I don't know of any NHL GM except Ken Holland that thought Keith was worth that much.

Call up ken Holland... Maybe Benning

that trade made me realize I'm far too harsh on most ACGMs. Literally any trade is possible I guess

Absolutely no on is taking Burns atrocious deal at this point. You would need to add on like 3 1sts for a team to take on that nightmare

Bostons top 4 is too talented to take in another defenseman, specifically burns who is declining.

Kieths deal is so much more manageable. It's 3 million cheaper and only 2 years

Benning isnt good at trades. Only free agency

with 2.6 million retained it's literally the exact same AAV. Burns, who is currently better, will be the same age at the end of his deal as Keith is when expires

Lmaooo Burns is still good - way better than Keith. Yes he’s paid more but he actually still has positive value. This is just a bad take.

You think that huh?

Nope. I know it.

dunning kruger strikes again

Please to tell, oh intelligent one. I only watched like 95% of Sharks games last season and I pay attention to advanced stats of all sorts. But clearly that’s not enough. Please enlighten me.

Okay lets put it like this. Ignoring his contract now.

What do you feel that Burns is actually worth in terms of AAV and term ?

if signed today, I would say it would be 6.5M/3yr.

I think even that would be a crippling mistake.

He had the most TOI this year behind only Doughty, and still puts up plenty of offense while having improved defensively under Boughner

When you play a lot on a team that sucks hot ass I wouldn't consider that a good thing lmao, and it would be hard for him to be any worse defensively

1) it will be hard to find another team to do what Holland did

2) they partially did it because mcdavid wanted them to

3) Kieth is a 3 time champ, burns hasn't won once. That expierience factors in

4) just because kieth is still a servicible 2nd pair guy at 37 and 38 years old doesn't mean Burns will be. The idea that "they will be the same age at the end of their deals" is nonsense. Kieth will be 38 at the end of his, Burns will be 40 so your point isn't even correct, but that's not even the part that matters. You can't tell what burns play will be like 3-4 years. He very well could fall off a cliff that kieth hasn't fallen off yet. SO much more risk in all that term on the contract, regarless of if you retain to make it the same cap hit.

5) burns is owed double the atcual cash that kieth is owed. Burns is owed 7.5, then 6.5, then two years of 5. Kieth is owed 2.1 this year and 1.5 next year

And does it even make sense for the sharks? Recapture would be terrible if Burns was to retire and theres a much better chance he retires in the next 4 years than kieth does in the next 2

If he was a free agent today, 6.5x2 or 5.75x3

If I was re-negotiating the contract he’s currently on, I’d keep the cap hit between 7.5-8 and go for 1-2 less years in term.

I don't think there is any chance he would get much more than whatever Suter ends up getting. I think expecting more than that is just personal fan bias

Not sure how that's possible. At the same age as Suter, Burns is much better offensively according to multiple metrics (not just point totals), and he's actually better defensively too. And that's all with a poorer quality of teammates than Suter has had the last few years with MIN.



So yeah anyway what were you saying about dunning kruger again?

https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/hockeyanalysis/viz/HockeyAnalysisDmenCards/HockeyAnalysisDCards

check out Keith compared to Burns. Also for reference, Keith's last Norris vote was 2014-15, Burns was 2018-19

unfortunately there is only 1 Edmonton in the league and Chiarelli does not have job