Rumor: Wild in trade talks with....The New Jersey Devils

by Nodak on Jun 20, 2011 7:48 PM CDT

As we enter into draft week we are all filled with excitement at the thought of landing the next superstar prospect. Most of us that read this site spend time scouring over mock drafts, watching youtube clips, and reading the scouting reports to come up with our wishlists. But not all of the best players acquired on draft night are actually being drafted. It is often the best time to see established stars traded for prospects and draft picks. According to Russo, rumors are flying that the Wild are in trade talks with the Devils with the Wild giving up Brent Burns. Well who could possibly warrant a blue chip defenseman? A scoring winger? Draft pick? Find out after the jump.

First off, sorry to those of you expecting to see me say that they are trading for Zach Parise. Sorry, but that's just not going to happen. The names that have been brought up however are Brian Rolston and Dainius Zubrus. Read Russo's blog here. Both good hockey players with huge contracts that are getting up there in age at 38 and 33 respectively. I honestly can't see Fletcher going for either of these guys. He might as well just resign Burns for 5 million a season rather than take on the cap of an aging player when he says he wants to build a younger team. Besides, there will be plenty of other offers for Burns. What are your thoughts Wilderness?

The opinions posted here are not those of Hockey Wilderness

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Yuck.

I love Rolston, but I don’t want him back. Zubrus can go spend the season in a cave for all I care.

JS, Champion of the first ever Hockey Wilderness Playoff Bracket Challenge! WHOOOOOOOO!

Author, watchdog, enforcer and french-canadian connection for Hockey Wilderness.

twitter: BubbleWild48

by JSLandry on Jun 20, 2011 8:58 PM CDT reply actions

Fletch

Would be run out of town if he trades Burns for Rolston and Zubrus. Unless it has #4 overall draft pick and a second round draft pick. I believe both contracts would end after this next season.

by wild32384 on Jun 20, 2011 9:06 PM CDT reply actions

Ryan Malone being shopped

Interesting…

JS, Champion of the first ever Hockey Wilderness Playoff Bracket Challenge! WHOOOOOOOO!

Author, watchdog, enforcer and french-canadian connection for Hockey Wilderness.

twitter: BubbleWild48

by JSLandry on Jun 20, 2011 10:25 PM CDT reply actions

trade

how about this burns for cluade lemieux, scott stevens, and the goalie from Slapshot? the devils own the rights to him right? no no never never, unless you’re some english pig with no brain!

by wildfansec108row11 on Jun 21, 2011 6:33 AM CDT reply actions

I'm pretty sure that those two sentences are not connected.

It’s from the Devils perspective. They’ve talked with the Wild about Brent Burns as their puck-moving D man. Full Stop. They would really like to get out of the contracts of Zubrus and Rolston.

Now, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Wild would consider taking on some salary, because they have a little room, if the Devils are also thinking of adding the #4 pick. I highly doubt that that would happen, but it would be required if the Wild took on one of those bad contracts.

by Krotz the Wall on Jun 21, 2011 8:25 AM CDT reply actions

Agreed

Those two sentences are not related.

by cgp711 on Jun 21, 2011 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions

Can the Wild

Get away from taking on bad contracts? Don’t we have enough of them already?

by TC Mooch on Jun 21, 2011 10:41 AM CDT reply actions

That depends...

on the deal. The Devils need to free up money to sign Parise. Rolston will make over $5 million next year in the last year of his deal. What would it be worth to the Devils to get that contract off the books? I’m not talking about as part of a Burns trade. Say the Devils trade Rolston and the 4th, for Barker and the 10th. The Wild pick up around $1 million in salary and move Barker. The Devils can buy Barker out for a $350,000 cap hit, saving them almost $4.5 million that they can put towards Parise. The Wild would have spent about $1 million to jump up to the 4th pick, and have a winger they might be able to use, especially on the PP. (The Wild could buyout Barker for a total 2 year cap hit of around $350,000 this year and $590,000 next, or they could take on salary this year and clear out a bit more space next year).

This is just an thought experiment where it might not be a TERRIBLE thing to take on a bad contract.

by Krotz the Wall on Jun 21, 2011 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions

If the best they can offer is Rolston, Zubrus and/or the 4th pick

then I say run away fast.

by nemo1107 on Jun 21, 2011 10:52 AM CDT reply actions

Fletcher is in trade talks with all 29 teams

As for what he can get via trade is unknown I am sure he taking every opportunity to try & improve this team while not giving up an empty net goal. Who can say what the other GM’s might trade for a Clutterbuck or a Burns or even one of our goalie prospects. Stranger trades have been made than Burns for Parise. We just have three days until the offseason really kicks into gear & a week & a half till free agency madness starts. Should be an exciting & fun two weeks & I for one will enjoy as I am now suffering the major hockey withdrawals.

Blood and death are waiting like a raven in the sky
I was born to die
Hear me while I live
As I look into your eyes
None shall hear a lie
Power and dominion are taken by the will
By divine right hail and kill

Man-o-war

Tired of the Fucking idiots that post on Russo's Rants!!! Somebody put an end to MKIA & Technowild & The other losers.

by FightingWild on Jun 21, 2011 11:25 AM CDT reply actions

Doubtful

that they move Burns unless an offer really blows them away. I was on the trade Burns bandwagon until this week when Russo reported they have held contract talks. My guess is that Fletch knows how much it will be to resign him now and is shopping him to see if he can get a better value but I’m betting he is asking for the moon in either picks/prospects or young players like Couture. My guess is he would only offer Burns plus one other piece to NJ for Parise and it sounds like he isn’t going anywhere anyway if the cap is rising and they have a bunch of higher contracts (Rolston) expiring after this upcoming season.

by cgp711 on Jun 21, 2011 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm especially not a fan

If in this trade, the Wild also give up the 10 pick. I’d say Burns for Rolston, the fourth pick, and a second rounder. You could get Landeskog, Huberdeau, or Larsson, and a nice pick at 10, and get back into round two. I could deal with that.

"You don't understand anything, man. Leave your STUPID comments in your POCKET!"

by Georgie Fruit on Jun 23, 2011 2:16 PM CDT via mobile reply actions

I agree.

I wouldn’t mind taking Rolstons contract back for 1 year b/c we would get #4 and #34. their second round pick. But my preference would be to not trade Burns, but If we are offered that package for burnsie, I would jump on it.

by wild32384 on Jun 23, 2011 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions

I could get behind this for sure. But since it sounds like a good deal, it is probably too good to actually happen.

by Jonsey on Jun 23, 2011 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions

Seeing what Philly got for Carter & Richards

Anything is possible for Burns.

Man-o-war

Tired of the Fucking idiots that post on Russo's Rants!!! Somebody put an end to MKIA & Technowild & The other losers.

by FightingWild on Jun 23, 2011 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions

But still

They want to get rid of the dead weight that is Rolston’s contract. Say Burns is worth a high first, is getting rid of Rolston worth a high second? I would think so.

"You don't understand anything, man. Leave your STUPID comments in your POCKET!"

by Georgie Fruit on Jun 24, 2011 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions

I would noy

Give up what CJB or LA did for Carter and Richards especially due to their contracts.

Similar trades for the Wild for Carter would be:

Our 1st, 3rd and Granlund.

For Richards it would be:

Granlund and Latendresse.

NO THANKS. Have you seen the cap hits and length of contract for both these guys? Not worth it. Don’t get me wrong, Richards is tempting but he is kind of a moody guy and Carter is kind of a baby from what I’ve heard. No thanks, not needed on a team without too many bad contracts and some moody players already. I am with Fletch on building through the draft, develop your own players and get them for cheap while they are still producing. Now if we could just pick up a second rounder somewhere?

by cgp711 on Jun 23, 2011 5:52 PM CDT reply actions

I would much rather have Richards

That trade would be interesting. I really want to see Granlund on the Wild but having Koivu and Richards down the middle for years would be fantastic. Richards has a great cap hit especially considering his age, long but not bad at all!

by Kingpin45 on Jun 23, 2011 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions