[Trade] SJS trade Burns (33% retained), Pederson to CAR for cond 3rd, Makiniemi, Lorentz

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Brent Burns at 37 years old for 3x5.33... it's okay. It's a bit risky. The Canes do need more goals, and Burns does generate goals for himself and others.

[OptimalTates]

I guess you have to assume that the signing bonus was paid off at UFA and not July 1st? If signing bonus was already paid this is laughably bad for the Sharks, Carolina would be getting a defender who just scored 54 points for the equivalent of 2.8M/year for three years.

[OptimalTates]

If Carolina pays him 2M this year, 3.33M next year, then pays (2/3) of his signing bonus for 1.333M before sending him to like Arizona in that third year where he's only due 2M (let's say taking back a one-way contract in the process), then they get him for 3.33M/year for 2 years in actual salary. Giving up only some conditional third in the process.

The wheels can fall off anytime for a player of Burns age, but he hasn't missed any of his last 679 games (only behind Kessel). He put up 54 points last year, even if he puts up 45 this year, 40 next, it's a massive win for Carolina in my opinion.

More worrisome for the Sharks is that they retained salary and still got nothing for a player who doesn't have injury problems, is still playing at a high level and only has 3 years left. What does that mean for Karlsson and obviously Vlassic?

[Roof-Daddy]

I had to bump this thread

What a friggin steal this trade was for Carolina.

Burns had 18 goals and 61 points, +19 playing 23 minutes per night. At 38 he's still a #1 defenseman and the Canes got him for two AHLers and a 3rd round pick....and they got San Jose to retain 33% on the deal so he's only rocking a $5.28million cap hit.

He's also leading their D in scoring and ice time as he helps the Canes to the conference finals.

I guess we'll see how the next two seasons go, but wow. Absolutely schooled the Sharks in this trade.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I had to bump this thread

What a friggin steal this trade was for Carolina.

Burns had 18 goals and 61 points, +19 playing 23 minutes per night. At 38 he's still a #1 defenseman and the Canes got him for two AHLers and a 3rd round pick....and they got San Jose to retain 33% on the deal so he's only rocking a $5.28million cap hit.

He's also leading their D in scoring and ice time as he helps the Canes to the conference finals.

I guess we'll see how the next two seasons go, but wow. Absolutely schooled the Sharks in this trade.

Completely agree. Wasn’t this Grier’s first move? If you’re rebuilding the Sharks, you have to get actual building blocks in return. This was an absolute waste of a trade for San Jose.

[Erick Estrada]

Sharks wanted to move out their big contracts and the return likely represents the best they could get without taking a big contract back in return. It’s an astute move for Carolina but they are one of the few contending window teams that could take on his contract without shedding salary. Arguably the best team when it comes to salary cap management.

[MrMike]

Didn’t Burns have a NMC as well? Probably would only leave San Jose for one or two contenders as well.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Sharks wanted to move out their big contracts and the return likely represents the best they could get without taking a big contract back in return. It’s an astute move for Carolina but they are one of the few contending window teams that could take on his contract without shedding salary. Arguably the best team when it comes to salary cap management.

I don’t even think it’s arguable.

They’re basically the only franchise who even tries - everyone else seems to approach the cap like “#### it, I’ll be fired by the time this becomes a problem anyway”, ignoring the possibility that better cap management might lead to them keeping their job longer.

Can you imagine how much better off this team would’ve been simply by not doing the Brouwer and Neal contracts.

Literally would’ve let them keep Tkachuk.

[Huntingwhale]

WTF I obviously missed this trade. Had no idea BB was a 'Canes, let alone putting up the points he is at age 38. Crazy.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I don’t even think it’s arguable.

They’re basically the only franchise who even tries - everyone else seems to approach the cap like “#### it, I’ll be fired by the time this becomes a problem anyway”, ignoring the possibility that better cap management might lead to them keeping their job longer.

Can you imagine how much better off this team would’ve been simply by not doing the Brouwer and Neal contracts.

Literally would’ve let them keep Tkachuk.

Be quiet

[LiquidX]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Literally would’ve let them keep Tkachuk.

Pretty sure money was not the issue in keeping Tkachuk.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I had to bump this thread

What a friggin steal this trade was for Carolina.

Burns had 18 goals and 61 points, +19 playing 23 minutes per night. At 38 he's still a #1 defenseman and the Canes got him for two AHLers and a 3rd round pick....and they got San Jose to retain 33% on the deal so he's only rocking a $5.28million cap hit.

He's also leading their D in scoring and ice time as he helps the Canes to the conference finals.

I guess we'll see how the next two seasons go, but wow. Absolutely schooled the Sharks in this trade.

I was thinking about the Sharks blowing it up

Even though they just let him walk as a UFA, it has to sting the Sharks seeing Joe Pavelski still playing point per game hockey, and also in the final four

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I was thinking about the Sharks blowing it up

Even though they just let him walk as a UFA, it has to sting the Sharks seeing Joe Pavelski still playing point per game hockey, and also in the final four

What an awful trade bringing Karlsson was at the end of their window, but it was their other contracts that killed them. I still can’t believe they extended Hertl.

[Macho0978]

Great trade by the Canes and maybe the Sharks could have been patient, but I do believe Karlsson 100-point season is partly due to not having to share the PP with Burns. Sometimes this is the price you pay to get out of being stuck in the middle too. With Burns and Pavelski, they aren't drafting 4th overall.

If they move Karlsson in the next year and get a decent return, they are turning a bad situation that didn't look fixable for 5+ years into a great situation in 2 years. Once some of buyouts and retained salaries come off the book in the next 2-3 years, they could be a very good young team.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by LiquidX

Pretty sure money was not the issue in keeping Tkachuk.

Flames signed Tkachuk to his 3y extension in September 2019.

The year earlier, they had to go and give James Neal $5.75M a season, and thus didn’t have cap space to give Matthew eight years.

Plus Brouwer’s buyout money.

$7M extra, only a bit of which would’ve payed for Matthew’s raise.

Sign me up for a potato of a GM - the potato would’ve gotten this done.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Flames signed Tkachuk to his 3y extension in September 2019.

The year earlier, they had to go and give James Neal $5.75M a season, and thus didn’t have cap space to give Matthew eight years.

Plus Brouwer’s buyout money.

$7M extra, only a bit of which would’ve payed for Matthew’s raise.

Sign me up for a potato of a GM - the potato would’ve gotten this done.

8 years was absolutely never happening. Look at the RFA deals that summer. 6 years is most likely.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

8 years was absolutely never happening. Look at the RFA deals that summer. 6 years is most likely.

Then we would have had him for three extra years.

[Major Major]

If the flames clear some cap, let's say trade Lindholm and Toffoli, could the flames bring in Logan Couture on a Burns style bargain? 8 million for 4 more years, signed until he's 38.

[the-rasta-masta]

Originally Posted by Major Major

If the flames clear some cap, let's say trade Lindholm and Toffoli, could the flames bring in Logan Couture on a Burns style bargain? 8 million for 4 more years, signed until he's 38.

I don’t understand the thought process behind that at all. Getting rid of Lindholm and Toffolli would indicate some form of retool or rebuild direction, and then bring in an even older player?

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

I don’t understand the thought process behind that at all. Getting rid of Lindholm and Toffolli would indicate some form of retool or rebuild direction, and then bring in an even older player?

Fit with Huberdeau and Kadri