Because he would finish the rebuild of our blueline. With Burns, we wouldn't need to mess with anything back there anymore.
#1 - Burns
#2/3 - Klefbom
#2/3 - Larsson
#3/4 - Sekera
#5 with upside - Nurse
#5 with upside - Davidson
Depth with 2nd pair upside - Reinhart
That's why its always Edmonton asking for Burns.
Can you honestly blame us? Burns is a stud and exactly what we are looking for.
No, I can't, which is why I
do not consider what I said to be a dig. It was only Oilers fans who jumped the gun and though I was dissing them. It's just a comment which we all know is true. Nothing more and nothing less.
On a side note, do you even know anything about Edmonton the city? This place is very appealing to many people.
-We made the top 10 in National geographic's best cities
during the summer (link below)
http://globalnews.ca/news/2003203/ed...-summer-trips/
-We are a short drive from a beautiful mountain retreat, great for summer and winter.
-If you are an outdoors person and love wilderness (seems like Burns would be) we are surrounded by forests, great off-roading trails, and unparalleled hunting.
True, it gets cold. But if you don't know anything else about the city don't demean it, because it is actually quite nice. It's as naive as me saying, if you don't like surfing the bay area has nothing to offer. Its just not true.
Trash the team but not the city itself. The bay area is beautiful, so be aware that isn't what I am saying.
But it appeals to a person who enjoys an urban lifestyle which isn't for everyone.
The first bolded is kinda the problem. During the summer, when Burns will be traveling and visiting home, rather than living on a day to day basis like he does during the season.
The second bolded is just pure insanity. I think you're thinking of LA.
Burns does love the wilderness, which is why there isn't any place better to be than the Bay Area. When I was young, I wanted to get out of the Bay because I'd never seen anything different and couldn't appreciate it. Coming back years later and I can truly appreciate it for being the greatest place in the country to live (which is why it's so expensive, but that's not an issue for someone like Burns). The Bay Area has an incredible amount of cultural diversity, there's no better place overall for ethnic food of any kind. There's San Francisco, which is just an incredible city to live near by. There's the beach and the ocean. There's forests, mountains, anything an outdoorsy type would want. Okay, sorry for going on so much (I just really really love the Bay), but this should put into context why these (and other) Anaheim/LA comments really bug me.
Yup. And Kesler loved Anaheim so much that he "settled" for $6.9M to stay there. Hardly a "California discount".
Southern California is trash. Sorry. To those of you who equate the Bay Area to LA/Anaheim, take a step back. Anaheim is just a garbage place, and LA is so overrated. They're hot, smoggy, too much traffic, everything is grey, and overall just really unpleasant places to live in comparison to the San Francisco Bay Area (as can be attested to by everyone I've ever met who grew up in SoCal).
Hell, I might even prefer Edmonton to Anaheim or LA.
Firstly, I respect you as a poster. That said the bolded is nothing but a shot below the belt. Did you forget about McLellan just a season and change ago leaving to Edmonton? I wouldn't doubt that many or even most players would rather play in SJ than Edmonton for a bunch of reasons but Edmonton has a lot going for it as well from a professional standpoint (let's keep city bashing out of this). McDavid, a solid supporting cast, his former coach, a new state of the art arena, etc. Is that enough to lure Burns? Most think that he's quite content right where he is and he may very well be based on a similar thread that I started awhile back. But no one knows this for sure other than Brent and his wife.
I do however think that if it's such a slam dunk that it's a little odd that he hasn't been extended yet. Naturally he could sign after the season like Stamkos or during the season like Byfuglien, but it at least adds a small amount of a possibility that he may test the FA waters.
The writing on the wall was there for McLellan leaving. It was a "mutual" decision, but he was not wanted back. And Edmonton was the best landing spot for the reasons you just listened. Comparing that to Burns' situation seems silly to me.
And it's worth noting, as always, that Burns' career season (by far) came the season as soon as McLellan left. McLellan jerked him around, playing him at forward, giving him a bad 19 year old rookie as a partner (Mirco Mueller, ugh), etc. The reason why so many Sharks fans wished he (Todd) would just keep Burns at forward was because he was just so good there, and aside from the first half a season he was here, Burns just wasn't that good a defenseman under McLellan. Until this season, I was firmly on the Burns-at-forward train because until then, he'd been better at forward than D as a Shark. I'm sure Burns likes McLellan and everything, but I can't imagine he'd jump at the chance to play for him again if he had better options.
As for the contract, I'm not really concerned in the slightest. Two years ago, Thornton and Marleau didn't sign until February. No big deal. Wilson is good with contracts and he won't insult Burns. If Burns wants to be back, Wilson will get it done and he'll be back. If he wants to move on, he'll move on. But I think he wants to be back. I'm not saying it's a slam dunk by any means. I'm just expressing my doubt that Edmonton would be where he would want to go if he didn't want to come back to the Sharks.