HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Detroit Red Wings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   OT: Sharks extend Burns for 5 years (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=961577)

Ricelund 08-01-2011 10:01 AM

Sharks extend Burns for 5 years
 
From Dan Rosen:

Quote:

Sharks announce they've signed Brent Burns to a 5-year contract extension.

Shoalzie 08-01-2011 10:05 AM

Only interested in his cap hit for the purpose of Kronner having to re-sign.

zombi 08-01-2011 10:10 AM

Doesn't he have a history of concussions?

Hopefully this doesn't blow up in their faces if he goes down with an injury.

ProPAIN 08-01-2011 10:16 AM

I'm also interested in seeing what the cap hit is. He hasn't even played a game for them and they are re-signing him for 5 years? Couldn't they at least wait until mid-season?

Filppula 08-01-2011 10:18 AM

Freaking SUCKS. Majorly sucks.

Heaton 08-01-2011 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Filppula (Post 35562045)
Freaking SUCKS. Majorly sucks.

You thought SJ wouldn't re-sign him?

Filppula 08-01-2011 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heaton (Post 35562263)
You thought SJ wouldn't re-sign him?

Deep down I knew they would, but he was always the one I really wanted. :(

Ricelund 08-01-2011 10:30 AM

Deal is for five years at $5.75m per. Not bad at all.

HockeyinHD 08-01-2011 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProPAIN (Post 35562001)
I'm also interested in seeing what the cap hit is. He hasn't even played a game for them and they are re-signing him for 5 years? Couldn't they at least wait until mid-season?

SJ's modus operandi is 3-6 year deals at current market rates for their top players. Thornton (3 years @ 21), Marleau (4 @27.6), Boyle (6 @ 40), Niemi (4 @ 15.2).

I'd guess it's going to be 5 years for 32-35 mil. SJ doesn't push for discounts.

Edit: At 5 at 5.75 per, that's a good signing for them.

And by the way, does Wiz at 5.5 forever still look like a good option now that we've seen a much better player sign for 5.75 on a much shorter term? Didn't think so.

CloneHakanPlease* 08-01-2011 10:42 AM

Bet Babcock is happy.:sarcasm:

RedWingsNow* 08-01-2011 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProPAIN (Post 35562001)
I'm also interested in seeing what the cap hit is. He hasn't even played a game for them and they are re-signing him for 5 years? Couldn't they at least wait until mid-season?

Good chance, with SJ's system, he's near career highs by January.

RedWingsNow* 08-01-2011 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heaton (Post 35562263)
You thought SJ wouldn't re-sign him?

A lot of the Ken Holland apologists were trying to make this deal look bad by suggestion the Sharks wouldn't sign him.

RedWingsNow* 08-01-2011 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HockeyinHD (Post 35562365)
SJ's modus operandi is 3-6 year deals at current market rates for their top players. Thornton (3 years @ 21), Marleau (4 @27.6), Boyle (6 @ 40), Niemi (4 @ 15.2).

I'd guess it's going to be 5 years for 32-35 mil. SJ doesn't push for discounts.

Edit: At 5 at 5.75 per, that's a good signing for them.

And by the way, does Wiz at 5.5 forever still look like a good option now that we've seen a much better player sign for 5.75 on a much shorter term? Didn't think so.

Who are all these people who think Wiz was a good option at that price?

Heaton 08-01-2011 10:52 AM

18 goals and 48 points by January?

ArGarBarGar 08-01-2011 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heaton (Post 35562981)
18 goals and 48 points by January?

Bob is silly like that.

HockeyinHD 08-01-2011 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 35562937)
Who are all these people who think Wiz was a good option at that price?

The ones criticizing Holland for not signing him.

HockeyinHD 08-01-2011 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 35562909)
A lot of the Ken Holland apologists were trying to make this deal look bad by suggestion the Sharks wouldn't sign him.

:laugh:

No, people were just pointing out that trading assets to get Burns was riskier than trading assets for a player already under contract, since Burns a) has to be re-signed and b) that contract will impact the teams ability to keep players moving forward.

Really, that's why the Sharks moved Heatley and Seto and replaced them with Havlat. Salary dump to provide tagging space to sign Burns. There was a linkage to those two deals most ignored.

Even still, SJ is at just over 52 million against the cap next year... with 12 of 23 possible spots filled. If Couture gets a 3-4+ mil a year deal (which he will if he's anywhere close to as good as he was last year), then you're talking about being at 55-56+ with 13 of 23 signed.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that kind of roster planning, of course. Detroit was cap crushed for quite a few years there post Zetterberg's RFA status. But it does tend to make a team less flexible. So, if this current composition of the Sharks is less than successful it will be difficult to shift the team on the fly without stepping back a bit.

RedWingsNow* 08-01-2011 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heaton (Post 35562981)
18 goals and 48 points by January?

I think he can be near his career totals by January. Maybe not goals... But points.

RedWingsNow* 08-01-2011 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HockeyinHD (Post 35563777)
:laugh:

No, people were just pointing out that trading assets to get Burns was riskier than trading assets for a player already under contract, since Burns a) has to be re-signed and b) that contract will impact the teams ability to keep players moving forward..

I don't recall what *YOU* said, but i remember Poker and Pucks and a few others saying this could blow up in SJ's face because Burns might walk.

Disaster averted.

RedWingsNow* 08-01-2011 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HockeyinHD (Post 35563571)
The ones criticizing Holland for not signing him.

I honestly don't remember many people critical of Holland for not signing Wiz not at the price Montreal signed him for.

crashman 08-01-2011 11:58 AM

Bummer.

HockeyinHD 08-01-2011 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 35564463)
I don't recall what *YOU* said, but i remember Poker and Pucks and a few others saying this could blow up in SJ's face because Burns might walk.

Disaster averted.

So you're saying it couldn't have blown up in SJ's face because Burns was metaphysically certain to sign there? If you are, that's silly.

If you're not, then why should people pointing out that such a thing was a possibility be a reason to label them 'Holland apologists'?

HockeyinHD 08-01-2011 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 35564495)
I honestly don't remember many people critical of Holland for not signing Wiz — not at the price Montreal signed him for.

Heh. Yeah, that was part of the charm of the criticisms. Holland was criticized for not signing guys who signed elsewhere for more than pretty much anybody here wanted to sign them for, or for not trading for players who were acquired with a deal larger than pretty much anybody here would have been willing to part with.

Then, when he leaves himself vast room to make subsequent moves, people complain that the offseason was a bad one because he didn't get guys he shouldn't have gotten or traded for guys he shouldn't have traded for, mostly because they don't believe Holland is going to be an aggressive trade deadline player even though pretty much every time Holland's had the financial freedom to make a deadline move he's made a significant one.

As though the moves SJ has made aren't fraught with at least as much risk (if not more) than Holland's more value-focused approach. Havlat and Burns are not exactly Cal Ripken Jr's on skates. If either or both end up being as brittle as they've demonstrated at times over the years, that team is in real trouble immediately.

Different approaches.

Fugu 08-01-2011 02:01 PM

I just remember Babcock really being pissed off.

And yes, he's probably way beyond pissed off at this point.

Heaton 08-01-2011 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fugu (Post 35570027)
I just remember Babcock really being pissed off.

And yes, he's probably way beyond pissed off at this point.

I really wish they could've elaborated on that too. Since we really have no idea for all the reasons he was pissed off besides the fact that Burns went to SJ.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.