Confirmed Signing with Link: [SJS] Brent Burns (8 Years, ~8M AAV)

HookKing

Registered User
Dec 12, 2008
8,795
2,580
Its the kind of deal you make in a win now mode. I tip my cap to the Sharks. If you don't win a cup soon however, the knives will be out.
 

DonskoiDonscored

Registered User
Oct 12, 2013
18,641
9
Sorry dude he's right that contract sucks. Prepare for the basement for a few seasons on the back end of that contract

Yea we're going to be rebuilding for years 4-7/8.

If we're rebuilding, why does the cap hit matter? What's important is that we have him signed at a steal of a deal for the next few years.

It's like people on this board would rather ditch a 31 year old Norris finalist than pay him money. Ludicrous.

Also, people on here have been saying that we were done since the moment Thornton/Marleau turned 30. It means nothing at this point.
 

CrypTic

Registered User
Oct 2, 2013
5,069
81
Yea we're going to be rebuilding for years 4-7/8.

If we're rebuilding, why does the cap hit matter? What's important is that we have him signed at a steal of a deal for the next few years.

Cap hit always matters. If nothing else, having little cap on your books allows your team to take on bad contracts from other teams in exchange for good prospects/picks. You have more flexibility with lower cap. That's always important when contemplating trades. You also want your players to have a reasonable cap hit bc it makes trading them easier (which is esp important since Burns's contract is buyout proof).

I agree that cap hit isn't as important to a rebuilding team as to a contending one but it's always important IMO. It's not the end of the world like it might be with a contending team but it is a negative.
 

Alwalys

Phu m.
May 19, 2010
25,894
6,140
Sorry dude he's right that contract sucks. Prepare for the basement for a few seasons on the back end of that contract

Point is not to care by then.

Folks this is what it looks like to keep a stacked roster together for years. Ain't a walk in the park.
 

izzy

go
Apr 29, 2012
86,866
18,825
Nova Scotia
San Jose might not even need a full rebuild honestly, maybe a bit of a retool. Couture is only 27, so he'll be good for the length of the contract. Hertl, Donskoi, and Nieto (hopefully he finds his game) are still 24 and under.

Mueller should be ready soon, and they had a heavy 2014 draft. It's unlikely that Bergman, Rod, and Chartier don't become NHLers. I seriously doubt Labanc doesn't become a top 6 player and probably a top liner. He's just so good. They also got Goldobin in that draft and he's been very impressive.

Who knows about Meier, he's pretty good but the future would definitely look bright with Werenski.

I'm not a San Jose fan, but this team has a pretty solid under the radar prospect pool.
 

Pavelski2112

Bold as Boognish
Dec 15, 2011
14,774
9,777
San Jose, California
San Jose might not even need a full rebuild honestly, maybe a bit of a retool. Couture is only 27, so he'll be good for the length of the contract. Hertl, Donskoi, and Nieto (hopefully he finds his game) are still 24 and under.

Mueller should be ready soon, and they had a heavy 2014 draft. It's unlikely that Bergman, Rod, and Chartier don't become NHLers. I seriously doubt Labanc doesn't become a top 6 player and probably a top liner. He's just so good. They also got Goldobin in that draft and he's been very impressive.

Who knows about Meier, he's pretty good but the future would definitely look bright with Werenski.

I'm not a San Jose fan, but this team has a pretty solid under the radar prospect pool.

Yes, like we did two years ago.

Also, Mueller is pretty much a bust, but we already have better guys in the pipeline already.
 

Hawksfan2828

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
13,437
20
Libertyville, IL
Its the kind of deal you make in a win now mode. I tip my cap to the Sharks. If you don't win a cup soon however, the knives will be out.

As a Hawks fan I understand risk vs reward but contracts like this can really handcuff teams down the road.

But, yea I understand it.

You know at the same time tho if Burns is still playing at 37+ the contract will probably be terrible unless he's one of those guys like Jagr that can be a key member of a team until he's 90.

On the bright side tho at least it's not one of those long term 35+ contracts.
 

hohosaregood

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
33,070
13,697
Yes, like we did two years ago.

Also, Mueller is pretty much a bust, but we already have better guys in the pipeline already.

And most of our defense is in their prime as is. So even if we don't get a defensive prospect to hit for like 3 years, we'll still be okay.
 

Hawksfan2828

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
13,437
20
Libertyville, IL
I think a better deal would have been 9 per for 6 years just to rid of the 2 extra years because those last 2 years are really going to bite the Sharks in the ass.

Well that would have been my offer - that or something like 10 for 4 years.

Wow, Burns really made out like a bandit in this deal.
 

CrypTic

Registered User
Oct 2, 2013
5,069
81
San Jose might not even need a full rebuild honestly, maybe a bit of a retool. Couture is only 27, so he'll be good for the length of the contract. Hertl, Donskoi, and Nieto (hopefully he finds his game) are still 24 and under.

Mueller should be ready soon, and they had a heavy 2014 draft. It's unlikely that Bergman, Rod, and Chartier don't become NHLers. I seriously doubt Labanc doesn't become a top 6 player and probably a top liner. He's just so good. They also got Goldobin in that draft and he's been very impressive.

Who knows about Meier, he's pretty good but the future would definitely look bright with Werenski.

I'm not a San Jose fan, but this team has a pretty solid under the radar prospect pool.

We will probably retool instead of doing a tear down. I don't think the owner wants a full rebuild. That is the main reason I'm not as negative about Burns's contract as some non-Sharks' fans. Otherwise, I'd be worried that it might be tough to trade Burns if he declines given his new contract. And having Burns, if he does continue to be excellent, could hurt a full-blown, tear down rebuild.

Werenski would have been great. Too bad that we lost one of the tie-breakers and drafted after Columbus. I'm not sure about Mueller but we have some decent d-men in the pipeline. Not sure any are top-pairing, tho. Roy looks very good when he's not injured but he's injured a lot.

Meier looks good in the AHL. He might have made the Sharks at the beginning of the season if he hadn't gotten mono. Goldobin is progressing well. A few other players might become NHLers. We mainly need high-end talent after Thornton, Pavs, and Burns decline. I'm not sure how we'll get that without tanking but I doubt that was ever contemplated in any event.
 

Michel Beauchamp

Canadiens' fan since 1958
Mar 17, 2008
23,276
3,386
Laval, Qc
Very happy with this this deal! Contract is front-loaded -- can trade him to a team that's trying to hit the cap in 5 years. It's about time the sharks took advantage of some silly CBA contract rules.

One good thing about this contract is not only that it's front-loaded.

The other attractive aspect for a cap floor team is the signing bonus to be paid on July 1st of each season.

On the 8th year, for example, the salary is $5M, including a $2M signing bonus.

A team acquiring him on July 2nd or thereafter, would only need to spend $3M to get $8M on the cap.

Eugene Melnyk is already salivating...
 

Michel Beauchamp

Canadiens' fan since 1958
Mar 17, 2008
23,276
3,386
Laval, Qc
No, in 6 when they renegotiate the CBA that cause this mess. All this term, albatross, mess, trouble, blah, blah will end with a buyout at the perfect point in the contract, Signing those Kovy deals thinking you were smart gettin around the cap was dumb. This is brilliance of forethought. A gamble, but a good one.

Can anyone tell me why they believe that Burns won't/can't be bought out after the next cba? Their last solution to the their mess was buyouts, and I see no reason to think why they wouldn't fall back on that again.

Great hockey fan...

Hoping for strike/lockout so that there would be compliance buyouts...
 

Michel Beauchamp

Canadiens' fan since 1958
Mar 17, 2008
23,276
3,386
Laval, Qc
Which team currently could/would do that? You can't give away a $3m player now. Trades? What's a trade daddy? Plus there's no way to eat salary to boot. It'd be an $8m bottom 6 guy. GL

As shown above, he would be a $3M bottom pairing dman or bottom 6 forward counting for $8M against the cap.
 

krt88

Registered User
Jun 19, 2002
3,258
1
Fayetteville, NC
cybionscape.com
Love the player but hate the deal overall.

Now if it was 8 years 52m or 6.5 average I'd gave issues especially since you could make the last couple years at 4m per, easier buyout. But is the guy really gonna 8m good at 37/38 years old. Seems unlikely.

I feel 6 years 48m would have been better but if the Sharks were willing to tack on that extra 16m, more power to em! Enjoy the extra cash Beardman.

Seems like this could be a recapture penalty nightmare in about 7 years.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
71,559
15,230
Folsom
Love the player but hate the deal overall.

Now if it was 8 years 52m or 6.5 average I'd gave issues especially since you could make the last couple years at 4m per, easier buyout. But is the guy really gonna 8m good at 37/38 years old. Seems unlikely.

I feel 6 years 48m would have been better but if the Sharks were willing to tack on that extra 16m, more power to em! Enjoy the extra cash Beardman.

Seems like this could be a recapture penalty nightmare in about 7 years.

Cap recapture doesn't apply here.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad