HFBoards

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

Burns, future forward for life?

View Poll Results: Will burns spend more time on the ice as a forward or as a defenseman next season?
More time on the ice as a forward 30 41.10%
More time on the ice as a defenseman 43 58.90%
Voters: 73. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-14-2013, 12:21 AM
  #51
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,668
vCash: 1040
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Which again, is still incorrect. Kane has been PPG for a few seasons. Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, St. Louis, Iginla, Alfredsson, Hossa, etc have all been PPG+ for multiple seasons. But whatever man, keep backtracking.
So they are all PPG for their careers, like I said, not a couple seasons, like you just said. And that means that clearly Burns will be a PPG player for his career too.

It's not possible at all that MY POINT was that wingers like that are incredibly rare (why I said "basically does not exist" not "absolutely does not exist". As in, there are no wingers who are consistently, year after year, a PPG) or even non-existent (either way, I really don't care, it doesn't effect my point in the SLIGHTEST), and that anointing Burns a permanent forward position after 15 games MIGHT be a tad pre-mature? And that, seeing as how very few of those wingers exist at all, the odds that Burns is one is less than that he is not.

But hey, instead lets argue about our **** length for hours even though it has NOTHING to do with the point, I already said "I hope he does keep it up but I don't expect it" and that if as long as he is keeping it up you can't move him back to defense.

So in the end, you are spending a large amount of time going back and picking apart quotes (in ways that fit your argument, not the way they were meant) because you think I'm wrong to say "Hey, maybe we should give this a bit more time before we go counting our chickens"?

Seriously. Get over yourself.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 12:24 AM
  #52
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 14,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Do me a favor, since you clearly are psychic and know exactly what I was thinking, please, explain the point I was making and then explain how I'm wrong. I don't think you can because you are too freaking busy picking apart word usage.
Why don't you address Barrie's post? I don't think Burns will be a consistent PPG+ player, but he certainly has the size and skill-set to be a consistent first line RWer. There will be better footage of how to defend him next season, but he's really big and really fast. There are hardly any players in the NHL with his combination of speed, skill, and size. And if you don't like people picking apart your word usage, you shouldn't use incorrect statements to try and prove a point.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 12:29 AM
  #53
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Why don't you address Barrie's post? I don't think Burns will be a consistent PPG+ player, but he certainly has the size and skill-set to be a consistent first line RWer. There will be better footage of how to defend him next season, but he's really big and really fast. There are hardly any players in the NHL with his combination of speed, skill, and size. And if you don't like people picking apart your word usage, you shouldn't use incorrect statements to try and prove a point.
While Burns has the raw talent to do the job, the thing that will hold him back is his shot. He's very wild and has historically been inaccurate mostly because he puts so much whip into it. He has what Ehrhoff used to have. A booming shot and is just praying it gets on net rather than having the skill to direct it on net.

He can probably continue to pile up assists at a decent rate and he'll be good for the garbage goals if he keeps going to the net but even with his size, that will come at a cost. He certainly has the skill set to be a top line winger in the NHL but he has the skill to be a #1 d-man as well and with the way Boyle is dropping off, they will need him back there unless they pull a miracle out of their ass and trade for a new one soon but good luck with that one.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 12:34 AM
  #54
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 72,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
While Burns has the raw talent to do the job, the thing that will hold him back is his shot. He's very wild and has historically been inaccurate mostly because he puts so much whip into it. He has what Ehrhoff used to have. A booming shot and is just praying it gets on net rather than having the skill to direct it on net.

He can probably continue to pile up assists at a decent rate and he'll be good for the garbage goals if he keeps going to the net but even with his size, that will come at a cost. He certainly has the skill set to be a top line winger in the NHL but he has the skill to be a #1 d-man as well and with the way Boyle is dropping off, they will need him back there unless they pull a miracle out of their ass and trade for a new one soon but good luck with that one.
Well DW did trade Doug Murray for two 2nds. Minor miracle right there.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 12:38 AM
  #55
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 14,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
But hey, instead lets argue about our **** length for hours even though it has NOTHING to do with the point, I already said "I hope he does keep it up but I don't expect it" and that if as long as he is keeping it up you can't move him back to defense.
I already said my point had nothing to do with Burns. You could've easily just said "Okay, my bad. PPG+ wingers do exist but I don't think Burns will be one". But instead, you just tried to backtrack to "Those aren't multiple seasons" to "Those aren't long-term" which is still wrong.

But really, why don't you address Barrie's post? I mean, on the actual Burns topic, I agree with you that it's very unlikely that he'll be a consistent PPG+ winger. But what is your reasoning of why Burns can't be a consistent first line RWer? Most of us want him at D because he's more valuable to the team as a defenseman, but that's irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
While Burns has the raw talent to do the job, the thing that will hold him back is his shot. He's very wild and has historically been inaccurate mostly because he puts so much whip into it. He has what Ehrhoff used to have. A booming shot and is just praying it gets on net rather than having the skill to direct it on net.
I saw it as he's always trying to hit the corners, which leads to him missing the net more often than not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
He can probably continue to pile up assists at a decent rate and he'll be good for the garbage goals if he keeps going to the net but even with his size, that will come at a cost. He certainly has the skill set to be a top line winger in the NHL but he has the skill to be a #1 d-man as well and with the way Boyle is dropping off, they will need him back there unless they pull a miracle out of their ass and trade for a new one soon but good luck with that one.
I agree. It really depends on the market and what DW does this off-season.


Last edited by WTFetus: 04-14-2013 at 12:45 AM.
WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 12:40 AM
  #56
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Well DW did trade Doug Murray for two 2nds. Minor miracle right there.
Taking advantage of a seller's market and getting yourself a #1 d-man might be apples and oranges there. lol

The last time DW got a guy they planned on being a #1 immediately was a guy that had been forced out and no I'm not talking Burns.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 01:03 AM
  #57
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 72,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Taking advantage of a seller's market and getting yourself a #1 d-man might be apples and oranges there. lol

The last time DW got a guy they planned on being a #1 immediately was a guy that had been forced out and no I'm not talking Burns.
Yeah unfortunately no disgruntled #1 Dmen out there right now. Hopefully they are able to shore up both forward and defense. Even if they trade Boyle and move Burns back to D...I'm not sure about Irwin, Braun etc going forward. I think they can turn it around but it has to be looked at.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 01:23 AM
  #58
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Yeah unfortunately no disgruntled #1 Dmen out there right now. Hopefully they are able to shore up both forward and defense. Even if they trade Boyle and move Burns back to D...I'm not sure about Irwin, Braun etc going forward. I think they can turn it around but it has to be looked at.
Well, they can relegate those two to the third pairing. Vlasic-Burns and Stuart-Demers isn't a bad top four.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 02:22 AM
  #59
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 72,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Well, they can relegate those two to the third pairing. Vlasic-Burns and Stuart-Demers isn't a bad top four.
Yeah its not bad but we better hope Demers can step his game up . I think he can be a top 4 defenseman next year.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 02:49 AM
  #60
StalockSuperfan
Registered User
 
StalockSuperfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
As far as I'm concerned, Burns is just playing great hockey right now, no matter what position. I think it's likely that if he were on defense he'd still be putting up points, not as many, but playing a solid defensive game too. I don't think he's necessarily playing this well because he's at forward, but simply because he's healthy and just a damn good player. In future, putting him at forward is a good option to have in the back pocket, but having him on D is more valuable, especially considering the apparent regression of Boyle lately.

If Burns is going to be the organizations #1 D-man going forward, which I'm certain he was acquired to be, he's going to need to develop into one, and that development better start soon before it's too late. He is the only person in the org other than Boyle that can be a game changer on the blue line. That is an absolute must for any team that wants to contend. We have one, and it would be such a shame to see that potential wasted.

StalockSuperfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 03:00 AM
  #61
Negatively Positive
Stop Lying!
 
Negatively Positive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,743
vCash: 500
I thought we traded Seto and Coyle for a future #1 d-man or at least a top pairing d-man, not a top 6 forward. If we wanted more forward depth might as well just keep Seto and Coyle then.

Marleau Thornton Seto
Coyle Couture Havlat
Gali Pavs Torres

Negatively Positive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 09:07 AM
  #62
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Yeah its not bad but we better hope Demers can step his game up . I think he can be a top 4 defenseman next year.
If he's not injured or yanked from the lineup anymore and is just allowed to play, he'll get there. He's just about played those types of minutes since he got back into the lineup for good just before Murray got dealt.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 09:51 AM
  #63
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,668
vCash: 1040
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
I already said my point had nothing to do with Burns. You could've easily just said "Okay, my bad. PPG+ wingers do exist but I don't think Burns will be one". But instead, you just tried to backtrack to "Those aren't multiple seasons" to "Those aren't long-term" which is still wrong.
Because you are still misinterpreting what I said. There are very few if any PPG CAREER wingers. That was always what I meant, whether you read it that way or not. I'm not an idiot, I know there are a bunch this season, which actually reinforces my point, small sample sizes are small. I also know there are players that have done it, I'm still not an idiot, but doing so every year consistently basically doesn't happen. Even if I am wrong (because I didn't feel like spending a bunch of time looking that up because IT DOESN'T EFFECT MY POINT ANYWAY) doesn't make it hyperbole, because I qualified my statement with 'basically'. It wasn't an absolute in the first place even though you guys went on a witch hunt about it. That crap is REALLY obnoxious by the way.

Quote:
But really, why don't you address Barrie's post? I mean, on the actual Burns topic, I agree with you that it's very unlikely that he'll be a consistent PPG+ winger. But what is your reasoning of why Burns can't be a consistent first line RWer? Most of us want him at D because he's more valuable to the team as a defenseman, but that's irrelevant.
Because I never said any of that. He's arguing a point that isn't relevant to my statement. I never said he 'cant' be a consistent first line RWer. I said the team is probably better off with him at defense and if he can't keep this pace up long term (which I think is unlikely, but not impossible) then he does more good on defense. I've laid that argument out several times and I am not doing it again.

My point, is, and was always, that Burns is not likely to keep up this pace and expecting him to do so is probably expecting too much. That's it. You two are the ones who took one little phrasing WAY too literally and ran with it.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 11:48 AM
  #64
hockfan1991
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,438
vCash: 500
whether forward or d alot of it will depend on what they do with boyle, if he gets moved in the summer. either sharks will need to aquire a solid # 1 or 2 two way d man, that way they can keep burns up there, probably not. more likely burns moves back to d and they look for a top 6 forward which will be easier to come by. either way you look at it we will be an allstar dman short, or a top 6 forward with a lot of skill. they will need to get one of those, probably the latter

hockfan1991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 12:07 PM
  #65
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 11,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockfan1991 View Post
whether forward or d alot of it will depend on what they do with boyle, if he gets moved in the summer. either sharks will need to aquire a solid # 1 or 2 two way d man, that way they can keep burns up there, probably not. more likely burns moves back to d and they look for a top 6 forward which will be easier to come by. either way you look at it we will be an allstar dman short, or a top 6 forward with a lot of skill. they will need to get one of those, probably the latter
it does seem to boil down to this.

I say if these youngsters can show they can be a solid, balanced, two way GROUP. then maybe there is an arguement for keeping him up top, but it will take some skilled coaching to make them a defensive unit that you can spread ice time through.

I just hope the hole in the top six doesnt cause DW to deal a higher end prospect.

do0glas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 01:03 PM
  #66
SharksFan1
Registered User
 
SharksFan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Orange County, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,424
vCash: 500
At this point I think there is a 50/50 chance he will play D next season. I think a lot of it will depend if they deal Boyle in the offseason and if they can pick up another top 6 to replace him.

Edit: Guess I could have just quoted hockfan1991. LOL

SharksFan1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 01:11 PM
  #67
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 15,888
vCash: 500
Well, he scored again thanks to his combination of size, skill, energy and awareness.

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 07:57 PM
  #68
WTFetus
Moderator
Marlov
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 14,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Because you are still misinterpreting what I said. There are very few if any PPG CAREER wingers. That was always what I meant, whether you read it that way or not. I'm not an idiot, I know there are a bunch this season, which actually reinforces my point, small sample sizes are small. I also know there are players that have done it, I'm still not an idiot, but doing so every year consistently basically doesn't happen. Even if I am wrong (because I didn't feel like spending a bunch of time looking that up because IT DOESN'T EFFECT MY POINT ANYWAY) doesn't make it hyperbole, because I qualified my statement with 'basically'. It wasn't an absolute in the first place even though you guys went on a witch hunt about it. That crap is REALLY obnoxious by the way.
So your entire point was that Burns won't be a CAREER PPG? Because that really isn't what your first post sounded like, and no one even implied that so I don't know why you even mentioned it then. Read the original post you replied to

"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..."

He isn't implying that Burns would be a career PPG. He said what if Burns could keep it up, aka for multiple seasons. A ton of wingers have accomplished that feat, which was my initial point and what Barrie responded to as well. Hardly anyone is a career PPG anything in any position because of their rookie years and their age later on in their careers.

Also, "basically does not exist" is not the same as "a few" at all. Just sounds like a bunch of backtracking. If you meant it as "a few", why not just say "a few". Obviously I'm not the only one who misinterpretted it since other people called you out on it as well.

As for the actual Burns topic, you never really explained your reasoning of why Burns can't be a PPG winger for multiple seasons. PF did by talking about his bad wrist accuracy which will affect his goal totals, which I can accept. All I saw in this topic was your reasoning of "Burns can't do it because other people can't do it", which really isn't true.


Last edited by WTFetus: 04-14-2013 at 08:06 PM.
WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 08:03 PM
  #69
JoeThorntonsRooster
#FireDougWilson
 
JoeThorntonsRooster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,289
vCash: 500
The more I think about it, the more I think we need another top pairing D man, regardless of what happens with Burns.

JoeThorntonsRooster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 09:02 PM
  #70
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 72,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great 88 View Post
The more I think about it, the more I think we need another top pairing D man, regardless of what happens with Burns.
maybe not another top pairing but a top 4 guy to ease some of Stuey's minutes.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 09:56 PM
  #71
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,668
vCash: 1040
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
So your entire point was that Burns won't be a CAREER PPG? Because that really isn't what your first post sounded like, and no one even implied that so I don't know why you even mentioned it then. Read the original post you replied to

"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..."

He isn't implying that Burns would be a career PPG. He said what if Burns could keep it up, aka for multiple seasons. A ton of wingers have accomplished that feat, which was my initial point and what Barrie responded to as well. Hardly anyone is a career PPG anything in any position because of their rookie years and their age later on in their careers.

Also, "basically does not exist" is not the same as "a few" at all. Just sounds like a bunch of backtracking. If you meant it as "a few", why not just say "a few". Obviously I'm not the only one who misinterpretted it since other people called you out on it as well.

As for the actual Burns topic, you never really explained your reasoning of why Burns can't be a PPG winger for multiple seasons. PF did by talking about his bad wrist accuracy which will affect his goal totals, which I can accept. All I saw in this topic was your reasoning of "Burns can't do it because other people can't do it", which really isn't true.
No, my entire point was that Brent Burns is unlikely to maintain this level of production long term. How much he drops off is hard to say, but he probably will level off at some lower, but still good, production level. The whole PPG thing was only to emphasize how rare what he is doing right now is and to illustrate why we should not get our hopes up too high. That was all.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 10:16 PM
  #72
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 49,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
maybe not another top pairing but a top 4 guy to ease some of Stuey's minutes.
If we'd actually contemplate keeping Burns up front, moving Boyle on, and getting someone else to slide in there, it'd have to be a quality PMD QB type d-man unless people are prepared to really unleash Jason Demers. The man has that potential but it's not going to come without some growing pains and people couldn't stand doing that with Ehrhoff even though Demers is more advanced at the same age.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 10:32 PM
  #73
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,668
vCash: 1040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
If we'd actually contemplate keeping Burns up front, moving Boyle on, and getting someone else to slide in there, it'd have to be a quality PMD QB type d-man unless people are prepared to really unleash Jason Demers. The man has that potential but it's not going to come without some growing pains and people couldn't stand doing that with Ehrhoff even though Demers is more advanced at the same age.
I see Demers potential being around Gologoski (offense wise) at best. Not exactly a Boyle replacement, but not a bad 2nd unit option. I think it's pretty clear Boyle will not be a shark next season unless Wilson cannot unload him. If that is the case they either need to get super lucky, or move Burns back, I don't see much choice.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 11:20 PM
  #74
Gene Parmesan
B.Y.O.G.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 72,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
If we'd actually contemplate keeping Burns up front, moving Boyle on, and getting someone else to slide in there, it'd have to be a quality PMD QB type d-man unless people are prepared to really unleash Jason Demers. The man has that potential but it's not going to come without some growing pains and people couldn't stand doing that with Ehrhoff even though Demers is more advanced at the same age.
Someone like Mark Streit would have been ideal.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2013, 11:28 PM
  #75
SharksAddict
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,534
vCash: 500
I'd be surprised if he stayed at forward. Even though its ultimately up to the coach, I have a feeling DW will push hard to get him back on D which I think is the right move. If they go out in the 1st round, TMac is likely gone IMO and I don't see a new coach keeping Burns at forward but we'll see.

SharksAddict 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 06:40 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.