HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Min-NYR

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-30-2011, 01:39 PM
  #1
BPD
Registered User
 
BPD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 2,707
vCash: 500
Min-NYR

get

Brent Burns

get

Michael DelZotto
Evgeny Grachev
2011 2nd (WSH)

Flame on. I'm curious as to what it would take to bring Burns to Broadway.

BPD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 01:41 PM
  #2
Fel 96
JFC
 
Fel 96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Little Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 56,874
vCash: 2037
Send a message via MSN to Fel 96
Well, this is an interesting deal but still no thanks.

Anyways, Burns won't be traded.

Fel 96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 01:42 PM
  #3
Emptyvoid
Registered User
 
Emptyvoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,360
vCash: 500
Value wise, in terms of potential, I think this is okay-good.

However, real world wise, I see no reason for the wild to do this. They're trading an all-star offensive defensemen for an inconsistent offensive dman (with large ?s in the defensive zone) and a top 6 prospect who has only recently started to 'dominate' the ahl.

I feel it will take more to take Burns.

P.S. I'm not sure of Burns' contract situation though.

Emptyvoid is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 01:46 PM
  #4
BPD
Registered User
 
BPD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 2,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fel 96 View Post
Well, this is an interesting deal but still no thanks.

Anyways, Burns won't be traded.
Oh, I totally agree. The Wild brass would have lost their mind barring a certified statement from Burns saying he will absolutely not re-sign in Minny. Burns is too damn good for Minny to let go. Just wanted to see if I had the ballpark right here.

BPD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 01:56 PM
  #5
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,814
vCash: 500
I don't know anything about Grachev, but I really doubt Burns is dealt, and if by some chance he is, I hope it would be a 1 for 1 deal, not for 3 pieces that add up to 75 cents on the dollar.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 02:28 PM
  #6
grN1g
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 1,505
vCash: 500
for the sake of the thread i wont say this will never happen, but burns isn't getting traded for anything less than a proven young top 6 forward+.

grN1g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 02:32 PM
  #7
JeffMangum
Ra shi da
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 55,156
vCash: 300
As a fan of both teams, Wild say no, Rangers say hell yes.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 02:37 PM
  #8
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
If Burns does not have an extension in place by September, then yes, I could see him being traded(off-season, if he rejects ANY extension offer). However, in the case of Mikko Koivu this past off-season, we got an extension done, at a non-discount price(7/47.25). We'd definitely do the same for Brent Burns. If he wants ~6/40, we will give him it.

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 02:53 PM
  #9
WestCoastWild
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 127
vCash: 500
Burnzie has a tattoo of the Minnesota Wild on his body, He LOVES Minnesota, he has his own little farm in Woodbury. I'm gonna be the guy here that says 100% Brent Burn resigns a long term deal with the Wild.

So no deal.

WestCoastWild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 03:02 PM
  #10
MK9
Registered User
 
MK9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Andover, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,329
vCash: 500
No go.

MK9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 05:52 PM
  #11
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,282
vCash: 500
Quantity =/= Quality

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 07:31 PM
  #12
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,503
vCash: 500
They're most likely not trading Burns.

This isn't a terrible deal, however.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 07:51 PM
  #13
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,814
vCash: 500
It actually is kind of. 3 lessor pieces for 1 good piece isn't what we would be looking for. If Burns was 34 and we were rebuilding, then yes, it might be acceptable. But he is 25 or 26, just coming into his prime and has improved every year that he has been healthy.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 08:00 PM
  #14
ShawnTHW
@ShawnTHW
 
ShawnTHW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 8,877
vCash: 500
Am I really the only one who thinks this is a bad deal for the Rangers?

ShawnTHW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 08:15 PM
  #15
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
It actually is kind of. 3 lessor pieces for 1 good piece isn't what we would be looking for. If Burns was 34 and we were rebuilding, then yes, it might be acceptable. But he is 25 or 26, just coming into his prime and has improved every year that he has been healthy.
It's really not.

You're getting a 21 year old puck moving defender that scored nearly 30 points as an NHL rookie last year, a solid prospect with a lot of potential in Grachev that's developing a little slow, but has a pretty high ceiling, and a 2nd rounder.

The only thing I could think of to change it would be to add another prospect like a Tomas Kundratek.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 08:28 PM
  #16
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post
It's really not.

You're getting a 21 year old puck moving defender that scored nearly 30 points as an NHL rookie last year, a solid prospect with a lot of potential in Grachev that's developing a little slow, but has a pretty high ceiling, and a 2nd rounder.

The only thing I could think of to change it would be to add another prospect like a Tomas Kundratek.
Well, it's 3 unknowns for known, so I consider it to be. Like I said, for a over 30 guy, that's probably a good package, but Burns is about to be 26, and has improved every full year he has played. I'm sorry, but does Del Zotto have 1st pairing upside? Does Grachev have 1st line upside? Because if we trade a 26 year old Burns for for a 2nd pairing D and a 2nd/3rd line forward, I'm going to be pretty pissed.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 08:34 PM
  #17
coolbean04
Registered User
 
coolbean04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,735
vCash: 500
I'm a Rangers fan.

If I was Minny, I'd turn down this deal. I would want a player or two over a 2nd round pick.

I would ask for Del Zotto, Grachev, Werek, and C. Thomas. Kreider is who I'd love but I know NYR won't trade him. If they did, they wouldn't be getting DZ or Grachev in a deal.

DZ and Grachev have HUGE potential but have their values at their lowest.

Werek has the potential to be a solid #3 or a good #2, he's progressing nicely.

Thomas as the 4th is a huge risk/reward case. He's been tearing it up and his shooting/shot placement is amazing. His size is an issue but he has a great wrist shot. He's also built like a tank so he won't get knocked off the puck easily.

Burns is an awesome player but I follow the Rangers prospects a lot. To do that 4 for 1 that I listed above would have me super excited.

Remember, DZ is only 20 so he has 5 more years before he's Burns age and I think by then, he will be putting up his kind of #'s. Which is 15 goals 30-40 assists.

coolbean04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 08:57 PM
  #18
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,842
vCash: 500
The Wild have no reason to do this. Burns is their best defenseman, this deal fills zero holes, and the Wild don't get back equivalent talent.

Sounds like Rangers just want to upgrade their defense without giving up anything that will hurt them.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 09:10 PM
  #19
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Well, it's 3 unknowns for known, so I consider it to be. Like I said, for a over 30 guy, that's probably a good package, but Burns is about to be 26, and has improved every full year he has played. I'm sorry, but does Del Zotto have 1st pairing upside? Does Grachev have 1st line upside? Because if we trade a 26 year old Burns for for a 2nd pairing D and a 2nd/3rd line forward, I'm going to be pretty pissed.
3 unknowns?

You definitely don't watch hockey all that much if Del Zotto is an "unknown". Nearly 40 points in his rookie year isn't much of an unknown. If you're taking a shot at him because he got sent down to Hartford, it was because of his confidence on the ice, and it's only his 2nd year in the NHL. The kid is going to get better. He put up 37 points last year and he didn't even have a point shot to pass the puck to on the power play after Kotalik went down the drain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
The Wild have no reason to do this. Burns is their best defenseman, this deal fills zero holes, and the Wild don't get back equivalent talent.
Really, so they wouldn't want to go younger, get a solid young offensive defenseman, and get a forward prospect that they could most definitely use with the lack of organizational depth up front in their system, plus a 2nd rounder?

Nah, you're probably right. They'll just pull another dumb deal and trade a good prospect like Leddy for an often injured Cam Barker and go a little older in the process.

Quote:
Sounds like Rangers just want to upgrade their defense without giving up anything that will hurt them.
No, that's the OP, not the actual organization. The fans don't speak for the organization.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 09:11 PM
  #20
BBSeabs27
#freeseabs
 
BBSeabs27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Brent Burns isn't going to go anywhere. He's done well for the wild.

BBSeabs27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 09:17 PM
  #21
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post
3 unknowns?

You definitely don't watch hockey all that much if Del Zotto is an "unknown". Nearly 40 points in his rookie year isn't much of an unknown. If you're taking a shot at him because he got sent down to Hartford, it was because of his confidence on the ice, and it's only his 2nd year in the NHL. The kid is going to get better. He put up 37 points last year and he didn't even have a point shot to pass the puck to on the power play after Kotalik went down the drain.



Really, so they wouldn't want to go younger, get a solid young offensive defenseman, and get a forward prospect that they could most definitely use with the lack of organizational depth up front in their system, plus a 2nd rounder?

Nah, you're probably right. They'll just pull another dumb deal and trade a good prospect like Leddy for an often injured Cam Barker and go a little older in the process.



No, that's the OP, not the actual organization. The fans don't speak for the organization.
Yeah, one good year and getting sent to the minors is an unknown to me. I watch a lot of hockey; none of it happens to be the Rangers or Del Zotto. Maybe you don't watch a lot of hockey, if you think that Del Zotto and Grachev could fill the void that losing Burns would create. And yes, we don't want to get younger; we'll just keep our "over the hill" 25 year old all-star defenseman. A forward prospect would be great, if it didn't come at the expense of our best defenseman. Cam Barker's performance aside, are you serious? He's 24; Leddy is 19. I wasn't aware that the average age of the Stanley Cup champions is and should be 19.5.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 09:34 PM
  #22
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Yeah, one good year and getting sent to the minors is an unknown to me.
Then you need to get off of these boards and do a little more research.

Quote:
I watch a lot of hockey; none of it happens to be the Rangers or Del Zotto.
Shocker. Maybe you should before talking about another player from another team before making posts like the ones you have in this thread to this point.

Quote:
Maybe you don't watch a lot of hockey, if you think that Del Zotto and Grachev could fill the void that losing Burns would create.
I've watched and played more in one year than you have in your life.

As for the void, right now, there's no way this trade could fill the void. A couple of years down the road, yes. If the Wild wanted to completely rebuild, and thought they would have a hard time resigning Burns in the future, than this is the type of deal they'd probably like to make.

Quote:
And yes, we don't want to get younger; we'll just keep our "over the hill" 25 year old all-star defenseman.
Could you quote me on where I said "over the hill"? Please do, especially since you're going to use it in that context. I know Barker's 25, he's younger than I am, but to act like that trade was smart on the part of Minnesota isn't something I would go around parading about considering his injury history and salary compared to a younger defenseman with a similar ceiling.

Quote:
A forward prospect would be great, if it didn't come at the expense of our best defenseman.
Gotta give to get, and giving up a guy like Burns is going to get quite a return. I don't know what you think you're going to get for him, but it's not going to 3 forward prospects, and a can't miss defense prospect on top of a 1st. He's good, but he's not Doughty or Keith or Weber.

Quote:
Cam Barker's performance aside, are you serious? He's 24; Leddy is 19. I wasn't aware that the average age of the Stanley Cup champions is and should be 19.5.
Cam Barker's injury history could easily elevate him to 30+ years old. The guy's had more injuries in his career to this point than some guys in the league that are 30 years and older. I would be hesitant to take him on as he gets hurt constantly. Then again, Minnesota also signed Martin Havlat who misses a ton of games too.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 09:52 PM
  #23
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post
Then you need to get off of these boards and do a little more research.
Jim Carrey had a hell of rookie year as well.

Quote:
Shocker. Maybe you should before talking about another player from another team before making posts like the ones you have in this thread to this point.
I apologize for real life getting in the way watching 82 Rangers games a year. How many Wild games have you seen?

Quote:
I've watched and played more in one year than you have in your life.
I doubt that, but there is really now way to prove it either way. So let's move on.

Quote:
As for the void, right now, there's no way this trade could fill the void. A couple of years down the road, yes. If the Wild wanted to completely rebuild, and thought they would have a hard time resigning Burns in the future, than this is the type of deal they'd probably like to make.
Your "ifs" are two pretty big ifs. You are correct; if Burns refused to re-sign, and the Rangers were the only other team in the league, then yes, that would probably be a pretty good offer. But I think if a 26 year old defenseman was put on the block, they would have to do much better than what you are offering. I'm sure 20 other teams would be ringing our GM as well.

Quote:
Could you quote me on where I said "over the hill"? Please do, especially since you're going to use it in that context. I know Barker's 25, he's younger than I am, but to act like that trade was smart on the part of Minnesota isn't something I would go around parading about considering his injury history and salary compared to a younger defenseman with a similar ceiling.
Your post at 9:10 PM said "Really, so they wouldn't want to get younger..." forgetting, of course, that Burns is also young.

Quote:
Gotta give to get, and giving up a guy like Burns is going to get quite a return. I don't know what you think you're going to get for him, but it's not going to 3 forward prospects, and a can't miss defense prospect on top of a 1st. He's good, but he's not Doughty or Keith or Weber.
I agree that you have to give to get, which I could probably throw right back at you, asking for Burns and all. If you want an impact player, you're going to have to give up more than 3 "maybes".

Quote:
Cam Barker's injury history could easily elevate him to 30+ years old. The guy's had more injuries in his career to this point than some guys in the league that are 30 years and older. I would be hesitant to take him on as he gets hurt constantly. Then again, Minnesota also signed Martin Havlat who misses a ton of games too.
Barker sucks, and the trade was a bad one. Every Wild fan will concede that. Didn't you guys sign an injury-proned Gaborik? Shall we venture into all of your acquisitions? Funny you bring Havlat up, as he is having an all-star year this year.

We saw our professional baseball team trade our Cy Young pitcher for what amounted to Baltimore's best middle relief prospect. Forgive us if we don't want to trade the best defenseman we've ever had for 3 "potentially" good players.

Bump this thread when Del Zotto and Grachev become impact players.


Last edited by Dr Jan Itor: 01-30-2011 at 10:01 PM.
Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 10:04 PM
  #24
Circulartheory
@danccchan
 
Circulartheory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post
Really, so they wouldn't want to go younger, get a solid young offensive defenseman, and get a forward prospect that they could most definitely use with the lack of organizational depth up front in their system, plus a 2nd rounder?
Actually no, we'd rather keep our all-star defenseman that is only 25 (that is very young), big (6'5" 219lbs), mobile, physical, can play against top lines, top minutes on even strength, top minutes on PP, top minutes on PK, on a good contract and second in the league in goals for defensemen.

We like that over 2 prospects and a pick.

Circulartheory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2011, 10:05 PM
  #25
JeffMangum
Ra shi da
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 55,156
vCash: 300
It's not a good deal for the Wild. Burns is better than MDZ will ever be imo. He brings the physical edge, defense, and size that MDZ just doesn't have.

JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.