows to long term 3.5+ contract would be risky because the Sedins have only two years left in their contracts. If they leave after that or sign new deals but decline a bit, there will be tons of people complaining about Burrows' contract because he's not producing.

Vajakki is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:47 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.