SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Burns to Seattle Signing Granlund Larsson Armia Raanta and Buying Out Jones

Créé par: CheechYou
Équipe: 2021-22 Sharks de San Jose
Date de création initiale: 4 mai 2021
Publié: 4 mai 2021
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Description
My straightforward roadmap for the offseason:

STEP 1: Burns to SEA.

Ship off Burns to Seattle at all costs. I think given that Burns still logs almost half the game in ice time as one of the league's top 3 players in time on ice, and that he's still a good player even if he's not at his former norris-level of offensive production, the compensation offered, all makes it a fair deal for SEA to take.

STEP 2: Sign Granlund Larsson Armia and Raanta

These three players fill major holes in the roster. Armia as a RH defensive heavy PK guy for the bottom lines to form a shut-down yet speedy/somewhat skilled/and big with Armia line of Nieto-Gamby-Armia. Granlund as the team's 3C of the future who brings in offense. Flanked with Meier and Balcers on the wings, this line could be a big mismatch in creating offense for SJ. Larsson rounds out the defense, replacing Burns at a more cost-controlled rate and just focusing on defensive responsibilities with Merkley coming in (but also having Jaros as his safety valve if he's not ready). Raanta on a 1-year deal to play with the new Fins coming in and also in a prove-it deal to try and stay both effective and more importantly healthy for a full season makes sense, though if not, sign another veteran on a 1-yr deal or even just play Korenar and Melnichuk. The 1-year deal is important to free up money for Hertl and Ferraro and Knyzhov's extensions the following year.

STEP 3: Buy out Jones or bury his contract for next year at least.

I just think it's time to move on, even if the 6-year buyout cap hit stings a ton. Avoid doing this if you can by burying him in the AHL at least until next year where the buy out becomes less terrible, but it's doubtful that works. Love ya Jonesey, thanks for 2016 and 2019 playoffs, but this is for as much your sake as it is for SJ's -- you can really use the fresh start elsewhere as a back up for a team with actual structured defense to PROVE to all the gullible Sharks fans who pin the blame of SJ's woes all on you with some good play there.
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
11 000 000 $
11 250 000 $
21 000 000 $
21 000 000 $
2750 000 $
2750 000 $
1750 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
11 000 000 $
45 000 000 $
21 500 000 $
33 000 000 $
24 500 000 $
1750 000 $
14 000 000 $
Transactions
1.
SJS
  1. Choix de 4e ronde en 2022 (NYI)
2.
SJS
  1. Choix de 3e ronde en 2021 (DAL)
DAL
  1. Donato, Ryan [Droits de RFA]
  2. Meloche, Nicolas [Droits de RFA]
3.
SJS
SEA
  1. Burns, Brent
  2. Dahlén, Jonathan [Liste de réserve]
  3. Leonard, John
  4. Choix de 3e ronde en 2021 (SJS)
Rachats de contrats
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2021
Logo de SJS
Logo de DAL
Logo de SJS
Logo de TOR
Logo de SJS
Logo de COL
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
2022
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de NYI
Logo de BUF
Logo de SJS
Logo de MIN
2023
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
Logo de SJS
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2281 500 000 $69 710 363 $0 $512 500 $11 789 637 $

Formation

Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
2 108 696 $2 108 696 $
AG, AD
NMC
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
5 625 000 $5 625 000 $
C
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
AG, AD
RFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
8 000 000 $8 000 000 $
C
M-NTC
UFA - 6
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
4 725 000 $4 725 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 3
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 4
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 250 000 $1 250 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 500 000 $1 500 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
C
UFA - 1
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 4
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
796 667 $796 667 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
10 000 000 $10 000 000 $
DD
NMC
UFA - 6
4 000 000 $4 000 000 $
G
UFA - 2
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance212 500 $$212K)
DG
UFA - 1
4 500 000 $4 500 000 $
DD
UFA - 4
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
G
RFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
7 000 000 $7 000 000 $
DG/DD
NMC
UFA - 5
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance300 000 $$300K)
DD
UFA - 2
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
750 000 $750 000 $
AG, C
UFA
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
750 000 $750 000 $
DD
UFA - 1
Équipe de réserve
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
776 667 $776 667 $ (0 $$00 $$0) (Bonis de performance110 000 $$110K)
C, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
725 000 $725 000 $ (0 $$00 $$0)
G
RFA - 1
Logo de Sharks de San Jose
725 000 $725 000 $ (0 $$00 $$0)
DG
UFA - 1

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
4 mai 2021 à 4 h 28
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2019
Messages: 14,042
Mentions "j'aime": 5,158
I like it
Doubt SJ ever becomes a contender soon but that’s a decent lineup
CheechYou a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 4 h 36
#2
mokumboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2019
Messages: 28,995
Mentions "j'aime": 11,239
You think the Kraken are going to eat $32M of a rapidly declining 36-year-old asset and refrain from taking something of real value to an expansion team (like, say, Ferraro) in exchange for a small meh winger, a 3rd and a small, gutless head case that two teams have already washed their hands of in trades for peanuts? Dude...
palhal a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 4 h 56
#3
Go Sharks
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2020
Messages: 391
Mentions "j'aime": 53
Quoting: mokumboi
You think the Kraken are going to eat $32M of a rapidly declining 36-year-old asset and refrain from taking something of real value to an expansion team (like, say, Ferraro) in exchange for a small meh winger, a 3rd and a small, gutless head case that two teams have already washed their hands of in trades for peanuts? Dude...


A lot of people forget that the Kraken still need to hit a cap floor and Vegas had to do so when acquiring Fleury, Neal, and Reilly Smith for compensation.
4 mai 2021 à 4 h 57
#4
Go Sharks
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2020
Messages: 391
Mentions "j'aime": 53
Quoting: mokumboi
You think the Kraken are going to eat $32M of a rapidly declining 36-year-old asset and refrain from taking something of real value to an expansion team (like, say, Ferraro) in exchange for a small meh winger, a 3rd and a small, gutless head case that two teams have already washed their hands of in trades for peanuts? Dude...


The mere suggestion of trading Ferraro is baffling. He’s the only untouchable on defense. Sharks would rather just keep both if that was the case.
Klara et CheechYou a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 5 h 11
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2020
Messages: 5,214
Mentions "j'aime": 2,867
Tell me you know absolutely nothing about the Sharks without saying you know nothing about the Sharks:

Quoting: mokumboi
You think the Kraken are going to eat $32M of a rapidly declining 36-year-old asset and refrain from taking something of real value to an expansion team (like, say, Ferraro) in exchange for a small meh winger, a 3rd and a small, gutless head case that two teams have already washed their hands of in trades for peanuts? Dude...
justaBoss, KakkoForMauriceRichardAward, Klara and 1 other person a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 5 h 12
#6
Bandwagon fairweathe
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 7,585
Mentions "j'aime": 3,250
I can see the pirate commercials now with burns as quite the character to be the face of the franchise. I don’t see them taking on that term though, without atleast a couple seconds. Seattle probably only looking for guys with a couple years of term at most so they can make there own longterm mistakes. I wonder what Vegas does to clear some cap, so they can double dip on this expansion.
4 mai 2021 à 5 h 15
#7
Domme90
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2021
Messages: 67
Mentions "j'aime": 25
Add your 2021 First and 2022 First and the may think about it
4 mai 2021 à 7 h 45
#8
mokumboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2019
Messages: 28,995
Mentions "j'aime": 11,239
Quoting: JacobLyons
A lot of people forget that the Kraken still need to hit a cap floor and Vegas had to do so when acquiring Fleury, Neal, and Reilly Smith for compensation.


There are better ways to hit a cap floor, as directly evidenced by Vegas.


Quoting: JacobLyons
The mere suggestion of trading Ferraro is baffling. He’s the only untouchable on defense. Sharks would rather just keep both if that was the case.


I suggested nothing of the sort. But all those NMC's are going to tie their protection hands somewhere. It certainly may not be Ferraro, but then I did only include him as an example. If it's a bad example, fine. The larger point stands.
4 mai 2021 à 7 h 46
#9
mokumboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2019
Messages: 28,995
Mentions "j'aime": 11,239
Quoting: RawZuccSauce420
Tell me you know absolutely nothing about the Sharks without saying you know nothing about the Sharks:



And which part(s) exactly do you disagree so strongly with? I'm intrigued.
4 mai 2021 à 7 h 54
#10
mokumboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2019
Messages: 28,995
Mentions "j'aime": 11,239
Modifié 4 mai 2021 à 8 h 51
Quoting: RawZuccSauce420
Tell me you know absolutely nothing about the Sharks without saying you know nothing about the Sharks:



Actually... for some reason I had it in my head that Couture also had an NMC, but he only has an NTC. My bad. I guess they won;t be quite as hamstrung with the protection list as I thought. Regardless, I'd still be utterly stunned if Seattle took on Burns for that weak return.
4 mai 2021 à 8 h 38
#11
LongtimeLeafsufferer
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 59,428
Mentions "j'aime": 22,636
Quoting: JacobLyons
A lot of people forget that the Kraken still need to hit a cap floor and Vegas had to do so when acquiring Fleury, Neal, and Reilly Smith for compensation.


Of course the Kraken still need to hit the cap floor (don't all teams?). But with so many team cap strapped, Seattle will have a choice of many high priced vets that are going to be exposed. Plus they will have a shot at lots of UFAs. Seattle will have no problem reaching the cap floor. But it's Burns for years of term that likely turns Seattle off. Just better ways to spend 8m X 4
mokumboi a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 8 h 43
#12
LongtimeLeafsufferer
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 59,428
Mentions "j'aime": 22,636
"Ship off Burns to Seattle at all costs." First you say that in your narrative then you offer Seattle little, Why not 3 first rounders?....which would support your all costs theory.
San Jose has a problem with Burns contract....but also Couture's long term, Kane long term, Vlasic long term Jones not as long term. 35m in five guys, most who are aren't good value.
mokumboi a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 10 h 35
#13
Grierless Sharks Fan
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: déc. 2017
Messages: 2,956
Mentions "j'aime": 927
Quoting: palhal
"Ship off Burns to Seattle at all costs." First you say that in your narrative then you offer Seattle little, Why not 3 first rounders?....which would support your all costs theory.
San Jose has a problem with Burns contract....but also Couture's long term, Kane long term, Vlasic long term Jones not as long term. 35m in five guys, most who are aren't good value.


Agreed. They franchise should fold honestly. They should just get rid of everything.
4 mai 2021 à 14 h 26
#14
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2020
Messages: 5,214
Mentions "j'aime": 2,867
Quoting: mokumboi
And which part(s) exactly do you disagree so strongly with? I'm intrigued.


A) Ferraro isn't expansion eligible. Sounded like you were insinuating that Seattle would take him in the ED, which obviously is not gonna happen. But on top of that, the Sharks don't trade him either.

B) Calling Leonard a "meh winger" doesn't do him justice. Sure he isn't a blue chip prospect, but there's a LOT more value and potential there than you're letting on. His ceiling is a speedy middle-6 scoring winger and he's still 22.

C) Dahlén might not pan out to be an NHL player not gonna argue about that. But calling him a gutless headcase is simply not true and indicative of someone who has any understanding of his situation. Not saying he's completely innocent, but that's just not a good take, I'm sorry.

D) Burns isn't rapidly declining. It's been a slow downhill and he's still well above replacement level. People act like he's the next coming of Jeff Skinner on here, he's not.
CheechYou a aimé ceci.
4 mai 2021 à 16 h 11
#15
mokumboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2019
Messages: 28,995
Mentions "j'aime": 11,239
Quoting: RawZuccSauce420
A) Ferraro isn't expansion eligible. Sounded like you were insinuating that Seattle would take him in the ED, which obviously is not gonna happen. But on top of that, the Sharks don't trade him either.

B) Calling Leonard a "meh winger" doesn't do him justice. Sure he isn't a blue chip prospect, but there's a LOT more value and potential there than you're letting on. His ceiling is a speedy middle-6 scoring winger and he's still 22.

C) Dahlén might not pan out to be an NHL player not gonna argue about that. But calling him a gutless headcase is simply not true and indicative of someone who has any understanding of his situation. Not saying he's completely innocent, but that's just not a good take, I'm sorry.

D) Burns isn't rapidly declining. It's been a slow downhill and he's still well above replacement level. People act like he's the next coming of Jeff Skinner on here, he's not.


A- Okay, so that's two wrong ideas I had in my head. Thought this was his third season. Again, my bad. But also again, never said or implied they'd trade him.

B- Selling him as a middle 6 is probably a little generous. He's a speedy 3rd liner who generally works the boards even though he's really too small to do so.

C- Ehhh two NHL teams and most scouting experts/services beg to differ. Even the local blog guys see him for what he is: a 23-year-old still choosing to play at a very low level instead of trying to work his way to the NHL (or even trying to compete at a high domestic level, for that matter). You'll see the light soon enough.

D- Gonna have to beg to differ again. Two seasons ago, he was legit All-Star level, should have won the Norris and was an absolute beast in the playoffs. Now, there's probably a good 40-50 D-men outperforming him. His ice time is clearly too high, his shots are sharply down, hits are sharply down, his play driving has fallen off a table, his puck movement rates are waaaay down, he's getting beaten in the Sharks' zone waaaay more, his assist and point rates have basically been cut in half from two years ago. The only thing he still does at an elite level is get shots through - he's still a damn wizard at that. That's a quick decline, and at 36, it's likely only going to get worse faster.

Oh... and did I mention he'll be eating 8M of cap (or nearly 10%) until he's past 40?
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage