SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Nylander for Burns with 2mil retained and a 1st

Created by: CheechYou
Team: 2020-21 San Jose Sharks
Initial Creation Date: Feb. 25, 2020
Published: Feb. 25, 2020
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
4$3,800,000
2$850,000
2$850,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
1$950,000
1$950,000
2$1,500,000
1$950,000
3$2,750,000
3$3,000,000
3$3,000,000
Trades
1.
SJS
  1. 2021 5th round pick (PHI)
2.
TOR
  1. Burns, Brent ($2,000,000 retained)
  2. 2021 1st round pick (SJS)
Retained Salary Transactions
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2020
Logo of the TBL
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the COL
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the OTT
Logo of the PIT
Logo of the WSH
2021
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the PIT
Logo of the WSH
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the PHI
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
2022
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the SJS
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
23$83,000,000$77,957,365$0$597,500$5,042,635
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$3,000,000$3,000,000
LW, RW
UFA - 3
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$8,000,000$8,000,000
C
M-NTC
UFA - 7
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$3,800,000$3,800,000
RW, LW
UFA - 4
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$7,000,000$7,000,000
LW, RW
M-NTC
UFA - 5
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$5,625,000$5,625,000
C
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Toronto Maple Leafs
$6,962,366$6,962,366
RW
UFA - 4
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$763,333$763,333 (Performance Bonus$20,000$20K)
C, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$850,000$850,000
C
UFA - 2
$2,750,000$2,750,000
RW
UFA - 3
$950,000$950,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$950,000$950,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$700,000$700,000
C
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$7,000,000$7,000,000
LD/RD
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$10,000,000$10,000,000
RD
NMC
UFA - 7
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$3,000,000$3,000,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$1,500,000$1,500,000
LD/RD
UFA - 4
$3,000,000$3,000,000
RD
UFA - 2
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$5,750,000$5,750,000
G
M-NTC
UFA - 4
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$212,500$212K)
LD
UFA - 2
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$863,333$863,333 (Performance Bonus$300,000$300K)
RD
UFA - 3
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$768,333$768,333 (Performance Bonus$65,000$65K)
LW, RW
RFA - 1
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$850,000$850,000
C
UFA - 1
Logo of the San Jose Sharks
$950,000$950,000
RD
UFA

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Feb. 25, 2020 at 2:32 a.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 14,543
Likes: 6,138
GMDW signed that contract, now he's going to have to live with it until it expires.
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 2:47 a.m.
#2
G O S I M E K
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2020
Posts: 930
Likes: 368
Quoting: tkecanuck341
GMDW signed that contract, now he's going to have to live with it until it expires.

If Bobby Ryan can be traded, so can Burns. Bad contracts are exchanged all the time. Thing is, Burns can still play. The Nucks took a bad contract in Eriksson. It happens. Burns is 5 times the player Eriksson is though
Feb. 25, 2020 at 3:05 a.m.
#3
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,777
Likes: 10,507
Quoting: Baphomet
If Bobby Ryan can be traded, so can Burns. Bad contracts are exchanged all the time. Thing is, Burns can still play. The Nucks took a bad contract in Eriksson. It happens. Burns is 5 times the player Eriksson is though


Fair Point about exchanging bad contracts, but of all teams, the Leafs aren't eating any bad contracts any time soon. If anything they are gonna start dumping at least one maybe two contracts for picks and prospects soon. They have entered and will continue to be in cap hell for a while.
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 5:06 a.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 148
Likes: 47
Quoting: Baphomet
If Bobby Ryan can be traded, so can Burns. Bad contracts are exchanged all the time. Thing is, Burns can still play. The Nucks took a bad contract in Eriksson. It happens. Burns is 5 times the player Eriksson is though


True. Bad contracts can be moved... but likely not in exchange for one of the other teams best young players and perhaps best contracts. That doesn't happen. You could see a Subban/Weber type deal, though.
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 7:25 a.m.
#5
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 33,053
Likes: 8,999
laugh William Nylander for an aging Brent Burns, Any GM would be a moron to make that trade.
OldNYIfan liked this.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 9:04 a.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 564
Quoting: Lovie_Smith
Fair Point about exchanging bad contracts, but of all teams, the Leafs aren't eating any bad contracts any time soon. If anything they are gonna start dumping at least one maybe two contracts for picks and prospects soon. They have entered and will continue to be in cap hell for a while.


Disagree about the Leafs being in "cap hell." They don't have a ton of room but after their LTIR contracts expire this summer they will be in much better shape. They have tons of players under contract with predictable cap hits and money to resign their RFA's this year. They aren't going to be bidding for top dollar UFA's this offseason, but how many contending teams can do that anyway? The Lightning have a much worse cap situation with valuable RFA's left unsigned and no money for them. They have player with big cap hits who don't live up to them, all the Leafs big money players are their best players. They made the necessary moves last offseason to get rid of Marleau's contract as well as Zaitsev and Brown, ensuring they are not "wasting" cap hits on players who don't live up to them.

Regardless of your take on their cap situation, this is an absolutely awful trade that makes Toronto worse, so they are not interested in doing it.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 12:41 p.m.
#7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,777
Likes: 10,507
Quoting: newballcoach
Disagree about the Leafs being in "cap hell." They don't have a ton of room but after their LTIR contracts expire this summer they will be in much better shape. They have tons of players under contract with predictable cap hits and money to resign their RFA's this year. They aren't going to be bidding for top dollar UFA's this offseason, but how many contending teams can do that anyway? The Lightning have a much worse cap situation with valuable RFA's left unsigned and no money for them. They have player with big cap hits who don't live up to them, all the Leafs big money players are their best players. They made the necessary moves last offseason to get rid of Marleau's contract as well as Zaitsev and Brown, ensuring they are not "wasting" cap hits on players who don't live up to them.

Regardless of your take on their cap situation, this is an absolutely awful trade that makes Toronto worse, so they are not interested in doing it.


They will have MAYBE 6mil to sign 3 or 4 players. And I assume they are not going to want to let all of Barrie, Ceci, Clifford, and Spezza just walk, that isn't even considering their RFA class. Most of which are due for considerable raises. I don't know anything about their prospects though. But regardless it is going to be difficult. And correct me if I am mistaken, but aren't they going to have some overages/bonuses from this season to compensate for on next seasons cap hit? They do not have it easy in the cap maneuverability department and they are going to have to pull some interesting stuff to do it. Probably including moving one of their big 3 contracts, nylander, or Kapanen. You are only thinking about the next season. But a GM also has to balance that with the long term and not putting themselves in a position to make desperate moves moving pieces just to get under the cap with garbage return on them, 1 or 2 or 3 years down the road. Then again we are talking about Dubas.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 12:45 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,777
Likes: 10,507
But again, that isn't considering what Seattle takes in the expansion draft and the relief that could bring. And also what prospects they might have that are ready to make the jump on entry level cap hits. One way or another, the cap crunch is gonna hit them eventually. They have a ton of money tied up and futures that are gonna need to get paid as well.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 1:06 p.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 564
Quoting: Lovie_Smith
They will have MAYBE 6mil to sign 3 or 4 players. And I assume they are not going to want to let all of Barrie, Ceci, Clifford, and Spezza just walk, that isn't even considering their RFA class. Most of which are due for considerable raises. I don't know anything about their prospects though. But regardless it is going to be difficult. And correct me if I am mistaken, but aren't they going to have some overages/bonuses from this season to compensate for on next seasons cap hit? They do not have it easy in the cap maneuverability department and they are going to have to pull some interesting stuff to do it. Probably including moving one of their big 3 contracts, nylander, or Kapanen. You are only thinking about the next season. But a GM also has to balance that with the long term and not putting themselves in a position to make desperate moves moving pieces just to get under the cap with garbage return on them, 1 or 2 or 3 years down the road. Then again we are talking about Dubas.


I would imagine Barrie and Ceci easily walk. Clifford maybe back on a low money deal, Spezza the same. Their RFA's are all going to come in at 2 mil or under (both of them). It's very likely they move a forward this offseason, even if they don't get a dman in return. I am well aware about the seasons after that, they won't have to do any of the things you are suggesting to get under the cap. They have no bonus issues or rollovers. Just because people want Toronto to be in trouble doesn't mean they are.
Feb. 25, 2020 at 9:17 p.m.
#10
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 979
Likes: 228
100% bad contracts can be moved. Issue is i'm pretty certain DW is not gonna want to retain 2mil for a player not playing on the team for 5 more years
Feb. 25, 2020 at 11:21 p.m.
#11
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 148
Likes: 47
Quoting: Lovie_Smith
They will have MAYBE 6mil to sign 3 or 4 players. And I assume they are not going to want to let all of Barrie, Ceci, Clifford, and Spezza just walk, that isn't even considering their RFA class. Most of which are due for considerable raises. I don't know anything about their prospects though. But regardless it is going to be difficult. And correct me if I am mistaken, but aren't they going to have some overages/bonuses from this season to compensate for on next seasons cap hit? They do not have it easy in the cap maneuverability department and they are going to have to pull some interesting stuff to do it. Probably including moving one of their big 3 contracts, nylander, or Kapanen. You are only thinking about the next season. But a GM also has to balance that with the long term and not putting themselves in a position to make desperate moves moving pieces just to get under the cap with garbage return on them, 1 or 2 or 3 years down the road. Then again we are talking about Dubas.


They'll have about 9M free before factoring the cap rising. You can probably get Spezza and Clifford for 2.2 combined. Leaving Mikheyev and Dermott to resign. Probably about 4M combined there (2.8 and 1.1, respectively). Leaves about 2.8 free before factoring any trades. It's not ideal but they have a small bit of wiggle room to maneuver with. Likely one of Kap or Johnsson end up moving for a D, though.

They really just have to get to expansion and the new TV deal.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll