OK, So What I have heard this May 2012

[RoyalDude]

I'm willing to give Booth more than 5 playoff games before he's run out of town - do people remember how bad the twins were their first year, or how bad Ballard was last year? People can improve and he was far from alone in sucking this playoff round.

Comparing the veteren Booth of now to the when the Twins were kids fresh out of Sweden? Booth is an extremely limited, one move player, Diehard. He can't think the game. When he gets the puck he has no forethought on what to do with it, he just parks his brain and tries to skate with it with god awful stick handling of his with his head buried in the ice.

Ballard can be all over the map, inconsistent, but he has much better skills and smarts than Booth. I'd keep Ballard way ahead of Booth. To be blunt, I want Booth off this team fast. Can't stand him. I will not be 100% happy with this team until he is out of this city. Malhotra too

[Eddy Punch Clock]

Dude? Did you just say something positive about Ballard?

...or is he just the lesser of the two evils?

[SKYO]

Dude? Did you just say something positive about Ballard?

...or is he just the lesser of the two evils?

Probably something like crap crap and more crap.
In a year or two Kass should be everything MG envisioned Booth would be, so we might as well trade Booth now - well the league thinks of how awesome he was with crappy Florida.

[Ched Brosky]

I highly doubt Burrows will leave. Kesler took a bit less than market value to stay and so did Bieksa. Both are Burrows best friends and all 3 decided to take discounts together to play together.

I do think Burrows will want a raise though. In the open market I see him getting 4M maybe 4.5M if he gets lucky. But I believe if the Canucks offered him something around 3.5M he'll take it to stay here

[Eddy Punch Clock]

I highly doubt Burrows will leave. Kesler took a bit less than market value to stay and so did Bieksa. Both are Burrows best friends and all 3 decided to take discounts together to play together.

The big difference though is that when Bieksa and Kesler signed their deals they were a lot younger than Burrows is now. My hunch is that Burrows will be looking for a longer term deal than Gillis is willing to give.

Welcome to the board.

[Ched Brosky]

I highly doubt Burrows will leave. Kesler took a bit less than market value to stay and so did Bieksa. Both are Burrows best friends and all 3 decided to take discounts together to play together.

The big difference though is that when Bieksa and Kesler signed their deals they were a lot younger than Burrows is now. My hunch is that Burrows will be looking for a longer term deal than Gillis is willing to give.

Welcome to the board.

I think Gillis will want a 3-4 year term taking Burr to 34/35, while Burr might want a 6 year deal to ensure he makes decent money when he may have declined.

Thanks! I was apart of CC from begining to end but didn't post too much there though, lurked the site every free day i had haha

[clem]

I think Gillis will want a 3-4 year term taking Burr to 34/35, while Burr might want a 6 year deal to ensure he makes decent money when he may have declined.

The "35-and-Older" clause complicates rewarding veterans.

"When a player aged 35 or older signs a multi-year contract, his average salary is counted against the team's salary cap during every year of the contract, even if the player retires before the contract is up"

It would have been easier to come to terms in the old days.

[Strangelove]

To be blunt, I want Booth off this team fast. Can't stand him. I will not be 100% happy with this team until he is out of this city.

Okay Dude:

Lou + Booth + Schroeder... for... Nash

Booth grew up 200 miles from Columbus, has family there. Ditto for Schroeds (600 miles). And Lou would be closer to his house & family in Florida (960 miles). Columbus is desperate for a top goalie and desperate to trade Nash. IF Lou gave the okay to this deal, Columbus could rest assured all three players would be happy there (something they don't get a lot of recently). The media speculates about Lou wanting to go to the crappy Leaves because of their goalie coach, the media DOES NOT speculate about Lou wanting to go to the crappy Jackets because of THEIR goalie coach? Why? Leaf rumours sell.

I know you are one of the many 'Lou won't return much' folk, but that's just because you listen to anticanuck pundits too much. He has HUGE value, especially this summer when there is a relatively large demand for a proven top ten goalie and a small supply. Lou actually more than earns his $5.3mil cap-hit and is likely to do so for the necesary 6 more seasons (all relatively injury-free elite tenders play until their late 30's; contract is easily disposed of in 6 years).

The only question of course is: Would Lou agree to go to Columbus?

Here's why he might:

1. Ian Clark is the goaltending coach of the Columbus Blue Jackets. Clark is the goaltending coach Luongo pushed the Canucks to hire (and Lou was upset when Canucks - because he wouldn't sign on full-time - let him go). Lou still retains Clark as his personal summer trainer.

2. Lou would have messiah status coming into Columbus to save them (like he had when he came to Vancouver).

3. It is only 962.7 miles from Columbus to Lou's house/family in Florida.

Having said all that, I would be SHOCKED if Luongo chose Columbus.

But stranger things have happened, and it is a great idea on paper!

If the Canucks decide to trade Schneids instead, I'd say he's either going there or Tampa.

If Lou actually goes there perhaps we'd hafta add to the package (1st round pick or whatever).

[dhabums]

I think Gillis will want a 3-4 year term taking Burr to 34/35, while Burr might want a 6 year deal to ensure he makes decent money when he may have declined.

The "35-and-Older" clause complicates rewarding veterans.

"When a player aged 35 or older signs a multi-year contract, his average salary is counted against the team's salary cap during every year of the contract, even if the player retires before the contract is up"

It would have been easier to come to terms in the old days.

Are you misunderstanding the 35+ rule or are you saying Burrows will want long deal now because he can't get one after he's 35? Either way, I do not think that matters much.

I'd rather us give him a little more money per year and shorten it to 3 years.

[clem]

I was responding to

Burr might want a 6 year deal to ensure he makes decent money when he may have declined

It wasn't that long ago when the cap impact could be fudged by the long term contract.

[Island Nucklehead]

I think Gillis will want a 3-4 year term taking Burr to 34/35, while Burr might want a 6 year deal to ensure he makes decent money when he may have declined.

The "35-and-Older" clause complicates rewarding veterans.

"When a player aged 35 or older signs a multi-year contract, his average salary is counted against the team's salary cap during every year of the contract, even if the player retires before the contract is up"

It would have been easier to come to terms in the old days.

IIRC, that applies for contracts signed only after he is 35. Burrows just turned 31. There is nothing in the CBA (that I'm aware of) that stops a 32 year old player from signing past age 35. The 35+ clause, where salary hit stays with the team if the player retires, only applies to contracts signed AFTER the player has reached 35. See: Chris Pronger.

[SKYO]

To be blunt, I want Booth off this team fast. Can't stand him. I will not be 100% happy with this team until he is out of this city.

Okay Dude:

Lou + Booth + Schroeder... for... Nash

Or Luongo to TB/Toronto for pieces that CBJ's want in a three way trade for Nash to Vancouver.
whoever we get in the Luongo trade + Booth + Ricky Schroeder for Nash

Then Edler straight up for Weber, similar to the Hossa/Heatley swap.

[Canuck-One]

It has become something of a strange phenomena on these posts. We under value our players. Some seem to think that a guy who has scored an average of 33 goals and 31 assists over the last three seasons is worth more than a guy who was the Olympic Gold Medal winning goalie. He has led his team to 2 consecutive Presidents Trophies and 4 Division Championships. Who over the last 3 seasons has a GAA of 2.36 and a Save % of .920. He won the William M Jennings award for the lowest GAA in the league in 10/11. Alexandre Burrows has scored 30 goals + 26 assists over the same period. If you were a GM do you think anyone would give you Luongo plus plus for Burrows? So why in heck would MG trade a top 5 goalie for a good, yet unmotivated Rick Nash? For Columbus to get Luo, they better throw in some candy. Not the other way around.

[clem]

IIRC, that applies for contracts signed only after he is 35.

Agree (subject to June 30 date limit).

The cap impact of contracts can still be fudged by longer term. The "35-and-Older" clause forces you to do it earlier, & the “50% difference in years salary” clause makes you stretch it out longer – within some unwritten limit (Kovalchuk).

Contract rules used to be simpler. Don’t see how things have gotten much more equitable or credible by changes in contract requirements.

It’s unlikely Burrows warrants such finagling anyway. I've rambled about & complicated things.

[ukcanuck]

Comparing the veteren Booth of now to the when the Twins were kids fresh out of Sweden? Booth is an extremely limited, one move player, Diehard. He can't think the game. When he gets the puck he has no forethought on what to do with it, he just parks his brain and tries to skate with it with god awful stick handling of his with his head buried in the ice.

Ballard can be all over the map, inconsistent, but he has much better skills and smarts than Booth. I'd keep Ballard way ahead of Booth. To be blunt, I want Booth off this team fast. Can't stand him. I will not be 100% happy with this team until he is out of this city. Malhotra too

I seriously doubt that you would not be here complaining about this team next season even if you got to pick the entire roster, the coaching staff and the GM was your BFF