Dorsett - what happened?

[racerjoe]

Well and just common sense says don't give a guy who plays like that a 4 year deal in his 30's.

Its just never going to work out well.

Don't get me wrong. I love Derek Dorsett the player, and really respect how for years in this league hes made a career by being scrappy, a good teammate, and one of those rare "10 minute tough guys".

Its unfortunate, because its not Dorsetts fault he got offered that money. I hate seeing fan favorites sign these deals because they always end poorly,

With a lot of players I would really agree with in the last part, but we seem to run Benning up the flagpole pretty good, so yeah. Still not his fault, but he gets much less slack for it because of Benning. Way it should be.

 

[WTG]

Anybody that knows anything about stats knows that Dorsett is a huge waste of money.

At least Prust is actually a pretty decent defensive forward (not worth his contract). When you look at Dorsett's possession numbers it doesn't take a genius to figure out the guy is just a goon that skates fast. He can't really play hockey too well.

Every single player that plays with Dorsett sees his possession numbers decrease. This suggests he isn't driving any possession. He relies on his teammates too much which burdens his linemates.

I can think of 5 guys of the top of my head who bring what Dorsett does + make league minimum in the AHL.


He is a glorified goon and doesn't bring anything positive to the team when he is on the ice. Constant liability, only thing that keeps him in the NHL is the fact that he fights. And that is pathetic.

 

[Wisp]

guy mails it in after getting a big contract!

what a culture carrier! just splendid! isn't that right, jimmy?

 

[rypper]

I think a lot of the hate he gets is because people look at our 4th line with him and Prust making the money they do and are just baffled at the stupidity of it and lump all the hate together.

Yeah he deserves his share of it too, but between the two of them I'd take Dorsett over Prust any day. I'd rather neither and still have Brad Richardson making 2.5 but hey we don't always get what we want.

 

[jigsaw99]

Good player if play time are kept to a minimum. Now he is burned out from being over played and probably have a lot nagging injury by this point due to his mins. Willie D's fault of course. And no way worth his contract. 1.25 mil player at best.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Slight difference between guys flagging a bit in the last years of deals that have been very good value and guys doing nothing as brand new acquisitions/contracts.

If Dorsett turned in 3 good-value years on his deal and was then struggling in year 4, nobody would mind too much. This is not the case.

Precisely.

It's pretty much a given when you sign a player to a long-term deal, you will get good value up front and then poor value at the end. Every GM makes that trade-off.

But for Dorsett, he's already horrible value in the first year of his deal. We have three more years of this garbage left.

 

[Fat Tony]

I agree, but that's fairly difficult to measure, no? That's why they're "intangibles".

We can't really say whether having Dorset on the team has a positive influence on his teammates' performance, or whether the opposite might be true.

Wow. This is a defense of Dorsett and his contract?

 

[Tiranis]

Wow. This is a defense of Dorsett and his contract?

As intangible as Dorsett's intangibles (and on-ice impact). Fitting.

 

[Alan Jackson]

Wow. This is a defense of Dorsett and his contract?

Not really, no.

But 30 coaches and 30 GM's believe in intangibles, and so do the players. So I think it's a bit silly to dismiss the notion that some guys can provide value beyond what we can measure.

As far as Dorsett goes, I have a bigger problem with the term than I do with the cap hit.

At this point, I agree that he's not played up to his contract.

 

[MS]

I beg to differ. There are some of us who do mind. Don't get me wrong, I want Dorsett and Prust out of here but I also want Burrows and most of all, Higgins gone.

At some point you have to leave the sentimentality behind and get past 2011. I appreciate what Burrows did but 4 years where he is worth nowhere near 4.5 million is too much and his act with the slurs and everything has worn thin with me. More to the point, watching Burrows this year does nothing for me. I can't get into it just because "he slayed the dragon" 4 years ago. Good organizations like Chicago make good moves, and that includes moving on from guys that actually won Stanley Cups to set up the future, not overpay them for the next 4 years.

Higgins even worse. Every game you watch he does nothing out there. I no longer care that he was once a good deadline acquisition

Higgins' deal was excellent for the first 3 years. He scored 30 ES points every year as a quality two-way middle-6 forward. He's struggled this year and will be moving on shortly, but that was a good contract for the team.

Burrows I'm happy to see here still on that deal. I understand why you disagree, but he's a guy I'd like to see retire a career Canuck.

Dorsett's deal stunk from literally the moment it was signed.

Precisely.

It's pretty much a given when you sign a player to a long-term deal, you will get good value up front and then poor value at the end. Every GM makes that trade-off.

But for Dorsett, he's already horrible value in the first year of his deal. We have three more years of this garbage left.

Exactly. It's just a given on those types of deals that the last year might hurt a bit.

And it's exactly the same thing with Sbisa, except worse.

 

[NoShowWilly]

I think a lot of the hate he gets is because people look at our 4th line with him and Prust making the money they do and are just baffled at the stupidity of it and lump all the hate together.

Yeah he deserves his share of it too, but between the two of them I'd take Dorsett over Prust any day. I'd rather neither and still have Brad Richardson making 2.5 but hey we don't always get what we want.

of course the hate he gets is that he is on the 4th line making 2.65m a season. People talk about how good the 4th line has looked on any given night. It better be ****ing spectacular when you are paying 2 players 2.5m. That is the elite of the elite in terms of 4th line money.

these aren't players who have fallen off a cliff and used to be more. That is what they are.

 

[Wisp]

what kind of culture is Dorsett carrying when you mail it after a big payday?

this has caused his intangibles to become bad intagibles and it is clearly caused his bad behavior to rub off on the group.

IMO that is why the team is bad.


(I can make stupid arguments too)

 

[VanJack]

I'm tired of guys getting paid for "intangibles"....that's just GM speak for "we're disappointed, but we have to justify the contract by pointing out he's a great guy in the room'.....great guy or not, the results on the ice are all that matters.

 

[Cupless44]

Higgins' deal was excellent for the first 3 years. He scored 30 ES points every year as a quality two-way middle-6 forward. He's struggled this year and will be moving on shortly, but that was a good contract for the team.

Burrows I'm happy to see here still on that deal. I understand why you disagree, but he's a guy I'd like to see retire a career Canuck.

Dorsett's deal stunk from literally the moment it was signed.



Exactly. It's just a given on those types of deals that the last year might hurt a bit.

And it's exactly the same thing with Sbisa, except worse.

I agree with you that Dorsett and Sbisa deals stunk from the get go.

We will agree to disagree on the other 2 but i will leave you with this...

Burrows 1 point in 19 games. Higgins 1 point in 21 games.

 

[RobertKron]

I agree with you that Dorsett and Sbisa deals stunk from the get go.

We will agree to disagree on the other 2 but i will leave you with this...

Burrows 1 point in 19 games. Higgins 1 point in 21 games.

So you basically agree that MS is correct?

 

[MS]

I agree with you that Dorsett and Sbisa deals stunk from the get go.

We will agree to disagree on the other 2 but i will leave you with this...

Burrows 1 point in 19 games. Higgins 1 point in 21 games.

Yup, both guys are struggling.

But both have long track records in this league, and both had lived up to their contracts previously.

Burrows in particular is having a terrible 6 weeks, but you'd think 10 years of excellent play would buy him some slack, especially when he was very good in October.

I have a much bigger issues with moves that are instantly (and predictably) bad than with contracts that become poor near their conclusion.

 

[Cupless44]

Yup, both guys are struggling.

But both have long track records in this league, and both had lived up to their contracts previously.

Burrows in particular is having a terrible 6 weeks, but you'd think 10 years of excellent play would buy him some slack, especially when he was very good in October.

I have a much bigger issues with moves that are instantly (and predictably) bad than with contracts that become poor near their conclusion.

Burrows will not have been worth 4.5 a year for 4 years by the time that contract is over. Way too much overkill on the loyalty factor.

Next year
This year
Last year - he was ok but not a 4.5 million a year player
And the year before that when he went 38 games without a goal

 

[HSD19]

Stupid contract by a clueless manager that's what happened. Most of us saw this coming.

 

[Fat Tony]

But 30 coaches and 30 GM's believe in intangibles, and so do the players. So I think it's a bit silly to dismiss the notion that some guys can provide value beyond what we can measure.

More wow.

 

[Ernie]

Burrows will not have been worth 4.5 a year for 4 years by the time that contract is over. Way too much overkill on the loyalty factor.

Next year
This year
Last year - he was ok but not a 4.5 million a year player
And the year before that when he went 38 games without a goal

In terms of actual talent, Burrows has been pretty overrated since he started playing regularly with the Sedins. What we're seeing is the natural decline of a player who really peaked as a quality defensive player / 3rd line type. To get an idea of what he would have been without the Sedins, you could look at 07/08, when he chipped in 27 ES points playing with Kesler as a 26 year old.

A good player, no doubt, but if you go by the bellyaching over Brandon Sutter, not somebody who should be paid $4.5m. As long as he was playing well with the Sedins, you could ignore that individually he probably was being overpaid. But without them and with his advancing age, it's easy to dislike his contract.

 

[mathonwy]

In terms of actual talent, Burrows has been pretty overrated since he started playing regularly with the Sedins. What we're seeing is the natural decline of a player who really peaked as a quality defensive player / 3rd line type. To get an idea of what he would have been without the Sedins, you could look at 07/08, when he chipped in 27 ES points playing with Kesler as a 26 year old.

A good player, no doubt, but if you go by the bellyaching over Brandon Sutter, not somebody who should be paid $4.5m. As long as he was playing well with the Sedins, you could ignore that individually he probably was being overpaid. But without them and with his advancing age, it's easy to dislike his contract.

What a stupid argument.

Ignore the production Burr had with the Sedins and he's overpaid.

Sort of like ignore the production Dank had with Hank and he's overpaid right?

Dank by himself doesn't drive possession. Dank by himself kinda actually sucks.

Here are his #s in the 2013-14 season when Hank went down.

So... its easy to dislike Dank's contract right?

Ridiculous.

Burr has been the Sedins most productive linemate ever.

And the reason why is because of his commitment to his fitness as well as because he's one of the most intelligent Canucks on the team. Hansen has been tried on the Sedins line numerous times over the years with zero luck until this season.

Burr's issue this season is the same issue that is afflicting Higgins and Dorsett. There is less skill on this team than last season, ESPECIALLY down the middle.

And that's on JB.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

He pretty much has completely stopped trying. He gets gifted Ice time for being a veteran. Since his contract extension the guy hasn't played anything like he was before. Pretty disappointing. Went from a solid 4th liner to a guy that literally does jack ****.

I don't think anything is wrong with him I think he just is what he is I don't know why people expect him to be a legitimate NHL player he's a borderline NHL player he skates fast and pretty much does nothing else well including fighting maybes because he just got paid or maybe it's because he has a new baby but I honestly just think this is what his skill set is

 

[Ernie]

What a stupid argument.

Ignore the production Burr had with the Sedins and he's overpaid.

Sort of like ignore the production Dank had with Hank and he's overpaid right?

Dank by himself doesn't drive possession. Dank by himself kinda actually sucks.

Here are his #s in the 2013-14 season when Hank went down.

So... its easy to dislike Dank's contract right?

Ridiculous.

Burr has been the Sedins most productive linemate ever.

And the reason why is because of his commitment to his fitness as well as because he's one of the most intelligent Canucks on the team. Hansen has been tried on the Sedins line numerous times over the years with zero luck until this season.

Burr's issue this season is the same issue that is afflicting Higgins and Dorsett. There is less skill on this team than last season, ESPECIALLY down the middle.

And that's on JB.

YOU'RE A STUPID ARGUMENT

Anyways, Burrows has been a good linemate for the Sedins, but there have been others who have been just as good or better. Samuelsson, Demitra, for a stretch, and yes, Hansen. You say that he's had zero luck with them. The numbers say otherwise. I urge you to peruse Henrik's WOWY numbers here: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=602&withagainst=true&season=2007-15&sit=5v5

The market value for Burrows should be what he contributes when he's not with the Sedins, as that is what another team would expect from him. Without the Sedins, his individual production has been about 1.4 points / 60. With them, it's been 2.4 points / 60.

 

[mathonwy]

YOU'RE A STUPID ARGUMENT

Anyways, Burrows has been a good linemate for the Sedins, but there have been others who have been just as good or better. Samuelsson, Demitra, for a stretch, and yes, Hansen. You say that he's had zero luck with them. The numbers say otherwise. I urge you to peruse Henrik's WOWY numbers here: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=602&withagainst=true&season=2007-15&sit=5v5

The market value for Burrows should be what he contributes when he's not with the Sedins, as that is what another team would expect from him. Without the Sedins, his individual production has been about 1.4 points / 60. With them, it's been 2.4 points / 60.

Disregarding
- Burr's production with the Sedins
- The fact that Burr can play on all 4 lines; and
- The fact that Burr is one of our most effective PKers

is probably something JB would do.

If Burr gets traded, I anticipate sending a 5th rounder along with Burr for a bottom 6 plug because Burr was mean to Tootoo.

 

[Ernie]

Disregarding
- Burr's production with the Sedins
- The fact that Burr can play on all 4 lines; and
- The fact that Burr is one of our most effective PKers

is probably something JB would do.

If Burr gets traded, I anticipate sending a 5th rounder along with Burr for a bottom 6 plug because Burr was mean to Tootoo.

Oh god, you know they JB hate has crossed over into total ridiculousness when we see stuff like this. If JB could move Burrows for ANYTHING without eating half his salary, that would be a good strategic move (though obviously wouldn't make some fans happy).

To be clear, I think Burrows is a very good player. Similar to Jannik Hansen, who has all the qualities you mentioned above. But Jannik Hansen doesn't earn $4.5m, and neither should Burrows.