Canuckz.com » Alex Burrows

Gillis Re-Signs Raymond for Cheap

Tonyz Tanti — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:21:40 +0000

The Canucks announced on Monday that they have re-signed Mason Raymond. The restricted free agent re-signed just minutes before his arbitration case was to be heard. But that’s not the surprising part, the surprising part is that Mike Gillis was able to get Raymond to sign a two year deal, worth $2.55 per season. There’s no doubt in my mind that Raymond would have been awarded more in arbitration, perhaps well more. In fact, most pundits (including myself)were predicting $3 million or more.

This begs the question: why did Raymond settle for less? Was he worried that he would get awarded too much and have the Canucks walk away from the award? Does he just really want to win and knew that a lower cap number would help keep the team together? Or did he just run-in to Mike “the negotiator” Gillis?

Mike Gillis has done a superb job on a number of contracts in his two plus years as Canucks GM. His style seems to lay low, keep quiet and then at the last possible minute offers up his best offer. It’s like playing hard to get. Remember when he re-signed Alex Burrows? Rumours were swirling that Burrows would be traded if he didn’t sign before the deadline, and what do you know, he signs a dirt cheap contract. You could almost just see him starting to sweat, wondering what Gillis was going to do.

The fact that Gillis is a former player agent plays a big part in this also. He knows how players think, what offends them, what impresses them, etc. It’s something that we didn’t see with the last few GMs in this town.

So just how good was this deal? Consider Raymond, a 25 goal scorer is getting $2.55 million and compare that to Clarke MacArthur’s arbitration award ($2.4 million for a 16 goal scorer) or Nikolai Kulemin’s new contract ($2.35 million for a 16 goal scorer). Both of those players are of similar age and clearly not as good as Raymond.

The 2009-2010 Vancouver Canucks, How Bad Was It?

Tonyz Tanti — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 05:30:48 +0000

Well, we’ve all had a chance to take a deep breath, sit back and really think about the year that was for our beloved Vancouver Canucks. Gone is the emotion/heartbreak/disappointment/anger from their second straight second round loss to the Chicago Blackhawks. What’s left is a better chance for impartial analysis as to what they did, what they have and what they should do.

Was it as Bad as we Thought?

It’s been over a month since the Canucks were ousted by the Blackhawks. At the time we knew the Blackhawks were good, but we also thought the Canucks could have and should have been better. Perhaps they should have, but consider this. The Canucks lost to the eventual Stanley Cup champions, which suggests they’re a pretty good team. The Blackhawks beat a hard working bunch with a strong defense (Nashville), a high scoring team (Vancouver), an all around talented team (San Jose) and a gritty team (Philadelphia). Basically, they beat different teams and it didn’t faze them one bit. The Canucks stretched the Hawks to 6 games, as far as any of their other three opponents.

I’m not arguing that the Canucks couldn’t have played better or that they don’t have problems they need to fix, but I’m starting to think that they weren’t as bad as we thought they were. We need to give the Blackhawks a bit of credit.

Your Best Players Need to be Your Best Players

So what just happened? Why did the Canucks look so terrible at times against the Blackhawks? For me, it starts with the old adage that your best players need to be your best players. I believe that Daniel and Henrik Sedin were good enough in the playoffs, each notching better than a point per game in the post season. It was the Canucks most important player, Roberto Luongo, who did not play up to par. True, the Chicago Blackhawks can make a lot of goalies look silly, but Luongo ended the playoffs with a save percentage below .900, not good enough for a goalie of his ability. Quite simply, the Canucks as they were constructed this year can’t and won’t win a Stanley Cup with average or below average goaltending.

But now, a little perspective. A lot of uneducated hockey fans are suggesting that the Canucks trade Luongo and “give Schneider a shot”. Lets not lose our minds here folks. Luongo may have had an off-season, but he can certain bounce back and giving the reigns to an unproven good AHL goalie is probably not a prudent move. For those of you in favour of letting Louie go, consider that his cap number will be going down next season, from $6.75 million to $5.33 million. That cap number puts him in 9th place among the other goalies in the league.

Who Would You Rather Have?

For those Luongo haters I also ask you this: how many goalies in this year’s playoffs would you want ahead of Luongo? Certainly not either of the Stanley Cup Final goaltenders. Would it be Evgeni Nabokov, he the man who plays behind all that talent in San Jose and year after year can’t get it done when it matters? How about Ilya Bryzgalov, who after a terrific regular season posted similar numbers to Luongo and lost in the first round. It’s getting harder and harder to make the case for Martin Brodeur now, with his best days behind him he looks like he’s beginning to lose a step and has had a few playoff flops in recent years. The Marc-Andre Fleury argument has always been “he’s got a Stanley Cup ring” but look at this year’s playoffs and I defy you to say that you’d be more comfortable with him in net. Steve Mason proved that having one amazing year doesn’t necessarily mean that it can be sustained, so lets forget about Tuukka Rask, Craig Anderson, Jimmy Howard, Brian Elliott and Jaroslav Halak. That leaves Ryan Miller, who was the best goalie in the league this year, and I would take him ahead of Luongo, but his teams (Team USA and Buffalo) didn’t do as well as Luongo’s this year.

The point? The best option for the Canucks remains to keep faith with Luongo and hope that he has a bounce-back season. Perhaps he needs to play less, and perhaps they’ve learned their lesson in that respect. Maybe he doesn’t need to play every game to be a great goalie, maybe he just needs to get used to resting more.

Where was the Grit?

Against the Chicago Blackhawks it seemed to be non-existent. While the Canucks defensemen were getting pounded, the Blackhawks defensemen cruised around with ease. A little more grit that can play in their top 9 or even in their top 6 should be a high priority for GM Mike Gillis, but once again, a little perspective is needed. Yesterday, Alex Burrows underwent shoulder surgery, while Ryan Kesler revealed he also played through a shoulder injury in the playoffs. It should come as no surprise that grit would be an issue when the two grittiest players in the Canucks top 6 forwards have shoulder injuries. So maybe it’s not quite as bad as we thought.

Defense

What was once the Canucks greatest strength not long ago is now their greatest need. Losing Willie Mitchell hurt greatly, and I contend that he is their most important defenseman. Christian Ehrhoff had a great season, but is not great defensively. Sami Salo actually stayed healthy for longer than anyone predicted, and had a solid season. Kevin Bieksa is now another year removed from his great breakout season, and I’m among those who think that he won’t regain the form that rewarded him with a big contract. Alex Edler stepped his game up more than anyone in the playoffs, which was a pleasant surprise. The Canucks D is missing a bit of nastiness though, something Kevin Bieksa is supposed to provide. It’s also missing a stud on the blueline that can eat up big minutes against the other team’s best players while contributing offensively.

The Recap

The Canucks had a nice regular season, not a great one. They won their division, but finished fourth in points in the Western Conference. They were a clear notch below the Sharks and Blackhawks in the regular season and failed to make it past the second round. That is not the mark of an elite team ready to knock on the door. There were a lot of positive things that happened this year though (the emergence of the Sedins as elite players, Kesler and Burrows proving they can score consistently, Edler and Ehrhoff taking steps forward in their development). Mike Gillis has some things to tweak, no doubt. But how bad was it? It wasn’t so bad, and it can sure get a lot better.

Ten Days Away

The NHL entry draft is ten days away, which not only marks the day that teams pick future NHL stars, but also the start of the NHL trade frenzy! Speaking of frenzies, the free agency frenzy begins in just over two weeks.Check back before the draft and July 1st to get in-depth analysis of just what Mike Gillis’ options are.

Game 5 Recap – Canucks Live Another Day, Lose Salo

Tonyz Tanti — Mon, 10 May 2010 22:25:39 +0000

After an impressive 4-1 win, the Canucks will live to play another game. So just how did this team, that looked so beleaguered on home ice in game 3 and 4, manage to extend the series? Remarkably, the keys to victory have become astonishingly clear (to this blogger at least).

The Canucks got excellent goaltending from Roberto Luongo, while the team in front of him limited the chances against. They also stayed away from penalty trouble for the most part, and killed them off when they took them. Everything else in this series has remained fairly constant. They’ve been good on the power play and at even strength. Just clean up your PK and get Louie to be on top of his game.

The Return of Bieksallent

In my series prediction I said that Kevin Bieksa needed to play like he hasn’t in two seasons and/or Luongo has to be great, and well, they both did that last night. Kevin Bieksa played like he did in 2006-07 last night and it was much needed. The guy has been in my doghouse all year, playing more like a fifth defenceman than a top four defenceman. After Sami Salo went down with an injury, Bieksa was counted on big time and he stepped up.

Salo Injured – But Still Ballin’

Thankfully contrary to early reports, Sami Salo DID NOT rupture his testicle in game 5. What exact injury he has though, is uncertain. He’s apparently day-to-day, but who knows what that means come playoff time. It doesn’t sound like he’ll be back for game 6, but after that is anybody’s guess. I could go on a parade of ball jokes now, but they’re kind of tired already (so much so that you can follow ‘Sami Salo’s Testicle‘ on Twitter).

Big Game From Burrows

Alex Burrows only had an empty netter last night, but that doesn’t tell the story. Burrows was planted firmly in front of Antti Niemi on two of the three goals that Niemi gave up. Those screens were the main reason that those goals went in and Burrows hasn’t gotten enough credit for it.

Game 3 Recap – Blackhawks Outsmart Canucks

Tonyz Tanti — Fri, 07 May 2010 04:08:14 +0000

What a debacle game 3 of the second round turned out to be. A 5-2 result in which the Canucks looked out of it past the 10 minute mark of the 1s t period. At the end of the night I felt like the Blackhawks had won, and won easily. In game 2 they had to scratch and claw their way to victory, but not in game 3.

Outsmarted

Chicago picked their spots to get under the skin of the Sedins and Luongo and they did it largely without taking a penalty. The ridiculousness of no goaltender interference penalty being called yet in this series is beside the point. They’re getting away with it. Dustin Byfuglien and Jonthan Toews both got away with inteference on Luongo which lead to Hawk goals. Those guys need to be taken care of by the Canucks D.

The Canucks need to ride that fine line also, the key being to do it without taking a penalty. The example of what not to do came from Alex Burrows on Brian Campbell in the 2nd period. A costly penalty for roughing up Brian Campbell, making it look too obvious, lead to a power play goal, and you have your game winner. David Bolland on the other hand was able to rough up Daniel Sedin while taking him off the ice with him, and there en lies the difference.

Goaltending

If the Canucks are to win this series, Roberto Luongo has to be better than Antti Niemi. Case closed. Niemi was better than Luongo last night as Luongo was unable to handle his rebounds all night. Of course his defense isn’t making it easy on him, as they were unwilling to move players from the crease or even willing to box players out. Take a look at Kevin Bieksa on the first goal for an example of what I mean.

GM Place = Library

What is up with the fans at GM Place? I have been to every playoff game at the Garage thus far and it is quiet in there. In the first round I chalked it up to LA not being a big rival and the fans not being as excited about the first round as we used to. But now, I don’t know. The team could have really used a jolt of adrenaline from the fans to start the game and it simply wasn’t there. I believe of the 16 playoff teams this post season, Vancouver probably has the 2nd or 3rd quietest fans, perhaps only ahead of Detroit and Ottawa. In game 3 versus Chicago, the fans were unable to start the ‘go Canucks go’ chant by themselves even once. That’s a first for a Canucks playoff game in my experience.

Reasons for this? Perhaps the 6:30pm start time played a factor, but it’s only half an hour earlier than usual. Perhaps the Canucks have finally priced most ‘real fans’ out of the building (ticket prices started at $150 each). What also must contribute to it is the brutal job done to pump up the fans before the game. There’s a decent pre-game montage on the video screen, but everything else leaves a lot to be desired. They play the quietest intro song in the league, ‘Where the Streets Have No Name’ by U2 and have a few flag wavers on the ice. Maybe it shouldn’t be any surprise that it elicits a quiet response by the fans.

Game 2 Recap – Hawks Even up the Series

Tonyz Tanti — Tue, 04 May 2010 08:54:47 +0000

What an entertaining game we saw on Monday night. High intensity, high drama, complete with a last minute goal to win the game. Unfortunately for Canucks fans, the Blackhawks prevailed on this night, winning 4-2 and evening the series coming back to Vancouver. Lets take a look at the bad, good and what to look forward to.

THE BAD:

The Canucks lost, so lets start off by venting about what they did wrong. After getting an early goal and having all the momentum on their side, they were unable to get the knockout blow to make it 3-0 in the first. Still, 2-0 was a good lead but not good enough. The momentum seemed to turn on a dime and the Canucks couldn’t muster much of an attack the rest of the game. Antti Niemi was barely tested the rest of the way which allowed the Blackhawks back in it.

With that said, the Canucks lost this game on the power play. It looked terrible tonight, in particular their last three power plays in the second and third period. They had one measly shot in their final three attempts, all of which would have turned the momentum in their favour and would have gone a long way to ensuring a victory. This is especially critical when you are facing a goalie who hasn’t looked great yet in this series in Antti Niemi. To make matters worse, they allowed the Hawks to score shorthanded, evening the game and setting the stage for Kris Versteeg to win it late.

THE GOOD:

It wasn’t all bad for the Canucks on Monday night. First, their start was phenomenal. I’m sure the United Center faithful were shaking in their boots to start the game off. Also, Roberto Luongo looked strong once again, which is a good sign for this Canucks team. They also limited their penalties, giving the Blackhawks only two power plays in the game. Through two periods, the Canucks were in good shape, ahead by a goal and playing fairly even with Chicago. Alex Burrows made one of the smartest plays this season, giving the puck to Ben Eager to draw a too many men on the ice penalty.

The third period in my opinion would have been a lot different had they been better on the power play. If they could have generated a few more chances, even if they didn’t score, that would have gone a long way to shifting the momentum in their favour.

LOOKING AHEAD:

It goes without saying that game three is a big one. Will the Canucks be able to assert some dominance at home as they have most of this season? Will having last change allow the Sedins to free-wheel a little more than they have thus far? We’ll find out on Wednesday night, in what promises to be another nail biter.

Game 5 Recap – Not So Quick

Tonyz Tanti — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 08:23:52 +0000

Game 5 was the first one sided game of this entertaining series. For the first time in the series, Roberto Luongo clearly outplayed Jonathan Quick, who was chased in the second period. For the second game in a row, the Canucks power play equaled the Kings power play, perhaps indicating that this penalty killing jinx is at least close to ending.

While the Kings have silenced Alex Burrows in this series (I believe he must be injured, he hasn’t looked himself at all), they haven’t found an answer for Mikael Samuelsson. Samuelsson had two goals in game 5 and is red hot, netting seven goals already in this series. That ties him with none other than Pavel Bure for the franchise record of most goals in a playoff series.

Encouraging for the Canucks was the play of their defense. Alex Edler continues to be a beast on the back end, with Ehrhoff and Sami Salo also leading the way. The problem in recent weeks has been the play of their bottom three d-men: Kevin Bieksa, Shane O’Brien and Andrew Alberts. While the three of them weren’t superstars by any means, Bieksa looked steady, O’Brien got in a fight and the fans were chanting “Lets Go Alberts!” late in the game. Alberts looked steady defensively, but is still incapable of making an outlet pass, which reminded me of possibly the best tweet in the history of twitter: “Saw Alberts play a bit in Carolina. Hits like a truck. Handles the puck like a truck, too”.

Speaking of O’Brien, he appears to have not learned his lesson yet. I think he’s an underrated player, but giving the #1 motion with his finger after his fight was not the brightest move. If you’re in a one-off game in the regular season I don’t have much of a problem with it, but doing it in a playoff series is showing up the other team and essentially works the same as giving the other team “bulletin board material”. Kings head coach Terry Murray called him a “clown” which was probably a little bit harsh, to which Alain Vigneault responded with “I don’t care” (you got to love Vigneault).

Here’s another example of why you’ve got to love Vigneault:

Now the bad news. The Canucks ran away with game 5 and looked good doing it. I believe a lot of Canuck nation is getting a little cocky after it though and we shouldn’t be surprised if the Kings take game 6 to set-up a dramatic seventh game at GM Place. Teams often rebound from blowouts to win the next game, presumably because the losing team makes a lot of adjustments while the winning team gets a little overconfident. Game 6 will also be played at the Staples Center where the Kings have looked great and the Canucks (save for the 1st period in game 3 and the 3rd period in game 4) have looked overwhelmed. Once again, special teams will be of the utmost importance. If you stop the Kings power play you should win the game.

And now something to keep you entertained until game 6, one of the better Canucks songs I’ve heard in a while (with apologies to Ivan Hrvatska and Ink Operated) :

MacLean-Gate

Tonyz Tanti — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:42:33 +0000

Alain Vigneault is fuming mad at a member of the media and his name is… Ron MacLean?! How weird is that? This, the same man who is beloved so much in this country that when the CBC decided to let him go, that the entire nation rose up and demanded (successfully) that he get whatever contract demand he wanted? A bizarre situation, indeed. For those that missed MacLean’s comments and Vigneault’s rebuttal:

In my mind, Vigneault is more than justified in his criticism of MacLean. Ron MacLean focused on the diving and embellishment that Alex Burrows has been guilty of in the past rather than focus on the real story: did referee Stephane Auger pre-determine penalties against Alex Burrows as a form of retaliation? That’s the real story, and I think most people would find it hard to believe that Burrows would make up such an elaborate story with such conviction.

MacLean attacked the character of Alex Burrows and in my mind they could have easily done the same to Stephane Auger, just as Pierre Lebrun did for ESPN:

During a December 2005 game between the Coyotes and Canadiens in Montreal, Auger handed Doan a 10-minute misconduct penalty after concluding the Phoenix forward had verbally abused an official and made culturally insensitive comments against the referees. Both referees and both linesmen for the game were French-Canadians.

The league conducted an investigation and found the allegations against Doan to be baseless. As a French-Canadian, I’m particularly sensitive to this stuff, but I can tell you, from the conversations I had with Doan, both at the time and since then, I believe the Coyotes captain when he says he did not make ethnic slurs.

In any case, I don’t believe that Ron MacLean necessarily has to run segments for Hockey Night in Canada like some kind of judicial process with representation from all sides, but he has look at the story. Even if Burrows was the biggest diver in the league (he’s not), Auger should not be allowed to make-up interference penalties as a form of revenge.

This brings me to another point. Diving in the NHL: is it a penalty or isn’t it? I wish they could decide. It seems to get called sometimes and ignored other times. And about 90% of the time they call diving, they also call hooking/tripping/etc as well. That’s not the way to get rid of diving. You get rid of diving by calling just the dive. To me, a dive should negate any kind of hook/trip/etc. Do you think Burrows would dive every game if say, every 4th game he received a diving penalty which could potentially hurt his team? Not a chance.

Burrows Beef

Burrows Beef

Tonyz Tanti — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:09:12 +0000

With a pair of goals on Monday against Nashville on top of last week’s NHL number one star of the week honour, Alex Burrows is red hot at the moment. But it’s the controversy that revealed itself on Monday night that is all anyone can talk about. Burrows accused referee Stephane Auger of carrying out a personal vendeta against him, looking to call penalties because Burrows showed up Auger a month ago. Listening to Burrows in his post game interview and looking in his eyes, it’s not likely that he is fabricating this story. If it’s true, the NHL will have a messy situation on its hands. Helping Burrows’ case is the fact that his chat with Auger was caught on camera, although you can’t tell what they are talking about.

Laser-Gate

It seems that the only thing more beloved than those green men at GM Place is the laser pointer guy at GM Place. Well, at least for some. The Calgary Flames aren’t too happy about it. For good reason, I guess. You shouldn’t have to deal with that for that long, but I think some people are starting to exagerate things a little bit. Take a look at the Calgary Flames message board. Here’s a sample of some of the best:

That was not the same laser you use to play with your cat. It has to be considered assault. I don’t care if it was a kid fooling around, an over enthusiastic college kid or somebody’s Grandma, it’s assault and they should be charged for it. Set an example before this gets out of hand.

Not only an ejection but the !%@##+ should be charged for trying to cause bodily harm to another person.

This whole incident appears to be a security issue at GM place.
Now that it has been highlighted, there is no excuse for the owners not to fix it.
If it continues then perhaps a league fine and/or movement of the remainder of the games to a safer venue is in order.

It’s a laser pointer people. It probably won’t appear again, and if it does, the security at GM Place will do a better job of finding the person. It’s also not some kind of retina burning laser or a shark with a laser beam attached to its head. Actually, it’s something more like this:

Wellwood is Terrible and Everyone Loves Him

Tonyz Tanti — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 01:07:37 +0000

How great was it to see Kyle Wellwood score his first goal of the season last night against the Los Angeles Kings? Sure, it was an empty netter, sure he needed two cracks at the empty net, but to have a game where the crowd chanted his name, booed the announcement that his goal earlier in the game would be credited to Tanner Glass and have a standing ovation for a meaningless empty net goal was pretty special. And Kyle Wellwood is a special character for Canucks fans.

He’s amazingly popular considering that it took him almost two months to score a goal this year (check out the jubilation on the Canucks message board) and has a mere 14 points in his last 67 regular season games! Lets face it, he’s been terrible and everyone loves him… including me! The guy is just too damn lovable. Maybe it’s cause he’s a little guy, maybe it’s cause he doesn’t like to workout and stay in shape, maybe it’s cause he uses a wood stick, but it just seems like he’s someone that people can relate to.

Wellwoodmania overshadowed the return to form of Alex Burrows. Burrows had a goal and an assist, was plus two and had seven shots on goal against the Kings last night. This return to form, not surprisingly, has coincided with the return of Daniel Sedin. Nice to see, because if the Canucks want to go deep in the playoffs this year they’ll need a potent top line.

“Welly” also overshadowed the amazing game by Roberto Luongo. He was simply spectacular, and has been very good for a few games in a row now. He hasn’t given up more than two goals in a game since returning from injury and has a .934 SV% in that time. Those are Vezina trophy numbers. Needless to say, the Canucks are at the best when Luongo is on top of his game.

So was the game against the Kings a blip on the radar or a sign that a healthy Canucks lineup will mean chalking up a lot of victories? Probably too soon to tell, especially since they haven’t played a road game since the return of Daniel Sedin. The Canucks still need to prove that they can win consistently on the road to improve their 4-8-0 road record.

Memo to Grabner: Your time is NOW

Tonyz Tanti — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:14:28 +0000

Recently called-up Michael Grabner will make his NHL debut tonight tonight when the Canucks play the Flames. The speedy winger has been thrown right into the fire, playing the club’s chief rival on the top line with Henrik Sedin and Alex Burrows. Grabner will never get a better opportunity to succeed than this to finally prove he’s NHL worthy and he’d better excel or there may not be many chances left for the young Austrian sniper.

Lets review. He was the Canucks’ first pick, 14th overall in the 2006 entry draft. He currently sits as the only forward taken in the first round to have yet to play an NHL game. Players picked behind him include many youngsters already making a significant impact in the NHL: Claude Giroux, Simeon Varlamov, Patrik Berglund, Nick Foligno, Milan Lucic, Steve Mason and Cal Clutterbuck. Last season, he lead the Manitoba Moose in goals, notching 30 in 66 games. He has never been able to translate that success at the NHL level, preseason included. He played in a team high seven preseason games this year, scoring zero goals and one lone assist. Just for some perspective, that put him 20th (20th!) in scoring on the team.

Grabner is now 22 years old, not as young as he used to be, and is getting a chance with a team that has Daniel Sedin, Pavol Demitra and Jannik Hansen out of the lineup for significant periods of time. If he plays anywhere half decently, he should be given a long look in a scoring role. Will he succeed? Don’t bet on it. Personally, I would have liked to see Sergei Shirokov back. Shirokov grossly outplayed Grabner in the preseason and has more points in Manitoba. If Grabner can go from brutal in the preseason last month to good in the regular season, I will be pleasantly surprised.

(A little motivation for Grabner)