Speculation: Buyout window opens today.

[KeninsFan]

Why turn the page on Burrows if he's still a useful player and cutting ties with him would further irritate a fanbase that is already thinning out?

Burrows has one of the worst reps in the NHL - he should be moved for the sake of culture change.

Add in his brutal cap hit and declining on ice play and it's a no brainer for Burr to be traded.

 

[Cupless44]

The problem is that they come out a million ahead, but do need to fill that roster spot in the NHL as Burrows is still an NHL player. So, when you add in the replacement player you are back to zero and probably with a worse player.

Higgins on the other hand, you are needing an AHL replacement only so it's completely different.

I have no problem either way with Burrows, but yes Higgins, should not be on the roster taking away a spot.

 

[DL44]

Retaining salary and trading Burrows would be the best option.

But again as for the disgusting action of trading a player who was actually good over 3 years ago....it is a business, better teams than the Canucks do it and there is no locker room revolts. It's a business, the players get it, just as they get it when they have the contract leverage and their agent bends a team over.

With 99% of the players on each team.. i would agree with you...
We just did it with Bieksa last season..

But every once in while, there is a player on a franchise that you just don't slap in the face without it causing residual effects...

Trade - business, not a slap in the face..
Buyout - slap in the face.

I would not support for one minute the idea of taking any of Burrows' contract money away.

A buyout of Burrows makes little business sense anyways.. $1.5 mil against the cap for 2 yrs... plus paying the replacement... say $925K...
So $2.4 mil of space plus downgrade in player.. makes little sense considering where this team is currently...
So $2.4 mil for 2 yrs.. or one yr of Burrows.

 

[m9]

With 99% of the players on each team.. i would agree with you...
We just did it with Bieksa last season..

But every once in while, there is a player on a franchise that you just don't slap in the face without it causing residual effects...

Trade - not a slap in the face..
Buyout - slap in the face.

I would not support for one minute the idea of taking any of Burrows' contract money away.

Burrows would likely come out ahead financially with a buyout.

 

[Ho Borvat]

Can we please get over what Burrows has done? Chicago moves better players than him after actually winning cups when it is a business decision.

So time to let go of 2011 and move on. It was only 5 years ago. Burrows has badly under - achieved for the first 3 years of his 4 year "thank you" contract. It isn't enough already?

Chicago is also a competitive hockey team, and Vancouver is arguably the worst team in the league going into next season.

This is also a team that preaches high character, and the GM has traded multiple players due to "attitude issues", so wouldn't you think Burrows is the kind of player Benning would keep around for "mentoring" purposes?

 

[Cupless44]

Burrows would likely come out ahead financially with a buyout.

Yes and it all depends on the way the situation is handled. Burrows himself already sounds prepared for anything. I think anything to do with Burrows will be handled with respect by the team.

 

[tantalum]

They come out 1 million ahead, but have 2 million more this year when the cap is not going up.

Next year it costs them a million back but then it will be a better salary cap situation and Miller and others will be off the books.

I disagree that it's a better cap situation next year. Yes Miller comes off the books but they'll still need a starting goaltender and in fact a back up as Markstrom is up for renewal. If he's that starter he's going to make money. You also have extensions to Hutton, Horvat, Gudbranson and Tryamkin next summer. Baertschi this year. They have $40 mil committed to 11 players right now for 17/18....depending on the cap 30-35 mil in cap space. I don't think it's an exaggeration to see $20 mil on those 5 or 6 guys leaving $10 mil or so for the other 5 or 6 guys you need to sign. This doesn't include ANY contract from this UFA period. A big one to Eriksson or Lucic and things get more complicated. I'd argue they don't want to have a near $2 mil cap penalty in 17/18.

 

[Cupless44]

Chicago is also a competitive hockey team, and Vancouver is arguably the worst team in the league going into next season.

This is also a team that preaches high character, and the GM has traded multiple players due to "attitude issues", so wouldn't you think Burrows is the kind of player Benning would keep around for "mentoring" purposes?

He could keep Burrows around another year. I am not losing sleep either way.

 

[Jay Cee]

I know what people are saying about cap space, but really I wouldn't care at this point if we cut Higgins loose. It is kind of awkward really keeping around a vet with the team who signed a nice deal to stay with the team and now he doesn't quite cut it for the direction we're going. I could go either way really. We do save 1.67 mil next year which is nice on top of the other ways we are getting some space. We would pay 800k next year which is not nothing, but it is not a big cost if we have a way to properly replace him with a better young player.

Burrows is a different story. He still has value on the team no matter where he plays and I think he is a great player to help develop young players. I wouldn't mind getting rid of him with retained money or something, but given the whole picture of what our cap looks like and his role on the team, it just isn't worth it.

 

[Canucker]

Keep Burr, dump Dorsett and/or Higgins.

 

[Hit the post]

Despite all the hate and ridicule here, Sbisa is actually a more tradable commodity than Burrows.

And Hamhuis isn't.

Two years of Pizza or one year of Burrows. Rather have neither - but one year of Burrows is the lesser stinkereno.

 

[Cupless44]

And Hamhuis isn't.

Two years of Pizza or one year of Burrows. Rather have neither - but one year of Burrows is the lesser stinkereno.

Do we have to re live that debacle?

 

[NFITO]

I don't really find him that useful anymore at the expense of another player that could or would be part of our future. I suppose we can bury him in the lineup somewhere if we have to though. I just don't like keeping players around for non-hockey reasons. Keeping him around just because people are emotionally attached isn't a great idea in my mind. We have a lot of other options for his spot.

This is where I disagree and why it also doesn't make sense to me that he should get bought out.

I still think Burrows serves a "hockey function" for this team. He's still a veteran with a ton of experience having this career that he's given it all for. He's the type of veteran I'd want around a bunch of inexperienced kids trying to learn how to succeed at this level.

Yes he's old and past his prime... and not worth his cap hit on a competitive team needs cap $$... but on this team a guy with his work ethic, history and experience would be good factors to have somewhere in your top 12 forward set.

After his contract is done I'd have no problem signing him again at a 4th line rate to play a 4th line veteran winger role for another season or 2.

Bottom line ignoring cap hit Burrows is still a useful "hockey" asset for this club and a lot of others in the league... and given our current situation where that cap space isn't going to matter for this year, I don't see a logical reason to buy him out this year.

 

[Nuckles]

 

[Hammer79]

Buying out Higgins may make a small amount of sense, if only to give the player a fresh start. Doesn't really save any money.

Buying out Burrows would be one of the most braindead, non-sensical things I've ever seen from an NHL GM.

So we should just hold onto Burrows even though he's likely not going to be re-signed. He's done a lot for this franchise, shouldn't we return the favor and cut him loose a year early so that he can sign a contract while he's a year younger? He's clearly not in our long term plans. Even if we retained 50% in a trade, we'd still have to add because he would still have negative value. His spot should be used on a player we want to develop.

 

[Hammer79]

Burrows has one of the worst reps in the NHL - he should be moved for the sake of culture change.

Add in his brutal cap hit and declining on ice play and it's a no brainer for Burr to be traded.

Yeah, I'd love to move on from the 'Reffing tax' that comes with having Burrows on our roster.

Besides, it's the best thing for Burrows if he gets bought out. He will get his buyout money plus sign a new contract while he's a year younger. It's a win-win.

 

[JuniorNelson]

Yeah, I'd love to move on from the 'Reffing tax' that comes with having Burrows on our roster.

Besides, it's the best thing for Burrows if he gets bought out. He will get his buyout money plus sign a new contract while he's a year younger. It's a win-win.

They could buy out Burrows and immediately hire him to coach in the AHL. No hurt feelings, although I wonder if this club has evolved that much? Previous heroic figures have been kicked to the curb without regret. Is Burrows that special?

Higgins can mimic Mike Keane in the minors and do occasional NHL duty.

These matters are akin to rearranging deck chairs while an engine fire blazes below deck. Fix the problems, FFS! If Aquilini corp. expects to keep fans interested, they should have already made some moves to bolster the attack. Adding an NHL defenseman is a very good sign but I think they need to be in front of the curve every opportunity. All talk is about Cowen and the Leafs. Why?

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

So we should just hold onto Burrows even though he's likely not going to be re-signed. He's done a lot for this franchise, shouldn't we return the favor and cut him loose a year early so that he can sign a contract while he's a year younger? He's clearly not in our long term plans. Even if we retained 50% in a trade, we'd still have to add because he would still have negative value. His spot should be used on a player we want to develop.

And who would go in in his place?

There's a place here for guys like Burrows as veteran leaders and professionals who show the next wave how its done. One of Edmonton's great (many) failings was in dispatching all of their veteran, leader types in favour of shoehorning in kids. (this is my opinion)

I know that "mentorship" is a derided phrase around here given Benning's use of the term with respect to guys like Dorsett and Prust, but Burrows is a guy that can be this effective mentor. He had to scratch and claw his way to the NHL from the East Coast, he's played in all sorts of big games, has a reputation as a clutch performer, is effective at both ends of the ice, etc. etc. etc...he's still an effective defensive player and PK artist.

I think he still has value to this club. Far more than certain other players that are likely going to be kept around and force-fed ice-time.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

Buyout Higgins.

Burrows should either be traded, with retention if needed (it most likely is) or kept. Makes more sense to be saddled with 1 year of Burrows contract than extra years of his buyout cap hit.

 

[PM]

The same people that are scared of us becoming the Oilers are completely fine with us losing the exact type of player the Oilers need in Burrows for nothing. I think they are just convincing themselves ahead of time so they have their defense of Benning ready to go.

 

[Hammer79]

And who would go in in his place?

There's a place here for guys like Burrows as veteran leaders and professionals who show the next wave how its done. One of Edmonton's great (many) failings was in dispatching all of their veteran, leader types in favour of shoehorning in kids. (this is my opinion)

I know that "mentorship" is a derided phrase around here given Benning's use of the term with respect to guys like Dorsett and Prust, but Burrows is a guy that can be this effective mentor. He had to scratch and claw his way to the NHL from the East Coast, he's played in all sorts of big games, has a reputation as a clutch performer, is effective at both ends of the ice, etc. etc. etc...he's still an effective defensive player and PK artist.

I think he still has value to this club. Far more than certain other players that are likely going to be kept around and force-fed ice-time.

Yes, he's still an NHL player, but his time is up here. There are plenty of journeymen forwards we could sign if someone in the system doesn't justify a promotion. We don't need a 4th liner with a $4.5M cap hit. Yes, it costs cap space next year, but we get space this year to do something with this roster.

 

[VanillaCoke]

This team is hot garbage. Buying out Burrows accomplishes absolutely nothing. It's one year for a bottom 6 forward...

 

[Hammer79]

The same people that are scared of us becoming the Oilers are completely fine with us losing the exact type of player the Oilers need in Burrows for nothing. I think they are just convincing themselves ahead of time so they have their defense of Benning ready to go.

Not nothing, we gain back cap space this year to sign a more effective player this upcoming season. We lose space in 17-18, but the cap will probably go up again to cancel out that disadvantage.

 

[The Extrapolater]

Considering Burrows is still the team's best penalty killer, and chipped in points even despite rotating line mates pretty much every game, he should be a keeper, even at an inflated price. Especially considering he can play both wings, and can play up and down the lineup. He's very versatile, and is a workhorse.
It's unlikely the Canucks can replace Burrows' contributions to the team, easily. And if they can't, they shouldn't try. The Canucks really need to find bargains this off-season, rather then swinging for the fences.

 

[dwarf]

Its a shame we traded Bones for Sutter. I think the lack of puck distributing centers is the main reason our wingers are suffering.

We have the Sedins, and Baertschi with glimpses, who show any talent at puck distribution on the whole team. Everyone else is an off the rush scorer.

I think this is no fluke as to why players like Burrows, Higgins and Vrbata's value nose dived last year.