He's eerily similar (with a very similar development curve) to Ryan Stanton, who did a very nice low-event job on our 3rd pairing for 2 years before we ran him out of town to prioritize Sbisa and Bartkowski.
Player Discussion Kyle Burroughs
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates, this is just a temporary look. We will continue to work on clearing up these issues for the next few days and restore the site to it's more familiar look, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
Considering that Hamonic isn’t playing at all, that’s pretty faint praise.
Seriously though, if he can be the defensive ying to Rathbone’s yang, he could be a really nice find.
Just to follow up on this, it's his 4th NHL contract. What I was getting at is that this isn't really a "relatively unknown" player in the vein of Tanev. He's been around.
I see your point, Burroughs although barely played, been on a few teams already. While Tanev was signed to a contract from a league no one has ever heard of. Tanev was a true unknown gem of a signing. I was simply saying I've never heard of this local player, until now. I see that he was drafted by the Islanders, had a cup of coffee with Colorado recently, and now he's playing well with the Canucks. Out of curiosity who was the 4th NHL contract may I ask?
Cheers
Tanev was signed out of the NCAA and played in the Frozen Four tourney. Before that he played Junior A in Ontario. Neither of those are leagues no one has ever heard of, but at least he was an undrafted prospect who came out of nowhere due to having been like 3' tall until he was basically past his draft year.
Burroughs played in the WHL, was drafted by the Isles, signed his ELC and an RFA deal with them, and then a UFA deal with the Avs, and then this UFA deal with the Canucks.
super unknown. round 7 pick, 7 nhl games. wouldn't call that "around"
i'd wager >5% of fans knew who he was
either way.. has looked good. he's the anti-juolevi. probably wouldn't have him right now if he was drafted higher. sunk cost fallacy and draft reputation go too far in this league
Prof Scout: “There’s a local kid who may be a good low risk option on the right side, Kyle Burroughs”
Benning: “Like Alex Burrows! he’s a legend in Vancouver!”
Prof Scout: “There’s no relation. Their names are spelled different.”
Benning: “Let’s sign him as I’m sure they are related.”
Prof Scout: “They are not.”
Benning: “Well you know how the saying goes, potato-tomato”
Prof Scout: “That’s not how the saying…nvm”
Benning: “Like Alex Burrows! he’s a legend in Vancouver!”
Prof Scout: “There’s no relation. Their names are spelled different.”
Benning: “Let’s sign him as I’m sure they are related.”
Prof Scout: “They are not.”
Benning: “Well you know how the saying goes, potato-tomato”
Prof Scout: “That’s not how the saying…nvm”
Are people really arguing whether hes obscure or not? Haha
I've honestly liked his game. Dont notice him a lot but he has made some clever offensive plays to support Boner that were great.
That said I've seen him standing there for several goals against too. Hes probably not an NHL guy but hes also not penciled in on the third pairing if all our guys are around. Hamonic, Keeper, etc would likely be ahead of him if they were around.
So all in all hes a good depth kid that can definitely fit in if they need it. We used to have worse players that were actually penciled into our 6 starting D....
I've honestly liked his game. Dont notice him a lot but he has made some clever offensive plays to support Boner that were great.
That said I've seen him standing there for several goals against too. Hes probably not an NHL guy but hes also not penciled in on the third pairing if all our guys are around. Hamonic, Keeper, etc would likely be ahead of him if they were around.
So all in all hes a good depth kid that can definitely fit in if they need it. We used to have worse players that were actually penciled into our 6 starting D....
who needs the Sunday funnies when you’ve got riveting comedy like this on HF Boards!
This conversation was in terms of being a "find" like Tanev, not in terms of howevermany fans knowing who he is. At the time of his acquisition by the Canucks, he had been under control of an NHL team for 8 years, and played major junior hockey before that.
That is not a similar situation to Tanev, who despite not having been signed from a league nobody has heard of as OP claimed, was still a player who was too small to be remotely considered a prospect until basically after his draft year, and was playing in the NHL like 2 years later - less than a year after signing his ELC.
Burroughs has enough games played to be an AHL vet for lineup considerations for crying out loud. If that's not a guy who has been "around," I'm not sure what is.
Last edited:
My guess is no, I think with the Wolanin/Brisebois moves they've prioritized the cerebral puck-mover types.
He's a good guy and a good story, but I'd only want him back at league minimum as an 8D.
My hot take after reading this old thread - I don't think @MS is a big Markus Granlund fan.
Probably not. I like his game but, judging by the recent play and signings of depth - D men Wolanin, Juulsen (recent play, and RFA), Brisebois and their desire to bring Johansson over, I'm wondering whether they're thinking these are their 6 thru 9. They'll probably re-sign Bear and are stuck with OEL.
Hughes - Bear
OEL - Hronek
Wolanin-Myers
Juulsen (RHD)
Brisebois
Johansson (RHD)
Rathbone
It's pretty tight on the right side for depth defensemen.
That's still a weak D core but adding a depth RHD doesn't help. They still need to work on the top 4.
Last edited:
It's relevant - nobody wants a new Burroughs thread!
I also may have missed a Player Discussion thread - the search is still totally wonk sometimes
I'm fine with Burroughs brought back to compete for the #4 RHD spot with Juulsen and whichever other depth guy emerges.
same as long as we strike out on Livingstone or someone of the like. If we get Jake/X then there is no room unless Burroughs decides he's ok with a 2 way and likely demotion to the AHL which i would be happy with but rightly so he wont be.
I think his toughness and ability to stay in the NHL to this point makes it probable that he will want to keep the NHL dream alive even if it means a bottom feeder or a bench spot on a different team vs the minors.
I'm not expecting him back with Johansson coming over and Jet Woo getting near the point of being able to fill in some games and Juulsen already a good option
Rathbone's not long for this organization, IMHO. Myers either... probably... hopefully. And unless we pick up Schenn again, we're going to need a guy who can be a physical force.
Still only have him 6 or 7, at best.
Ad
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
NFC Wild Card Minnesota Vikings vs Los Angeles Rams - Glendale, ArizonaWagers: 8Staked: $8,186.00Event closes- Updated: