• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Probie

Wild Firesale Could Mean Wings Benefit

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest Crymson

Couldn't you make part of the trade conditional on him re-signing with us?

That's not legal. It would constitute a re-negotiation of his existing contract, and that's prohibited by the current CBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not legal. It would constitute a re-negotiation of his existing contract, and that's prohibited by the current CBA.

Actually, you can do that. You can say, okay, we'll trade you this and this and this for Burns, and if he re-signs with us in the '12-'13 offseason, we'll throw in that and that too.

Trades with conditional assets (usually picks) based upon a player signing/re-signing with a team happen fairly often.

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, you can do that. You can say, okay, we'll trade you this and this and this for Burns, and if he re-signs with us in the '12-'13 offseason, we'll throw in that and that too.

Trades with conditional assets (usually picks) based upon a player signing/re-signing with a team happen fairly often.

Exactly, conditional picks is common place in the NHL, just recently in the Kaberle deal another pick was conditional on the B's either being in the SCF or re-signing Kaberle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not legal. It would constitute a re-negotiation of his existing contract, and that's prohibited by the current CBA.

It would probably have to be conditional draft picks. I don't think the NHL does the "player to be named later" like the MLB does. Also, I think you could get permission to speak with the player about possible contract expectations. I remember Holland saying that he had allowed Hossa permission to speak with teams about contracts as a courtesy when they knew they wouldn't be re-signing him. If this were to happen, it any trade would probably have to be completed after July 1 when he would technically be in his contract year.

To me, if the Red Wings decided that they thought Burns was heads and shoulders above any UFA, making a trade that requires giving up assets may not be a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crymson

Actually, you can do that. You can say, okay, we'll trade you this and this and this for Burns, and if he re-signs with us in the '12-'13 offseason, we'll throw in that and that too.

Trades with conditional assets (usually picks) based upon a player signing/re-signing with a team happen fairly often.

Yes, but you can't throw in a clause that says, "If we trade for you, you're required to re-sign with us."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would make sense to have future considerations in picks as burns cant be traded before the draft anyways. this means that if detroit makes the playoffs or something, then they have a s***ty first rounder next season and then they would be obligated to add another pick to that to sweeten it up and bring the value back up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, if the Red Wings decided that they thought Burns was heads and shoulders above any UFA, making a trade that requires giving up assets may not be a bad idea.

I think he's head and shoulders above any UFA. So will Minnesota want to trade him? And what's the price?

Yes, but you can't throw in a clause that says, "If we trade for you, you're required to re-sign with us."

I don't think that's what he meant at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's head and shoulders above any UFA. So will Minnesota want to trade him? And what's the price?

Id give up Fil, Kindl, 2012 first rounder for Burns + 2012 3rd rounder

OR

Franzen, Kindl, future considerations for Burns + 4th rounder 2012

I'd also try to work Hudler into both of these deals. I think a dman must go back and kindl is best option with smith almost ready.

Once again, I'm not saying this will happen, ahhemmmm crymson, im just answering his question about the price we could offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to draft a defenseman with the first pick this year, but I would trade next years pick.

agreed. if we did do burns, it would HAVE to be after the 2011 draft due to his current contract. he cannot be moved before july 1 I believe. this would force us to trade next years first rounder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to draft a defenseman with the first pick this year, but I would trade next years pick.

If by some miracle we were to trade for Burns, we could give up our first this year. Odds are in 10 years he'll still be better than anyone we could draft anyway.

But the only reason Minnesota could possibly have for trading Burns is fear they won't be able to sign him, and unless he's come out and told them he won't re-sign I doubt they'd be willing to mive him now unless they were getting someone around the same age and just as good or better, or maybe a top 10 pick plus extras. Most likely they'll keep trying to get him signed, maybe decide to move him at the deadline if they're not confident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone please explain a trade to me between Detroit and Minny that Minny would find beneficial that includes Burns? I'm just having trouble seeing one.

I honestly believe you just do not want Burns on this team... so you don't even look at any options. Filppula, Kindl, and a pick. There.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly believe you just do not want Burns on this team... so you don't even look at any options. Filppula, Kindl, and a pick. There.

You really think that's the best deal Minny could get for Burns? And why would they want to trade him in the first place? Have there even been any rumors that he wants to leave?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crymson

I honestly believe you just do not want Burns on this team... so you don't even look at any options. Filppula, Kindl, and a pick. There.

Not good enough. Minnesota's biggest problem is scoring. Even their premier forward, Koivu, is not a scorer. Filppula can chip in some points, sure, but he's primarily a defensive player. Kindl may end up being very good, but there's no guarantee of them; and despite all his time in the AHL, last season wasn't very good for him. At this stage, he doesn't hold a candle to Burns, and he might never compare. The pick we can offer will, unless the team absolutely craps the bed and has a horrible season, be a late one in the first round, and so it won't be worth much more than a second-rounder.

We'd be offering that for a player who is essentially Minnesota's franchise defenseman, who can score, hit, is big, and plays fairly good defense, and who is young to boot. It won't happen. There's not a chance in hell they'd accept that deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharks look damn good, but they gave up quite a bit for Burns.

To Minn:

Devin Setoguchi

Charlie Coyle (1st rd pick last year, top prospect in their system)

28th Overall Pick

To SJS:

Brent Burns

2nd rd pick in 2012

Wings didn't have a chance at Burns. Minn wanted more offense. Wings would have had to trade Franzen + 1st pick + Tatar/Nyquist and even that might not have been good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this