msweet Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Minnesota Wild defenseman Brent Burns' costly overtime giveaway against the Columbus Blue Jackets on Saturday not only killed any realistic chance of his team making this year's playoffs, but was cited by Startribune.com columnist Jim Souhan as an example of how Burns' erratic play could impact his long-term future with the Wild. Burns' current contract expires after next season, making him eligible for unrestricted free agency and leading Souhan to speculate Wild management will have to decide this summer if Burns should be re-signed to a long-term extension worth up to $6 million per season, or traded for hopefully more scoring depth at forward. Souhan suggested a possible trade target would be New Jersey Devils left winger (and Minnesota native) Zach Parise if the Devils are unable to re-sign the restricted free agent this summer. As Larry Brooks of the New York Post observed Sunday, the Devils lack a skilled puck-moving, playmaking defenseman. Brooks wondered if perhaps Parise would be the bargaining chip to land such a blueliner. Parise would be a good fit with the Wild, but one shouldn't automatically assume he'll get swapped for Burns or, for that matter, any other notable two-way defenseman. http://www.thehockey...on-the-way.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 LOL, yeah him and about 3 first round draft picks. A perennial point-per-game forward and model citizen for an "erratic" defenseman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 so Larry Brooks dit not observed that we're sucking at scoring goals? Trading away Parise would be the best idea in the world yeah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 If we were trading Parise for perhaps Lidstrom in his prime, I could see trading Parise being a decent one. Not for some a little above average puck-moving defenseman like Burns. Material is running thin for these guys to write about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyP. Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 If we were trading Parise for perhaps Lidstrom in his prime, I could see trading Parise being a decent one. Not for some a little above average puck-moving defenseman like Burns. Material is running thin for these guys to write about. I second that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derlique Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Minny would have to add, but do you guys know how good Brent Burns is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 here's the point though - if parise is not willing to sign long term over the summer at a reasonable price (5-8 years, cap hit of $7MM - $7.5MM), then he must be dealt. burns alone is not enough of a return, but if they took rolston also and gave a 1st round pick - so parise/rolston for burns/1st, i'd have to think about it. ideally, i'd prefer sending him to SJ for setogucci, demers and maybe even nittymaki to back up marty next year. sure that's two nickles for a dime, but that's a decent return if he HAS to be dealt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I understand that Parise needs to be dealt if not signed long-term. But he's a special talent. Burns, while a big boy who also puts up pretty good offensive numbers, is a big question mark as a shut-down defenseman that he needs to be. His +/- is not good, even for what is essentially an even GF/GA team. I hate even thinking about Parise going anywhere and I hate that SJ trade even more than getting something done w/ the Wild as shown above. Parise will fetch a good return (stud defenseman or RW) if he has to go because a lot of teams will want the right to lock him up for the long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevilinLA Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'm sure Burns would love to come play for the guy (Lemaire) who forced him to play as a grinding forward for part of a season. Sounds like a match made in heaven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'm sure Burns would love to come play for the guy (Lemaire) who forced him to play as a grinding forward for part of a season. Sounds like a match made in heaven. lemaire is coaching the team next year? either way, the wild would have to throw in a substantial amount and eat a terrible contract of ours. i think parise, rolston, and corrente for havlat, burns, and a 1st would be a fair deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korean Kid 23 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'd trade Parise for Drew Doughty, but other than that, there's no other defenseman I'd trade him for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Fan Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Parise for Shea Weber would not be a bad idea to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'd trade Parise for Drew Doughty, but other than that, there's no other defenseman I'd trade him for. That's a bit of a pipe dream I'd say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derlique Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 lemaire is coaching the team next year? either way, the wild would have to throw in a substantial amount and eat a terrible contract of ours. i think parise, rolston, and corrente for havlat, burns, and a 1st would be a fair deal. i think the wild really get ripped off here. For skilled forwards that leaves them with Koivu, Bouchard, Parise and Clutterbuck? plus you rid them of their best d. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I would trade Parise for Malkin and Crosby and a 1st... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-SS Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Smartest article I've ever seen !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Soul Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Give me Ovechkin and Backstrom for parise that's all I'd except for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 i think the wild really get ripped off here. For skilled forwards that leaves them with Koivu, Bouchard, Parise and Clutterbuck? plus you rid them of their best d. it's minnesota's fault that they don't have any skilled forwards, not new jersey's. parise for burns straight up is horrific. ditto burns and a 1st. the deal i am proposing is incumbent on parise signing there long-term - there would be no such provision for NJ and burns. maybe we would have to take cam barker's contract too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedenby21 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Did he get that from Єklund (2.3% accurate)? Honestly, let's trade a great team guy, fan favorite, 45 goal scorer not even in his prime yet for an injury prone defenseman. Deal! Maybe if the Wild add in like 4 1sts. I still wouldn't do it though, because I love Parise and I don't want me jersey to be garbage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Diablo Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 larry brooks s a hack - he wishes zach away from the devs if his rags cant have him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevilinLA Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 lemaire is coaching the team next year? either way, the wild would have to throw in a substantial amount and eat a terrible contract of ours. i think parise, rolston, and corrente for havlat, burns, and a 1st would be a fair deal. No you are.... didn't you get the memo? At this point I would be surprised if JL didn't have that choice to coach if he wants to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derlique Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 it's minnesota's fault that they don't have any skilled forwards, not new jersey's. parise for burns straight up is horrific. ditto burns and a 1st. the deal i am proposing is incumbent on parise signing there long-term - there would be no such provision for NJ and burns. maybe we would have to take cam barker's contract too I agree that they would have to add, but Havlat? How would we fit Burns AND Havlat in the cap. They'd have to take Rolston and maybe clarkson. I wouldnt be opposed to Parise for Koivu and a 1st Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamtheprodigy Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 No you are.... didn't you get the memo? At this point I would be surprised if JL didn't have that choice to coach if he wants to. Probably, but there's no guarantee that he wants to. In fact he's probably still leaning towards retiring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellOnICE Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 Hey Paging any of my posts from November. I've been saying this for months. Unfortunately it makes sense. I'm not sure Parise fits in here with the Kovy contract on the books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 here's the point though - if parise is not willing to sign long term over the summer at a reasonable price (5-8 years, cap hit of $7MM - $7.5MM), then he must be dealt. burns alone is not enough of a return, but if they took rolston also and gave a 1st round pick - so parise/rolston for burns/1st, i'd have to think about it. ideally, i'd prefer sending him to SJ for setogucci, demers and maybe even nittymaki to back up marty next year. sure that's two nickles for a dime, but that's a decent return if he HAS to be dealt. What's the point of dealing Rolston as a negative in a trade if you're dealing Zach? It's not like we'll have cap troubles next year if we're not going to be able to sign Zach long-term anyway and we'll have to keep at least a couple forwards around capable of scoring 20+ goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.