HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Notices

What would it take to get Burns in SJ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-28-2010, 01:15 AM
  #1
sweHockeypunk21
Registered User
 
sweHockeypunk21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CALI
Country: Sweden
Posts: 882
vCash: 500
What would it take to get Burns in SJ?

The Sharks would be willing to trade anything excluding their top 6, Boyle and Vlasic. They just need to add a top-4 defensman.

Griess would be included, as you guys are looking for a back-up (correct me if I am wrong). Mitchell is expendable, and I would give up younger players like Mcginn and picks for him.

I would propose:
To MIN:
Mitchell
Griess
Huskins (If MIN wants him, otherwise we'd probably dump him for cap room)
1rst/2nd round pick 10

To SJ:
Burns

Our D would look like...
Boyle-Murray
Vlasic-Burns
Wallin-Demers

sweHockeypunk21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:21 AM
  #2
avs1986
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweHockeypunk21 View Post

Griess would be included, as you guys are looking for a back-up (correct me if I am wrong). Mitchell is expendable, and I would give up younger players like Mcginn and picks for him.
Nope, they are happy with Khudobin

avs1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:27 AM
  #3
sweHockeypunk21
Registered User
 
sweHockeypunk21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CALI
Country: Sweden
Posts: 882
vCash: 500
http://www.startribune.com/sports/wi...tml?page=2&c=y

Quote:
"Thursday we get on the plane and Anton's either coming or going because once we get there it's pretty hard to airlift a guy in."

Harding's injury has forced the Wild to contemplate whether they have to go outside the organization for a suitable backup goalie, such as Jose Theodore or Vesa Toskala.

"We're going to have some meetings tomorrow [Monday] and obviously Theodore's available, Toskala's available," Fletcher said. "I've had calls from several general managers who have a third goalie they'd like to move, and in some cases a second goalie they'd like to move because they've got a young guy they'd rather put on the team, so I would say there's a pool of seven or eight guys that are available."
Is where I sparked the idea of swapping Griess, but do you have any other top-4 defensman the Sharks might be interested in? Burns would be ideal IMO though. I see why you guys don't want to trade him.

sweHockeypunk21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:32 AM
  #4
pbunder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 430
vCash: 50
Our D is even thinner than San Jose atm. Dunno that Burns is going to even be looked at until we see how he's progressing this season.

pbunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 02:00 AM
  #5
Generic User
Dynamic as they come
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 6,567
vCash: 500
Personally, no. You're offering bits and pieces for one of the most important pieces of this team. Burns won't be traded unless it's for a top 6 forward and (maybe) then some. This team has plenty of depth when it comes to 3rd/4th liners and bottom 4-pairing D-men. Quality > Quantity.

Generic User is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 02:10 AM
  #6
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweHockeypunk21 View Post
The Sharks would be willing to trade anything excluding their top 6, Boyle and Vlasic. They just need to add a top-4 defensman.

Griess would be included, as you guys are looking for a back-up (correct me if I am wrong). Mitchell is expendable, and I would give up younger players like Mcginn and picks for him.

I would propose:
To MIN:
Mitchell
Griess
Huskins (If MIN wants him, otherwise we'd probably dump him for cap room)
1rst/2nd round pick 10

To SJ:
Burns

Our D would look like...
Boyle-Murray
Vlasic-Burns
Wallin-Demers
And our D would look like this:

__________________
Blog: First Round Bust: A Cast of Thousands celebrating a rather dodgy track record of Minnesota Wild Drafting.

"Will beats skill when skill doesn't have enough will."
-Doug Woog
1974 1976 1979 2002 2003 2014?
GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 03:37 AM
  #7
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,270
vCash: 500
Couture and a 2nd

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 03:44 AM
  #8
melinko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 3,742
vCash: 2551
Any Minnesotans on the sharks roster?

melinko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 04:00 AM
  #9
Howe Elbows 9
Registered User
 
Howe Elbows 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gävle, Sweden
Posts: 2,524
vCash: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by melinko View Post
Any Minnesotans on the sharks roster?
Not in the NHL, but Stalock is viewed as the top goalie prospect and Braun will also be in Worcester this year.

Howe Elbows 9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 07:23 AM
  #10
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,821
vCash: 500
So let me get this straight, you are asking for another team's best defender, and your trade is built on a back-up goaltender and, in your words, an "expendable" forward?

Yeah, Wild say Hell no.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 08:49 AM
  #11
mnwildgophers
Registered User
 
mnwildgophers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,497
vCash: 500
We'd be looking for guys in your top 6, or either a combination of McGinn, Couture, and picks. If we are going for swapping Greiss, I'd think it would just be picks, but I don't think they should be trading more picks away. So, Burns isn't moving unless we get a forward similar to his talent/potential, or has already eclipsed that.

I'd think we may think about trading for Greiss, but I'd prefer just picking up a goalie via FA.

mnwildgophers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 09:04 AM
  #12
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweHockeypunk21 View Post
The Sharks would be willing to trade anything excluding their top 6, Boyle and Vlasic.
This is where I stopped reading.

Honestly, for the life of me, I can't begin to understand some people's rational. Especially when it comes to trades for the their own team. Why would any team take multiple complimentary (at best) pieces for one of their young, impact players, with tremendous upside?

What if we proposed the same for a player like Pavelski or the like? Probably wouldn't end so well either.

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 09:34 AM
  #13
Circulartheory
@danccchan
 
Circulartheory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,880
vCash: 500
Setoguchi.

Circulartheory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 12:36 PM
  #14
WildisLaw
Just win, baby
 
WildisLaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Napa Valley, Cali
Country: United States
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 50
Burns for Seto and Greiss

WildisLaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 12:46 PM
  #15
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,422
vCash: 500
Deadline deal:

CHI receives: Burns, Brunette

MIN receives: Leddy/Connelly, Stalberg, Brouwer, Richards/Toivenen, and a 1st

Too high, too low?

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:02 PM
  #16
countrygentleman
John Frusciante
 
countrygentleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
CHI receives: Burns, Brunette

MIN receives: Leddy/Connelly, Stalberg, Brouwer, Richards/Toivenen, and a 1st

Too high, too low?
Yes. Give us back Leddy.

countrygentleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:09 PM
  #17
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygentleman View Post
Yes. Give us back Leddy.
Burns has a good cap hit, so we could afford him for later on. I guess you could have Leddy back. Now, is that too high of an offer? I might say a little high, don't you think?

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:11 PM
  #18
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Value of Brunette by himself: 2nd Round + Forward Prospect that isn't garbage.

Value of Burns by himself: Top-6 Forward.

For both of them, you are looking at:
2nd Round + Decent Forward Prospect + Top-6 Forward (think Sharp).

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:17 PM
  #19
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Value of Brunette by himself: 2nd Round + Forward Prospect that isn't garbage.

Value of Burns by himself: Top-6 Forward.

For both of them, you are looking at:
2nd Round + Decent Forward Prospect + Top-6 Forward (think Sharp).
Well, then Burns and Brunette for Leddy, Stalberg, Brouwer, Richards, and a 1st is a fair trade.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:50 PM
  #20
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500


This is what gets me...

What part of "Top Six forward" do people not get?

Start with Sharp. Brouwer is not a top 6 forward.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 01:59 PM
  #21
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
Well, then Burns and Brunette for Leddy, Stalberg, Brouwer, Richards, and a 1st is a fair trade.
Says you.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 02:01 PM
  #22
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post


This is what gets me...

What part of "Top Six forward" do people not get?

Start with Sharp. Brouwer is not a top 6 forward.
Wow, I guess that Kane and Toews' line partner, Brouwer, is joining them on the 3rd line.

Brouwer-Toews-Kane was our top line for most of last season.

Cullksinikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 02:08 PM
  #23
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Kindly hint...

Take your bawl and go home.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 02:12 PM
  #24
mnwildgophers
Registered User
 
mnwildgophers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,497
vCash: 500
There's no reason to do this deal right now as we should just see how the season goes, and I'm sure that's how things will shake out until we either need a change, or decide to go on a re-build (which I don't see happening). That would be a good package if we're trying to rebuild, but we'd probably be better off keeping Burns no matter what unless we get like a 30-50 goal scorer of similar age.

mnwildgophers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-28-2010, 02:15 PM
  #25
Vashanesh
My best outfit
 
Vashanesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 2,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
Wow, I guess that Kane and Toews' line partner, Brouwer, is joining them on the 3rd line.

Brouwer-Toews-Kane was our top line for most of last season.
And Buf was there in the playoffs. That doesn't make him a top-6 forward.

If your proposal starts with "Burns", the return starts with "Sharp", or you're offering crap. EDIT: The same goes for San Jose, if Clowe (and I really don't even want him) or Seto aren't involved, neither are the Wild.

I seriously don't get what's so hard to understand. We want someone who can either play on Koivu's wing, or give us a reason to break up Havlat and Lats.

If you're not offering that, quit offering ANYTHING. We don't want a bunch of prospects, we don't want picks, we don't want ANYTHING other than a 25+ goal top-6 forward. It isn't that hard to understand.

Vashanesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.