432 replies to this topic

[Daniel]

Theres been time for Parise to resign here. Going forward we need to make moves to improve this team for a playoff run/playoff series. We need to make decisions that will improve our team. If they affect Parise resigning here than so be it. We NEED to improve in certain areas(mobility in the back end). I'm getting ticked off here, I don't want Lou not to make a beneficial move because Parise is still in limbo on whether he wants to resign, leave, or test the market. this is a TEAM.

I'm not saying it's Parise uber alles, just that I don't want to take on a large financial commitment for someone who, at best, only marginally makes the team better this year, which are basically all of the defenseman that are available. If you're talking about Weber or Suter that's another thing entirely.

There's always a tension between making your team better now and doing what's best for the long term. In this case, the chance that Zidlicky or whoever is the missing piece that puts us over the hump are not large enough to justify the potential long term impact.

[Devils Pride 26]

Long term impact? Unless we'll be that tight that the $4M will cost us Parise, I don't see how there is much of one. If you don't resign Salvador, its only a $1.1M addition.

[mouse]

Theres been time for Parise to resign here. Going forward we need to make moves to improve this team for a playoff run/playoff series. We need to make decisions that will improve our team. If they affect Parise resigning here than so be it. We NEED to improve in certain areas(mobility in the back end). I'm getting ticked off here, I don't want Lou not to make a beneficial move because Parise is still in limbo on whether he wants to resign, leave, or test the market. this is a TEAM.

We have Merrill coming soon and Larsson developing. Why would an old, overpaid blueliner impact the team that positively? Also, that's a roster spot we're giving up that one of the kids in our system could be fighting for. Like Daniel said, Weber and Suter are a different story. I would go for them even at the risk of losing Parise, but Zidlicky not only endangers us keeping Parise (more valuable to the team than Zidlicky will ever be), it also creates a bad situation for the development of our d.

[Triumph]

I am pretty sure that the Devils getting Zidlicky would not impact Parise, one way or the other.

As for the kids, none of them are right handed shots who can run a power play. Lou used to let this sort of thing happen organically - now that he's no longer forced by the salary cap to play kids to save cap $, there's a rush to put Merrill in the NHL ASAP.

Edited by Triumph, 16 February 2012 - 04:26 PM.

[NJDevs4978]

We have Merrill coming soon and Larsson developing. Why would an old, overpaid blueliner impact the team that positively? Also, that's a roster spot we're giving up that one of the kids in our system could be fighting for. Like Daniel said, Weber and Suter are a different story. I would go for them even at the risk of losing Parise, but Zidlicky not only endangers us keeping Parise (more valuable to the team than Zidlicky will ever be), it also creates a bad situation for the development of our d.

You could make Tallinder or Greene 'dissapear' if you have to, hell you could even make Zidlicky dissapear. Merrill's not ready to be in the NHL both in terms of he hasn't played a lot this year and maturity-wise. Urbom's been up and down a bunch, he doesn't look anywhere close to being ready. Clearly they're not high on Taormina, or they would have given him a chance to run the PP or play regularly.

And Lou's not stupid, he's not going to overspend and jeopardize keeping Zach...unless he knows Zach's already a goner anyway.

Edited by NJDevs4978, 16 February 2012 - 04:39 PM.

[sundstrom]

the only way they could know parise is definitely leaving is if they've made the decision they are not giving out a contract that is more than 6/42 because they can't afford it - and he'll obviously get almost double that from at least 5 other teams.

there is little doubt if they offer him a competitive offer, he will take it and stay.

[Neb00rs]

How in any way does Parise get affected by Zidlicky? Zidlicky will be moveable no matter what and in worse case scenario he signed before 35 right?

[Daniel]

How in any way does Parise get affected by Zidlicky? Zidlicky will be moveable no matter what and in worse case scenario he signed before 35 right?

I'm not talking about cap space, but actual dollars available. Barring a trade there's no way you can get rid of that. At best you can just defer it with a buy-out.

[Neb00rs]

I'm not talking about cap space, but actual dollars available. Barring a trade there's no way you can get rid of that. At best you can just defer it with a buy-out.

You may call me naive for this but I just don't think that's playing in to it. As far as I'm concerned the Devils have basically said that they are not going to let the team finances stop the team from spending on players. It's clear Lou wants a cup run this year whether the team is ready or not. As far as I'm concerned everything Lou is doing, is done with Parise in mind.

Edited by ben00rs, 16 February 2012 - 11:45 PM.

[Chorske17]

I'd rather trade Parise for Rick Nash. Personally, I'd rather trade Kovalchuk for Nash so we can keep Parise, but that is NO secret! Rick Nash has what the Devils are missing up front. It won't happen, but a fun "What if"... Then the Devils could concentrate on a VERY GOOD D-man and hopefully/more importantly go after a solid goalie. I can't wait to see the fiasco next year with goal.

[nessus]

How does trading away Kovalchuk have to do with keeping Parise?

[Neb00rs]

I'd rather trade Parise for Rick Nash. Personally, I'd rather trade Kovalchuk for Nash so we can keep Parise, but that is NO secret! Rick Nash has what the Devils are missing up front. It won't happen, but a fun "What if"...

umm...not really.

[Triumph]

I'd rather trade Parise for Rick Nash. Personally, I'd rather trade Kovalchuk for Nash so we can keep Parise, but that is NO secret! Rick Nash has what the Devils are missing up front. It won't happen, but a fun "What if"... Then the Devils could concentrate on a VERY GOOD D-man and hopefully/more importantly go after a solid goalie. I can't wait to see the fiasco next year with goal.

You're still here? I thought you and MantaRay were hiding in a bunker together swapping Kovalchuk turnover stories. Hate to break it to you, but Nash isn't any better than Kovalchuk.

[Neb00rs]

You're still here? I thought you and MantaRay were hiding in a bunker together swapping Kovalchuk turnover stories.

This might be my favorite post of the month.

[lazer]

zach has more post season experience than kovalchuk

if were going for it this year then im chugging lou-aid

so is it go after the rangers or go around them

Edited by lazer, 17 February 2012 - 12:19 AM.

[Chuck the Duck]

I'd rather trade Parise for Rick Nash. Personally, I'd rather trade Kovalchuk for Nash so we can keep Parise, but that is NO secret! Rick Nash has what the Devils are missing up front. It won't happen, but a fun "What if"... Then the Devils could concentrate on a VERY GOOD D-man and hopefully/more importantly go after a solid goalie. I can't wait to see the fiasco next year with goal.

Time to lay off the pipe son, "crack is whack!" - Whitney Houston

[Daniel]

You may call me naive for this but I just don't think that's playing in to it. As far as I'm concerned the Devils have basically said that they are not going to let the team finances stop the team from spending on players. It's clear Lou wants a cup run this year whether the team is ready or not. As far as I'm concerned everything Lou is doing, is done with Parise in mind.

Guess I'll have to call you naive then. The team has already defaulted on one loan and looks to be on track to default on a much bigger loan a few years down the road. That's not good. Doesn't mean that the team can only spend the bare minimum on players, but it also means that you ought to be careful when you throw $4 million in a year for an aging and declining defenseman who really isn't that much of an upgrade over what we have already.

I also would suggest that you would make fine congressman, being that you're willing to buy into the premise that you can not let the state of your finances stop you from spending on what you want to spend.

[Devilsfan118]

You're still here? I thought you and MantaRay were hiding in a bunker together swapping Kovalchuk turnover stories. Hate to break it to you, but Nash isn't any better than Kovalchuk.

So..much..win..in this post

[DevilinLA]

I love the folks here with their analyzation of Zidlicky (i.e. "aging and declining), when before this rumor and his coach-related issues started they probably never saw him play for more than the 1 game we play against MIN.

I'm not saying that he's the answer but some of the folks here crack me up with how they can spin stuff.

[Devils731]

Guess I'll have to call you naive then. The team has already defaulted on one loan and looks to be on track to default on a much bigger loan a few years down the road. That's not good. Doesn't mean that the team can only spend the bare minimum on players, but it also means that you ought to be careful when you throw $4 million in a year for an aging and declining defenseman who really isn't that much of an upgrade over what we have already.

I also would suggest that you would make fine congressman, being that you're willing to buy into the premise that you can not let the state of your finances stop you from spending on what you want to spend.

Devils haven't defaulted on any loan. They've continued to make interest payments, so it's akin to an extension.