Follow me on Twitter:
@BenShelley_20
Follow HockeyBuzz Sharks Twitter:
@HB_Sharks
Heading into the offseason, some of the main questions around the San Jose Sharks are related to whether they could move one their two most notable defensemen, in Brent Burns and Erik Karlsson.
Sportsnet's Elliotte Friedman had reported that the Sharks had minor trade conversations regarding Karlsson, while Burns didn't necessarily seem committed to staying with the Sharks in his exit interview, rather than looking to contend for a Stanley Cup elsewhere.
The Sharks are coming off a third straight year missing the postseason and looking ahead, they’re a long ways off from getting back in the playoff hunt. Meanwhile, both Burns and Karlsson are past their most impactful point as players but each have term remaining on their contract.
Burns is now 37 years old and still has three years remaining on his contract, which carries an $8 million cap hit. Despite his age, he still scored 10 goals and 54 points in 82 games this season and can certainly be a contributing member of a team’s blue line.
An issue is that Burns has been forced to maintain a huge role on the Sharks’ blue line. He faced the toughest matchups of any defenseman on the team and averaged over 26 minutes per game this season, which ranked third amongst all skaters in the NHL.
Karlsson, on the other hand, turns 32 years old on Tuesday and still has five years remaining on his contract at an $11.5 million cap hit. He only played in 50 games this season but did score at a really good pace, with 10 goals and 35 points.
The combination of term and cap hit on his deal is going to make Karlsson a very difficult player to move. Even if a team could make the cap space, that’s a long time to a commit to a player on the wrong side of 30 who's seen a decline in his impact.
Of the two defensemen, Burns would likely be the most realistic of the two to actually be dealt. He still has three years remaining on his deal which isn’t insignificant, but also may not necessarily be a deal-breaker.
I’d also argue that if sheltered a little bit or paired with a very reliable defender on a different team, Burns could be really effective over the next couple years. If the Sharks were willing to retain some salary, which they shouldn’t hesitate to do, they could possibly get decent assets back.
Obviously, both players have pretty airtight trade protection and if they were okay with being moved, they’d have huge control over where they ended up, which affects the return the Sharks could get. From the Sharks’ perspective though, they should absolutely be committing to a rebuild (even though that doesn't seem to be the direction they're moving towards). They’re not competitive at this point and have nowhere near a deep enough prospect pool or enough cap space to fill in the gaps on their roster.
That said, they did just lock up Tomas Hertl to an eight-year contract, so it still seems as though there’s no desire to go through a full-on rebuild. Even with that in mind though, if the Sharks are able to get a player in their 30s with term remaining off their payroll, they’d be able to free up a ton of cap space to start transitioning to a younger team. While a legitimate rebuild would be the ideal course of action, they could at least create space to target a younger free agent or two instead, while potentially getting some decent assets back in the process.
It still feels unlikely that the Sharks will end up dealing either defender in the near future but if the opportunity presents itself, they shouldn’t hesitate to try to make it work.
QuizMaker
OTHER ARTICLES FROM MAY
Sharks drop final three games to end season
Sharks re-sign Alexander Barabanov and Jaycob Megna
Patrick Marleau retires, Sharks will select 11th overall in 2022 NHL Draft
2021-22 Season Recap: San Jose Sharks
10 players from Sharks participating in WHC
Analyzing Alexander Barabanov’s new contract
Sharks sign Mitchell Russell 
San Jose Sharks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»