News: Russo: Guerin looking to make significant moves

[Dr Jan Itor]

and my guess is this 1 team is looking for Minn to retain a big amount of that $7.5m per or take back a crap contract like Ladd's in return.

Ladd: 3+ seasons, $5.5m per cap hit and $12m in actual cashed owed after this season.
Parise: 5+ seasons, $7.5m cap hit and $20m in actual cashed owed after this season.

Ladd: 14 points in 34 games in the AHL
Parise: 37 points in 60 games in the NHL

I think everybody is expecting a bad contract or retainage if this thing ends up happening (I'm no holding my breath), but I don't think it's beyond reason for Parise to garner a little bit of value as well.

If, for example, we brought Parise down to the Ladd's $5.5M, is the extra 2 years really that much of a disaster when he's probably going to be giving you 20+ goals for at least 3-4 of those years?

 

[Bazeek]

Why would we make that move just to free up a roster spot? Either retaining or taking a bad contract back would effectively neutralize the negative aspect of Parise's contract. There's going to be value coming back if a deal happens, unless a team takes on the entirety of his contract with no bad contract coming back and no retention.

It's not purely the roster spot, it's the role. He's been given choice ice time all year and I think some of it's due to his own lobbying. If the team wants to start giving those minutes to guys like Fiala, Kaprizov, Boldy, Kunin, etc. it's likely to ratchet up whatever tensions are already present.

I also think there's a non-zero chance that Parise himself wants out and that it's what's driven some of the talk since last summer. I don't know if there's been a formal trade request, but sitting down with Russo for a feature about his future in Minnesota is up there with calling in his own powerplay consultant. We'll see how the next few months go, but it feels like both sides are just ready to move on.

But the contract is a problem and the only reason another team would take it on is to get the good 2-3 years he has left on the cheap. Salary retention or taking a bad contract probably helps, but it doesn't push the return up into premium asset territory.

Bottom line is that it's not a trade that makes a lot of sense from a purely cap or hockey perspective.

 

[CREW99AW]

Ladd: 14 points in 34 games in the AHL
Parise: 37 points in 60 games in the NHL

I think everybody is expecting a bad contract or retainage if this thing ends up happening (I'm no holding my breath), but I don't think it's beyond reason for Parise to garner a little bit of value as well.

If, for example, we brought Parise down to the Ladd's $5.5M, is the extra 2 years really that much of a disaster when he's probably going to be giving you 20+ goals for at least 3-4 of those years?

I argued against the Ladd contract before the isles signed him, when it was just a rumor in the press. I argued against adding an aging star, whose best yrs were clearly behind him and giving him a big chunk of the caphit/payroll.
So, no thanks on paying 35-40 yr old Parise $5.5m per.
I want the isles to get younger, speedier and more skilled.

Ladd has 3 yrs left after this one. I would not be surprised if the isles eventually buy out the last yr of his deal.

 

[AKL]

It's not purely the roster spot, it's the role. He's been given choice ice time all year and I think some of it's due to his own lobbying. If the team wants to start giving those minutes to guys like Fiala, Kaprizov, Boldy, Kunin, etc. it's likely to ratchet up whatever tensions are already present.

I also think there's a non-zero chance that Parise himself wants out and that it's what's driven some of the talk since last summer. I don't know if there's been a formal trade request, but sitting down with Russo for a feature about his future in Minnesota is up there with calling in his own powerplay consultant. We'll see how the next few months go, but it feels like both sides are just ready to move on.

But the contract is a problem and the only reason another team would take it on is to get the good 2-3 years he has left on the cheap. Salary retention or taking a bad contract probably helps, but it doesn't push the return up into premium asset territory.

Bottom line is that it's not a trade that makes a lot of sense from a purely cap or hockey perspective.

So the Wild trade him simply because he wants to, with no value coming back, simultaneously taking on all the recapture risk and either retaining or taking a bad contract back?

What incentive do we have to make that move? IF a deal happens, there's going to be something coming back that would be expected to help the NHL roster in the future.

Also, let's not act like the Isles prospects are some premier assets. Some potential middle 6ers, a late 1st, these are not blue chip pieces the Isles are working with here.

 

[Bazeek]

So the Wild trade him simply because he wants to, with no value coming back, simultaneously taking on all the recapture risk and either retaining or taking a bad contract back?

What incentive do we have to make that move? IF a deal happens, there's going to be something coming back that would be expected to help the NHL roster in the future.

Also, let's not act like the Isles prospects are some premier assets. Some potential middle 6ers, a late 1st, these are not blue chip pieces the Isles are working with here.

I'm not advocating for it to happen and don't think that it will. I can't come up with a good reason for it that doesn't appeal to "behind the scenes" reasons and those sorts of trades rarely go well.

 

[AKL]

I'm not advocating for it to happen and don't think that it will. I can't come up with a good reason for it that doesn't appeal to "behind the scenes" reasons and those sorts of trades rarely go well.

It would be one thing if Guerin was chomping at the bit to get rid of him, calling all 30 GMs saying, "please, I'll do anything to get rid of him."

It's different when the report is that a GM has contacted him, and has had interested in acquiring Parise for a year. I'm also not saying it's going to happen, but it's certainly not out of line to expect something of value to be coming back, especially when we're talking about retaining 33-50% or taking on a bad contract in return.

 

[KrisBeKreame]

Ladd: 14 points in 34 games in the AHL
Parise: 37 points in 60 games in the NHL

I think everybody is expecting a bad contract or retainage if this thing ends up happening (I'm no holding my breath), but I don't think it's beyond reason for Parise to garner a little bit of value as well.

If, for example, we brought Parise down to the Ladd's $5.5M, is the extra 2 years really that much of a disaster when he's probably going to be giving you 20+ goals for at least 3-4 of those years?

I agree that once the salary part of the deal is out of the way he should get a good value in a trade. However I can not fathom it being several premium pieces kinda value. One of 1st, Wilde, Bellows but not multiple, probably add a lesser prospect going to Minn. Personally I think a deal could be reached. One other thing to think about is Ladd does not need to get protected in the Expansion draft where Parise will.

 

[AKL]

I agree that once the salary part of the deal is out of the way he should get a good value in a trade. However I can not fathom it being several premium pieces kinda value. One of 1st, Wilde, Bellows but not multiple, probably add a lesser prospect going to Minn. Personally I think a deal could be reached. One other thing to think about is Ladd does not need to get protected in the Expansion draft where Parise will.

I should have phrased it better. The way I said it definitely implied that it would be multiple of those pieces. I believe it would be 1 of those pieces, with maybe some additional fluff on each side.

 

[Sota Popinski]

Trocheck
Matheson
Noel

For

Brodin
Staal

Wild have no interest in Matheson with that contract

 

[CREW99AW]

I agree that once the salary part of the deal is out of the way he should get a good value in a trade. However I can not fathom it being several premium pieces kinda value. One of 1st, Wilde, Bellows but not multiple, probably add a lesser prospect going to Minn. Personally I think a deal could be reached. One other thing to think about is Ladd does not need to get protected in the Expansion draft where Parise will.

KrisBe we will simply have to agree to disagree.
Not only would I be unhappy giving up any of those young pieces for Parise, I would be really salty if the isles acquired him, knowing they would have to protect him in the expansion draft.

 

[CREW99AW]

It would be one thing if Guerin was chomping at the bit to get rid of him, calling all 30 GMs saying, "please, I'll do anything to get rid of him."

It's different when the report is that a GM has contacted him, and has had interested in acquiring Parise for a year. I'm also not saying it's going to happen, but it's certainly not out of line to expect something of value to be coming back, especially when we're talking about retaining 33-50% or taking on a bad contract in return.

I posted a link to a Russo article from July,2019 where he reported the Wild ecplored moving Parise.

Now, maybe your new GM sees no need to move him.

 

[AKL]

I posted a link to a Russo article from July,2019 where he reported the Wild ecplored moving Parise.

Now, maybe your new GM sees no need to move him.

Yeah, or maybe he sees even more reason to move him

 

[A Pointed Stick]

Still waiting for one of you to acknowledge that Parise is actually an effective NHL player, and likely will be for at least 3/5 years of his contract, whereas Ladd is already an AHL player and not a very good one at that.

The age/injury/contract triangle of excellence scares me away. I mean we already have one of those. I would prefer neither.

 

[Eggtimer]

As a devils fan it sucked to lose Parise to put it mildly . Having said that though , the strength of his game will leave him far sooner than his contract runs out , making it not as painful losing him knowing it will be a bad contact around present day and moving forward .
He is still a decent player but not worth the cap hit and will continue to decline . He’s not someone who can alter his game style and still be effective ( Sellane Jagr )

 

[fentonsbrainchild]

What are the chances Parise waives even if a deal is agreed upon? Probably next to zero

 

[AKL]

What are the chances Parise waives even if a deal is agreed upon? Probably next to zero

Well from the sounds of it, he may not want to stick around here through a rebuild or retool

 

[thestonedkoala]

Having said that though , the strength of his game will leave him far sooner than his contract runs out , making it not as painful losing him knowing it will be a bad contact around present day and moving forward .

Most people were tagging Parise that he wouldn't be effective past 32-33? Except he scored 28 goals last season (at the age of 34) in only 74 games and is on pace for 29 this season. Having a 25-30 goal scorer at 35+ is unique and I think Parise has lived up to his contract.

He is still a decent player but not worth the cap hit and will continue to decline .

Decline? He's on pace for 28 goals and around 51 points. It's the team around him that isn't doing well. But he's been a consistent 25+ goal scorer /82 games since the Wild signed him. I haven't seen him declined much.