GDT: Game #16 • San Jose Sharks @ Chicago Blackhawks • February 22, 2013 • 5:30pm PST

[Led Zappa]

You make it sound that overpaying Burns was the only option. He's not worth the contract, just because a bunch of others are overpaid doesn't mean the Sharks had to. I would only take Burns over 4 on that list, BTW.

No, I'm making it sound realistic and putting it in perspective. You seem to think your opinion on NHL salary's is more legit than what players are actually getting paid.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Time will tell if Burns is worth it or not. But based on the market value at the time Burns contract was signed .. it was a good deal. Hindsight is 20/20 right?

Oh, of course. I am not saying I still wouldn't do the trade based on expectations of Burns performance could be here. But to say he's earned it thus far last year and this year would be incorrect.

 

[Led Zappa]

Oh, of course. I am not saying I still wouldn't do the trade based on expectations of Burns performance could be here. But to say he's earned it thus far last year and this year would be incorrect.

Earned his salary and worth his contract sound a lot different to me. I'll wait a couple years to decide whether it sucked or was "worth" it. He's only played, what, 6 games on this contract lol.

 

[THEALLKNOWING*]

That's dumb, stop looking at scoring stats and watch a hockey game. He is worth his price tag easily. Last year in the second half, he was awesome. He is NOT a defensive liability by any stretch.

STH means season ticket holder. I have been with the Wild since the beginning, so I have seen Burns since his career started. I understand the offensive appeal, but after a while his defensive liabilities make you think its just not worth it.

I also don't think you pay a d-man that kind of money if he doesn't have leadership skills. The Wild used to rotate the As and Cs for years. Burns never had either, that should tellyou something.

 

[19sharks19]

STH means season ticket holder. I have been with the Wild since the beginning, so I have seen Burns since his career started. I understand the offensive appeal, but after a while his defensive liabilities make you think its just not worth it.

I also don't think you pay a d-man that kind of money if he doesn't have leadership skills. The Wild used to rotate the As and Cs for years. Burns never had either, that should tellyou something.

Interesting poll from a few years back on Burns. Interesting read only but man, how time goes by so quickly;

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=579843

 

[sjshrky27]

Question- Didnt the loosing streak start for the Sharks once Burns came back?

 

[Led Zappa]

Question- Didnt the loosing streak start for the Sharks once Burns came back?

Nope. He's only been back 6 games I think and wasn't iced for one of those. We've actually won one of those games.

 

[tHeExIsTeNtIaLiSt]

At this point I consider off days as wins...Just trying my best to see the glass as half full....

 

[Alwalys]

You make it sound that overpaying Burns was the only option. He's not worth the contract, just because a bunch of others are overpaid doesn't mean the Sharks had to. I would only take Burns over 4 on that list, BTW.

How many of the others could actually have been had? You can't look at a list that includes a lot of homegrown talent that never hit the market and say oh well those players would have been better choices. They were never choices to begin with. On the open market half of those guys are worth way more.

Burns is absolutely the best we could have asked for.

 

[Led Zappa]

Question- Didnt the loosing streak start for the Sharks once Burns came back?

Hm...........

The wild card in what may happen next — if anything — is the ownership change that, curiously enough, coincided with the start of the Sharks’ current slide.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks...s-on-the-hot-seat-players-coach-gm/#more-9115

 

[Alwalys]

For all the line combinations Tmac has tried, I wonder why Havlat on the top line has never really been one of them? It's been a few shifts at most. I mean the guy was brought in to replace Heatley, and sure he's not as much of a goalscorer as Heatley was, but with Pavelski routinely getting run over defensively (I know this is nowhere near fair to him), maybe it's time to at least give it a fair shake.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

How many of the others could actually have been had? You can't look at a list that includes a lot of homegrown talent that never hit the market and say oh well those players would have been better choices. They were never choices to begin with. On the open market half of those guys are worth way more.

Burns is absolutely the best we could have asked for.

Again, I am not saying I still wouldn't make the trade. Lotta time left.

 

[Alwalys]

Again, I am not saying I still wouldn't make the trade. Lotta time left.

Well, that's a backpedal. You condemned his value based on the few games he has played this season coming off major injury, but now say well the jury is still out.

This early in a contract, the potential is a large part of what the value is. The important thing coming off injury is to see that the player still has his physical abilities, which so far it looks like Burns has. The mental part and conditioning can (and damn well better) come back but if he were permanently hobbled from the injury, then you could say unequivocably he is not worth it. But that's really the only situation.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Well, that's a backpedal. You condemned his value based on the few games he has played this season coming off major injury, but now say well the jury is still out.

No, it's not.

He's not earned it thus far. But the guys he was traded for hasn't earned theirs either.

Thus, both are correct. You can't judge the trade this early. But both can be true, neither side got the value they expected.

 

[19sharks19]

Hm...........



http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks...s-on-the-hot-seat-players-coach-gm/#more-9115

Great write up and spot on.

 

[do0glas]

You make puck moving or skating dmen more ineffective when you play 100% pucks deep. They need the freedom and the team needs the confidence/coach support to carry the puck over the blue line. Right now we are lucky if we get it to burns or Boyle on the point. Murray and vlasic get it more often (which screams tactic to me). I'd let vlasic shoot more often than not.

 

[Alwalys]

No, it's not.

He's not earned it thus far.

No player earns a fairly large long-term contract in 6 games, let alone off of major injury. But even if he was PPG you could not say he earned his contract, you simply do not know how the rest of it will pan out. It's way too early to even determine anything about this season, it's ridiculous to extrapolate that to Burns' contract.

This is just not an objective standard.

 

[sjshrky27]

looks like Clowe is out tonight because of last night?

 

[Juxtaposer]

I'm not as down as most people are on the team but I'm starting to think some of these players just need a change of scenery. If this tailspin continues the only logical thing would be Mclellan getting axed and then some of the top six being moved out.

I don't want it to happen but it seems like this team might need a step on your balls coach instead of two buddy player oriented coaches.

I would of have had more respect for this team if someone got suspended for responding to what Shaw did. Kinda reminds me of the Bruce Boudreau speech on 24/7.

Happy?