Jyrki21 wrote:2. Calling Alex Burrows "untouchable" may be extending the meaning of the word beyond its intended ambit.
Farhan Lalji wrote:2) Don't trade away key defensive components for offensive help. The Canucks' current style is not conductive to scoring many goals as it is. By sacrificing defensive depth for offensive help, all you are doing is adding assets while depleting other ones (so that overall 'net gain' is close to '0'). On top of that - adding more offensive players (at the expense of our defense) may give the team a false sense of "offensive prowess" (which they won't have). Even if they add a couple of key offensive ingredients, the Canucks will still have an 'average' offense at best.
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Burrows is about as untouchable as a dirty diaper. He has a use and once he's full of urine or fecies you throw him out.
Jovorock wrote:Blob Mckenzie wrote:Burrows is about as untouchable as a dirty diaper. He has a use and once he's full of urine or fecies you throw him out.
I respect Farhan's comments, Alex is younger version of Cooke and Richie, right now is he better than these two? Sure maybe down the road he might have some offensive upside, time will tell. All three of these guys are heart type guys, the two will drop the gloves only Cooke is a turtle.
As usual Blob your comments are always enlightening.
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 4 guests