Here is a very simple question for you or anyone. If Burrows was to be traded name a player or pick you think he would bed traded for?
- VANTEL

huh?

I would hope we could get a 1st for him.
- Bluechip23

And you wouldn't trade him for a first?

And you wouldn't trade him for a first?
- VANTEL

I don't think they'd get a first for him with the year he's having and the contract he just signed.

I wouldn't trade him. Talk about selling low... (to answer your question, he'd fetch (frank) all)
- DrChristianTroy

Then in two more years you will have a 4.5 mil third liner. We just get rid of Booth and slot in another expensive third liner.

And you wouldn't trade him for a first?
- VANTEL

If they are selling for next year then I would for sure. But if they aren't then they need to keep him cause he is a great player. Never will be a star but he is the type of guy championship teams love because he can fulfill any role.

I don't think they'd get a first for him with the year he's having and the contract he just signed.
- Fosco

I agree .

I wouldn't trade him. Talk about selling low... (to answer your question, he'd fetch (frank) all)
- DrChristianTroy

This

I don't think they'd get a first for him with the year he's having and the contract he just signed.
- Fosco

Its a tough call. Paul Gaustad got a 1st. You just need one stupid GM to pony up or really like what he brings.

Then in two more years you will have a 4.5 mil third liner. We just get rid of Booth and slot in another expensive third liner.
- VANTEL

That's what happens when you pay a guy for what he did in the past, then take away the opportunity that allowed him that success. If he isn't on the Sedin line (he's still the best fit for them on this team), then he won't be worth what Gillis paid him. That's why communication & a shared vision between GM & Coach is so crucial.

This
- AlexF

I think burrows has two more years left at high performance and then will be an expensive third liner

Then in two more years you will have a 4.5 mil third liner. We just get rid of Booth and slot in another expensive third liner.
- VANTEL

Selling a player at an all-time low is panicky and poor asset management. As I mentioned before, if Burrows is the guy you as GM are fixed on trading then wait at least until the summer when:

a) the cap goes up
b) teams have more space and are more willing to deal
c) Burrows has had a half season to recover some or all of his normal form and therefore look more attractive to other GMs

That's what happens when you pay a guy for what he did in the past, then take away the opportunity that allowed him that success. If he isn't on the Sedin line (he's still the best fit for them on this team), then he won't be worth what Gillis paid him. That's why communication & a shared vision between GM & Coach is so crucial.
- DrChristianTroy

I agree he got paid for what he did in the past. You are assuming the Sedins are still at the level they were 3 years ago.

When it comes to selling high, I'd be looking at what Hamhuis could fetch right now. That superficial Olympic bump to his value could do this franchise a lot of good down the road. He's still nothing more than "solid" IMO and the perception (thanks to his Olympic opportunity) is that he's become elite.

I agree he got paid for what he did in the past. You are assuming the Sedins are still at the level they were 3 years ago.
- VANTEL

... and you're assuming they're not - based on how they've looked with a 3rd line talent on their RW for most of the season.

Selling a player at an all-time low is panicky and poor asset management. As I mentioned before, if Burrows is the guy you as GM are fixed on trading then wait at least until the summer when:

a) the cap goes up
b) teams have more space and are more willing to deal
c) Burrows has had a half season to recover some or all of his normal form and therefore look more attractive to other GMs
- AlexF

Hansen has more speed and is cheaper with a good contract. He has showed signs of getting better. Pretty soon one of those two players will be third liners and you need to ask do you want the younger cheaper or older more expensive

... and you're assuming they're not - based on how they've looked with a 3rd line talent on their RW for most of the season.
- DrChristianTroy

Numbers are down even when Burrows was flanking them

When it comes to selling high, I'd be looking at what Hamhuis could fetch right now. That superficial Olympic bump to his value could do this franchise a lot of good down the road. He's still nothing more than "solid" IMO and the perception (thanks to his Olympic opportunity) is that he's become elite.
- DrChristianTroy

Good point

Numbers are down even when Burrows was flanking them
- VANTEL

If Burrows was flanking them all season, no line juggling & no injuries, I think they'd each have 10 more pts than they do right now (putting them top 10 in the league).

When it comes to selling high, I'd be looking at what Hamhuis could fetch right now. That superficial Olympic bump to his value could do this franchise a lot of good down the road. He's still nothing more than "solid" IMO and the perception (thanks to his Olympic opportunity) is that he's become elite.
- DrChristianTroy

I thought of that at the exact moment when he was announced on the team. IMO there are certain D on this team that we could lose without any hit, some who's loss we could absorb for the boost in F offense (Edler, Garrison, Tanev), and others that would destabilize our D core (Bieksa, Hamhuis).

No one is irreplaceable, but we'd really need an elite offensive talent coming back to make up for the increase in GAA I think we'd be taking in losing Hammer.

If Burrows was flanking them all season, no line juggling & no injuries, I think they'd each have 10 more pts than they do right now (putting them top 10 in the league).
- DrChristianTroy

Its a fair assessment.

If Burrows was flanking them all season, no line juggling & no injuries, I think they'd each have 10 more pts than they do right now (putting them top 10 in the league).
- DrChristianTroy

I don't see it that way. Daniel has removed himself off the sniper duties and decider to be a passer instead. They had
Kesler playing wing and they dried up with him also

If Burrows was flanking them all season, no line juggling & no injuries, I think they'd each have 10 more pts than they do right now (putting them top 10 in the league).
- DrChristianTroy

Yup.

Imagine if the Canucks had a powerplay that produced even middle of the pack. Could add another handful of points.

Duncan Keith has 40 assists? WTF?

I don't see it that way. Daniel has removed himself off the sniper duties and decider to be a passer instead. They had
Kesler playing wing and they dried up with him also
- VANTEL

Kesler doesn't compliment their game anywhere near as well as Burrows.

Santo/Hansen/Booth/Kassian can't hang... None of them complete that line & make the Sedins as effective as they're capable of being. All a waste of time.

Hansen has more speed and is cheaper with a good contract. He has showed signs of getting better. Pretty soon one of those two players will be third liners and you need to ask do you want the younger cheaper or older more expensive
- VANTEL

I'd be happy with getting rid of either Hansen, Burrows or Higgins. Hansen has a good cap hit but doesn't seem to have the finish that either Higgins or Burrows has... frustrating stuff, wish Burrows was healthy and contributing.

Whenever I look at the cap geek for the Canucks, Booth's name sticks out... anyone ever see this kid play? maybe if he could get going we might make some noise and do some damage in the playoffs....