DrunkUncleDenis
Condra Fan
- Mar 27, 2012
- 11,820
- 1,682
Last edited:
Don't let the dor ion hit you on your way out.
You gotta be careful with those door irons. They can jump out at you.
Would you have traded Dahlen knowing you'd end up at the ECF and be saddled with two years of a bad 2-yr $2.5M contract instead of potentially missing the playoffs altogether? I don't like the deal at all, but I look at it this way and it helps me sleep at night. I'm not saying Burrows was the difference between missing the playoffs and going to the ECF, but just replace his name with X and look at the result instead. The process stunk IMO, but the result is there.
I said at the time the only way I'd be happy with the deal is if we manage to get past round 2 of the playoffs, and we did.
Celine Dorion
Celine Dorion
Would you have traded Dahlen knowing you'd end up at the ECF and be saddled with two years of a bad 2-yr $2.5M contract instead of potentially missing the playoffs altogether? I don't like the deal at all, but I look at it this way and it helps me sleep at night. I'm not saying Burrows was the difference between missing the playoffs and going to the ECF, but just replace his name with X and look at the result instead. The process stunk IMO, but the result is there.
I said at the time the only way I'd be happy with the deal is if we manage to get past round 2 of the playoffs, and we did.
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.
I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.
The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.
I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.
I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.
The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.
I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...
They made the Burrows deal when they weren't sure if they were ever getting MacArthur back. So it was at least partly a hedge against losing Mac as a potential top-9 winger. That part is understandable.
The part that bothers me is that they seem to have believed they were getting 2011 Alex Burrows or some near facsimile. The Burrows we got might score 35 points but I think that is at the high-end of the estimate scale. He's more likely to be in the 25 - 30 point range. And his infamous agitator reputation was nowhere to be seen when he came over from Vancouver this past season. I don't recall a single incident where I felt like Burrows got under an opponent's skin or clearly put them off their game. So I'm not sure our pro scouts did a terrific job there. He could presumably have been had for less than a top-5 prospect. Perhaps a 2nd round pick or a lower pick plus a Gabriel Gagne type prospect? And the topper was we had to sign him for another 2 years. At 36 years of age.
It just wasn't a good deal. Too much wishful thinking and quick trigger-pulling went into that deal. Even if the Sens didn't love Dahlen as a prospect, he still likely had some cache outside the organization and could have been used to net a better return.
Anyway, it's all speculation. They were not wrong in trying to replace Mac's production in the forward group. And the Stalberg pick-up was excellent. But the Burrows deal was not Pierre Dorion's finest hour to be sure.
Dorion is getting waay too much credit for Ottawa going far. It's getting tiring that it's used as an out. Oh you can't criticize Dorion we just went the farthest we've gone in 20 years!!!11!
Karlsson willed the team in the finals with Boucher doing the most out of an average group. (it's his speciality) and and it also involved a whole lot of luck facing a depleted Bruins squad, a rangers squad that had no gamebreakers and a penguins squad that was missing its top two d-men.
Dorion is getting way too much credit for pure luck.
Dorion is getting waay too much credit for Ottawa going far. It's getting tiring that it's used as an out. Oh you can't criticize Dorion we just went the farthest we've gone in 20 years!!!11!
Karlsson willed the team in the finals with Boucher doing the most out of an average group. (it's his speciality) and and it also involved a whole lot of luck facing a depleted Bruins squad, a rangers squad that had no gamebreakers and a penguins squad that was missing its top two d-men.
Dorion is getting way too much credit for pure luck.
I see it this way aswell. He is a top 9 forward not a 4th linerMaybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.
I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.
The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.
I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...