Speculation: 2021 Expansion draft

[Gecklund]

The need to trade Burns before losing him for nothing to Seattle. He's worth quite a bit still to a team trying to win a cup. I'll be shocked if he isn't protected in the expansion draft.

What they really need to do is trade with Seattle to leave Burns unprotected.

 

[Cas]

What they really need to do is trade with Seattle to leave Burns unprotected.

Do they even need to do that? Leave Burns exposed and Seattle's options are an aging but good defenseman whose cap hit is much higher than his salary, and either a bad goalie with a bad contract or a bunch of unimpressive prospects.

 

[Gecklund]

Do they even need to do that? Leave Burns exposed and Seattle's options are an aging but good defenseman whose cap hit is much higher than his salary, and either a bad goalie with a bad contract or a bunch of unimpressive prospects.

Burns is still one of the best offensive D in the game. He scored at a 65 point pace on a shitty team least season and was over a PPG the season before.

 

[Cas]

Burns is still one of the best offensive D in the game. He scored at a 65 point pace on a shitty team least season and was over a PPG the season before.

Yes, he is, but I decided to see on the side of further decline over the next year (and beyond). In any case, that description is not meant to be exact.

 

[Barrie22]

Burns is still one of the best offensive D in the game. He scored at a 65 point pace on a shitty team least season and was over a PPG the season before.

But but but one of those 4 years left he might not be the best offensive player but only the 10th best so its not worth it to keep him or get anything for him. He needs to be a cap dump because reasons.

 

[Barrie22]

Yes, he is, but I decided to see on the side of further decline over the next year (and beyond). In any case, that description is not meant to be exact.

What decline has he shown other then a horrible system that neutered his offensive creativity? His skating is still there, his passing is still there, his shot is still there. He personally has not declined as a player, the team and the players around him has.

 

[Gecklund]

Yes, he is, but I decided to see on the side of further decline over the next year (and beyond). In any case, that description is not meant to be exact.

There hasn’t been any part of a decline. No evidence at all. Burns had close to the same amount of goals (4 less in 12 less games) but less assists. The assists are a result of a shitty system and a much worse team. Yes you are right he might decline soon. He also might stay his current level for 4 years.

 

[STL Shark]

But but but one of those 4 years left he might not be the best offensive player but only the 10th best so its not worth it to keep him or get anything for him. He needs to be a cap dump because reasons.

Then show me how to improve the roster with his cap hit, Vlasic's cap hit, and Jones' cap hit on the roster? Also, add in a Hertl extension in two years along with Ferraro not on his ELC with minimal at best cap ceiling increases... It's not that Burns isn't a good player. It's that he controls where he goes, teams don't have cap space to bring him in, and they have another bluechip offensive D-Man in Merkley waiting in the wings. Of all of the big contracts, he is the only one without a NMC for the expansion draft and also the most replaceable internally.

Surely to goodness you can't be this dense to not understand why trading him for assets is virtually impossible in this cap climate with his clause and why not moving any of the big contracts means this team is mired in mediocrity for the rest of time...

 

[WSS11]

Ferraro is exempt as a 2nd year player, correct?

 

[Barrie22]

Then show me how to improve the roster with his cap hit, Vlasic's cap hit, and Jones' cap hit on the roster? Also, add in a Hertl extension in two years along with Ferraro not on his ELC with minimal at best cap ceiling increases... It's not that Burns isn't a good player. It's that he controls where he goes, teams don't have cap space to bring him in, and they have another bluechip offensive D-Man in Merkley waiting in the wings. Of all of the big contracts, he is the only one without a NMC for the expansion draft and also the most replaceable internally.

Surely to goodness you can't be this dense to not understand why trading him for assets is virtually impossible in this cap climate with his clause and why not moving any of the big contracts means this team is mired in mediocrity for the rest of time...

Sorensson, simek, labanc gone. Just cleared the 8 million and kept the team just as good.

And let jones be picked up in the expansion draft. Boom now we are close to 13 million next year.

Add that to the already 10+ million we have already open for next year and we have plenty of space to better the team with out removing one of the best players we have on this team.

 

[seroes]

Anyone not expecting Burns to decline over the next 5 seasons is being incredibly naive I think. That isn't to say he will be a bad player but once that decline starts its going to be harder and harder to trade him, at least without retention. We need help at forward and removing his cap hit would be a major help towards that. Adding to that, if Donato will be for moderate raise next off-season if he works out. The season after that Hertl and Ferraro will need raises. Keeping all 3 of those will be difficult without Burns coming off the books. Forget about adding any significant help. Teams right now are not willing to pay for long term contracts and that will especially be true for aging players like Burns.

I don't even know what a package to take Vlassic looks like. I assume we will have to take a bad contact back and then still pay a significant price. The last couple of years on that contract will be brutal and given his current play he is already overpaid by 2 million (at least).

Losing Burns for nothing may not be ideal but given where we are it will probably end up being the best case scenario we can reasonably hope for.

 

[Gecklund]

Anyone not expecting Burns to decline over the next 5 seasons is being incredibly naive I think. That isn't to say he will be a bad player but once that decline starts its going to be harder and harder to trade him, at least without retention. We need help at forward and removing his cap hit would be a major help towards that. Adding to that, if Donato will be for moderate raise next off-season if he works out. The season after that Hertl and Ferraro will need raises. Keeping all 3 of those will be difficult without Burns coming off the books. Forget about adding any significant help. Teams right now are not willing to pay for long term contracts and that will especially be true for aging players like Burns.

I don't even know what a package to take Vlassic looks like. I assume we will have to take a bad contact back and then still pay a significant price. The last couple of years on that contract will be brutal and given his current play he is already overpaid by 2 million (at least).

Losing Burns for nothing may not be ideal but given where we are it will probably end up being the best case scenario we can reasonably hope for.

No one expects him not to decline. It’s the people saying that he’s already declining. I’d be okay losing Burns but for free? f*** that.

 

[seroes]

No one expects him not to decline. It’s the people saying that he’s already declining. I’d be okay losing Burns but for free? f*** that.

Then who takes him? Which team in this flat cap world has the space and need at right D? Who takes on that contract knowing that he probably will not be worth his cap hit in the last 2 years? Who gives up assets for that? By all means lay something out. Be specific. I would love to get something for him and make us better as a result. I just don't see it.

 

[STL Shark]

Sorensson, simek, labanc gone. Just cleared the 8 million and kept the team just as good.

And let jones be picked up in the expansion draft. Boom now we are close to 13 million next year.

Add that to the already 10+ million we have already open for next year and we have plenty of space to better the team with out removing one of the best players we have on this team.

Lol, yeah Labanc gone makes us just as good. That's hilarious. Good one there.

How many first round picks are you paying to get rid of Jones because you sure as heck know they're not taking him for free? How much of that now saved money are you spending to bring in a new starting goalie? Next year's batch of starters in UFA is terribad so add some more assets into trading for a starting goalie.

I'll entertain your plan though. Your teardown leaves the 2021-22 roster with Kane, Hertl, Couture, Meier, and Kellman at forward, Vlasic, Burns, Karlsson, Ferraro, Middleton, and Merkley on defense, and no goalies. This leaves you $25 million to now bring in 2 goalies, 8 forwards, and a D-Man. Even if 4 of those forwards are at $1 million and Melnichuk is the backup goalie, that still only leaves you $20 million to bring in 4 top 9 forwards and a starting goalie. Good luck doing that given the UFA group next year and the lack of any draft capital since you used it all up to get rid of Jones' contract.

 

[STL Shark]

Then who takes him? Which team in this flat cap world has the space and need at right D? Who takes on that contract knowing that he probably will not be worth his cap hit in the last 2 years? Who gives up assets for that? By all means lay something out. Be specific. I would love to get something for him and make us better as a result. I just don't see it.

And which of those teams would be on his 3 team list of places to be traded? People piss and moan that we have too much money tied up in defense, then piss and moan again when you come up with literally the only plausible solution to alleviate it.

If you're not getting rid of Burns, then you sure as hell better be ready to trade Merkley for forward help then. Can't have it all and if Burns is still here eating up PP time and top 4 minutes (which at $8 million a season he better be), then you're wasting an asset in Merkley. Given the choice of Merkley and Burns for the 4 years following this upcoming season, give me Merkley and give me his contract 10/10 times.

 

[Gecklund]

Then who takes him? Which team in this flat cap world has the space and need at right D? Who takes on that contract knowing that he probably will not be worth his cap hit in the last 2 years? Who gives up assets for that? By all means lay something out. Be specific. I would love to get something for him and make us better as a result. I just don't see it.

Why is it probably he won’t be worth that contract? Based on what EK/Petro got he’s worth more than his 8M. You don’t lose a PPG defenseman for free. You aren’t going to replace what he does with his cap hit.

 

[seroes]

And which of those teams would be on his 3 team list of places to be traded? People piss and moan that we have too much money tied up in defense, then piss and moan again when you come up with literally the only plausible solution to alleviate it.

If you're not getting rid of Burns, then you sure as hell better be ready to trade Merkley for forward help then. Can't have it all and if Burns is still here eating up PP time and top 4 minutes (which at $8 million a season he better be), then you're wasting an asset in Merkley. Given the choice of Merkley and Burns for the 4 years following this upcoming season, give me Merkley and give me his contract 10/10 times.

This, and it will have to be cheap forward( most likely ELC and teams just love giving those guys up) help because our cap situation will not have changed because we are still stuck with long expensive contracts. In addition, all of those cheap forward or forwards will need raises too within 1-2 years. We would have no cap space to pay them and then we will have extremely difficult decisions to make as to who we let go or trade for next to nothing.

 

[Barrie22]

Lol, yeah Labanc gone makes us just as good. That's hilarious. Good one there.

How many first round picks are you paying to get rid of Jones because you sure as heck know they're not taking him for free? How much of that now saved money are you spending to bring in a new starting goalie? Next year's batch of starters in UFA is terribad so add some more assets into trading for a starting goalie.

I'll entertain your plan though. Your teardown leaves the 2021-22 roster with Kane, Hertl, Couture, Meier, and Kellman at forward, Vlasic, Burns, Karlsson, Ferraro, Middleton, and Merkley on defense, and no goalies. This leaves you $25 million to now bring in 2 goalies, 8 forwards, and a D-Man. Even if 4 of those forwards are at $1 million and Melnichuk is the backup goalie, that still only leaves you $20 million to bring in 4 top 9 forwards and a starting goalie. Good luck doing that given the UFA group next year and the lack of any draft capital since you used it all up to get rid of Jones' contract.

Who will seatle take if not for jones? Some D level prospect that has not been able to crack a depth inept sharks team?

Jones will be the only available player that will have any kind of potential to help the seatle team. It won't cost anything and if it does then it will be so minor that it will be worth it.

 

[Barrie22]

And which of those teams would be on his 3 team list of places to be traded? People piss and moan that we have too much money tied up in defense, then piss and moan again when you come up with literally the only plausible solution to alleviate it.

If you're not getting rid of Burns, then you sure as hell better be ready to trade Merkley for forward help then. Can't have it all and if Burns is still here eating up PP time and top 4 minutes (which at $8 million a season he better be), then you're wasting an asset in Merkley. Given the choice of Merkley and Burns for the 4 years following this upcoming season, give me Merkley and give me his contract 10/10 times.

By the time merkely becomes the defenseman his potential could end up being, then burns will be in the last year of his contract or already finished this current contract.

I like merkely and think he will be a good offensive defenseman. But you all are placing him into a top pairing role before he has even played 1 god dang nhl game in his career. Did you all not learn anything from the other defenseman that was rushed to the nhl under 5 years ago?

There is enough room on this team for burns, karlsson, merkely. Let merkely be a rookie and work his way up the roster. Qnd that is if he can even crack the nhl roster this season or next season.

 

[seroes]

Why is it probably he won’t be worth that contract? Based on what EK/Petro got he’s worth more than his 8M. You don’t lose a PPG defenseman for free. You aren’t going to replace what he does with his cap hit.

Petro is worth it now. But the last 2-3 years he won't live up to it. But Vegas gets 4-5 years of a fantastic defenseman and so they are willing to suffer the end of that contract. The difference is we will have already gone through the best years on Burns contract. Any other team won't. Those last 4 years are not a good bet for a team because Burns will likely be in his decline and not be a PPG player.

 

[Barrie22]

Petro is worth it now. But the last 2-3 years he won't live up to it. But Vegas gets 4-5 years of a fantastic defenseman and so they are willing to suffer the end of that contract. The difference is we will have already gone through the best years on Burns contract. Any other team won't. Those last 4 years are not a good bet for a team because Burns will likely be in his decline and not be a PPG player.

Well i will bet he is closer to the 60 point mark at the very end of the contract which will still be worth 8 mil a year.

 

[seroes]

Who will seatle take if not for jones? Some D level prospect that has not been able to crack a depth inept sharks team?

Jones will be the only available player that will have any kind of potential to help the seatle team. It won't cost anything and if it does then it will be so minor that it will be worth it.

I dont want Jones on a league minimum deal right now. Much less his albatross of a deal. He is god awful and a huge reason we were so terrible last year. Some D level prospect won't cost much money nor be an active detriment to their team. Them not taking Jones is a no brainer.

 

[Lebanezer]

Then who takes him? Which team in this flat cap world has the space and need at right D? Who takes on that contract knowing that he probably will not be worth his cap hit in the last 2 years? Who gives up assets for that? By all means lay something out. Be specific. I would love to get something for him and make us better as a result. I just don't see it.

The entire problem with moving Burns is in your post. His age, salary, relative value, and expected decline means that whatever return you receive simply isn't worth what he is to the Sharks now, let alone in 2 years.

On top of all that, (this is meant everyone, not you specifically) Doug Wilson does not build his team through the draft, particularly his core players, unless there's a season that's a blip in his mind. And before you mention Hertl and Meier, remember he almost traded those 2 for T.J. Oshie and Kevin Shattenkirk. He is not going to move out established high level players for futures. Ever. He does not remove players from the core unless he cannot afford to re-sign them. His plan moving forward is to build around Karlsson, Hertl, Meier, Couture, Burns and Kane. If you think any of those guys are going anywhere, you're not paying attention to his tenure as GM.

Ultimately, for any kind of rebuild, we would need a new GM. Doug either doesn't have the support, or isn't willing to go that route. I think in his mind he's going with the safe bet by acquiring established players instead of the relative unknown with futures.

 

[seroes]

Well i will bet he is closer to the 60 point mark at the very end of the contract which will still be worth 8 mil a year.

For the record I disagree and think he will be around the 40-45 point mark in the last 2 years.

But even if you are right that will leave our forward core in the same state it is currently in plus the possibility of decline to age (Couture, kane) or injuries (hertl). Meier probably improves some and I am about 1 season away from saying Labanc is who he is.. Which (as a group) is just not good enough. Especially with raises coming due and the overall cap situation.

 

[STL Shark]

Who will seatle take if not for jones? Some D level prospect that has not been able to crack a depth inept sharks team?

Jones will be the only available player that will have any kind of potential to help the seatle team. It won't cost anything and if it does then it will be so minor that it will be worth it.

They're not just going to take a high priced goalie that has performed like crap for the hell of it and in the process toss a life preserver to a team in their division. They'd take a prospect like Dahlen/True/Gambrell (Gambrell is a from Seattle so he'd fit) or a D-Man like Simek/Middleton and be fine with doing so unless we gave them a large incentive to take Jones off our hands.

Also, Seattle has their goalie locked in already with Allen's extension in Montreal. They have to protect Price with his NMC so Allen gets exposed by MTL and now Seattle has their starting goalie for the first couple of years. No reason to take on bad money for the sake of taking bad money (there is your definition of bad asset management).