There is no reason for Philly to take Burn's contract. Look at how hard it is for Vegas to get rid of Fleury right now.

We’d never get that for burns unless he’s playing unreal by TDL and even then we’d probably get less

More like San Jose gives the 1st rounder

PHI desperately needs help -- particularly offense -- at RD. Swap the 1st for a 2nd if you like but there should be interest there at the least for this deal, if not heavy pushing IMO.

PHI getting Gustafsson today means Ghost is pure dead weight combining his play and his contract.

Burns still has a lot of value in terms of play. He's far from washed up and still elite offensively and not bad defensively (he's actually improved the last two years in that department). His contract term is bad, but it's a move that's good for PHI for the next 3 years especially in this deal where SJ is taking back Ghost so it's a net change of 3.5mil extra for PHI for the next 3yrs to have Burns instead of Ghost. PHI should take that and run not just bc of the Ghost aspect, but far more importantly because they sorely, sorely need offense from the point.

There's a giant glaring hole in PHI's top-4 RH-side defense, and overall offensive production from their total defense. Unlike teams who are pretty okay with their goaltending so there's no need to take on Fleury, PHI is basically out of options when it comes to getting at least good offensive production from the RH-side on the point. DeMelo's gone, Brodie and Barrie are gone, Petro's now gone, and on top of that, Nisky's now gone too so there's an even bigger hole there.

Besides, they always have the option to leave Burns exposed next year to SEA and have him likely be selected. Then it'd be getting rid of Ghost and one full year of Burns for the going rate price of a rental: a protected 1st or a 2nd+3rd rounder. Worst case they keep Burns and have Voracek's cap come off the books instead.

I doubt Seattle would take Burns without a major sweetener. If PHI needs offense from the right side of defense, they can target a younger, more cost effective option. Burns is stuck in San Jose.

The "If" part in


is telling me you're refusing to consider this trade proposal objectively and are just bent on hating on the Sharks, so no point in discussing.

And for the record "younger most cost-effective" top-pairing offensive dmen don't go on trees, come free, or take back Ghost in their deals.

I'm not hating on the sharks, it's just very clear that Burns has very little value and sharks fans have this weird pipe dream where he and his full contract get traded while still getting a 1st rounder back and it's completely unrealistic in a flat cap world.

I'm not bent on the getting a 1st back part. On top of Burns still having value, going-rates for elite defensemen are high now (Schmidt), especially offensive ones, but I've stated throughout here I could see the protected-1st+Ghost being swapped for a 2nd+a 3rd+Ghost instead. My main point here is that this trade makes at least reasonable sense for both teams in this situation (i.e. sharks going after Cirelli, PHI needing a top-pairing offensive dman on the right side).