TheWanderer
Registered User
- Nov 15, 2013
- 4,959
- 32
You people are crazy to want to ship out Higgins/ Hansen/ Burrows.
Higgins and Hansen have the making of a good NHL 3rd line. Both are on good contracts.
Now with Vrbada added to the mix, the top 6 is closer to resembling an actual top 6. Turning around and taking Burrows out of that group would be taking one step forward then two steps back.
This was originally a conversation about the effects of these players on the cap, but it's hit a bit of a tangent.
At any rate: Higgins last year was worth his salary. Burrows and Hansen were not, but could be next year. In my opinion, gambling that salary and roster spot on one of these players is fine, but gambling it on both may not be.
I think Burrows has a long way to go to be worth a top 6 position again. That's a tough sell, at this point in time, and there is nobody in the system to replace him should he falter. Hansen, on the other hand, can be replaced internally if he falters. So having said that, I want to replace Burrows with someone stable, and roll the dice on Hansen. If he flops, someone else (like Matthias) can move up. If he pays out, he keeps Matthias down to fill out the depth.
Burrows, on the other hand, could be moved out to create cap space for someone who isn't quite as much of a question mark. If we roll the dice on Burrows and he flops, we have a crappy top 6 again. If we roll the dice and he pays out, well that was a bit less work for Benning.
IMO, that LW slot is the hole, and it should be filled. I don't think Burrows fills it, and I don't think Burrows's 4.5 is allowable in the bottom 6.
Burrows was trending down prior to the catastrophic season. Hansen was trending up. Therefore, I want to keep Hansen, but not Burrows.
Don't get me wrong. Moving Burrows is an ideal situation, IMO, but I would not be upset if none of these guys were moved.