Canucks sign Radim Vrbata

[herb]

Nope, I don't. When you're building a winning hockey team, you want guys that'll cross the line once in awhile and know how to game the system.

When you're building a winning hockey team sometimes you need to cut the fat. In this case the aging, overpaid utility player is the fat.

[mathonwy]

Then maybe you should do a better job of arguing your points. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But seriously, if you want to have a debate then why not focus on the underlying point of my "whistling" post or respond to my more direct explanation thereof in the post you've quoted here - instead of calling me a douchebag and then pulling out Doc's "damaged psyche" chestnut while completing ignoring anything of substance?

Ok DBR. Let me also respond to YOUR posts with quotes and emoticons and I also expect you to interpret it and respond intelligently. Ok?



Your posts reek of condescension and maybe you should do a better job of presenting your arguments.

[dbr]

For example, is Sean Avery a "meat and potatoes" guy because he'll do whatever it takes to win?

To answer your question DBR, no I do not consider Sean Avery a meat-and-potatoes player. Sean Avery is in a class by himself. The opposing players hate him and his teammates hate him.

And... he is no longer playing in the NHL because nobody wants him for all of the above reasons.

Sure but do you consider Sean Avery to be something other than meat and potatoes (boy am I getting sick of that phrase) because of his scoring numbers or because he is hated by, among others, refs and off ice officials?

Nobody is saying that Burrows is as bad as Sean Avery, my point is merely that Burrows - like Avery but not to the same extent - possesses some qualities that are decidedly not "meat and potatoes."

But anyway I think the phrase in question is stupid and overblown and if you want to ignore its connotations so you can apply it to Alex Burrows that's fine with me.

Then we can go back to arguing about why Burrows is better than a guy with a shorter contract, barely different cap hit whose outproduced him on aggregate (and blew him out of the water last year) with worse linemates.

[herb]

I don't know why this Burrows talk is being taken as such a personal affront.

All people are saying is that Burrows' spot in the lineup is an obvious place to try to upgrade for performance and contractual reasons.

[dbr]

Ok DBR. Let me also respond to YOUR posts with quotes and emoticons and I also expect you to interpret it and respond intelligently. Ok?

I think my post was clearer than this, both in terms of using just a single emoticon and in terms of providing extensive context, but okay.

Your posts reek of condescension and maybe you should do a better job of presenting your arguments.

I am reasonably satisfied with the job I've done presenting my arguments. Perhaps they were disrespectful and more than a little bit intended to elicit a response, but that's just because I'm a meat and potatoes guy who will do whatever it takes to win!

[Island Nucklehead]

*Out of those 45 days of being injured, 10 is from shoulder surgery, 12 is from the broken ankle and 20 is from the broken jaw.

*Take also into consideration Burr scored a whole 5 goals last year

So, if you can suspend all of your personal prejudice against Alex Burrows the person and make an objective decision, who would you rather have on your team?

Does any of this work in Burrows' favour? That tells me he's had some relatively serious injuries, and the 5 goals seem to indicate they may have caught up with him. Vrbata, on the other hand, did miss 14 games with a cracked bone in his foot, but the other injuries appear to be the nagging type.

The other thing to consider is the nature of their games, something you're highlighting to emphasize Burrows' value to the team. I would speculate that Burrows' style leads itself to injury, and since he's getting older, and getting injured more often, it could lead to a diminishing return on his ability to play the style of game that made him so successful in the first place. If Burrows can't get greasy, can't block enough shots, can't take the punishment, is he a valuable top-6 player? Certainly, Vrbata's style lends itself to a longer career and his skill-set is not one that requires a great deal of physical play.

I fully expect both of them to be around by camp, because I don't think Burrows has much value in the league at the moment, but I would not be surprised if he's on the block by next summer, regardless of how he rebounds.

[sagebrush]

Who would have thought meat & potatoes could be so controversial?
Vrbata's merits never stood a chance against a meat & potatoes discussion.

The loyalty to Burrows is admirable, until it gets in the way of Canucks loyalty.

[Hockey Widow]

I like Burrows for all the positive reasons others have stated. The real debates are, whether he is over paid for what he brings, is taking a roster spot from a younger player in the organization, is the team stronger with him on the team or better served to trade him and does that trade with the returns and freed cap space out weigh the continued contributions he brings.

1) Given what we see happens every July 1, I have no doubt he would hit 5x5, at least, as a FA last year or this. Moving forward hard to say. He is not over paid based upon the current market. He is a versatile player that can play on all four lines and special teams. He still has wheels and is an agitating in your face player.

2) It is yet to be determined if he is taking a roster spot from a player in the organization. He alone I say no. The combination or log jam of similar players may make him the more expendable given his cap hit. But I just don't see anyone in the organization that could step in and contribute what he does. There are other lesser players on the roster that could moved/waived that would free a roster spot for a kid knocking at the door but realistically who is ready to step in and is being held back because Burrows is on the team?

3) The biggest positive in trading him now would be the 4.5 million dollar cap relief. I can't see a trade at this point bringing us back an upgrade. Perhaps a prospect or picks, none of which will make us a better team today. So to me the only benefit of trading him is to gain valuable cap space because it would be needed for other moves being contemplated. Yes it would free a roster spot for a Horvat type but we can do that a number of different ways without parting with Burrows.

Bottom line to me is we should only move Burrows if we need the cap, this year. Depending upon the year he has we can re-evaluate. He is not a problem in the locker room. He is a hard working passionate player who brings a lot of experience to the line up. Last minute of play, up by a goal, Burrows is one of the guys I want on the ice.

[ClamRussel]

I don't know why this Burrows talk is being taken as such a personal affront.

All people are saying is that Burrows' spot in the lineup is an obvious place to try to upgrade for performance and contractual reasons.

Because this is typical Canuck fan shortsightedness. Guy had an injury riddled season, not because he's injury-prone but rather because he was in the trenches, sacrificing the body for the team. The guy wants to be here & is a heart & soul player like Bieksa.

Trading Burrows now would be a mistake, his value is low after a rough & unlucky season. He's due for a rebound season. After that he will either be a veteran presence moving forward or be worth a better return in a trade. It would be a mistake to trade him right now.

[kelowna kanuck]

For what its worth, I agree with points made by HW and Clam on this. We just got rid of someone who didnt want to be here, and here we are arguing about a player who would take a bullet. I agree that the only way Burr is moved is if it is for cap space reasons, resulting in a trade for a non-questionable upgrade. ie: one where this board would erupt into a love fest .
He had an injury prone year that few players experience, including a jaw broken by a puck from his own player.
Here we are on this board complaining about the media in Vancouver (and rightly so) and we have zero sense of loyalty to a player who has, up until last year, been an extremely good player for us.
The whole team needs a bounce back year, why would we not give Burrows that chance. He , unlike any other member of the team actually had an excuse for a shitty year.... injuries.

[Blob Mckenzie]

But I just don't see anyone in the organization that could step in and contribute what he does.

You got me there. I would imagine pretty much any team would struggle to find players that bite, dive, scratch, pull hair and ball like a 9 year old on tv after a big meanie ref threatened him.

Burrows is very unique.

[Chef Boi RD]

C'mon Steel Plant McKenzies aren't you being a bit harsh on ole Burrows. Do you not remember the time when Burrows "slayed the dragon"? Does that not bring back the love vibrations?

[sagebrush]

Living in the past is done best by the Oiler organization.

[Strangelove]

we're doling out Kesler money for a guy who has never put up a pt/game and will be 34 in Jan.

Actually Vrbata turned 33 less than 3 weeks ago.

June 13th.... hmmmm... THE VERY DAY THE CUP WAS WON!!!

Oh yeah, it's totally a sign.

Yes I'd rather pay Iginla until he's 40 than Vrbata until he's 36.

Vrbata will be 34 when he plays his last game for the Canucks under this contract

... unless we win the Cup on his 35th birthday.

Umm yeah, his birthday is in JUNE dude.

[Tciso]

So you have the:

Sedins, Sedins, Vrbata - 1st line
Kassian, Bonino, Burrows - 2nd line
Matthias, Vey, Higgins - 3rd line
Sestito, Richardson, Dorsett - 4th line

Where does that leave Hansen Jensen

Easy. Sestito and Richardson warm the bench. Sestito becomes the water boy, while Richardson is our 13th forward. Vey is still a question mark to make the team too, imo.