[Andy & Rono] Still absolutely have no idea why the Wild traded Brent Burns to San Jose after 2010-11 season. Did Burns have any issues with the Minnesota coaches or something?
Still absolutely have no idea why the Wild traded Brent Burns to San Jose after 2010-11 season. Did Burns have any issues with the Minnesota coaches or something? pic.twitter.com/t3ZxO93SQf
— Andy & Rono (@ARHockeyStats) August 1, 2023
by seeldoger47
9 Comments
Charlie Coyle! duh!
The Wild took a chance on what they thought was “selling high” on Burns (who had one year left on a contract) on a forward (Setoguchi) who seemed to be coming up (and on a three year deal) and two prospects.
It was a “genius if it works out” front office move that didn’t really work out.
He had one year left on his contract and was due for a raise the team felt they couldn’t afford or didn’t want to pay him.
They traded a valuable asset at probably his highest value (something some fans clamor for from time to time) but unfortunately it didn’t really pan out.
IIRC he was going into the last year of his contract without an extension in place. I have no clue if maybe extension talks had stalled at that point (the Wild had missed the playoffs for a few years at that point so it’s possible he was hesitant to extend) but I’m guessing the org was afraid of a repeat of the Gaborik situation (where he left in UFA and we got nothing) and wanted to ensure they at least got some value for him rather than losing him for nothing.
I was OK with the return at the time, even though in hindsight it doesn’t look great. Still part of me would like to see the alternate timeline where we extended both Gaborik and Burns and had a team built around them, Koivu, and Backstrom.
Basically what everyone else has said – Burns was a solid defender but was heading for UFA without an extension in place – and the wild had just shot their load on Suter and Zack.
And we got back a good young prospect who was going to solve our forward problems – Coyle. Unfortunately we forgot that it was the Zack / Suter show and they didn’t like young guys.
Burns was not re-signing here. It was a sell high moment, and the return was what was expected even if it didn’t pan out. A top-6 player (Setoguchi), a top level prospect (Coyle) and a FRP (Phillips?).
People would kill for that haul in the modern age.
Old Chuck Fletcher needed to save cap space to sign Parise and Suter a couple years later. Let’s not forget he was the GM for all of that
Sucks that we traded him.
Looking in retrospect, Coyle was probably the best prospect we could have asked for: https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/949815-san-jose-sharks-the-franchises-7-most-exciting-prospects-under-21-years-old.amp.html
And of roster players, the place of obvious ‘Wild could have won’ would have been at center, though I give a near zero chance San Jose would have sent either a 22 year old Couture or prime Pavelski (27) to us in a 1 for 1.
https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/SJS/2012.html
Honestly, this could have worked fine for us if we weren’t so bad at drafted 1st rounders back then. I also think Coyle could have been a much better player for us if we had been better at player development.
Many of didn’t have a problem trading Burns at the time. He was going to command a huge raise for average
To below average production and the Wild didn’t want to over pay for his salary. He was still in devilment mode. It sucks but at the time it was a wise decision.