Leafs really dont need a Burns style player. Their team is defensively disabled. And trading Kapanen really doesnt help that. On the other hand SJ is very unlikely to retain 25% of that contract for a middle sixer and a 2nd.

I dont think Dillin and Thorton fetch a 1st probably a 2nd and 3rd respectively

When i tought your trades with TML already hit the low........

These are horrible for all teams. Jeez

I personally dont think any team needs a defenseman whose overpaid and generally not very good

All these Burns trades by San Jose fans. Think the reality is setting in that there are just too many long term deals on declining players. When cap is king, other teams don't want them either.

Tampa says no.

But you're forgetting that BB is awesome

Tampa will give you the Lightning's 2020 4th rounder for Thornton and that's all

Awessome? Maybe in the past. Is he now? And will he be in the future? Think he very prohibitive M NTC shows he is just going to retire in California like so many other highly paid, declining NHLers.

That SJS team is gonna be in so much troubles going forward. Right now they are just scratching the surface. One of the worst farm systems in the NHL + a combo of declining, old Dcore who happens to be way overpaid for what they are bringing to the table and signed to incredibly long deals + one of the worst goalies in the league signed for 5 more years at an important cap hit while having a 3 teams trade list M-NTC.

And this team isn't even in possession of their fisrt rounder this season.
Yikes

Hot take on a Norris winner that just had an 83 point season

Not hot at all. Using points to evaluate defenseman is like using save percentage to evaluate forwards. Not important at all

yes and yes. What makes you think otherwise?

The fact that so many Shark fans want to trade him even at retention. His raw stats at least to me shows a decline. Even the Sharks...maybe out of necessity have used him at RW. Can the Leafs get better value at 6m long term? I think so.

I keep explaining this. I'd be fine with Burns finishing out in teal were it not for the fact that in addition to Burns (age 34, signed to 40), Sharks have

1) Couture (30 through 38),
2) Vlasic (32 through 39),
3) Karlsson (29 through 38),
4) Kane (28 through 33), and
5) Jones (30 through 35)

under contract. That's too many aging players on one team, as I'm sure you fully agree. Our opinions differ it seems on my contention that in isolation, a Vlasic/Karlsson/Couture/Burns helps out a team even at their big contract, whereas you don't agree. I just say that it's too many on one team that needs to rebuild and has a dearth of young guys.

On a team filled with young guys like the Leafs, however, Brent Burns right now would be VERY effective and wouldn't hurt the team given that they have guys signed through their 20s instead of 30s.

THAT's why I keep proposing the Sharks to trade Burns. Because they already have that type of player locked in with Karlsson, and because the Sharks have too many of those contracts. Not because he sucks, and not because his contract in isolation is egregiously terrible (it's not ideal in isolation, but a little retention like I keep proposing and an increasingly insignificant cap-hit-value with the salary cap steadily increasing balances things out for a team like the Leafs).

Dont explain reason to homers.....when will you ppl learn.....